Leica for commercial work

[dovevadar]

Im having a shoot and MF is the option, but I wish to have the Leica feel. Anyone know of any photographer who uses a Leica for commercial work?

I know many will refer to dutch house of photography, but most of their stuff were shot with MF or dslr as mentioned in other threads here, certainly not m8 or film M. So no point refering to their result.

Do you think a film M is good enough for commercial work? maybe A4?

 

[rlouzan]

Texas Leica 😉(Fuji 6x7, Plaubel Makina, Bronica RF 645, ...)

 

[rlouzan]

Paolo Koch, Jeanloup Sieff, ...

Im having a shoot and MF is the option, but I wish to have the Leica feel. Anyone know of any photographer who uses a Leica for commercial work?

I know many will refer to dutch house of photography, but most of their stuff were shot with MF or dslr as mentioned in other threads here, certainly not m8 or film M. So no point refering to their result.

Do you think a film M is good enough for commercial work? maybe A4?

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

I say of COURSE it is, Ms aren't just toys for people with enough money, they were made as tools for serious work.
what kind of shoot is that you're doing?
I can only think of street photographers with analogue Ms right now (matt stuart, bruce gilden, yadda yadda) then again I'm not too good with other photographers' names 😀

 

[Tom A]

It all depends on the client's preferences. He is the one who is paying you and, unfortunately, they are always right - at least until the cheque clears.
From a practical stand point - the client doesn't care what you use and depending on end use - 35mm is fine for magazine work. If you are doing full spread stuff - MF is easier to control and does give a bit better quality in the end.
Ask the client what he expects as to usage. Today they also expect almost instant turn-a-round and images that can be transmitted electronically. If you are shooting color - have the processor burn you a CD/DVD too.
I like the clients who insist on a/large files 40-60Mb and then you find out that they are using them as 2"x3" images on bad paper!
There are most likely many shooters who still use M's - they just dont tell the client that they are using an "outdated" technology and submit scans or DVD's instead.
The advantage with using digital in commercial work is that you can run it through Photoshop and do a lot of corrections that are difficult to do in analog shooting and. truth be told, in color it starts looking really good now and you also have far more latitude with high speeds - a Nikon D3 at 6400 asa beats any film at those speeds!

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I second what Tom said. I wouldn't even consider using 35mm for any commercial work unless the client explicitly asked for it. That kind of work is 100% digital now. Those who pointed out that some pros use M's didn't notice the original post was about commercial photography, NOT journalism/street/documentary work.

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

well street CAN be commercial too 😀 and I know about one german photographer doing commercial portraits and other things with an M7 too.

 

[rlouzan]

*Paolo Koch did work for fortune 500 companies.

*Jeanloup Sieff did commercial work for Nikon, Leica, ...

I second what Tom said. I wouldn't even consider using 35mm for any commercial work unless the client explicitly asked for it. That kind of work is 100% digital now. Those who pointed out that some pros use M's didn't notice the original post was about commercial photography, NOT journalism/street/documentary work.

 

[dovevadar]

hmm.. maybe im wasn't clear enough. the commercial work will be fashion spread. hmm... really tore between an MP/summilux and a hasselblad/p45. Any links on the work of the above mentioned M photographers?

 

[hans voralberg]

Shoot both ? Do the safe shots with Hassy, then some spontaneous ones with MP 😉. I do that all the time with fashion sessions, I'm away atm so don't have photos with me to show you but most of my clients don't care much about having run of the mill shots.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Wouldn't your style be at least partially defined by the equipment? I mean the difference in image quality between 35mm Tri-X and medium-format digital file is so large....

I don't know why anyone would hire someone to shoot a fashion assignment if they didn't already have a portfolio of work done with a person style/approach, including mastery of the equipment and media... we're not talking about generic product shots on white backgrounds.

Lots of successful fashion and editorial photographers have used Leicas. Peter Lindbergh shoots mostly with Rs but there are photos of him using Ms too. Arthur Elgort is an amazing old-school fashion photographer who shoots with Ms sometimes. William Klein... Christopher Bush is a younger guy who shoots Ms -- there are a whole lot inbetween.

I've yet to get a really good / appropriate job to shoot with Leicas but I figure if I work my butt off maybe I'll get a chance.

