"Leica M10 - Expect Simplicity" (overgaard.dk)

[Chazphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In reply to Mike Myers re Thorsten von Overgaard's photos, art and the teaching of it.  

You can teach the components of what makes for an artistic photograph, subject to art being in the eye of the beholder.  There are enough beholders, however, that some degree of consistency of art appreciation emerges and from those examples can be derived some pointers for an artistic photograph.  I think we would all agree that a technically competent photograph doesn't make for an artistically appealing one, per se.  It is also true that a photo which has been composed artistically in accordance with various guiding principles may not achieve its aim (at least for all beholders), but it stands a better chance of doing so than one which has not.  The big caveat to that is that technical competency is ones and zeros, whereas these principles of good composition and artistry are fuzzy-logic, so the variables are far greater.

Thorsten is an excellent teacher, both in person and online, with a strong personality & philosophy that runs through all he does; you either get on with that or dislike it.  His technical material online is extensive, but not the only thing he writes by any stretch.  He talks a lot about his experiences, thoughts about photograph (and life) and about composition and light.  Find his article on "which lens are you" and have a read, if you haven't chanced upon it yet.  In person, Thorsten gives very little artistic or technical direction but a huge amount of encouragement and support.  His way of looking at and for light is worth experiencing and then trying to apply.

His own photographs are recognisably his, which itself is a mark of some artistry.  They are not all alike, but within certain categories share a number of characteristics.  The same is true for many of the great photographers and something to aspire to.  

Cheers

 

Chazphoto

[MikeMyers]

1 hour ago, Chazphoto said:

In reply to Mike Myers re Thorsten von Overgaard's photos, art and the teaching of it.

I agree with everything you wrote.  Having artistic ability doesn't guarantee a great photo.  Understanding the technical details - that alone isn't enough, as it needs artistic ability.  Having both may be enough, but even then, I doubt if even Mr. Overgaard is completely pleased with every photo he creates.  But that is probably one of the goals, probably for most of us too.

It certainly is one of my goals, but I'm still working on learning the capabilities of my cameras.  With enough effort, I can eventually create an image I am proud of.  They are not as "strong" as the images I admire from Overgaard, but as long as I am making progress, for me that is the main thing.  

My Leica cameras make that easier, as I can concentrate on the basics, not pages and pages of technology settings and adjustments.  

 

1 hour ago, Chazphoto said:

Find his article on "which lens are you" and have a read, if you haven't chanced upon it yet. 

I haven't, and I'll see if I can find it.  Maybe you can post a link to it?  

Are you referring to this YouTube video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyrcghhPjHY

[MikeMyers]

2 hours ago, Chazphoto said:

"which lens are you"

My first real camera was a Contax II, with 50mm Sonnar lens.

My next camera was a Nikon SP, again with a 50mm Nikon lens.

My third camera was a Leica M2, with a 50mm Leica lens

Lots more cameras since then.....

But to answer your question today, I am a 50mm Voigtlander APO-LANTHAR lens on my Leica M10.  If I rushed out the door taking one camera and one lens, that's what I would have on me, but with a spare battery in my pocket.

[Adam Bonn]

20 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

Maybe you can post a link to it?  

https://www.overgaard.dk/the-story-behind-that-picture-0186_gb.html

 

[MikeMyers]

26 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

https://www.overgaard.dk/the-story-behind-that-picture-0186_gb.html

Just read this.

Maybe I'm just too old - I'll be 79 in December.  Way back when I read the major photography magazines monthly (1960's), there were really only three kinds of lenses - normal (for most everything), wide angle (for when you couldn't squeeze enough into the photo) and telephoto (for when you couldn't get close enough.  

I never thought of any of these ideas, and I don't remember reading about them.  

 

Thanks for posting.  It's a very different way to "look" at the world.  The only unusual way I used lenses in past years was to "expand" or to "compress" space.  I know the lenses weren't really doing this, but knowing the distance at which someone was likely to view my images, it was a fun tool to play with.

What probably ruined my old ways of thinking about all this was ZOOM lenses, which I used to crop images to fit my screen, oblivious of the other ways this effected my images.

 

Now that my Nikons are sold or on the way to being sold, I'm back to my Leica, with lens of 15mm, 25mm, 35mm, 50mm, 90mm, and 135mm.  (The strange focal lengths were bought for my M8.2, to try to allow me to shoot in my "normal" focal lengths, wide, normal, and tele.  The M8 broke that concept with its crop factor.  I rarely use the 15 and 25, and for that matter, the M8.2 camera.  I have it mostly for infrared photography, and because I'm too stubborn to even consider selling it - and also because I enjoy using it.)

I don't know the thought process behind how all of you select a lens, or Mr. Overgaard, but I still do this like when I was a kid, at least most of the time.  Sometimes it's fun to "twist" space, but 99.9% of the time I want my photos to show what I wanted them to show at first, before realizing I couldn't get further away, or closer.  

 

Maybe I'll eventually get to use the lenses to help with my composition.  For that to happen, I'll need to get rid of my "photojournalist" hat, and find another hat labeled "artist".  Playing with people's perceptions, by altering the perception of space by selecting a different lens, probably violates the concept of "photojournalist".....     but that's a different topic.

 

........but before I stop typing, the Leica M10 makes all of this so easy compared to my other cameras - lenses are small, and light, and easy to carry around so they're available in an instant.  My camera bag can be much smaller than it would be for my old DSLR.

Edited September 26, 2022 by MikeMyers

[Adam Bonn]

3 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

I don't know the thought process behind how all of you select a lens

My interpretation of this (and really Torsten should answer, it's his article) is that you're walking down the street and you see something that makes you say to yourself 'wow that needs to be photographed' but what are you looking at? What focal length would best capture the thing you're looking at in the way you're seeing it for example if it's a lovely looking couple sitting on a park bench, well a super wide will capture them, plus loads of peripheral stuff that doesn't add to the picture, a telephoto might be too close and a little creepy looking, so probably about 50mm is right.

You'll find that although you often have a need for a super wide and a tele, the scenes that most excite you will often be captured always at your own favourite focal length.

This is "what lens you are" learn and focus on using it exclusively for while and you'll find your way.

But happy to be corrected by Torsten, my interpretation of his article is no where near the same as him writing it.

 

[Overgaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

My interpretation of this (and really Torsten should answer, it's his article) is that you're walking down the street and you see something that makes you say to yourself 'wow that needs to be photographed' but what are you looking at? What focal length would best capture the thing you're looking at in the way you're seeing it for example if it's a lovely looking couple sitting on a park bench, well a super wide will capture them, plus loads of peripheral stuff that doesn't add to the picture, a telephoto might be too close and a little creepy looking, so probably about 50mm is right.

You'll find that although you often have a need for a super wide and a tele, the scenes that most excite you will often be captured always at your own favourite focal length.

This is "what lens you are" learn and focus on using it exclusively for while and you'll find your way.

But happy to be corrected by Torsten, my interpretation of his article is no where near the same as him writing it.

 

I think the simplicity of it is that you can do all with one lens. But that we like the lenses so much we get more of them. And then return to our favorite focal length, and occasionally use others for challenge, inspiration or whatever. 

We can do what we want to do. I will travel with a bag with cameras and lenses. But when I walk out, I have one camera and one lens for the day. Using one camera and one lens trains your eye to "see 50mm" or whichever lens. It is very true that when you walk down the street, you get an urge to take a photo. You "see a photo" no matter how clear you see it, and you should take it immediately without delay or overthinking it. Having one lens and being used to see the world that way will enable you to "see 50mm" and also to predict where to stand and when to take it to get what you envisioned. 

The freedom of this is also that you don't have to look out for 400mm photos, 21mm photos etc. You only see the photos you are able to capture with your 50mm. If you carry a bag with lenses, or have a zoom, you are "too open minded" and is open to all opportunities and will never get really good at getting just the photos you are supposed to. (Photojournalistic work is different in that you cover an event and use whatever gear necessary to find and tell that story).

It's gone so far for me that when I travel currently in Portugal, UK and Istanbul, I have a bag with SL2, M9M, M10-R and M11 and five 50mm lenses (50/2 Rigid, 50 APO, 50/0.95, 50/1.4 and 50/1.1 7artisan) and don't even try to bring a 28/1.4, 90/2 or any of the other great lenses. I see all of it in 50mm and it works. 

Circling back to the article "Which lens are you?" and seeing what focal length painters were, it's true that Picasso was one focal length, Hammershøi one focal length, and so on ... but also that sometimes they took another view and used another focal length. 

But it is strangely interesting that even we have the same eyes, we see the world differently and can even discuss if the eye see as a 9mm wide angle or 80/1.4, or 35mm. 

The lens you are is the one you naturally feel most comfortable with. I think 21/1.4 is exciting, and I can get into using it for days. But then I return to 50mm. Most people are 35mm or 50mm, shown in the sales figures for Leica lenses (those are the two most sold focal lengths).

I think matching the "picture I see" on the street with the focal length is what matters. Say you see 50mm nut use a Leica Q2 with 28mm, the final picture never really match what you envisioned until you crop the image down to 50mm. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Overgaard

[MikeMyers]

3 hours ago, Overgaard said:

I will travel with a bag with cameras and lenses. But when I walk out, I have one camera and one lens for the day.

I need to think about this some more.   Before getting so much more involved with the M10, I would do the same thing - but it was always a zoom lens.  I have prime lenses for my Nikon in 24, 50, and longer, but the zoom removed my need to make a decision.

Now, I'm going out with my M10, but I'll usually (almost always) pick one prime lens, and make do with it for the whole day.  Most often it is 35 or 50, and that sets my mindset for the rest of the day.  I think I feel equally comfortable with either one, but my brain naturally thinks in a 50mm view.  There's always the other potential photos, that I can't do justice to without a telephoto, but I "put those off for the future".  

What's much more difficult for me, is trying to "think" and "see" in B&W.  Like, why might I shoot this in B&W rather than how I always do, in color.  I'm still struggling with that.  If it didn't cost so much, I could buy a Monochrom and there would no longer be a choice.  Maybe I'm just too old - I find it very difficult to "see" in b&w.  

I look at most of the photos in the Monochrom gallery here, and while they are interesting, it's not obvious to me why the photographer selected b&w.  I look at Thorsten's photos, and most of the time their being B&W improves them, and makes the photo stronger.  I don't think I'll ever get there unless/until I learn how to see in B&W.  

I haven't tried it yet, but I read how it's possible to set up the M10 to "see" in B&W.  What I see in Live View, or the Visoflex will be B&W, and after taking an image, my preview will be in B&W (but the raw image of course will still be in color).  

I'm also speculating that while I know a Monochrom will get a better B&W image than my M10, if I set things up right, I can come pretty close using my M10.  Maybe I'll post a new thread about this in the M10 forum, asking what change I could or should make to my M10 to learn how to "think" in B&W again, like when I was a kid, and I couldn't afford color.  🙂

[charlesphoto99]

Lots of blah blah about lens choice, b&w vs color, etc etc, but at the end of the day, it's all about light. Learn to read and understand light as the most important emotional component of your images, no matter the gear used or the subject, and you will start to rise to the top. And it doesn't matter whether the light is ambient or artificial, dramatic or neutral, it is the key underlying element to a universally successful photo that viewers will connect with. 

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, charlesphoto99 said:

….but at the end of the day, it's all about light. 

With a Monochrom, this is literally true, as only luminance/brightness matters; color saturation and hue have no effect on b&w tonality. For me, the ‘mindset’ advantage of using a Monochrom is that I’m not distracted by looking for color pics.  This was obvious when shooting b&w film, but the Monochrom forced some discipline in the digital realm when any camera could produce color and b/w at any time.  I have no problem ‘seeing’ in b&w (reading the light), but it helps when I’m not tempted to also see a potential color pic, where colors do matter (not just the light).

Even then, however, composition and framing and editing and output (prints) matter, too. Judgment and decision making are key at every stage. I’d say it’s all about the photographer.

Jeff

[Adam Bonn]

@MikeMyers

if you set the camera jpeg to on (along with RAW) and BW, you’ll get a BW preview in live view. But also you’ll get BW jpegs!

import both the jpegs and DNGs into LR/whatever then when you review the photos you’ll get a colour RAW and a BW jpeg of every picture, this way you can evaluate if the scene worked better in colour or not.

If it worked better in BW edit the RAW to BW.

(optionally delete the jpegs when you’re done)

[Cobram]

I just read the article Thorsten Overgaard's Photography Pages - The Story Behind That Picture 186 - "Which lens are you?"

Thank you @Overgaard for sharing knowledge/your philosophy with us. Especially regarding the relation/connection to famous paintings. Very interesting and instructive.

As per colors and other things: I can highly recommend Johaness Iten's books. The book Art of color was proposed to me by a (sadly) banned forum member who's focus was more on composition, light, color,... and less on Leica lenses mechanical tolerances 🙂 Although he was a little bit too extreme in defending his views 🙂 Anyway I miss him. I always miss anyone I can learn from.

@Adam Bonn Thank you for your summary of the article that make me curious to read it.

Thanks again to both of you! 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Cobram

[MikeMyers]

All of this prompted me to post a thread in the DxO PhotoLab forum, asking for suggestions on how to process images from my M10 in a way that I might end up with beautiful B&W images.  

https://feedback.dxo.com/t/does-photolab-5-have-an-option-to-take-a-dng-image-and-convert-it-to-black-white/28492

They made me aware of the fact that if I did buy a Monochrom, I would once again need to buy the color filters I used half a century ago to improve my B&W images.  As described in the link, if I stick with my M10, I can do this work in PhotoLab, my current favorite editor.

As soon as Hurricane Ian moves on, I need to get back to work searching for images that will look the way I want in B&W.  And, since my brain seems to think like a 50mm lens on a full frame camera, that's what I'll likely continue with.

I don't want to copy Mr. Overgaard's "style", but I'm wide open to let his "style" influence what I want to create, as I enjoy his photos immensely.

[Olaf_ZG]

On 9/27/2022 at 4:59 PM, charlesphoto99 said:

Lots of blah blah about lens choice, b&w vs color, etc etc, but at the end of the day, it's all about light. Learn to read and understand light as the most important emotional component of your images, no matter the gear used or the subject, and you will start to rise to the top. And it doesn't matter whether the light is ambient or artificial, dramatic or neutral, it is the key underlying element to a universally successful photo that viewers will connect with. 

Lots of bla bla, true. Ofcourse light is important, but having the lens which matches you, is very important as well, as this basically set the seen for composition.

[MikeMyers]

I guess I'm just different.  Whichever camera I happen to have with me, with whatever lens it might be, I just adapt so I can get the photos I want regardless of the equipment.  Since I usually don't have any options, I just make-do.  Of course, with Nikon, for ages now I always have a zoom lens on my camera, so I can pick whatever works best for me, wherever I happen to be.   Not having a zoom lens, which is always the case if I have a Leica M, complicates things - in which case I just do the best I can.  I think I'm spoiled, after so many years with an SLR or DSLR.  I then have a lot more options.  But with my Leica, I would just do the best I was able to do.  

Light - just one more thing to need to adapt to, to get the best possible photo.  When possible, I need to position myself ahead of time, so I'll b able to do that.  This is easier now with digital, as I can just dial in the appropriate ISO speed based on the lighting.  There is almost always a way to get whatever I have with me to do what I need - meaning I need to bring enough "tools" to be able to do so.

[charlesphoto99]

4 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Lots of bla bla, true. Ofcourse light is important, but having the lens which matches you, is very important as well, as this basically set the seen for composition.

Light is ESSENTIAL - without it, all talk of lenses, sensors, etc is moot. Give me the choice of a 24, a 35 or a 135 and I'll make a picture with each of them, no matter the scene, but without light, nothing would even show up. The title of the thread is "...simplicity" and that's about as simple as it gets. 

[Adam Bonn]

IMO it's not merely if the light if plentiful or not, but is it harsh, soft, warm, cool, direct, reflected... and the challenge is how to get that light to work for the subject/mood you're trying to capture

[Lukitas]

It's the camera, said a wise man, the camera takes the picture. Not really, said another wise man : it's the lens. But, said the third wise man, it's the light, glorious light! You bleeding bunch of wankers ! said a fourth wise man, it's the brains behind the camera. Think!

Me, I'm just stupid. I think it is what is in front of the camera that counts. It's what you get to see in the photograph.

[MikeMyers]

15 minutes ago, Lukitas said:

It's what you get to see

Are you referring to the scene about to be photographed, or to the resulting photograph.

As a photographer, isn't it something twelve inches behind the camera that counts?  🙂

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jakontil]

I have a few of the leica 50mm, ranging from noctiluxes to apo summicron, and when i travel i might carry more than one 50mm lenses, but just like thorsten, when i go out n a bout for the day, only one lens n one camera, sometimes limiting the options is a blessing when taking photos

what really decides which lens to take is usually the DOF, for street definitely i’d go with the apo while for modeling portraits my pick usually the noctilux 0.95 

the summilux and the noctilux remake sit in between these situations

simple which dont seem to be simple