Haiti Photos with M7 and M6

P

pcsmythe

Member
Local time
11:29 AM
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
19
I recently traveled to Haiti to photograph for a Christian orphanage in Ouanamintha, Haiti. My equipment was an M7, M6, 35 cron, 50 lux and 75 lux. No flash or special lighting of any kind.

Based on this portfolio, I'm now headed to Africa and Asia next year for a couple of different projects.

You can view the portfolio on my site at petersmythe.com under Danita's Children and "Kiddos" (about half of the photographs are from Haiti). Below is one of my favorites:

Smythe15Nov2008PanFPortraits-16-Edit.jpg
 
Fantastic work. Great use of light, interaction with the subjects, and the composition on many is really striking. thanks for sharing- is inspirational :)
 
pcsmythe said:
I recently traveled to Haiti to photograph for a Christian orphanage in Ouanamintha, Haiti. My equipment was an M7, M6, 35 cron, 50 lux and 75 lux. No flash or special lighting of any kind.

Based on this portfolio, I'm now headed to Africa and Asia next year for a couple of different projects.

You can view the portfolio on my site at petersmythe.com under Danita's Children and "Kiddos" (about half of the photographs are from Haiti). Below is one of my favorites:

/QUOTE]

I would have a hard time choosing a favorite; they're all quite beautiful, in a sad sort of way.

Harry
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the comments.

I did bring a Nikon F6 on the trip, but found that I really couldn't use it.

An SLR with AF is much a different shooting animal than an M.
 
Is this is a gear-related thread or one about poor kids?

One of them has to take precedence over the other, isn't it?

Imagine Salgado coming back from Sahel and telling his Magnum buddies, "hey guys, look at these photos that I took with my Leica gear!"
 
Last edited:
Great shots, Peter. The poverty rivals anything I witnessed in Africa. But for those of us who have lived/traveled in desperately poor places, you realize how much the human spirit is alive and well anywhere. We westerners tend to make wealth the end-all of everything, and turn us into uptight pricks who, like Nh3 above, don't feel comfortable mixing gear talk with a frank discussion of poverty. It's all okay, man.
 
Peter, top drawer images in every respect. Which film did you use, and are these low res scans of prints, or did you scan the neg directly? Again, congratulations on a very moving series of images.

Cheers,
Jeff
 
Nice work! One suggestion is to eliminate the few color shots that you have posted. They don't fit , at least for me, with your execellent eye for B+W. Don't take this the wrong way, I really like your work: but everyone can get better. Before you make your next trip study some of the world's greatest Documentary photographers. Especially look at Eugene Richards work:his composition is very diverse. Look at THE ROD AND GUN CLUB and COCAINE TRUE,COCAINE BLUE. Look at Leonard Freed, Koudelka's books EXILES and GYPSIES. Eugene Smith's work MINAMATO and DREAM STREET. And Salgado's work. All these photogs are great and use different techniques. Good luck !
 
Nh3: I don't believe that one has to take precedence over the other. In the latest issue of Outdoor Magazine, Salgado discusses his Pentax, Leica, and particular lenses and how he uses them in his work. He also states that he is using BW film because he cannot get the same results with digital. Ralph Gibson is often quoted as saying that he uses a rangefinder exclusively because of his "eye" as compared to an SLR. While I'm not really a gearhead, the type of equipment to be used informs the approach. Personally, it has been helpful for me to know how the Gibsons, Salgados, McCurrys, etc. have gone about their work and what equipment they have used to get their results.

Another photographer visited the same orphanage some years ago with a digital SLR and flash and the photographs are entirely different. The subjects are posed and the lighting is artificial (I'm biased, but my wife agreed with me). A different approach with different equipment.

I'll also add that having a film RF was a dream. Believe it or not, all the kids in Haiti are used to seeing digital cameras (with white photographers). Consequently, they pose for every shot and then rush the photographers to see themselves (the kids have no mirrors anywhere). With my film Leica, they left me alone after they saw that I didn't have an LCD. That allowed me to get the kind of photographs I did (this experience alone quelled any desire for a digital RF).

Jeff: The kids' portraits were done with PanF+. The rest of the photographs were done with Tri-X (a small few with Delta 3200). I had intended to mostly use PanF+ for the trip, but the lighting conditions were so harsh - extremely dark skin in extremely bright sunlight. I wasn't a big fan of Tri-X until I took this trip. Now I have lots of it in the fridge.

These are direct scans from a Nikon 9000 using Vuescan. They were high-res, but cut down to 96 pixels per inch for the website.

John: I've been thinking of eliminating the color shots and I probably will. The color shots were taken on Kodachrome - first time I used it and first time that I liked the colors. And thanks for the suggestions. I've got a couple of those books, but can always get more (just got Abell's book and have found it to be really helpful). Salgado is the one that got me hooked on handheld Leica Ms.

Everyone else, thanks for the comments. Based on this trip, I'm doing jobs in Africa and Asia this coming year.
 
It's fine to look at the Masters like Salgado and Koudelka, but for God's sake don't stare at them or see through their eyes. I think you have a well-realized style of your own and my recommendation is that you deepen that at this point. Really nice work, Peter.
 
I just looked at your photos for the second time . Again great work. What I miss after looking at all of your shots twice is what I refer to as the "wide and tight shot" This is a shot taken with a wide angle lens where the subject is close to the camera and the background gives the context of the picture. This type of shot was made famous by National Geographic and is seen frequently in the photographers I mentioned above. Do yourself a favor and really look at Eugene Richards work. Viewing his work will probably expand your already good "vision". I wouldn't bother posting this advice if I didn't already like your work and believe that viewing the work I reccomend will help you a great deal. I do not think you should try to copy a style, but rather further educate your vision so that you can be even more creative in the future. Richards is probably the best documentary photographer alive, and if you are doing documentary work it always helps to see tthe best. I believe Eugene Richards is a member of V11. At least he was the last time I looked. He was a former member of Magnum.
 
A lot of middle class white guys with expensive cameras like taking photos of black bums and drunks.

Why are forlorn looking photos of bums and orphans regarded as "powerful" and "meaningful"?
 
Wonderful work Peter. I also appreciate hearing about the equipment you use and your methodology. It's for this type of sharing of information that I come to this site.

Good luck on your new assignments.
 
Nh3,

Rather a snide comment, isn't it? There is no conflict between capturing images of human pathos and using an excellent photographic tool to do the job. I suggest that you digest Walker Evans, Eugene Smith or Dorothea Lange for starters. When you can take photos with a box brownie that can measure up with any of those produced by pcsmythe, then we should be impressed and happy to discuss your imaginary distinction.

BTW, in case you haven't noticed,this is the Leica M forum.
 
Petroleum V. Nasby said:
A lot of middle class white guys with expensive cameras like taking photos of black bums and drunks.

Why are forlorn looking photos of bums and orphans regarded as "powerful" and "meaningful"?
Click to expand...

Maybe it's those big innocent eyes and the sad, poignant expressions.
Lord forgive me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom