Obviously, this is a “One Nundred Minapools” monetary note from the “Republic of Mars.” It bears a beautifully wrought likeness of the planet’s “Capable Leader” (in a typically inverted pose). And it arrived in our family’s Columbus, Ohio mailbox, addressed to me, when I was 16.
Like the hearty souls who hunt and fish, most photographers can probably tell a story or two about “the ones that got away.” Loss can happen for any number of reasons:
Not having a camera handy
Reacting too slowly for a fleeting moment
Poor exposures
Lost or stolen equipment
Fires, floods or storms
Computer or disc crashes
Inadequate backup
And perhaps a hundred more
I don’t intend for this article to be about “paranormal” photos. But I’ve had more than my fair share of such experiences, and my most memorable losses have come from that realm.
I’ve just read an article on Digital Camera World about a couple in the states who complained about “irreversible distortion” in a family and engagement shoot. It reminded me of a time some years ago now when a similar thing happened to me.
The article can be read here. The gist of the customer’s complaint was that they didn’t like what they called “irreversible distortion” in the background and foreground of the images supplied by the photography company. What they were complaining about was actually the blurred backgrounds caused by a choice by the photographer to shoot with a shallow depth of field. They had contacted the photographer asking if the “distortion” could be reduced, but of course the photographer replied saying it was caused by the lens and therefore it couldn’t. The crux of the issue is that the couple wanted to be able to see more of the attractive surroundings in their images. The complaint also talks about the time it took for the photographers to reply. To be fair, an argument could be made in favour of the couple. It’s not entirely unfair to want photos without an out-of-focus background, and indeed if the photographers were taking a long time to reply then that probably would be frustrating, especially days before a wedding.
But, in reality, the images the photographers took are actually really nice photos, and supposedly most of the images in their portfolio also have out-of-focus backgrounds. If the couple had booked them based on their portfolio, which one would assume they did, then they should have known what to expect.
That isn’t really what this article was supposed to be titled. If things had gone differently it would have been “Last of the Kodachrome”.
My life with 35mm photography began in HS in the mid 80’s with a class taken the spring of my junior year. My first camera, one I still own and shoot with is a Petri 2.8. You can read about it here. It was a 1960’s era hand me down and I shot exclusively with it for a year and a half. During this time, I found room for a bathroom darkroom with a Beseler 35.
The next big gear acquisition was when I graduated from HS. My family of aunts and uncles knew what I wanted and indeed had been helping me with my passion since I got started. Everyone pooled their collective monetary congratulations and I was able to purchase my first 35mm SLR.
Actually, it might as well have been Minoltas. My best friends older brother had a Minolta X-700 that instilled a great deal of envy in me. The year was 1982 and I was at the time 12 years old. My used Praktica with a Pentacon 50/1.8, wasn’t quite on par with my ideals. The Praktica was given to me by my parents sometime when I was 11 or 12 years old as a substitute for the Kodak Instamatic 77X I got for my 7th birthday.
