Luminous-Landscape M8 in the field: Morocco

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suddenly feel a bit bad picking on Mr Reichmann. I looke at the images again, and say that the strongest is the silhouette against the pink wall. Totally reminds me of the mystery that is Morocco.

 

As the poster says above, it's a tough place to get pics and a challenge for even the best photographers. I think even Bruce Gilden would be tentative there. I was fortunate enough to be travelling with a French woman, so it opened a lot of doors to have a full time translator. That said it was one of the toughest travels I've ever done and we were only there 10 days. It was late December and therefore cold! at times. Between us we suffered colds, food poisoining (her) full body strep (me) and afterwards measles (her). I really thought I might die at one point and the last three days of the trip were spent in bed

 

This pic is from a village we stayed in at the end of Ramadan. We slept on the floor of a house in a village in the Draa valley where we were hosted by a group of really nice young men. We stayed up late eating, dancing and smoking. I woke the next morning with the strep. Anyway, it is the hardest place to photograph, but like anywhere can be done if one gives in to it and is willing to go the extra mile.

 

Anyway, it reminds me of the mysterious pic mentioned above though it was really just fun and dancing.

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!

[carstenw]

Count me among the many who does not understand the bashing of Michael Reichmann and his photos.

 

First of all, let's put things in perspective. He is not a Magnum photographer, but a successful Computer Scientist/Business man who ran some companies, earned some money, and has retired to his favorite hobby of photography. He is doing exactly what I would do in his situation, creating a website with lots of interesting information, travelling, taking pictures, making DVDs and so on. His images are often very good, sometimes not so interesting, but he rarely if ever publishes bad stuff, and who among us can say that. I enjoy his DVDs and his site. He has access to some interesting people and information, and generously shares it with us, often free, sometimes at a small cost.

 

I think that anyone who wants to criticise should show us that they can do better. It is so easy to criticise, so hard to do better.

[Guest stnami]

That the M8 helped him get the shots where other cameras might have been impossible is almost incidental

........ a load of rubbish or coming from a narrow perspective.

 

Micheal's problem is that he isn't street smart and probably not a good tactician. The shots are well executed but lack contact which goes with confidence and not working to one's strengths.

Giulio is on the money about McCurry's attitude towards his image structure, the last book, Looking East indicates a desire to sell not a desire to create, but so be it if it is one's intent and he does have an audience for this type of image. No different to making money taking wedding photos,grand vistas or pictures of donuts etc

 

I think that anyone who wants to criticise should show us that they can do better

.... ahummmm......followed by head shaking

[ustein]

>should show us that they can do better

 

What ever this means. Photography is not measured like a sports event.

 

The more I work in photography the more I like that there are so many ways to express your view and feelings. It also request to respect different views. Often I learn more from pictures I did not like that much at first. It is always fine to disagree while there has to be a lot of reason not to respect other people's work.

 

>show us that they can do better

 

Let me phrase it my way: Show us work that inspires other people (even it it might be a minority).

 

Uwe

[carstenw]

You are of course right, Uwe My point was that few here are likely to be able to, and that the criticism is really pointless.

[abrewer]

>should show us that they can do better

 

What ever this means. Photography is not measured like a sports event.

 

The more I work in photography the more I like that there are so many ways to express your view and feelings. It also request to respect different views. Often I learn more from pictures I did not like that much at first. It is always fine to disagree while there has to be a lot of reason not to respect other people's work.

 

>show us that they can do better

 

Let me phrase it my way: Show us work that inspires other people (even it it might be a minority).

 

Uwe

 

 

 

Well put Uwe.

 

Thanks for your contributions here too.

 

Allan

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personally, I am often awe-struck by Reichmann's images.

 

And then I read here that "he doesn't connect."

 

I think perhaps the complainers are saying that the images don't connect with them.

 

They do with me.

 

--HC

[Guest stnami]

A lot of his MF type of images a e very good indeed but employing the same tactics in this type of image making requires some adjustments, something I feel that Micheal needs to address.His photos of today compared to those a year ago there show a real honing of his craft as MF style of image maker

[sean_reid]

Count me among the many who does not understand the bashing of Michael Reichmann and his photos.

 

First of all, let's put things in perspective. He is not a Magnum photographer, but a successful Computer Scientist/Business man who ran some companies, earned some money, and has retired to his favorite hobby of photography. He is doing exactly what I would do in his situation, creating a website with lots of interesting information, travelling, taking pictures, making DVDs and so on. His images are often very good, sometimes not so interesting, but he rarely if ever publishes bad stuff, and who among us can say that. I enjoy his DVDs and his site. He has access to some interesting people and information, and generously shares it with us, often free, sometimes at a small cost.

