Leica M brochure; not good enough

[yanidel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A camera brochure can be memorable without stylized post-processing of the photos.

Or extremely boring with the same old stuff from the last 30 years

 

Again, this is about tastes. Really seems like some hate that brochure while others love it. I guess Leica did succeed with it since we talk all that much about it.

[Advertisement]

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

[Fotomiguel]

A camera brochure can be memorable without stylized post-processing of the photos.

Stylized post-processing? for me is just light conditions. With the M9 you can get this images after a few seconds of raw post-processing. In the brochure is not a matter of post-processing but good photographer and of course the M9.

[pico]

Can you name another camera brochure you remember the subject matter and photos from? I sure can't.

 

Sure! Pirelli tires' calendars.

 

Seriously, Hasselblad's brochures. Pretty good.

[rennsport]

I don't remember the brochure anymore, and I believe Leica didn't lose many sales from that.

 

It's better than some fancy brochure of a certain brand advertising complex metering feature which, in reality, isn't accurate when it comes to challenging scenes. ;-)

[zlatkob]

Or extremely boring with the same old stuff from the last 30 years

 

Again, this is about tastes. Really seems like some hate that brochure while others love it.

 

I don't think it's just about taste. The boxing photos are beautiful — I'm not saying I dislike them. Without seeing the original files, I can't say how much post-processing was done to them. Some look more processed, some very little. However, the clipping of the highlights in some photos (especially pages 14-15, 41, 43 and 72-73) seems inconsistent with the brochure's technical message. Also, the color scheme doesn't look real, as if some colors were emphasized and others desaturated in post. If that was done, along with pushing contrast, then we are seeing more of a fashion esthetic than a documentary esthetic. And that seems inconsistent with the brochure's message about how great the camera is for capturing "authentic, natural images, taken from real life" (p. 18). (But again, we can't be sure either way.)

 

What was good about "the same old stuff from the last 30 years" is that it did tend to show "authentic, natural images, taken from real life". And Salgado's work certainly wasn't boring.

[drums1977]

Stylized post-processing? for me is just light conditions. With the M9 you can get this images after a few seconds of raw post-processing. In the brochure is not a matter of post-processing but good photographer and of course the M9.

 

I'm sorry to disagree. For anyone even a tiny bit familiar with digital PP, those images are retouched. Not that I disapprove that at all -I find the images very nice myself-, but let's be realistic, and not say that those images were like that "straight from the camera". As you say, those images can be achieved in a few seconds of RAW post processing. You must be very good -and fast- at RAW postprocessing, and you are right, camera raw, LR, etc are very powerful tools. Post processing tools the same as PS. I still face photographers who don't consider RAW PP as "retouching" or "post processing". I say that is a big lie to themself, who try to keep their peace of mind by saying "oh no, never, I don't use photoshop". All masters post-processed their images somehow, the same way as we do now with our computers.

 

Anyway, that is not the point of this thread, sorry... I just wanted to say that i like those pictures and that my first impression about them was that I didn't expect Leica to digitally postprocess the first "official" M9 images that much. I suppose it is, as someone said before, a way to show that Leica can also have a modern,attractive, "digital" look (when properly retouched, as any other brand). In the case of the boxing series I would say, at first sight, that the curves and colour balance are heavily modified, the shadows are burnt, the highlights dodged. Maybe even some selective colour corrections. If that is not PP, what is?

[leicashot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They may have been touched a little, but one things for sure. They used reflectors or possibly some diffused lighting to achieve that look. I believe it was very well done.

[Fotomiguel]

I'm sorry to disagree. For anyone even a tiny bit familiar with digital PP, those images are retouched. Not that I disapprove that at all -I find the images very nice myself-, but let's be realistic, and not say that those images were like that "straight from the camera". As you say, those images can be achieved in a few seconds of RAW post processing. You must be very good -and fast- at RAW postprocessing, and you are right, camera raw, LR, etc are very powerful tools. Post processing tools the same as PS. I still face photographers who don't consider RAW PP as "retouching" or "post processing". I say that is a big lie to themself, who try to keep their peace of mind by saying "oh no, never, I don't use photoshop". All masters post-processed their images somehow, the same way as we do now with our computers.

 

Anyway, that is not the point of this thread, sorry... I just wanted to say that i like those pictures and that my first impression about them was that I didn't expect Leica to digitally postprocess the first "official" M9 images that much. I suppose it is, as someone said before, a way to show that Leica can also have a modern,attractive, "digital" look (when properly retouched, as any other brand). In the case of the boxing series I would say, at first sight, that the curves and colour balance are heavily modified, the shadows are burnt, the highlights dodged. Maybe even some selective colour corrections. If that is not PP, what is?

Even when we worked with film we had post-processing. One was previous: The film type you chose. After that in the dark room, you could control again exposition, contrast, etc.

