Great article on '14 months with an M9'

[jto555]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I foud this to be a grat read.

 

The Leica M9 – 16 Months Later by Scott Graham | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

 

 

John

[Shanghait]

I couldn't read very far into the article as the pictures burned my eyes......

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ezc203]

Seriously, with images like those, I can't really take the man's words on photography seriously.

[rafael_macia]

Seriously, with images like those, I can't really take the man's words on photography seriously.

 

Out of curiosity;

Why would you say that ?

I have noticed that a lot of people dislike HDR. Is it because of that ?

........... The "unnaturalness" of the photos .... ?

Thanks

Rafael

[Jager]

Seriously, with images like those, I can't really take the man's words on photography seriously.

 

Why is that? I found his images to be quite lovely.

[akiralx]

Out of curiosity;

Why would you say that ?

I have noticed that a lot of people dislike HDR. Is it because of that ?

........... The "unnaturalness" of the photos .... ?

 

I certainly don't see the point of using Leica M lenses to produce HDR images of that type as any benefit of the Leica 'look' is lost. He may as well use his Nikon DSLR, though I realise the size of the M-system is his main motivation from reading the opening paragraph.

 

Subject isolation with wide apertures (one of the reasons I use the M-system) and HDR seem to be mutually exclusive, presumably because it's difficult to do.

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey, it's one persons way. That's all. He warned us right up front about his HDRing images, etc.

[IkarusJohn]

Hey, it's one persons way. That's all. He warned us right up front about his HDRing images, etc.

 

I agree.

 

I haven't tried HDR, and I might give it a go. But the colour balance and photoshopping that has gone into those photos aren't really to my taste. But that's my problem.

 

Cheers

John

[GarethC]

OT but I like his style, not something I could look at for every photo but his pbase account showed that that was not all he shot.

 

Great article too, mirrored in some of my experiences in buying an M8 in terms of shooting differently and it being such fun.

[ezc203]

HDR when done correctly in a feast for the eyes. And when they are done correctly, I really enjoy them.

 

That said, I have seen very limited numbers of HDR images that I find acceptable. It's a very specific art.

 

Not every images can be made into an HDR image. You have to have the mindset when you're shooting, you have to find the right scenes, with the right subjects. ETC ETC. It's a "style" that depends even more so on content and subject than other styles.

 

It's not easy to do, but with all these silly programs now a days that do it for you, anyone who can afford $10k on a camera and then another $500 on software is an HDR photographer.

 

I feel like it's the same concept as pretty girls who buy an entry level DSLR, shoot on full Auto mode and call themselves photographers. Please. Stop.

 

Here is in my opinion, a stellar application of the HDR imaging technique. Yes, it's a little more derived, but this man obviously put some thought into these pictures. And didn't just pump it out through a pre-set workflow.

 

Photographer Aims to Capture 15 Hours in Single Image - DNAinfo.com

[ezc203]

BTW - if you are in NYC, I do recommend seeing his work in person. VERY VERY impressive.

[Shanghait]

Why buy a tool that excels at capturing subtlety if all you intend to do is destroy it?

 

Regardless if the system is Leica or not, the photos are distasteful. Subject matter included. I have no qualms about photographing people of varied background, but I don't take pictures of beggars, the handicapped, or homeless. Its tasteless to exploit their condition. The mound of trash with people sifting was already borderline, but a man inside a dumpster?

How would he feel if he saw that picture?

 

A few HDR/overdone images would have been acceptable, but not all of them.

 

Then there are his borders.......

[AlanG]

.... The mound of trash with people sifting was already borderline, but a man inside a dumpster?

How would he feel if he saw that picture?

 

 

Maybe he'd feel it would be nice if somebody who saw his desperate situation would help improve it.

[Shanghait]

Maybe he'd feel it would be nice if somebody who saw his desperate situation would help improve it.

 

It's hard to speculate as he has left no avenue to do so in this article. This is an article about a camera. If it was part of an essay that was to benefit this man ok, if not, leave it out of the review. Give it context so it does not appear to exploit.

 

Second, if that was his intent, then the viewer should feel compassion, disgust at the condition, or even the beauty of the person juxtaposed with the trash.

 

I see none of that, I see a man poorly captured who is trying to shield his face from either the sun or the photographer.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Shanghait

[d2mini]

I doubt most of those are HDR, if any.

Looks like he's just playing around in Lightroom with local contrast and saturation.

 

I like his composition and eye, but my initial reaction was that some of them were pushed too far in processing for my tastes.

He did make me want to run out and buy an 18mm.

[d2mini]

Regardless if the system is Leica or not, the photos are distasteful. Subject matter included. I have no qualms about photographing people of varied background, but I don't take pictures of beggars, the handicapped, or homeless. Its tasteless to exploit their condition. The mound of trash with people sifting was already borderline, but a man inside a dumpster?

How would he feel if he saw that picture?

 

For real? So we should all ignore the bad and only take pictures of the good?

Maybe this gentleman is feeling exploited too. Maybe this image should be ripped out of all the history books and banned from the internet.

http://files.myopera.com/gdare/blog/1968_Shot_in_Head.jpg

[Shanghait]

For real? So we should all ignore the bad and only take pictures of the good?

Maybe this gentleman is feeling exploited too. Maybe this image should be ripped out of all the history books and banned from the internet.

http://files.myopera.com/gdare/blog/1968_Shot_in_Head.jpg

 

I think you are missing my point.

 

That picture wasn't used to in an article to demonstrate how beautiful a camera is to use.

 

That picture does no fall into any of the categories I listed above.

 

Eddie Adam's photo is powerful, and demonstrates brutality and the atrocities of war. It was also photo journalism, while Im am doubtful Scott Grahams is. It was also very controversial, even for the photographer who later regretted the impact it had on the general and the war.

 

Everyone draws a line somewhere on what is appropriate or not. If you enjoy the photo of the man in the trash, then I apologize.

 

I'll refrain from any more discussion on the appropriateness of the photo.

 

That aside, I am still not a fan of a majority of Scott's photos.

[colonel]

I feel like it's the same concept as pretty girls who buy an entry level DSLR, shoot on full Auto mode and call themselves photographers. Please. Stop.

 

 

What have you got against pretty girls ?

I see plenty of men and women using full auto.

It sometimes looks pretty crazy when the auto flash pops up for daylight landscape but at least these people have made the first step in recognising that compact cameras sensors are awful. Although, saying that, my Nikon P300 takes pretty sharp pictures given good light.

 

Photography is a very varied art form and with a few exceptions I like most types of pictures.

I found his HDR pics very beautiful and I could definitely see the Leica character.

That 18mm lens is superb.

 

It has made me consider buying one.

[Archiver]

Funny, I hardly read his article as I was too busy seeing if I liked his HDR work or not!

 

Some of his photos are done quite tastefully and only look as if they had some effects applied, not necessarily HDR. Others have a definite HDR look that I am not fond of at all. But that's between the photographer and the viewer; no one is going to please everyone all the time.

 

At work, we create panoramic virtual tours, using raw capture and Photomatix to create very realistic looking images. We try to keep the 'HDRness' to a minimum and instead aim to recreate an idealized version of what you would see. That's as far as I'd go with HDR. Certainly not the overblown drugtrip horrors that turn up all over the internet.

 

As for the M9, heck, I love it. The Scottish groundskeeper in the Simpsons summed it perfectly when he spoke of his tractor: "Ach, me beauty! If it weren't ah violation of God's law, ah'd make yoo me wife!"

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[rafael_macia]

I think Auto allows those who want to concentrate on composition, to do so more comfortably.

 

I remember when I once insisted students use hand meters rather than built-ins.

How times change!

 

Photographers, "show" people what is happening.

Any way, anyone does that; should be fine.

Photography should be fun.

 

and .....

shooting wide open is not ... IMHO, a "Leica look".

 

The end result is the message.

 

As the Japanese proverb says; "The end is important in all things."

Hagakure