Leica M3 in the New Kate Upton ad.

It started well and then deteriorated, badly. By the time they were cavorting in their bathers it was a cross between a Leni Riefenstahl and a porno film. Leica should sue.
 
Richard G said:
It started well and then deteriorated, badly. By the time they were cavorting in their bathers it was a cross between a Leni Riefenstahl and a porno film. Leica should sue.
Click to expand...

Thank you...I quit watching before the half-way point because it got too disgusting...:(
 
Cheesy maybe, but not disgusting. And better than most European perfume/cologne ads. Not really sure what they were selling, but the Leica book and the camera made for a timeless feel.
 
That's a Bruce Weber product. Totally sentimental and obvious as all his work is. Disgusting, not so much. She is a nice looking woman indeed and even Bruce Weber couldn't quite ruin her.

My oh my but that muscle-boy in Speedos sure as hell doesn't know how to use that camera. And no one thought it necessary to give him even rudimentary instruction.
 
d.sge --- I was going to comment that the total intellectual and aesthetic dishonesty of weber is evident in the simple fact he'd film the guy shooting her from at most 18 inches away. HE knows. Whatever looks good.
 
I wonder if they got to drive the early 60's Ferrari during the shoot. That car is only worth a cool 1.5mil US or so.
 
Kevin I was glad I saw it but I just got frustrated by the level of artistic integrity, which I concede is quite unreasonable of me in the context of something like this, perhaps an advertisement for something. Still, some ads can be beautiful and clever. I didn't notice you'd posted this or I would have been more circumspect. I won't look again, but wasn't that handsome young fellow wearing a Rolleiflex too?
 
Crappy video, no doubt, but you guys really need to loosen up. Who gives a damn if the props aren't used correctly. If they were used accurately that wouldn't make the film any better.

This trend in the past few years of photographers making videos really does shine a light on how completely unoriginal and cliché-driven a lot of them are.
 
errorlogin said:
Nothing fits....M3 is from the 50th with black later lens on it. The Leica book is from 1937/38, when no M3 was existing. :mad: :eek:
Click to expand...

Well, that's not a really problem, is it? You can actually read a book years after it came out.

Anyways, it's pretty clear that this isn't supposed to be a period piece. The use of a digital lighmeter should've given it away.
 
sparrow6224 said:
d.sge --- I was going to comment that the total intellectual and aesthetic dishonesty of weber is evident in the simple fact he'd film the guy shooting her from at most 18 inches away. HE knows. Whatever looks good.
Click to expand...

...As does the rest of the world, apart from some Leica nuts over here and those over at LUF who bought their expensive new stuff hoping they could once ever shoot a pretty woman up close with it.


Wining about the minimum focus distance and the fact that the ad is untrue is useless.

It's an advertisement, it wasn't meant to show 'the truth' in the first place, for crying out loud!

And it was made for the German Vogue. Try looking at German commercials in general and tell me you like them more!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom