Okay. Here's the scoop... Yesterday I posted a FS for my 75 Summilux. Mike Dixon made a suggestion I trade it to him for some pics of his ladies (in jest). At least one person suggested it might be worth it just to see more of his incredible images.

Well, it appears that suggestion is taking on a life of its own. At present I have received a few anoymous monetary pledges from participants on this forum to assist Mike in obtaining this lens. In that spirit, I thought it was only right that I officially open this up to the entire group. I don't know where it will all lead, but there are enough of us here that appreciate his work that this could be interesting to watch!

If you are interested in participating, please email me offline with your pledge for Mike. Your name and contribution will be kept confidential unless you request otherwise.

Regards,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 16, 2002

Answers

I want to see Mike's *PRIVATE COLLECTION*. I'll pay U.S. dollars.

Dennis

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 16, 2002.

Hehehe private collection. Of course Mr. Flesher wouldn't have an ulterior motive for rallying Mike's cause. ; ) Anyway, sounds like an interesting and unique drive. Have fun...

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), February 16, 2002.

Of course I have an ulterior motive -- But apparently I'm not alone! Hopefully all of us will see more of Mike's images... Send in your pledges!

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 16, 2002.

um...this is a joke, right?

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), February 16, 2002.

No joke. Mike's gonna take us on a real photo shoot and afterwards we get to have dinner with the models. Cool, huh?

Dennis

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 16, 2002.

No joke... I'm serious. I have recieved multiple pledges -- no actual money yet though.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 17, 2002.

If Mike can make these ladies look so wonderful (and he does,) where are his pictures of men, making them look great? No pledges from me until I see some of the male models.

-- Margaret (fitz@neptune.fr), February 17, 2002.

How much are you "pledging" Jack ?

50% discount from your asking price for that lens you do not use? Sure Mike would appreciate that.... !

When you commit to something of the kind, I'll glaldy help sponsorise Mike's purchase myself. Otherwise this could lead some to detect a vague smell of scam.

Guys : I have a Nocti for Mike, gimme 2,500 USD and he gets the lens for free !

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), February 17, 2002.

50% discount from your asking price for that lens you do not use?

Jack, since you started this campaign you should be the one to "front load" its chances of success. Simply make a one-time, non-tax deductible donation of your 75 Summilux to www.mikedixonphotography.com. I promise I'll make up the difference.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 17, 2002.

Perhaps we should televise the 'Mike Dixon-athon' and get some celebraties to host it...

That said, I'd love to see more of his 'private' stuff

-- Philip Woodcock (phil@pushbar.demon.co.uk), February 17, 2002.

Jacques: It is really none of your business, but I pledged $100. Keep in mind there are two individuals who are happy to pay my already low full price. I offered this lens to this group at that low price because I thought it would be put to good use here. Apparently, a few other folks think Mike is the best one to put it to use.

John: This is NOT going to qualify as a tax-deductible donation, at least in the states.

Margaret: I certainly understand your point of view, and do not blame you one bit.

Everybody else: If you don't want to take this seriously, fine. But a few have. If this post keeps going down this track, I'll pull the plug and sell the lens to one of the two waiting buyers.

Regards,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 17, 2002.

Humbly suggest that party selling an object is not really the best party to set up a "fund" asking other people to contribute for the purchase of said object on behalf of a third party.

If we all feel that Mike (who has not asked for anything of the sort) should be helped purchase some equipment, why not help him get it new ?

I would contribute to such a Mikeathon, 'cause I also enjoy his work, and am thankful for him sharing it on this list.

Again, guys, I have a few bits and pieces I do not use, why don't you all gimme some money so that I can send those to great photographer Rob ?

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), February 17, 2002.

Many of you are being idiots.

The idea of Jack's plan is a good one. But the better way to do this would be for mike (or Mike and Jack), to sell some prints (or a CD gallery, or whatever of Mike's photos.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), February 17, 2002.

Oh Margaret!

Please no.

-- David Smith (dssmith3@rmci.net), February 17, 2002.

I can't make head or tail of this. Mike Dixon is a working photographer. Presumably if he needs some lenses he'll just go out and buy them. He knows what he needs and how much he can recoup his investment in equipment and materials. As far as I recall, he prefers the older design lenses anyway! What is this all about?

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 17, 2002.

Wow! This is certainly unexpected (but highly entertaining). Maybe I should make more jokes about people exchanging their equipment for my photos.

First, thanks to everyone who has offered to make a contribution. It's quite flattering (and surprising). I didn't really expect anything more than a few light-hearted exchanges in response to my "offer" to Jack. And in the spirit of keeping this light-hearted, no matter what the final result, I'll try to address the issues raised honestly (if not entirely seriously).

My "private collection," such as it is, doesn't contain any photos that are significantly more explicit than what I've posted. I'm willing to show most of my stuff to anyone who'll look it--the "private" photos tend to be of people and moments that have special meaning to me, not ones that are any "juicier" than the rest. Your contributions will not unlock my secret porno vault because it simply doesn't exist . . .

I haven't said anything about going a photo shoot, but it doesn't sound like a bad idea. You'll have to be on your very best behavior, though--you have to treat the models with respect no matter how much you contribute!

As far as I can tell, Jack's offer is entirely sincere (and quite generous). If, however, he just collects money and deosn't send me the lens, I'll lead the pack to hunt him down and bust him up.

I'd be happy to send print(s) to those making a significant contribution as a show of my appreciation. The b&w stuff is custom printed on fiber paper; color stuff is inkjets from an Epson 1270. I don't have releases for all of my street stuff (only for some), but just about any of the model work is fair game.

