M8 in IRAQ- A US Soldier and his Leica go to WAR

rover,
I am pointing out the obvious to someone who knows better. That some people feel every mention of digital or the M8 is either an affront to there chosen medium or in this case, brand of film, is obvious. That you would call me on this and not KM for his hostel post yesterday is curious.
 
And others who are affronted by any comment not in line with their positive opinion of the M8. The bottom line is that unless both sides here get themselves under control and moderate their own posts the M8 Forum will remain void of useful reasonable discussion. Based on the many complaints about every thread discussing the M8 it is clear that everyone is always wrong and nobody is right.

EVERYONE, If you want to make the M8 forum work, then act in that manner.
 
Interesting gallery Ted. Some of the shots are very good and really get through. Even more of achievement considering he's a grunt and not a full time journalist.
 
rover,
You are of course correct except this is not a thread flaming the M8 were I or other M8 owners come in to share our experience to the contrary of some patriot parroting something he heard from another patriot parroting on about how the M8 does this… or….that. Far be it from anyone who actually owns an M8 and loves it to express his or her feelings let alone start a thread chronicling an M8 going to war without some film guy whipping it out and having a go. This is a forum for digital M8 photogs so why defend film Trolls- they have several forums to choose from and they come here after all.

Perhaps as a side its telling that a fan of film is making excuses for his film of choice due to storage issues in the desert. This seems just the environment where an M8 could shine for reportage and not need to worry about how it's film was stored. I am 100% positive that his M8 shots will blow his M7 shots on Kodachrome or any film away. When they do, this will be justification enough for the M8 to surpass its film brothers in an environment exactly suited to the Leica legacy. Of course if his M8 craps out then this too will be telling and give faughter to the M8 detractors. Either way we have an interesting M8 drama about to unfold- and if it significantly outperforms film well then I can already hear the excuses.
 
Last edited:
The ball simply always starts rolling slowly and turns into an unstoppable ugly force in each of these threads. Your points too are valid, but a line needs to be drawn in the sand as to when the troll starts to be ignored. Then there will be a right and a wrong. The line will be best drawn by the members, only in that way will it be successful.
 
Some of this stuff is pretty nice. I'm not sure that the M8 will blow his film work out of the water - I have yet to see an M8 shot that has me giving up my film M's. My experience with the M8 is simply this - it's a digital M body that finally allows us M users that option. I've seen some very good images from it on numerous boards, flickr accounts and in person - but it isn't the Jesus Camera.:angel:
 
There's always the possibility that the scanning & post-processing was inadequate. Because of its density, Kodachrome can be a bitch to scan (Velvia 50, too, for similar reasons) & the guy may not have lot of time to mess around w/his images in Photoshop.

KM-25 said:
His Kodachrome is either from pre-1995 or got really hot, it is terribly magenta. So not really any comparison to be made. Properly exposed Kodachrome in good shape will give the M8 a run for it's money and often exceed it in terms of overall detail and resolution.
Click to expand...
 
Sailor Ted said:
How do you suggest he keep that film refergerated and fresh in the Iraqi desert? Perhaps you can send him some of your personal stash as a contribution to the Kodachrome project.
Click to expand...

Actually, that is a good question.

The film is one of the most robust ever made. I remember shooting an assignment in Death Valley for 4 days and it got quite hot, like 112, but I never had the film look like this. It might have been a combo of things, old film never refrigerated and constant heat. If you are signed up on that site you should ask him about the Kodachrome, where he got it and such...
 
Ted,
Sorry but it takes one Troll to feed another. If you ignore the comments, the troll ends.

TO ALL
As Rover has said, the large majority of this forum is fed up with the same bickering arguments that get repeated in just about every M8 thread by the same people. To be honest it looks like a group of kids having a senseless arguement in the playground about who started it. Some like the M8, some don't - get over it!:bang:

Kim

Sailor Ted said:
rover,
You are of course correct except this is not a thread flaming the M8 were I or other M8 owners come in to share our experience to the contrary of some patriot parroting something he heard from another patriot parroting on about how the M8 does this… or….that. Far be it from anyone who actually owns an M8 and loves it to express his or her feelings let alone start a thread chronicling an M8 going to war without some film guy whipping it out and having a go. This is a forum for digital M8 photogs so why defend film Trolls- they have several forums to choose from and they come here after all.

Perhaps as a side its telling that a fan of film is making excuses for his film of choice due to storage issues in the desert. This seems just the environment where an M8 could shine for reportage and not need to worry about how it's film was stored. I am 100% positive that his M8 shots will blow his M7 shots on Kodachrome or any film away. When they do, this will be justification enough for the M8 to surpass its film brothers in an environment exactly suited to the Leica legacy. Of course if his M8 craps out then this too will be telling and give faughter to the M8 detractors. Either way we have an interesting M8 drama about to unfold- and if it significantly outperforms film well then I can already hear the excuses.
Click to expand...
 
