Leica Monochrom and Jacob Aue Sobol...

sepiareverb said:
Overprocessed, overprocessed, overprocessed? Why? This is the look he's used for years- were they overprocessed when he shot them on film? Style is style- film or digital.

Even I am intrigued by the MM. Combined with the DeVere digital enlarger I might even make the move. And I've been a diehard B&W film shooter. The more I shoot RAW the more I think it is better.
Click to expand...

Not one to get all drooly over gear but damn, that Devere makes me all giggity!
 
ChrisN said:
Has Leica promised "film-like uniqueness" in the M9M?
Click to expand...

Bobfrance said:
Well that was my interpretation of Leica's statements surrounding the camera. YMMV

"Countless iconic black-and-white photographs have been shot with the legendary cameras of the Leica M-System. So it was time for a camera to continue this tradition and finally make it possible to deliver authentic monochrome photography in digital form: the Leica M Monochrom. It is the first full-frame, 35 mm format digital camera to be designed exclusively and without any compromises for black-and-white photography. It delivers ‘true' black-and-white images in unrivalled sharpness and dynamic range. This makes the M Monochrom the perfect camera for anyone with a passion for black-and-white photography."
Click to expand...

Yes, I can understand why some would interpret the advertising that way. I'll admit I don't tend to read the advertising these days, preferring to look at available images and listen to critical users.

Personally I think that the Leica Monochrom, rather than merely emulating film, will move B&W photography to a different space (not better or worse, but different). As Jaap says, it is digital, not chemical based, and the fundamental difference is reflected in the output. Of course digital files can be manipulated into a wide range of styles (just like film), which confuse the issue.

For me this photo by Thorsten Overgaard (near the bottom of this page) better represents this different space, with a combination of characteristics and a look that I find very pleasing and desirable.

Of course for those of us who love to shoot film (and I have shot and developed 4 rolls of TRI-X this week) and love the look of the images we get from film, perhaps film remains the best option. With a bit of planning we should be able to enjoy this for many years to come! Good times, surely! :)
 
Personally I think that the Leica Momochrom, rather than merely emulating film, will move B&W photography to a different space
Click to expand...


That's very astute ... and I think you're right on the money! :)
 
obtaining similar results with film

obtaining similar results with film

Hi. I would appreciate information on what technique can be used to get similar results with film (film, exposure, development, etc.)..
 
pvg said:
Hi. I would appreciate information on what technique can be used to get similar results with film (film, exposure, development, etc.)..
Click to expand...

shoot your 400 film at 1600, shake your film when developing for 10 minutes instead of 4, then walk on it with dirty boots to dry it.
 
I am not the biggest fan of the M9M but it seems to work for Sobol, the images look a lot like his film work, so in a way they look very film like. For this kind of photo, which I do like, a huge dynamic range of midtones is not necessary. I'd love to see the printed originals side by side though.

Dominik
 
ChrisN said:
Yes, I can understand why some would interpret the advertising that way.
Click to expand...

precisely. And (hopefully for Leica) especially the type of customer at whom the monochrome is aimed. For Leica positions itself not as just a lens/camera maker -they don’t need to, that image has a 100% penetration- but as a company in the heart of photography as a craft and art. Hence the awarding of prizes at the presentation, the artistic setting of the Monochrome introduction , the association with Magnum, etc.
 
Don't really care about the camera, but I really liked several of the photos. I also didn't mind his "overprocessed", "just discovered the clarity slider", "overexposed" style. it was a consistent style which I thought suited the images quite well - he's obviously a talented photographer.
 
Sigh. Got this today from my friends at KHB regarding the DeVere digital enlarger:

Hi Bob,

If the last pricing we have is still current, at the current exchange rate a complete system would be something over $28,000US, plus about $4000 - $5000 or so for shipping, installation and training. However, I have to say that we have received no updates or related information from the factory on the 504DS for quite some time now. So we would be reluctant to recommend it at this point.
Click to expand...
 
sepiareverb said:
... This is the look he's used for years- were they overprocessed when he shot them on film? Style is style- film or digital.....
Click to expand...

I'm not particularly fond of his style but when comments like above suggest, that he achieves "his style" that he has developed with film (?) over the years, on his shootout trip with a Monochrom using it for the first time, then well, this should be a good indication how versatile this tool might be in the hands of many experienced photogs going digital B/W.
 
anu L ogy said:
I am a bit confused. The images are cool and all, but no one at Leica or Magnum thinks his images look a little Anders Petersen? By a little I mean exact clones, like some of the shots look like they're intentional copies of AP.
Click to expand...

yo are rite, i can see some similarities to anders petersen but i think AP's images are less harsh technically and more pleasing to the eye.
 
very interesting photographer, wonder if he'll make full membership in Magnum.

photos packed with feeling.
 
The Leica store in Washington, DC has a gallery show of prints from Sobol's work with the MM and, to my eye, they're pretty impressive. Clear and clean ~16x20s and some prints rather larger than that. For what it's worth, I found the images much more appealing in the gallery setting than they appear on the computer screen.
 
wollivp said:
Of course they are, that's the goal isn't it?
Click to expand...

In theory.

In practice, I think plenty of people never print their photos and are concerned only with how they look on a computer screen. Or, as in this thread, they're discussing third party work that is available on the internet in a display that isn't as flattering/successful as an actual print.

Unless you were referring to the "goal" of the gallery in the Leica store, which presumably is to induce sales . . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top