pico Posted October 1, 2014 Share #1 Posted October 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Comments? "the pictures that weren't taken by a Leica, were taken because of a Leica" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 2, 2014 Share #2 Posted October 2, 2014 Kudos for production value, and clever re-creation of iconic photos. Thumbs down for arrogant, and incorrect, interpretation of photographic history, which had the camera out of the studio well before Leica. A lot of great images were made in the 19th and early 20th century, providing people with experiences in lieu of travel, and lots more. Even early 'modernism' didn't rely on Leica, as Strand demonstrated. Of course photography hadn't hit the masses yet, but if that were the criterion for invention, then one might just as well say photography started with digital and the internet. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 2, 2014 Share #3 Posted October 2, 2014 Couldn't agree more, Jeff. Leica do so many things well but the hubris behind the statement that "we invented photography" really does them no favours. I seem to recall that the Leica Store São Paulo had another irritating ad (presumably these ads are commissioned locally) a year or so ago that, I think, tried to associate the brand with the work of Capa. I wonder whether these Brazilian ads have the full approval of Leica in Wetzlar. If they do, the latter ought to know better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted October 2, 2014 Share #4 Posted October 2, 2014 I think it's worth viewing again, watching and listening carefully, and with an open mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 2, 2014 Share #5 Posted October 2, 2014 I think it's worth viewing again, watching and listening carefully, and with an open mind. I have a very open mind, thanks. What is it that I am missing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted October 2, 2014 Share #6 Posted October 2, 2014 I think what Stuart means is that the emphasis on the second "photography" in the last sentence means that as a result of the invention of a camera that (as Leica sees it) allowed photographers to break free from the confines of their studios and from the shackles of large tripod-based cameras, photography as an art form changed fundamentally which enabled photographers, regardless of the brand of camera they used, to take photographs that were not previously possible. There's evidently a problem with that statement and it is one of causality. I believe it can be argued fairly convincingly that at some point in time, from the invention of the Leica camera, through photographic history and the the images which were (really cleverly and impressively recreated and) shown in the video, the link to the origin of truly mobile photography is too thin to attribute the creation of images not taken with a Leica to that invention. Still, I liked the video Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 2, 2014 Share #7 Posted October 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think what Stuart means is that the emphasis on the second "photography" in the last sentence means that as a result of the invention of a camera that (as Leica sees it) allowed photographers to break free from the confines of their studios and from the shackles of large tripod-based cameras, photography as an art form changed fundamentally which enabled photographers, regardless of the brand of camera they used, to take photographs that were not previously possible. Yes, I understand the distinction the ad is making (which was why I italicised the word in my previous comment). I assume Stuart must be suggesting something in the ad that is less obvious or he thinks I am some kind of halfwit. There's evidently a problem with that statement and it is one of causality. I believe it can be argued fairly convincingly that at some point in time, from the invention of the Leica camera, through photographic history and the the images which were (really cleverly and impressively recreated and) shown in the video, the link to the origin of truly mobile photography is too thin to attribute the creation of images not taken with a Leica to that invention. Yes, indeed. I think we can be fairly certain that if Barnack hadn't created his little camera somebody else would have created something similar. It is also more than a little presumptuous to suggest that the development of a whole variety of different non-studio camera equipment from the Kodak Brownie to the Rolleiflex had their genesis in Barnack's camera (which I think is your point). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalHeMan Posted October 2, 2014 Share #8 Posted October 2, 2014 Interesting that a camera manufacturer uses clever videography to advertise photography.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 2, 2014 Share #9 Posted October 2, 2014 I thought it was very clever, but a bit contrived. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_g_wolf ✝ Posted October 3, 2014 Share #10 Posted October 3, 2014 Yes indeed, an ingeniously contrived video, worth having a look. Getting the photographer out of his studio and not using metal- or wooden devices trapping down his motifs in front of artificial backgrounds gave the art an impetus which has not come to an end until now. Of course it was not the LEICA alone which allowed this change, anyone who wants to know, does know this. Would have been great, had LEICA been the very first ones to incorporate VIDEO in their cameras, but for this and many other technical features - so loved by many - they became to slow. Thx for the link, pico. Best GEORG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan.y Posted October 3, 2014 Share #11 Posted October 3, 2014 In my opinion this is in very poor taste. Yeah, we get the puns, but the consecutive punchlines are heavy-handed (aside from being arguably historically inaccurate). You can almost hear the copywriters congratulating themselves. The reenactments are cheesy, as reenactments tend to be. I can't help noticing the differences: Capra's solider is sitting on a box, Arbus's twins have lost all their eery uncanniness, General Nguyen is now a white man. In the past, when video and special effects weren't ubiquitous and accessible, reenactments of still images did have some aura and meaning. Now it can only be cheesy or postmodern (or both). I would've been more receptive to the video if it used the imperfection of the reenactments for aesthetic effect and exposed their contrivance more overtly. Now there's just unintended humor. Most fundamentally, this ad is awkward because it's more symptomatic of an identity crisis than inspirational or expressive of an assured vision. Adopting completely tthe Hollywood/TV ad conventions of an old man narrator telling you exactly what to think and a soundtrack that tells you exactly how to feel, using hi def hi fi video and circulating via youtube--this is almost an affront to the medium of photography, which evokes moods and stories and whole worlds with neither narration nor motion nor even color. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaybob Posted October 3, 2014 Share #12 Posted October 3, 2014 I liked it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted October 3, 2014 Share #13 Posted October 3, 2014 And irrespective of the merits of this movie, there is one Massive picture missing from these re-enactments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted October 3, 2014 Author Share #14 Posted October 3, 2014 I liked it before I put on my hearing aids. There must be a word that embraces 'arrogance, pretentious, and poseur'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan.y Posted October 4, 2014 Share #15 Posted October 4, 2014 "One image contaminating the others. Metastatis." This sudden morbid turn reminds me of college students who slip whole lines of swear words into their papers just to see if their professors actually read them. Ditto for the half-second shot of the Tiananmen tank man represented with toys. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richfx Posted November 26, 2014 Share #16 Posted November 26, 2014 It's cool. I don't think it's necessary to pick it apart through psychological or historical analyses. It's just a video - and an ad - not a documentary. The fact is that Leica casts a pretty long shadow in the world of photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 30, 2014 Share #17 Posted November 30, 2014 Agreed, a little more wincing than what BMW or Mercedes is guilty of. Leica advertising is missing an editor to send this stuff back with red pencil all over it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted November 30, 2014 Share #18 Posted November 30, 2014 It's cool. I don't think it's necessary to pick it apart through psychological or historical analyses. It's just a video - and an ad - not a documentary.The fact is that Leica casts a pretty long shadow in the world of photography. What he said. A little less negativity would be nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 30, 2014 Share #19 Posted November 30, 2014 I agree. I was being critical. It was certainly better than having Leica do nothing. I do like that they are trying to emphasize photography as opposed to the endless gear adds we see. And, overall I really like that Leica shows up at Photokina with a massive exhibition of photographic art. But, it did hit me a little bit like they could have taken a wee bit of the hubris out and it would have gone a long way to making more palatable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 1, 2014 Share #20 Posted December 1, 2014 And irrespective of the merits of this movie, there is one Massive picture missing from these re-enactments. Brett, excuse my ignorance, but which one do you think is missing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.