Now is all quite different and at the same time very easy. When the shot is good postprocessing is really easy. Or course they modify the file. It's a raw flat image. You have post process the image but in the same way you did in the dark room. Now it's just so easy and Photography has arrive to everybody.

In the brochure they play with strong light conditions and the photographer controled the light with the right exposure. In some of them looking for details in shadows and lights and in another just burning the highlights. After the shots you have to develop the raw files.

When you have a bad shot, you need to work a lot with PS

[Fotomiguel]

They may have been touched a little, but one things for sure. They used reflectors or possibly some diffused lighting to achieve that look. I believe it was very well done.

I don't agree at all.

[leicashot]

I don't agree at all.

 

Feel free to disagree but If you've done similar shoots before you know how to spot light being reected back onto the subject. I also confirmed this with a Leica rep. It sounds like you're disappointed to hear that. There is nothing wrong with adding some discreet fill light if it makes the images better

[drums1977]

Even when we worked with film we had post-processing. One was previous: The film type you chose. After that in the dark room, you could control again exposition, contrast, etc.

Now is all quite different and at the same time very easy. When the shot is good postprocessing is really easy. Or course they modify the file. It's a raw flat image. You have post process the image but in the same way you did in the dark room. Now it's just so easy and Photography has arrive to everybody.

In the brochure they play with strong light conditions and the photographer controled the light with the right exposure. In some of them looking for details in shadows and lights and in another just burning the highlights. After the shots you have to develop the raw files.

When you have a bad shot, you need to work a lot with PS

 

We agree in the fact that post processing is and has always been a part of the photographic process, but I strongly disagree in your saying that these boxing images are lightly post processed images. These are not candid images shown in a natually captured way at all. I agree with Leicashot, the scenes look, in some cases, artificially lit, possibly with large softboxes or maybe just with big reflectors, for a subtle fill.

 

Also, if you look at the photographer's website (Maik Scharfscheer) you'll see that most of his portfolio shows artificially lit models and heavy digital PP. They are great shots by a highly inspired and skilled professional, but they are not just as you say, they kind of pictures you get "after a few seconds of raw post-processing". Not at all, sir.

[erl]

The last time I looked at the brochure pictures was when it was first released. The first and lasting impression I gained was that reflected fill had been used to open up some areas. In a 'natural' environment, heavy dark areas can often be problematic. If you have the facility to control anything, you do what the photographer obviously did. Totally authentic and full use of a photographic tool at his disposal. Particularly as the images were destined for a brochure and not just 'street' shooting.

 

It is the prudent use of such tools, that separates working professionals from most amateurs. I can say that because I wear both 'hats'. Also, PP is a totally legitimate tool and always has been. Some of the accepted tricks I did in my darkroom days would make your hair curl. The only question is, was it well done?

[theendlesshouse]

From the previous brochure

 

[drums1977]

The last time I looked at the brochure pictures was when it was first released. The first and lasting impression I gained was that reflected fill had been used to open up some areas. In a 'natural' environment, heavy dark areas can often be problematic. If you have the facility to control anything, you do what the photographer obviously did. Totally authentic and full use of a photographic tool at his disposal. Particularly as the images were destined for a brochure and not just 'street' shooting.

 

It is the prudent use of such tools, that separates working professionals from most amateurs. I can say that because I wear both 'hats'. Also, PP is a totally legitimate tool and always has been. Some of the accepted tricks I did in my darkroom days would make your hair curl. The only question is, was it well done?

 

I totally agree.

[erl]

The image from the previous brochure, according to 'theendlesshouse' is in totally different genre from the current one. Yes, it is a dramatic image from a lighting POV, one I often employ, but the pose is quite static and delivers no 'intent' which I feel a boxing image should.

 

Again, my recollection of the current brochure is that some of the images carry intent, which is probably important for boxing images. Maybe my recollection is wrong of course.

[Fotomiguel]

Trying to analize each picture of the brochure, I've realized that there is a picture of lightroom 2. In this picture you may see some of the shots and you may see that they have the same look without a PS postprocessing. The shots has just a quick lightroom postprocessing. They are just develop. I've been using lightroom 3 in the last weeck and it's really easy and quick.

On the other side looking at the pictures and trying to find out how they were shot, I think that most of them are just with natural light. The heavy one direction light and the heavy contrast make me think this way. At the end of the brochure there are a couple of shots with a girl. I think that it was used some kind of filling flash. May be the Leica SF 58.

[leicashot]

To download a pdf of the brochure, go here and see what I am referring to. http://en.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_4465.pdf

 

On further inspection I believe that at there was definitely some fill or light reflected into some of the images, definitely the pics showing the faces of the guy and girl together. The sun light is behind them in page 34 and in 37 you can see the reflection in her eye, most likely from a round reflector. This particular image is quite different form the rest and the effect is a little too much.

