[Leica] Personal challenges (long)

["Erwin Puts" <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

Recently I needed a few pictures to illustrate that elusive and at the same
time most important characteristic of a picture: the Leica fingerprint.
Searching through thousands of my negatives and prints, I came to the
conclusion that my pictures are lousy, contentwise at least. But also
technically there is a large improvement possible. But the core question is
of course: can they be identified as Leica pictures? The underlying
assumption is that there is or should be a difference between a picture
taken with a Leica and a Leica picture.
The two most obvious characteristics of classical Leica photography are: the
stream-of-consciousness-type of photography and the quality of the lens.
SoC-photography is the snapshot type of picture taking where the
photographer is immersed in the action or the environment and takes pictures
almost as a direct interaction with the enfolding course of events. As a
contrast: the artificial and deliberately constructed reality of the studio
scene or a landscape photo. There is a fine dividing line here, at least it
seems: environmental portraits of the Gisela Freund or HCB type are true
Leicalike, but Avedon or Penn portraits are not? After some considesation,
it becomes obvious (to me at least) that this distinction is untenable. A
portrait with a Leica R and a apo100 in a studio on tripod  or with an M6
and a apo 90 or apo 135 has to qualify as a Leica picture.
The type of pictures and the content is not sufficient to be  the
distinguishing characteristic between a Leica and a non-Leica picture.
Is then the lens the only way to differentiate the L and N-L pictures? Again
a dangerous assumption. Many pictures made with Leicas are of mediocre
technical quality (when compared to the optical potential) and the
introduction of the characteristic of bokeh does not save the day. The
illustrations in the fine Konica broschure are typically (and I assume
deliberately) Leicalike in style, content and quality.
I think that it is the sum of these three elements (style, content and
optical quality) and most specifically the constructive integration of these
elements that defines the true Leica picture.
As a photographic tool,  the Leica has instrumental qualities and
restrictions that inspire and "force" (or suggest and guide) a certain style
of taking pictures. Style here is not to be taken as meaning handheld versus
tripod or flash versus available light, but an approach to the subject
matter that suits the instrumental characteristics of the camera.
Content in my view is free: anything can be the topic of a Leica picture,
macro as well as landscape, glamour as well as social documentary. It is not
the content itself that is the defining element, but the way it is
approached and depicted by the imaging chain.
The optical quality is the third element and here we encounter serious
problems. Im my ongoing research on the Gigabit film and other high
resolution films (like TechPan) I have discovered that it is quite a
challenge to use the true potential of Leica lenses in most non-lab or
testing situations.
The imaging chain involves all aspects from exposure to focusing to choice
of film and the match of film characteristics to the lens and the printing
paper etc.
There is as example a big difference in reproduction characteristics between
a low light low contrast situation and  the optical quality of certain Leica
lenses and other Leica lenses and high contrast bright light situations.
Here then is my personal challenge for the next year:
try to develop an approach (style) to any subject of interest that maximises
the instrumental characteristics of the Leica camera and to elaborate
(study, explore) several types of imaging chain that suits the optical
quality of current Leica lenses in specific image taking situations.
The goal of all this: to explore the unknown world of Leica in its essence.

Some additional questionsto help focus on the issue: does a picture made
with a Hexar RF count as a Leica picture. And a picture taken with a Hexar
and a Leica lens on it, or taken with a Leica M and a Konica lens or a
Voigtlander lens attached to the M? Are these questions just semantic
juggling or is there some value added to a picture when taken with a Leica
camera and lens, both R and M.

This search is my personal one and I am not sure I will succeed or report on
it.

Erwin