For odd corporate brochures and business portraits you'll laugh but I just use a cheap Nikon DSLR. The only thing the pro Nikons do is auto-focus faster and give you several extra stops. Otherwise the 10-12mp file a D40x pumps out is not that much different than a D3 file.

 

[silvalis]

Jeff Ascough?
Not exclusively though...

 

[Riccis]

I do for all my commissions... Of course, some folks may not think of me as a commercial photographer 😀

Cheers,

 

[ChrisLivsey]

Jeff Ascough?
Not exclusively though...

Not analog for some time now.

http://jeffascough.com/blogpages/FAQ.html

He has posted M8 personal work and this is now OOD he is using 5DMkII and was on the Canon stand at UK Focus Exhibition promoting it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Of course a Leica is good enough -- if the clients like the look. And you won't know that until you put some Leica test shots into your portfolio, and they go 'Wow!' or 'Nah...'

Cheers,

R.

 

[Rui Morais de Sousa]

What a Leica is able to deliver is much better than most clients could expect!
Only snobery could turn down some Leica shooting in the field of fashion photography. Assuming you know your trade and are a competent photographer, of course.

Most clients have bad taste and can't recognize good photography from mediocre, so they ask for BIG, thinking that size can substitute their insecurity (some photographers think like that too!).

In the past, you could see some guys shooting 6x7, then they would commission a lab to copy it to 8x10 inches, and would impress the client with a 8x10 transparency... The poor client would not even notice that he was paying some more for a dupe, for a fake... (The client wouldn't know how to differentiate the type of emulsion...).

I think that I shoot almost any format that you can mention from 35mm (and "cheap" digital=Canon 30D) to 8x10 inches, and I can assure you that size doesn't necessarily means quality. The nature of the assignment, the style and the technique required make me choose the equipment for the task, not the other way round.

Afterall, how many of us can claim to be better photographers than Jeanloup Sieff, Ernst Haas, Peter Lindbergh, William Klein, etc, etc? Even Ansel Adams used 35mm occasionaly...

(Yes, yes, I remember we are talking about "comercial"!)

I am not saying that 35mm is better, I am saying that it depends.

Only you can know what you wish to achieve...

Cheers,

Rui

P.S.: I have earned most of my bucks with medium and large format color shots. What I consider to be some of the best images I made were often shot in 35mm b&w... Now, sometimes, I have to shoot digital...
Ach, life ain't easy...

 

[dovevadar]

thanks guys. really help me sort out my thoughts...

Frank Petronio:: the difference of mf and 35 is large but under proper control, the difference can be tiny for a spread. Style wise, I hope to keep it open but feeling slightly not so confident about film. Nikon D3 is quite a monster for noise control, other than that I really dont see a signifcant advantage over the regular dslr. This applies for most new models out there now. Guess we have reached the end of pixel war. Enough is enough ;D

silvalis:: Jeff Ascough gave up to the "D"ark side haven't he? ;D

Riccis:: Great stuff! But dont think you shot all that on M film right? nevertheless, great!

Roger Hicks:: I woke up to your statement! Never try, never know. And try i will!

Rui Morais de Sousa:: thanks for your thoughts. I feel the same way too. Leica outgunned by mf with digital backs during fashion shoots. I find leica gives me an edge when i communicate with the models, the little M seems so harmless!

Think i will give mf a miss, decided on the gears which gives me more movement. 5D mk2 and good old Leica MP. We'll if they dig the Leica shots.

 

[Al Kaplan]

I use to do a lot of work at local malls for a large public relations firm here in Miami. It was mostly all shot with a Leica. Sometimes I'd use a Hasselblad for a color shot if I knew it was going to be run large, like a cover shot for a Christmas flier. On rare occasions I'd use a 4x5 view camera if I needed the swings and tilts.

 

[Riccis]

thanks guys. really help me sort out my thoughts...

Riccis:: Great stuff! But dont think you shot all that on M film right? nevertheless, great!

It's a mix of M8 and M7 except one of the engagement galleries... Since I haven't updated my site in a while, the majority of the film stuff is in the blog (www.riccisblog.com).

Thanks for your comments.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Dang... Riccis takes weddings up a notch. That's really impressive and I am not easy to impress.