 

The pic of the two guys sitting together on page 8 has some natural reflection from the light colored concrete below them, but I think they also had some reflector added to their faces as the sunlight is directly above (see the shadows) yet you can still one of the guy's eyes perfectly.

 

The pic of the old man on page 12 most likely has some fill as the lighting is hitting him at a low angle, yet the color temperature of the light (white light) suggests it wasn't shot at the end of the day where the light would be coming through a door/window at that angle, and in a warmer color.

 

The pic of the boxer having his gloves checked on page 20 definitely has some fill light reflected on his face as the light from the sun is strongly above him in front (look at his coach's hat). Same with page 22, most noticeable on the coach's face.

 

Most of the reflected light used in this brochure is skillfully done, possibility with a white foam core board or reflector as it's very subtle and professionally implemented. Most of the shots at the gym were shot with the sun quite high in the sky, requiring the use of reflected light. At the end of the day, it was a commercial shoot and while there is noticeable clipping in highlights, all that does is show that the sensor has it's limitations. Personally I would have used a diffusion panel to soften the direct sunlight hitting any white clothing.

 

While it could be improved, most of us are not qualified to do such a shoot ourselves, so we really shouldn't criticize. I'm just happy to see Leica using a documentary style theme in their brochures for a change.

[zlatkob]

Trying to analize each picture of the brochure, I've realized that there is a picture of lightroom 2. In this picture you may see some of the shots and you may see that they have the same look without a PS postprocessing. The shots has just a quick lightroom postprocessing. They are just develop. I've been using lightroom 3 in the last weeck and it's really easy and quick.

 

Fotomiguel, you've spotted something that no one else has mentioned so far, but I think you've misinterpreted it.

 

Below is an enlarged portion of the Lightroom screen from the brochure, and it appears to show, side-by-side, the before and after versions of two of the photographs (the yellow text are my additions). It seems quite apparent that the colors where changed and the contrast was enhanced. They do not have the same look without post-processing. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but now we don't have to speculate. The degree of post-processing is shown to us right in the brochure. Although we can't see the sliders in the Develop module, we can see their effects on the photos.

 

I think your emphasis on "quick Lightroom postprocessing" is misplaced. Lightroom Develop presets can change an image dramatically in a fraction of a second; so quickness (if it even was quick) does not guarantee minimal post-processing.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Fotomiguel]

Fotomiguel, you've spotted something that no one else has mentioned so far, but I think you've misinterpreted it.

 

Below is an enlarged portion of the Lightroom screen from the brochure, and it appears to show, side-by-side, the before and after versions of two of the photographs (the yellow text are my additions). It seems quite apparent that the colors where changed and the contrast was enhanced. They do not have the same look without post-processing. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but now we don't have to speculate. The degree of post-processing is shown to us right in the brochure. Although we can't see the sliders in the Develop module, we can see their effects on the photos.

 

I think your emphasis on "quick Lightroom postprocessing" is misplaced. Lightroom Develop presets can change an image dramatically in a fraction of a second; so quickness (if it even was quick) does not guarantee minimal post-processing.

Don't forget you are working with raw files. The raw files are flat. You have to develop the files. This can be done in a few seconds. Even you can develop one and apply the same changes to the similar images. How long you need to develop with lightroom? If the shot is fine you just need a few of quick steps to get the final. In the examples of the brochure, you have a bit more of brighness, contrast and Whitebalance. The normal and quick postprocessing. No using the big tools of PS or changing dramaticaly the Shot.

[luigi bertolotti]

Personally, more than the images in itselves, which imho are up to the message of quality that the brochure wants to emphasize, it was the boxing thema in itself that made me think... why this choice ? Clearly they decided not to add simply a gallery of various beautiful images (as I saw recently in a Nikon brochure)... generally speaking, this is a message that links the camera to the concept of photographing as a "serious task" (a reportage is not simply "taking some fine pic"), and this can be perceived by the mean / amateur customer as a "positive" feeling toward the product : I think, most of we amateurs, even if simple shooters like me, intimately think that having choosen a Leica, photography, for us, is "something more" than simply taking pics when one likes to do.

But why boxing ? Box is, generally speaking, SPORT, but not related to free time, open air, pleasant locations... box is struggle, box is "macho"... I wonder why the choosed this... maybe a subliminal relation with the struggle of Leica to regain its place in a market dominated by a pair of "heavyweights" ? Or, similar but not the same, "we are still strong" (choosing a black man to avoid the trivial "we Germans are still strong"); anyway (and admit that this can be seen as a bit ridicolous) I'm prone to think that the choice of boxing is more related, consciously or not, to Leica camera than to their potential customer.

 

After that... I agree that nowadays brochures have a side place... not to speak of the fact that 99,99% of typical Leica users evaluate the buy of M9 dedicating 0,01% of their decision time to the brochure...