RE: [Leica] The quintessence of Leica photography?

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Come on, Erwin....Digital printing has nothing to do with photographic
principles, as in the principles of the art of photography - which has to do
with the photographer's vision, and then his mastery of his photographic
equipment so that he can freeze his vision....What you're talking about is
the craft/art of photographic printing...not photography.

B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Erwin Puts
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 7:26 AM
> To: L U G
> Subject: [Leica] The quintessence of Leica photography?
>
>
> The seemingly relentless march of digital printing does signify
> two trends.
> First of all a loss of knowedge of true and important photographic
> principles. If we might wish to agree that a black of density D=1,4 is all
> that is needed for the impression of blackness in a print, we also have to
> agree that we are no longer  interested in expanding our technique nor our
> visual sensitivity. A true black of D=2.0 and more is very visibly more
> black to anyone and will brings a warmth and depth into a picture that is
> sadly lacking in todays digital prints. Moreover: the cut-off of
> a range of
> dark tones from 1,4 to 2 is a considerable loss of information depth and
> tonal scale. Image listening to music with all bass tones filtered out.
> It may be the consensus that we do not prefer high quality, high fidelity
> prints any more. I would dare to propose that this attitude will end the
> craft of Leica photography. If the current quality of digital
> prints will be
> the standard for years to come (and it seems technologically difficult
> and/or culturally undesirable to get closer to a silver halide print), any
> digital camera of above 4 million pixels and any negative from any good
> quality camera, will give identical results, thanks to the
> software which in
> all cases is supplanting the art and craft of photography.
> We all love our Leica lenses as they are so able to capture the details in
> shadows and highlights and deliver image detail of depth and contrast that
> is unique in the world. And we spend days if not weeks to discuss the
> desirability of the use of filters and/or the adverse effects of
> filters on
> ultimate image quality. Now we record a scene with our best abilities,
> carefully exposing for the depth of details in the shadows and controlling
> development and/or exposure to capture fine and subtle shades of white in
> the highlights, we focus very critically to ensure optimum image
> quality at
> the sharpness plane to record the very finest detail of a scene
> and then we
> lose most if not all of it in a digital print.
> There is no need to counter that the use of a Leica camera is more than
> looking for image quality, as the Leica will deliver images that no other
> camera can. This is a frail argument as any issue of National
> Geographic or
> any book of Magnum pictures will demonstrate. Picture content,
> expressiveness and all that is not causally related to Leica cameras. Best
> street photography was with Rolleiflex, best reportage with Speed
> Graphlex,
> best fashion and portrait with Hasselblad etc.
> If content and acceptable or sufficient print quality are the goals, Leica
> has no comparative nor competitive advantages to any other top camera.
> Durability? Ask any Canon or Nikon user. Speed of focus? Ask any AF user.
> Ergonomics? A Hexar is as good.
> In my view, Leica photography has a high fun factor and the camera is
> inspiring to use as an instrument, just because it is able to
> inch ahead of
> the rest thanks to accuracy of the mechanics and the optical abilities of
> its lenses. It asks of the user to match the inherent qualities, the
> designers built into it.
> The famous Oddmund noted long ago that for 95% of street and documentary
> photography a humble Contax Compact camera would do. Protests
> mounted and he
> was crucified for his heresy. Alas, he proved to be very
> perceptive and the
> digital wave is the living proof that we are converging to a
> position where
> the highest common factor will decide what the standard of image quality
> will be.
> I know I am a loner here and that I will end my life on a deserted island
> with a small pipeline of chemicals and some classical books on
> the craft of
> Leica photography. I will even try to  write a new book on this topic. The
> Economist wrote long ago (1996) the following: "So eventually, as
> with every
> battle between digital and analogue, it is likely that digital will win.
> Film will live on, but probably only in specialist use. Just as a few
> diehards will still shun CD players and listen to vinyl discs thröugh
> amplifiers, in years to come there will always one tourist in that group
> high above Hong Kong who pulls out a battered Nikon F5 and delights in
> informing everyone that photographs never look right unless they are made
> from silver halide. For most people though, the chance to alter their
> holiday's weather conditions after the event will win out every time."
> Replace Nikon with Leica and the Economist journalist might have thougt of
> me.
>
> Erwin
>
>
>