I have to admit that I slept through a lot of my CalArts "History of Photography" class. I was waist-deep in my own second-semester projects and the class was in a comfortable, air-conditioned and darkened theatre with deep cushioned seats. Sometimes I'd wake up and my friends would have drawn on me, with the approval (if not participation?) of the teacher.
One time I woke up to see this photo, twelve feet tall.
At the time I'd never heard of Garry Winogrand. The photos came from a planet past my comprehension, though I could not look away. At that moment I got the impression that the desperation I saw in those photos was a desperation in Garry himself. It's an impression I've never lost -- the belief that it must have been painful to be Garry Winogrand, that there's a sort of weary melacholy in him even when smiling.
I wish I could say that seeing this made me rush right outdoors with my Nikon, but I was too caught up in filmmaking and theatre at the time. The camera stayed mostly on the sideline. Later on, when my shooting rose from its own slumber, this image and a thousand more like it were waiting just below the surface of my consciousness.
Kristie Lu Stout hosts a CNN "Summit" Panel, Palo Alto, 2007
Whaddaya know, the new issue of Consumer Reports has arrived and what do they pick as their favorite compact camera? The LX2, the latest variant of the LX1 (bigger LCD, higher res, higher ISO's, but the same lens, UI, and camera frame).
I couldn't help but get a smile out of their pic, though: what's she looking through?
The weird part is, I was just getting ready to blog about that topic anyway: not Consumer Reports, but viewing with the LX1 (or LX2, or Leica D-Lux2, or D-Lux3).
At this point I pretty-much know what the field of view is (especially given how much hipshooting I've done), just looking around. I can "see" the picture in front of me without any camera, so I've found it's comfortable enough to just pretend there's a viewfinder. No glued-on dots or minifinder, just hold the camera up near where my eye is (without covering the eye, as CR has bizarrely done), and go ahead & shoot. I can see the top of the lens to ensure me it's pointing straight, and a bit of the LCD glow gives me some vague notion about the luminance (which I usually ignore can't turn it off, alas -- gaffer tape and a bit of black paper to the rescue?).
And then yesterday, I finally got to reading Sean Reid's Review of the D-Lux 3 and he's commenting on the lack of detail in any LCD screen. Second-Opinion co-reviewer Mitch Alland has his own VF/LCD take, where he say his use of the LCD is mostly about gross-scale framing, and that (somehow) he too uses his un-VF'd eye a fair bit (though not, I think, the way I'm showing here).