Going full Leica...

[Peter Kilmister]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm prettier than the girl in the photo.

.

Now, that's a challenge! Let's see your offering so we can compare.

[pop]

I'm prettier than the girl in the photo.

.

No, you're not. Your hairdo is.

[Advertisement]

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

[pico]

Now, that's a challenge! Let's see your offering so we can compare.

 

Sure. Now is this not a real photo? (Credit to James A. Bowey)

 

[Peter Kilmister]

Cunning stunt!

[Rick]

How do you come to know Bowey?

[pico]

How do you come to know Bowey?

 

James was a professor at our University when I worked there.  His main pursuit was photojournalism, including dangerous war assignments and many other admirable projects. Among his many projects was a portrait series which was a genre I did not know he pursued. It was a remarkable success with his images being put into the collection of the Minnesota Marine Art museum. You might appreciate what a surprising collection it has for a small Midwestern town.

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Cunning stunt!

 

I would have your post removed, if I could.

 

That said, I am proud of the accumulation of wrinkles, scars I've earned in seventy years. I'm still above ground, so all is good.

.

Edited January 13, 2016 by pico

[Rick]

Pico - you never cease to amaze me.  You are a big dog.  

 

I had a photography teacher in the 70's that was an amazing portrait photographer.  He would look at our work and if he didn't like it he would say, "There is a place for you at Sears."

 

Rick

[Rick]

Cunning stunt!

 

 

Never as impressive as a portrait of a stunning... never mind.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Rick

[Jared]

As long as you are comfortable with the rangefinder focusing and can accurately get the nearest eye, you should be fine. Personally, I'd recommend the 75mm Summicron over any of the 50's for this use, but it depends on whether you are after head and shoulders shots or something a bit wider. I don't like the perspective I get when I use a 50 for tighter framing. Of course, you could always just crop a bit as well. A 90 would als be a popular choice, and I have owned one in the past but could never get accurate enough focus she shooting at larger apertures. Good luck!

 

- Jared

[Ai_Print]

P.S. I should have noted that I'm not a professional in the work sense.

 

 

Well then you are not a professional, there is no other "sense".

 

Now then, on to the topic at hand. I have done a fair number of portraits with my Leica cameras but they are by no means my first choice for the job for a host of reasons:

 

1. Parallax and the disconnect from the background causing the work to be slower and less accurate than I would like. I like to use background and foreground play a lot and an ever so slight difference in positioning in this regard can make a huge difference in getting a keeper or a tosser.

 

2. Having to always use focus and recompose slows the process down and if the subject moves at all when shooting at full aperture, it has to be done over again so it can test the patience of a subject if on a tight timeline. 

 

3. Slow frame rates, it is not uncommon for me to shoot in bursts so that half blinks and facial twitches are overcome, the Leica is not a fast frame rate camera.

 

4. It is not uncommon that longer lenses like an 85mm and up are used and in my experience, Leica is just not very effective with longer than a 50, just far too disconnected from the subject, like watching a movie from the bathroom of the theatre rather than in the theatre it self. 

 

5. RF lenses don't focus very close and sometimes I or clients desire creatively seen partial facial representations that come in from either side for layout purposes.

 

I had a portrait shoot for a major magazine not long ago and I used my D810 with an 85mm 1.8, Zeiss 50mm F2 Milvus and my M240 with the 35mm FLE. While the wider and more environmental shots with the Leica were fine and one got used, it were the shots with the Nikons that had the most refined pairings of subject to background and the best moments caught. 

 

I'm taking an M6 and M3 with my 28, 35 & 50 to Cuba this year for a month to work on a story, I will have to do portraits in some cases and while it will work, I know there will be times I am longing for my F100 and the 85mm or 105mm. 

Edited January 14, 2016 by Ai_Print

[jmahto]

Never as impressive as a portrait of a stunning... never mind.

Let us have the picture... let me be the judge..

[Adam]

Well then you are not a professional, there is no other "sense".

 

 

I think it is fairly obvious what he was trying to say. He is not a commercial photographer, but he can still do professional photographs.

 

 

Professional has been hijacked to mean commercial, instead of meaning done professionally. I guess it sounds better than being called a commercial photographer, or a commercial politician.   

[jdlaing]

Commercial Politician?

[Ai_Print]

I think it is fairly obvious what he was trying to say. He is not a commercial photographer, but he can still do professional photographs.

 

 

Professional has been hijacked to mean commercial, instead of meaning done professionally. I guess it sounds better than being called a commercial photographer, or a commercial politician. 

 

 

Mmm....no. It is the other way around actually, professional has been hijacked to say that an amateur's work is of a professional level.  

 

Given that the digital age has given birth to many who can take a technically good photograph because the camera and the computer at home does a lot of the work for them, sometimes with some personal vision involved, the term "professional" really ought to be reserved for those who actually pratice photography as a full time profession. 

 

I have some friends who can golf really well. They would never say they play "In a professional sense".

Edited January 14, 2016 by Ai_Print

[Adam]

Commercial Politician?

yep, a tautology pretending to be an oxymoron. I put it in as a joke

 

But I like to think a professional photographer does not need to be a commercial photographer, and a commercial photographer does not necessarily mean a professional one. Sadly this distinction seems to be disappearing. The implication being professional results require paying money.

 

The same in sports, your are a professional athlete because you get paid. Many college athletes are just as professional, but they do not get paid, just exploited. So college athletes are not called professional.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Adam

[Nick Bedford]

I'm a "hobbyist/amateur" who does professional jobs occasionally. So I'm obviously not full time but I can definitely do professional work, and most importantly I take all of the work I produce very seriously.

 

That being said I have noticed plenty of advertising "professionals" whose work is anything but.

 

I don't like the word amateur despite its technical definition. It's been hijacked to mean "learner" or "crap".

Edited January 14, 2016 by nickjbedford

[Ai_Print]

As a photographer who has been doing this full time for nearly 30 years, I did not call or refer to my self as a "photographer" until I was doing it full time. If in the future I fail to make the majority of my income as a photographer, then when I file my taxes my CPA will no longer be able to enter "photographer" on that line item. I will no longer be a photographer.

 

Full time income from photography = photographer. 

 

Occasional pay on the side from photographic services or products = photo enthusiast / amateur who makes some cash on the side. 

[Joshua Lowe]

I don't know much about studio portraiture.  I guess my impression of it is that you have the luxury of asking your subject to pose, to hold still, etc.  You can play with the camera's positioning, take different frames with different points of focus, etc.  Seems like you could use just about any camera you like as long as the output satisfies the client and meets your personal standards.  An M would not be my first choice but if your subjects/clients are happy and you're happy, then more power to you.  It also seems like a good environment for using LV or the EVF, versus trying to photograph in a fluid environment like a social event, where the LV/EVF's lag really hurts it.

 

Also, the whole concept of "portraiture" can mean a lot of different things.  The styles of Annie Leibovitz and Terry Richardson are incomparable but they both specialize in portraits.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Joshua Lowe]

As a photographer who has been doing this full time for nearly 30 years, I did not call or refer to my self as a "photographer" until I was doing it full time. If in the future I fail to make the majority of my income as a photographer, then when I file my taxes my CPA will no longer be able to enter "photographer" on that line item. I will no longer be a photographer.

 

Full time income from photography = photographer. 

 

Occasional pay on the side from photographic services or products = photo enthusiast / amateur who makes some cash on the side. 

 

Call yourself whatever you like.  But I'd appreciate you not telling me who or what I am, thanks.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Joshua Lowe