Annie Leibovitz on the cover of UK magazine with her Leica M

[GMcD]

Annie L. on the cover of the UK Sunday Times mag with her Leica. Can anyone identify what lens she's using?

Graham

 

[venchka]

Tabbed. 35mm?

 

[Stephan]

I doubt she really uses it much...

 

[MikeL]

There was a show on pbs about her and she used it all the time when she wasn't doing the Vanity Fair shots.

 

[kuvvy]

There was an article about her in the last issue of Photoicon and that showed her on the street with Konica Hexar AF.

 

[januaryman]

In your opinion, is she as over rated as I believe her to be? I just don't get it. Are we, as photographers, to be judged by the importance of our subjects? Or is there a depth in her work I'm somehow missing? I'm just saying.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

In her chosen area--celebrity portraiture--I think she's really good, not at all underrated. It's just not a type of photography that interests most of us here.

 

[Silva Lining]

In your opinion, is she as over rated as I believe her to be? I just don't get it. Are we, as photographers, to be judged by the importance of our subjects? Or is there a depth in her work I'm somehow missing? I'm just saying.

For me, Leibovitz photographs celebrity, so why should we expect any depth here. Her other work, less famous perhaps, is away from this genre is very different and has depth, warmth, integrity and a more artisitic feel.

As with all things, its all very subjective and IJMO 🙂

 

[aizan]

m7 with a 35mm summilux asph and motor wind.

 

[ruben]

For me, Leibovitz photographs celebrity, so why should we expect any depth here. Her other work, less famous perhaps, is away from this genre is very different and has depth, warmth, integrity and a more artisitic feel.

As with all things, its all very subjective and IJMO 🙂

You remind me some Hollywood stars who at the beggining of their carrere play at rather flat contents films, but once they have established their fame, money etc, they do serious staff.

Unfortunately I don't know Ms Leibovitz biography beyond a few cliche pictures of Hollywood stars.

BTW Graham, Leica Leica, but what about the interview ?

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[monochromejrnl]

overrated? by what standard? the audience and the cult of celebrity make her work 'important'... she's a professional photographer that is paid for her services... I don't think she professes to make 'art' out of her celebrity photography...

 

[Schlapp]

Having not seen any of her work, my feeling was that she was overrated. I then took in one of her 8x10 snaps at the Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh this week and I was most impressed. Lovely sense of light.

 

[Austerby]

Many of her modern photos for the glossy magazines are intentionally contrived but there's a lot of her work that is much less stagey and contains some seriously great photos, particularly from when she was working at Rolling Stone - e.g.there's a great monochrome shot of Emmylou Harris walking which seems to encapsulate so much about her, her music and, importantly, the context and location from which both arose. Not bad for one photo.

 

[Chuck Albertson]

Those of us with longer memories can recall Annie when she was chief photographer for Rolling Stone, and shot some of the iconic photos of the late 60's/70's, and not just rock'n'roll. She continues to do a lot of very good reportage (it shows up in her retrospective), it just isn't as widely published as her studio stuff.

 

[35mmdelux]

a truly ugly portrait of A.L.

 

[januaryman]

... she's a professional photographer that is paid for her services... I don't think she professes to make 'art' out of her celebrity photography...

That would mean someone at the Smithsonian here made a big mistake in presenting an exhibit of her work... But, as someone has already said, it's all subjective. And life ain't fair. I have seen work by people posting on Flickr AND here that surpass anything she's done. But that's me.

 

[35mmdelux]

overrated? by what standard? the audience and the cult of celebrity make her work 'important'....

IMO this statement is absurb. James Nachtwey's work is important, Salgado, and many unkown names working to bring real issues to the front -- these are important. A.L. photogs nothing more than rich people.

Her fotos fall into the "cool" or "nice" category. But compelling or cutting edge forget it.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

m7 with a 35mm summilux asph and motor wind.

On all counts, that's what I'm guessing it is as well. The lens looks to be silver chrome with no shade. The body could be an M6TTL, but I am betting it's an M7.

 

[icebear]

IMO this statement is absurb. James Nachtwey's work is important, Salgado, and many unkown names working to bring real issues to the front -- these are important. A.L. photogs nothing more than rich people.

Her fotos fall into the "cool" or "nice" category. But compelling or cutting edge forget it.

Obviously Salgado focusses on a completely different topic in his shots/reportage series than A.Leibovitz. Most of the shots published are indeed "celebrity" shots. No deep hidden message to be discovered here, I agree.
But have a look at her latest "coffeetable" size book, covering more of her personal work, in particular her relation to Susan Sonntag and her documentation of Susan's long struggle with cancer and her last days. If you're not made of stone you'll come to a different conclusion about her work than just judging on the frontpage glamour shots.

 

[Nh3]

She is a very successful 'entrepreneur'... and I can only wonder how much she was paid by Leica (perhaps a free S2?) for posing with their camera.