Re: M6 emotive quality

["Charles E. Love, Jr." <cel14@cornell.edu>]

This thread has produced some interesting points. But, as Mike Gardner says,
"...this sure has come some distance from a father lovingly photographing
his children."  Right--in two senses.  First, a serious discussion resulted,
with a technical offshoot ("emotive lenses").  Second, there's gratuitous
nastiness, which has no place on a list which is truly devoted to one of the
finest things in life, Leicas--a discussion of such things should be civilized.

First, I'll add a bit to the serious discussion.  The original question had
to do with the emotive quality one of us found in the photographs he took of
his children with an M as opposed to his SLR work.  The point that seems to
have attracted attention is that the M permits us to work close to our
subjects unobtrusively.  This is hardly controversial--look at the work of
Selgado, Mary Ellen Mark, Winograd, Bill Allard, Bruce Davidson, and other
greats identified with the M.  They don't jump down people's throats, they
develop relationships with them and then work among them (with the exception
of Winograd, who did grab shots with 35s and 28s on the street).  The
question was not whether this is the *only* way to take people pictures, but
what *differentiates* M's and their pictures from other cameras. 

Leica thinks so too.  Listen to this, from the current M6 folder:  "...when
the best picture demands spontaneous, unobtrusive photography in the center
of action, the rangefinder LEICA M6 is an indispensable tool.  While SLR
technology invites one to move away from the subject, the photographer
working with the LEICA M6 stays at the hub of what is going on.  The SLR
photographer relies on long focal lengths to bridge the gap between himself
and the subject; the LEICA-M-photographer, on the other hand, needs no
distance to stay inconspicuous.  He remains unnoticed and becomes an
intimate part of the event." 

No one says this is easy, and when I do it I check, in various ways, to see
if it's OK.  I have no photographs in which someone is giving me the finger,
and I have never been threatened.  If I were shooting celebrities from
behind a rope, I would use an SLR!

I obviously would also avoid Marc.  I see nothing in my original post
(reproduced below) that justifies the belligerence his (also below).  We are
discussing what is for most of us a hobby, and we are privileged to be able
to participate in it with the finest equipment.  Let's enjoy, not insult.

My original post:

>I think what you suggest is true (and so, I think, do a lot of great
>photojournalists, Mary Ellen Mark being one example).  The interesting
>question is why this should be so.  Lots of authors seem to say that it has
>something to do with what and how you see with a rangefinder (e.g., one said
>"you look into an SLR and through a Leica").  Another explanation, which
>seems to me sensible: amateur photographers often think that people pictures
>are taken by sneaking up on them with a long lens, as SLR's permit, but in
>fact this is unpleasant for the subjects.  You have to work right in the
>heart of things and interact with your subjects with an M, and they accept
>your presence.   I have another, simpler explanation to suggest, based on my
>own experience:  I think people these days react to a Leica M, especially in
>black, as if it were a point and shoot.  SLR's, especially pro ones like the
>Canon EOS-1 and the Nikon F4 and 5, have become huge and intimidating
>machines--think of an EOS-1 equipped with their excellent f2.8 28-70, for
>instance.  The contrast with the M is tremendous.  
>

Marc's post:

>Once again, I find myself disagreeing with Mr Love.
>
>I used to be a journalist.  I take a lot of people pictures.  I'm pretty
>active in community affairs and find myself photographed with some
>frequency.  I know that how I react to being photographed has affected how I
>photograph others, and its a matter of politeness.
>
>Simply put, when others photograph me, if they come at me with a wide-angle
>lens and get in my face, my reaction starts with my right hand and ends with
>my middle finger.  They can bloody well back off and photograph me from
>across the room.
>
>Thus, I do almost all my people shots with either an 85mm or a 90mm lens,
>rarely with a 50mm, and never with anything wider.  I simply don't have to
>be jumping down a guy's face to relate to him.  If you want to take people
>pictures, then learn how to relate without being offensively close.
>
>I suppose you'll next suggest that doing the macarena is a necessary part of
>photography as well?
>msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
>Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!
>
>
Charles E. Love, Jr.
517 Warren Place
Ithaca, New York
14850
607-272-7338
CEL14@CORNELL.EDU