M6 shoots at National Geographic

[anam_alpenia]

I thought you might enjoy this site with some nice M6 shots by

the Nichols

 

<p>

 

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0010/feature1/

zoom4.html

 

<p>

 

Cheers,

 

<p>

 

AA

[wolfgang]

I think your link does nor work. Can you please verify? Thanks! W.

[john_molloy3]

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0010/feature1

[jm_woo2]

Great photos on the NG site, and lots of information about

shooting.

<p>

fyi, you can use Google to find others: simply type

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=leica+M6+

site%3Anationalgeographic.com>leica M6

site:nationalgeographic.com</a> into your Google search box,

for instance.

[jm_woo2]

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=leica+M6+

site%3Anationalgeographic.com">leica M6

site:nationalgeographic.com</a>

<p>

...is what I meant.

[anam_alpenia]

Thanks, John - one days I will know how to poperly work this

computer - maybe once it has a lens?

[andy_piper2]

The intersting thing here is that at least ONE of these shots was made

with a Canon EOS and zoom. Test yourself. Can you - without peaking at

the technical notes - identify the camera used from looking at the

picture?

 

<p>

 

I was fairly sure of the Canon shot - but couldn't swear the other

shots were Leica-made without checking, although there were hints.

 

<p>

 

I've also seen Nichols' own website with many more shots from

megatransect - and many more Canon B&W shots. His personal vision is so

consistent that often a pic I'd swear was Leica would turn out to be

Canon SLR - and occasionally vice versa.

[Allen Herbert]

Just added to my favs..thanks

[john_molloy3]

i dod notice what andy was talking about. one thing to note, the EOS

picture have 2 other variables from the leica shots. it was shot

using a flash (as opposed to available light) and the film was Tmax

400 (not Tmax 3200). christ i'm a geek.

[keith_davis1]

And we like these photos why?

 

<p>

 

They seem fairly mundane to me once you look beyond the

exotic subjects and locale. And they are surprisingly flat,

considering that they were shot on TMZ.

 

<p>

 

Worst of all, he cut off those people's feet in the last shot. Totally

unnecessary. A half step back and he would have had it all.

[Allen Herbert]

Keith how can you judge a photo on a low res computer screen.Also

depends how it was,or what was used,to scan it.

[keith_davis1]

"Keith how can you judge a photo on a low res computer

screen.Also depends how it was,or what was used,to scan it."

 

<p>

 

How about content and composition? Or can't those be judged

adequately on a low res computer screen either?

 

<p>

 

I don't see anything particularly special in the NG photos

referenced.

[charles_mason]

I think the missing toes are more than made up for by the

wonderful compositional moment with the arm, and that eye, in

the bottom photo.

[nesrani]

Excellent work, although the black and white is a bit hard to read

sometimes. I would have preferred colour myself.

[geddert]

just in case somebody wants to check out more of Michael Nichols work

you can see it at his site here: <a

href="http://michaelnicknichols.com/">http://michaelnicknichols.com</a

>