Great link. Great photos.
It's a shame that someone had to bring up techical issues straight away. That's not what photographing in a war zone is all about. It's also a shame that the title of the OP is misleading. I think if it had simply been titled Leica in IRAQ, there would be no controversy and it would have been a more civil discussion.
Oh well...
 
KM-25 said:
Actually, that is a good question.

The film is one of the most robust ever made. I remember shooting an assignment in Death Valley for 4 days and it got quite hot, like 112, but I never had the film look like this. It might have been a combo of things, old film never refrigerated and constant heat. If you are signed up on that site you should ask him about the Kodachrome, where he got it and such...
Click to expand...

And the continued personal sparring is not appreciated. Kodachome is a fine film, but not the topic of this thread.
 
KM-25 said:
Actually, that is a good question.

The film is one of the most robust ever made. I remember shooting an assignment in Death Valley for 4 days and it got quite hot, like 112, but I never had the film look like this. It might have been a combo of things, old film never refrigerated and constant heat. If you are signed up on that site you should ask him about the Kodachrome, where he got it and such...
Click to expand...

My guess is he got it from Kodak for free but I'll ask him and report back. I thought his Kodachrome images looked pretty good but that all his images were a little dark. Perhaps this is the look he is looking for or perhaps as furcafe points out this is a scanning post process issue? It will be telling when the M8 images start rolling in if they share this signature and if so I guess we can assume it's the photog's expression and if not then it's as you suggested- a storage issues with his film; a factor that will not effect his SD cards so perhaps the M8 images will be very different.

This seems a perfect venue for both haters and lovers alike to follow the M8 in the worst of environments and compare it’s signature and robustness to that of film M’s. In fact it’s almost tailor made as a bridging topic between two opposed camps.
 
Last edited:
photogdave said:
Great link. Great photos.
It's a shame that someone had to bring up techical issues straight away. That's not what photographing in a war zone is all about. It's also a shame that the title of the OP is misleading. I think if it had simply been titled Leica in IRAQ, there would be no controversy and it would have been a more civil discussion.
Oh well...
Click to expand...

Bingo!

By the way, I gave my insight, some feedback since the guy who shot the photos is not here, I am not, was not in any way trolling. I bet his M8 photos will be great, afterall, it is not the tool that matters but the craftsman.

But, if one is really inspired by a new tool to get out and shoot more, then the importance of the tool becomes a greater role in how the images will come out.
I would never have got into Leica if the lenses were no better than my Nikons, Canon, Hassy's, etc.

There are more pros using the M8 than you may realize. One of them from the New York Times magazine was in my town a month or so ago, shooting away with what looked like to many to be a point and shoot....I love Leica!!

Really folks, moderators too, lets keep this all in perspective: If a thread starts to get weird, then we can turn it around, so lets.

...For what it is worth, I did my time for my country..:)
 
Sailor Ted said:
My guess is he got it from Kodak for free but I'll ask him and report back. I thought his Kodachrome images looked pretty good but that all his images were a little dark. Perhaps this is the look he is looking for or perhaps as furcafe points out this is a scanning post process issue? It will be telling when the M8 images start rolling in if they share this signature and if so I guess we can assume it's the photog's expression and if not then it's as you suggested- a storage issues with his film; a factor that will not effect his SD cards so perhaps the M8 images will be very different.

This seems a perfect venue for both haters and lovers alike to follow the M8 in the worst of environments and compare it’s signature and robustness to that of film M’s. In fact it’s almost tailor made as a bridging topic between two opposed camps.
Click to expand...

It is a pretty unique thing to see work like this on a site like that. Is he a DOD or communications shooter? Or a soldier with a love for the other kind of shooting?
Sorry this got all warped as far as our ramblings have gone, it was not my intent.

Let's *Both* get off of here and go shoot, eh?

....cameras that is...not guns;)
 
I shot Kodachrome in Kuwait and Iraq in 1990-91. It holds up well to harsh temperatures because it is, at heart, a black-and-white emulsion that has its colors added via a dye process.

By the way, the several tens of millions of people who live in and around the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula take a lot of photographs themselves. It's not as though film evaporates upon arrival.
 
Iraq isn't the first war to be photographed in hot, dusty desert climate. It was done before, with film, and the photos survived. Unfortunately the same can't be said for many of the subjects and a few of the photographers, and that IMO trumps any camera woes.
 
Thanks for the link.

Finding some irony in the next member post down on the list
"Are you afraid to carry a Leica?"

Makes one think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom