Reading mode: Light Dark

That Leica Look

Go to last post
HuntingSand said:
Re Irakly's example, I certainly agree it is a high-contrast image,
but the guys are caucasian, they wear black suits, and the picture
was taken in a dark tunnel for crying out loud, so you do really only
get the faces to stand out - which is exactly the reason I think it
is useful for the discussion at hand: it reduces what is marginal,
and highlights what is of importance. That particular balance is a
matter of debate of course, as personal taste (or the public's
aesthetics) come into play, among other things. With the Leica in
capable hands (not necessarily in mine, I am not a pro at all,
although I have stuff published), I always had the feeling it was
easier to strike that balance, to reduce what was marginal, and to
concentrate on what was (is) important.

Thomas
Click to expand...
I totally agree with this assessment, and will add that Irakly's image has something of that almost-indefinable timeless look. It reminds me of Cartier-Bresson's images of India, which were also not about sharpness. Until recently, I travelled there on a regular basis, and his images, although 40-60 years old now, could easily have been taken yesterday. They are every bit as relevant now as then- ordinary people living their daily lives, but invested by the camera and the artist with a palpable humanism. While Leicas in the proper hands have always provided that 'mantle of invisibility,' the Leica look is much more than that- a certain style as much as a quality or a marque. And the image that Irakly posted, whether a Leica image or not, fits my own personal view of what some call 'that Leica look.' It doesn't have to fit anyone else's definition, however........:-)
Rich
 
coincidentally i have just asked for some opinions in a new thread 5 min ago. i'm hoping i could get some advice.

i do notice the distinct leica look not found in nikkor/canon images...

--
Canon Pro1, Epson RD1s, Fuji S3 Pro, Sigma DP1&2, Panasonic LX3, Ricoh GRD & CX1
 
Thank you, John. The subject just started out with a couple of images and places, and eventually took on a life of its own.

Thomas
===========================
Visit my Abandoned Homes in Upstate New York Project
at http://hahn.zenfolio.com/p467294225
===========================
JohnK said:
I really enjoyed your gallery of abandoned houses, nice work, IMO.
--
JohnK
Take a picture, it'll last longer.
Click to expand...
 
It's not necessarily about the sharpness of a picture.

However, there is undeniably a "Leica Look". To say otherwise is specious.

Photographers, in general, use Leicas for that "look".
--
vettran.zenfolio.com
 
...if I may...

I'm not a Leica shooter... in fact, I'm just dropping in here from the Nikon forums...and I agree with the sentiment that most of what is the 'Leica' look is not specfic to Leica per say, but is an overall combination of technique and camera.

However, the first sample shots of the M8...yes, I do agree that there is something that is distinct about the 'Leica look', even in digital. The thing that popped out to me was the crispness of the the subject in the plane of focus combined with a nice backgroundbokeh. And of course, the crispness comes from the quality of those nice Leica lenses....and how they do at wide aperatures compared to more pedestrian fare...you don't get that nice contrastiness at f/1.4 with a Nikkor 50AFD.
 
Everyone looks at my Leica that way too. But I tried a little experiment and got rid of my M6 TTL, the only Leica I've ever owned with the red dot. Yet even now that I don't have a red dot Leica anymore, they still give me that same look.

People are funny.
Irakly Shanidze said:
dlux4 and "leica look" have almost nothing in common.
this is what "leica look" means:



--
Irakly Shanidze
http://www.shanidze.com/en
Click to expand...
--
  • Mark Ehlers (formerly 'markE')
http://www.pbase.com/marke



'Good street/wildlife photography is a controlled accident,
a vision of preparation and surrender materialized.'
 
If with crispness You mean detail and texture, then I fully agree with You. But the thing is that I have seen D-lux 4 pictures with that deep texture and 3D feeling. Because the glass of that P&S is so limited I draw the conclusion that it is achieved in PP (e.g. Dragan effect).

--
This space left intentionally blank
 
Brilliant, Chuck - I think you're onto something. Why didn't I think of that!

John
 
I don't believe the man's intention was to ridicule this forum. His comments seemed honest...

--
This space left intentionally blank
 
quercus said:
If with crispness You mean detail and texture, then I fully agree
with You. But the thing is that I have seen D-lux 4 pictures with
that deep texture and 3D feeling. Because the glass of that P&S is so
limited I draw the conclusion that it is achieved in PP (e.g. Dragan
effect).
Click to expand...
The work of Dragan has nothing to do with what people call the Leica Look. Dragan actually uses Canon systems if I am not mistaken. The Dragan Effect is a method of post processing that is his unique signature style. If anyone reading this does not know about Dragan.. visit his site here: http://andrzejdragan.com/

Look at his personal portfolio.. He relys on lighting and very good post work to achieve his signature look.

If anything, the Leica Look has to do with edge to edge sharpness, bokeh and micro-contrast.

--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com
http://www.oceona.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.
 
I know now. A mild Dragan effect gives the texturized, high-contrast and 3D-like feeling that i erroneously described as the "Leica look." I apologize for creating a stir, but this thread may have had one benefit: it seems that the "Leica look" is a very subjective matter.

--
This space left intentionally blank
 
quercus said:
I know now. A mild Dragan effect gives the texturized, high-contrast
and 3D-like feeling that i erroneously described as the "Leica look."
Click to expand...
Yep.. many have tried to duplicate Dragan's post work.. I have played with it myself but he remains the master.
quercus said:
I apologize for creating a stir, but this thread may have had one
benefit: it seems that the "Leica look" is a very subjective matter.
Click to expand...
No apology necessary, it's a forum, it's what happens in forums.. differing opinions, heated discussion, passion, etc.. it doesn't mean we're all not friends.... but you are right.. there is no definitive Leica Look.

--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com
http://www.oceona.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top