Rob, I am working, but not as much as I'd like lately (photography and another business interest have taken a recent downturn). I couldn't justify buying another expensive lens right now, though I'd be happy to use it as well as display images for and provide prints to those who let me get my hands on it! I do like old lenses, but some of the major reasons for liking them are lower cost, not-so-intense sharpness, and a level of wear that makes it psychologically a bit easier to take them out knocking around at bars, on the street, in the park, etc. Jack's 75 is exactly the type of used lens I typically look for--if my current finance were in better shape, I would have made him a real offer to begin with.

Margaret, while I do have photos of men, most of them are not sexy model material--mostly street photos and promo shots. There simply aren't as many men looking for modeling photos, and, to be honest, they don't spark my creativity nearly as well as women do. But just to show that I'm not apathetic to your concerns, here's a promo shot of an artist friend of mine. He's a very nice guy, and single. ; )

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 17, 2002.

I'm thinking that Ol' Scratch would accept my soul in exchange for Mike's talent, to hell with Leica.

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@cox.net), February 17, 2002.

Friends, Lurkers and Cynics:

It is my pleasure to announce the fund-drive is now officially closed, as all monies have been duly pledged. Thanks to all who participated in bringing this event off -- due to your generousity I expect we will see many more of Mike's extraordinary images!

Regards,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 17, 2002.

Friends, Lurkers and Cynics.

Jack, I think most of us have at least a visceral appreciation of Mike's portfolio. I for one find Mike a very considerate and professional photographer. I once emailed him on an issue and it was answered in a forthright fashion. Although Mike's gendre is something that I don't think I'll be pursuing his images score top marks for that style. I would like to contribute (although MY finances are also quite disheveled around tax season) however the $$$$ amount would at best be gestural. However, if Mr. Dixon feels like borrowing my 75 to get a feel for it then he is more than welcome to since my bodies are with Gerry for a few more weeks (by my reckoning). That and I still have the 35/50 combo to toy with...

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 17, 2002.

Jack,

I too would like to contribute to the Mike Dixon fund. I have learnt a lot of things from this website and am grateful to the many generous contributors of techniques and ideas, and many of Mike's photographs are stunning, to say the least. I am but a novice, and feel that what transpires here is like attending a master class, for FREE. It's not about the money, but I owe a great debt to this site. Since we all live in nameless regions, I thought what you did was a great idea. I know it started as a joke, but what the hell, it worked.

I don't know how many contributors you have in your secret black book, but count me in for an average amount. Are you using the Dutch auction method of assigning pledge amounts? Just curious.

Thanks again for the generous idea.

-- Vikram (VSingh493@aol.com), February 17, 2002.

John:

You need not make any gesture for the loan of your lens. Mike will have his own to play with by week's end. If you want to make a gestural monetary contribution, by all means, feel free to do so. There were a few of us who wanted to make this happen, and agreed to pony up the shortfall. Any contribution made will offset that shortfall. Totally up to you, but of course you'll have to trust that I distribute your money fairly to participants that want to remain anonymous.

Vikram: I'll email you offline with details. Thank you --

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 17, 2002.

Does this mean I don't get to meet the models?

Dennis

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 17, 2002.

A puzzlement. What's going on here?

Anyway, if what all this means is that Mike Dixon got lucky, well bully for you, Mike!

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 17, 2002.

Yes, Mike got lucky! He always gets lucky doesn't he? I mean babes to photograph with his newly-acquired-for-free 75mm, doesn't get any better... ; )

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), February 17, 2002.

Mike's fortune is neither lucky (unless you consider his outstanding images to also be lucky) nor is it free (unless he produces these images without cost).

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), February 18, 2002.

*A-HEM* it's called a sense of humor, lighten up.

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), February 18, 2002.

Allow me to elaborate, if your post is addressing mine, you are quite incorrect by implying from my saying that he's lucky to be photographing beautiful women that this equals his photos are from luck, and if you are implying that from me saying his lens was free that he gets his shots for free, then I really don't understand your flow of logic.

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), February 18, 2002.

I'm saying only that Mike earns his good fortune, James. Everyone can stand to lighten up :-)

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), February 18, 2002.

I see, yes indeed, t'was late and I was, well, unlightened up *grin*

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), February 18, 2002.

Thank you Mike for the photo of your friend, and all the other photos you and others have posted. Like John Chan, I appreciate and learn from the work of others. Thank you Jack and the annonymous contributors for this initiative.

-- Margaret (fitz@neptune.fr), February 19, 2002.

I think this is one of the most amazing threads ever in the entire greenspun.com LUSENET service! Cool!

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), February 19, 2002.

Well, the lens is on its way (Jack sent me the FedEx tracking numbers) and is scheduled to arrive on Thursday. I'll post a note with my initial impressions that evening after it arrives.

James and Ken, there's truth in what both of you say. I've been very fortunate in many respects (though not all my luck is good), but a lot of effort and sacrifice have also gone into getting where I am now. Even when "luck" is good, it often requires a lot of work to take advantage of it.

Margaret, you're welcome, and I'll keep you in mind when I'm scanning things in the future. Maybe we can draw more women to the board.

Tony, thanks for your excellent work in helping create and maintain this board. Aside from this windfall, there have been many other ways the board has been of significant benefit to me and many others.

Who know? Maybe we can get some kind of magazine article out of this craziness . . .

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 19, 2002.

wow!

I hope that you Mike will make good use of the '75Lux

And that we can be so lucky, that you will share some with us!

-- Kaj Froling (kf@draupnir.dk), February 21, 2002.