The Definition of Luck

Friday the Thirteenth brings to mind the question: Is it better to be lucky than to be good?  That depends, I guess, on your definition of lucky. 

If you just hope good things will happen to you, if you hope you'll find a winning lottery ticket on the sidewalk for example, well, then that depends on what you actually get.  If the lottery ticket is for $1M, well, then, yeah, in that case luck trumps everything.  But what if the lottery ticket is for another free lottery ticket?  Well, I guess that's better than nothing, but really, what's the point?  Even still, how long will your luck last?  Eventually, every lucky streak comes to an end. [more after the break]

Perfection is Overrated

Lauren in Chicago

There are three types of photography sites: those that concentrate on gear, those that concentrate on technique, and those that concentrate on photos.  The technique and photo sites are generally a wash as they often overlap but the gear sites greatly outnumber the other two, unfortunately.  I say this all somewhat sheepishly as I tend to frequent the gear sites much more than the photo sites even though I think that the photo sites are without question more worthwhile, at least in an artistic sense. 

I think this is partly because photography is almost unique in the arts that it requires both some artistic ability and technical/mechanical ability too.  This attracts lots of people who obsess over measuring results in order to seek technical perfection.   The Canon 5D3 has 23 megapixels but the Nikon D800 has 36 so the Nikon has to be better, at least for now.  Is this lens sharp enough? Don't know if it is?  Well, then get a sturdy tripod and photograph a brick wall.  Yup, do it again at all apertures and focal lengths and then look at them at full magnification in Photoshop.  Keep doing this because it'll make your pictures more technically perfect.  Yup, corner-to-corner, edge-to-edge sharpness in all its 36 megapixel glory, or 23 if you're a fanboy. [continued after the break]

The Leica, One Year Later

Orange Line, Wabash and Adams No.2

About 18 months ago I bought a Leica M8 with a Voigtlander 35 f/1.4 lens. I should say I've spent the last ten years shooting Canon 1d's of various versions. As my street gear, I'd mount a 28mm to my 1D2 for an effective focal length of 35mm. So, unlike most SLR shooters, I was already used to shooting with prime lenses. Still, this was a huge change.  Rangefinders, like the Leica, are just different animals, wholly unlike SLRs.

The viewfinder on the M8 is large and beautiful, but you don't really see the exact image you're shooting because, unlike an SLR, you don't actually see through the lens.  The viewfinder is off to the side and a bit above the lens.  Essentially, you look off at an angle from the lens itself and, of course, you don't see any of the blurring or even see the image snap into focus as you would with an SLR.  Also, framing is done with frame lines which will change depending size and position depending on focal length and focus distance and even then, they're not terribly accurate.  You focus manually with a projection of an image on the viewfinder that essentially triangulates between the rangefinder and your view.  Because of my long history with DSLRs, this was a bit disconcerting, to the point that I'd subconsciously use the entire VF, just like a dslr, just force of habit. [more after the break]