 

I think that anyone who wants to criticise should show us that they can do better. It is so easy to criticise, so hard to do better.

 

Michael was also a working photojournalist and earns part of his living now through gallery print sales and other professional photography work.

 

As is true elsewhere, people come to this forum with many different backgrounds in photography/art, different tastes and different senses of what is and is not a strong picture. Some recognize that and understand that one's perspective is only that, no more no less. Others seem to think that they're in a position to designate what photographic work is good and what is not. Its the latter hubris that I find troubling. Opinions, presented as opinions (not pronouncements) can be interesting. When the comments go beyond that, however, I think that things can get problematic.

 

Let's give Michael the same courtesy and respect that should be given to any member of this forum. I'm sure he'll ask for picture criticism if he wants that but wouldn't suggest that anyone hold his or her breath waiting for such a request. Now there are discussions we have here where people, such as Wayne Pease and many others, specifically ask for feedback on their work. That's a slightly different kettle of fish but even then I think the comments should be constructive and respectful.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[mwilliamsphotography]

Hi Marc,

 

It may just relate to the fact that we all hold and use the camera a bit differently.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Thanks Sean, but that doesn't seem to be the case with this specific camera. What I am saying is that the switch is very firm, and no amount of jostling would move it. It firmly clicks into each place and has to be deliberately moved out of position. If it were tighter, it would be a problem.

 

I find it interesting that others layer their own asthetic onto other's work. I guess that's the nature of the beast. Yet, when one looks beyond personal prejudices new elements of enjoying the work of others seem to open up to you.

 

I understand the usual "street photographers" disconnected comments on the work linked to. At the same time I find a seductive sense of mystery, the beauty of just rendering light, and many superbly designed frames that charm the eye.

 

If the nature of the subject is to be ethereal and elusive, is it not also valid to portray them in that manner ... especially if you the photographer are seeing it that way?

 

It's definitely all personal opinion. I found the other work linked to as de-facto examples of what it should be, not as quite as appealing ... but I'm working on over-coming that prejudice : -)

[ustein]

>My point was that few here are likely to be able to, and that the criticism is really pointless.

 

Carsten, of course I know what you mean. The point is that bringing images onto a scale of bad, good, great,... is already a bad thing. And you can be sure I am guilty of the same by many counts.

 

Read this excellent article by Alain Briot:

 

Being an Artist

 

He shows the big difference between the artist and the art critic.

 

Uwe

[sean_reid]

 

1) Thanks Sean, but that doesn't seem to be the case with this specific camera. What I am saying is that the switch is very firm, and no amount of jostling would move it. It firmly clicks into each place and has to be deliberately moved out of position. If it were tighter, it would be a problem.

 

2) I find it interesting that others layer their own asthetic onto other's work. I guess that's the nature of the beast. Yet, when one looks beyond personal prejudices new elements of enjoying the work of others seem to open up to you.

 

 

Hi Marc,

 

1) Actually, the switch action has always seemed fine to me too but maybe different examples of the M8 are set a bit differently. I do think the grip relocates one's hand in such a way that the switch would be less likely to be bumped accidentally.

 

2) I agree, each person is going to rely upon his or her own aesthetic ideas/tastes/experiences/preferences/exposure to art/etc. when he or she looks at pictures. I think the key thing is for one to remember that those are *individual* preferences, not universal standards or rules. I imagine you might agree with that.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Srf_Cast]

That the M8 helped him get the shots where other cameras might have been impossible is almost incidental ...... snip

 

That's actually puzzling to me. I don't understand the review and your comment.

The camera which you have to bring to your eye to take the shot when people are running away, without a telephoto lens (where as he says he's cropping superb 2MP!!! pics) and loosing 50% of shots due to the bad switch design.... this camera is "helping him" to get the shots

I wonder how it would compare with old P&S like Canon Pro1 (or any other comparable camera) where you can flip and twist the LCD for framing from the hip, store the hyperfocal as a custom function, zoom in to 200mm and still have a very nice 8MP RAW file in the end.

 

Reading the review it sounded like a disaster and yet the conclusion seems to be that the M8 is a terrific tool for this job

[mwilliamsphotography]

2) I agree, each person is going to rely upon his or her own aesthetic ideas/tastes/experiences/preferences/exposure to art/etc. when he or she looks at pictures. I think the key thing is for one to remember that those are *individual* preferences, not universal standards or rules. I imagine you might agree with that.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

 

Yes I do Sean.

[ho_co]

Reading the review it sounded like a disaster and yet the conclusion seems to be that the M8 is a terrific tool for this job

Mike--

To me the article isn't a review, but a description of a traveler's visit to a new location armed with a minimum of equipment.

 

The article seems to me to say: 1) New country for me. 2) More difficult to photograph people than I'm used to. 3) Had some repeated annoyances with the M8 on-off switch. 4) Here are some of my pictures.

 

He shows some good results despite the camera problems.

 

Michael has previously been quite clear that he likes the M8 very much but can't at the moment recommend it to everyone because of its quirks.

 

I don't see the article as indicative of a disaster, though he clearly would have liked better performance of the switch.

 

I'm also pleased to hear that he finds the NOTE as useful on the M8 as I do on the M6, and I will be very interested to hear his comments on the WATE and the Zeiss 15.

 

--HC

[Jamie Roberts]

........ a load of rubbish or coming from a narrow perspective.

Micheal's problem is that he isn't street smart and probably not a good tactician. The shots are well executed but lack contact which goes with confidence and not working to one's strengths.

 

Imants, with all due respect, because I really do like your work, I think your dismissal of Michael's feelings around using the M8 is a little off. The fact he felt he could work quickly, and as a "tourist" is enough: the equipment helped him; who are you to say it didn't? What are the "tactics" or "street smarts" Michael needed to get shots of his own perspective in a strange country?

 

Again, the point of the shots, from my perspective, is their absolute lack of contact.

The best shot of the bunch for me (though I like a lot of them) is the opening shot; the smoke, fire, and hints of faces is a wonderful "veil" through which to see. I bet it makes a great print, too (and I've seen Michael's prints at exhibition, and they're exceptionally good).

 

Anyway, other kinds of shots, equally good (but none I've seen posted here, sorry!), have as their point the "contact of cultures" (violent or otherwise) or the "universality" of human experience.

 

Frankly, I've had my fill of the last two categories as being completely outmoded by at least 20 or 30--if not 50--years, semiotically speaking, though I can still appreciate a finely executed portrait. Or sensitive critique of "human contact."

 

Giulio is on the money about McCurry's attitude towards his image structure, the last book, Looking East indicates a desire to sell not a desire to create, but so be it if it is one's intent and he does have an audience for this type of image. No different to making money taking wedding photos,grand vistas or pictures of donuts etc

 

And if McCurry took them and no-one looked at them and he didn't make money? What then? Would he be an "artist" instead of "shill?" Just a question, and a serious one at that. In other words, does his intent to sell define his portraits? Or is it a side-effect of the kind of audience he builds?

[arget]

So far I have not had switch issues but I do tend to a two hand hold, more age related requirement than technique preference. Switch temper tantrums have not occured but I do tend to keep switch on continuously or the day of shooting DNG single frame. I have not noticed any significant battery life decrease, averaging appprox 270 shots or better per charge.

[blakley]

Re: the switch, I think there must be some sample variation. I find mine halfway between the S and C positions fairly often, and this is a problem I've never encountered with any other camera. I'm hoping it gets fixed while it's on its current vacation in Solms. The shutter action, though, has never really bothered me - I have no trouble with its various positions though I admit I don't sense the tactile detent between positions one and two.

 

Re: McCurry - well, one can have any number of opinions. Here's my experience. I learned to take "very good" (by my own standards) black and white portraits with some difficultly but got to the point where I could do it reproducibly. When I reached that point, I could not take a good color portrait (by my own standards) one time in ten.

 

Then I looked at Phaidon's book of Steve McCurry's portraits. I went through it again and again, and I finally saw the light. What I saw was that he was using color theory the way a Renaissance painter would have. His portraits are almost all monochromatic or complementary color schemes, with the irises of the eyes determining the dominant color. Bingo. After ONE WEEK of studying color wheels and practicing with a few subjects, I got to the point where I could take "very good" portraits by my own standards in color.

 

So he taught me something important which I can use. I like his portraits. I like his use of color, which I like to think is deliberate. Like Rowell (who is my favorite color photographer), I think he puts a lot of time and thought into the way colors appear in his photos, and I respect that.

[jrc]

Then I looked at Phaidon's book of Steve McCurry's portraits. I went through it again and again, and I finally saw the light. What I saw was that he was using color theory the way a Renaissance painter would have. His portraits are almost all monochromatic or complementary color schemes, with the irises of the eyes determining the dominant color. Bingo. After ONE WEEK of studying color wheels and practicing with a few subjects, I got to the point where I could take "very good" portraits by my own standards in color.

 

Best example of how this works isn't in Renaissance paintings, but with paintings by Modigliani. If you look at the eyes in his portraits and figure paintings, they explicitly pick up a major color in the background, and sometimes so strikingly that the eyes look like empty sockets with the background showing through; often green (the complementary) to vibrate against the various reds and oranges of the figures.

 

JC

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[blakley]

Oh, cool - thanks for that. I'm definitely going to check it out.