Therefore, I_blog

The Fuji X100 in My Hands

2011-06-16T12:40:00.000-07:00

"And then I realized, like I was shot! Like I was shot with a diamond … a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God, the genius of that! The genius!"
-Col. Walter E. Kurtz, Apocalypse Now!

The Beginning...
I’ve been an enthusiastic fan of the FinePix X100 camera ever since Fuji unveiled the it back in 2010. I immediately found the optical viewfinder, the fast high-quality lens, the larger size sensor, and the rangefinder styling to be very attractive features that on their own would make the camera worthy of ownership. Based on those features alone, I knew back then that I would own the camera. However, after a succession of promising high-end fixed-lens point-and-shoot cameras had appeared under the new product spotlight over the years and then receded into the shadows dragging their failings along with them, I was a skeptical and somewhat cynical consumer. So, when Fuji announced the camera MSRP, I decided to be cautious and hold off on purchasing the camera until I had seen some of the initial usage reports. I also wanted to see the dpreview.com review for the camera (I was very keen on seeing the high ISO performance). I painfully pulled myself off of every online waiting list for the camera and hunkered down into lurk mode for the fallout.

The initial reports looked great, and everything seemed to shake out positively for the X100—even though the camera didn't receive the highly valued 'Recommended' rating from dpreview.com. Despite some of the minor concerns detailed in the review, I placed an order for the camera. I had yet to physically see or handle the camera, but I really wanted it. That desire didn't make the decision to purchase it any easier. The camera is quite a financial commitment for the hobbyist and amateur, and immediately after consummating the online order with Amazon, I began to have those nagging buyer’s remorse-type regrets. Fortunately (I reasoned), I ordered the camera while it was in an out-of-stock status, so I estimated that I had a wait period of about a month or two to reconsider my decision and, if necessary, cancel the order.

The Middle (Wait Period)...
Not long into the wait period, I had my first opportunity to handle the X100. I was shooting at an outdoor event in San Francisco when I ran into an online photo buddy who had the camera in one of those gorgeous red leather cases made by Luxecase.

Even beneath the case, the ergonomics of the camera called out to me. I’m really big on camera ergonomics, and I can't help but compare every camera to the camera that I consider to be the ultimate shooting machine, a Leica M. Luckily, on this day, I was able to get a direct comparison between the two cameras, and the X100 made an immediate and lasting impression on me during that very first handling.

I had been shooting that morning with a Leica MP (and a Cosina Voigtlander Color Skopar 35/2.5), so my hand was nicely conformed to the MP body. When I was handed the X100, it was a quick exchange between the two cameras. “Wow!” I was instantly impressed by how the X100 fit and how my MP-contorted hand fell naturally around the camera. I couldn’t spend a lot of time with the camera, because other local photographers were queuing up for a chance to hold it. I reluctantly passed the camera along, but the feel of the camera, the contours, the weight, the positioning of the shutter release and top-mounted dials had a comfortable familiarity.

A few days later, I had a chance to spend some more time with the camera when a friend brought it to our quarterly photo-print group meeting. The camera sidetracked us for about 20 minutes, but it was great to handle it again and confirm that same ‘perfect fit’ feel—this time on a naked camera with a modified Thumbs Up attachment.

I was able to spend a little more time investigating the viewfinder and playing with the manual focus ring. The fellow who brought the camera also does a fair amount candid street-style shooting, so I got some feedback from him about how the camera handled for this type of shooting. We talked a little about the auto-ISO and dynamic range settings, and by the end of this second encounter, I was convinced that camera was going to work out for me. I checked the order status on Amazon.com and found the camera had already shipped.
The Camera in My Hands...
When I received the camera, I took the advice of some online reviewers and set aside a block of time to go through the user’s guide. According to some accounts, the Fuji menu system on this camera is difficult and unintuitive. Hmmm. Maybe it’s the ‘internet bugaboo effect’ of magnifying complaints, or maybe it’s because I already own a Fuji point-and-shoot camera—I think it’s more the former—but those concerns about the menus are a load of nonsense. The menu system on the X100 is much simpler—structure-wise—than what I’ve seen on a Nikon DSLR or even a Canon G11. Of course, the Canon is a feature-laden point-and-shoot, which has a lot to do with it.

In fact, whilst rooting around in the X100 menus, it struck me with just how little there is to this camera. Beyond the high-level features (the hybrid OVF, the great lens, the large sensor, and the RF styling and ergonomics), which (again) are very nice on their own, there really isn't much by way of special features. Sure, I knew this already from reviewing the camera specs, but you become very (almost painfully) aware of this when you have the camera in-hand.

The reviewer at Dpreview.com seem to address this as well. He thought that certain standard-type features such as face detection should not have been left off the camera. Initially, I agreed with that conclusion. Of course, there are features that are somewhat unique and certainly interesting about the camera. For example, I think I’m going to really like the dynamic range settings, the RAW button on the back of the camera, the ND filter, and the leveling line, but beyond that I can imagine that there isn't much to entertain the buyer who likes a lot of bells and whistles. One can't help but wonder where all the $1200 USD (MSRP) went.

The Diamond Bullet...
After owning a an MFT camera and a slew of high-end compact digital cameras, I was a bit disappointed with the meager feature set, until I showed the camera to a couple of photographer friends who are outside the target audience for the X100. After a brief introduction to the high-level features and some camera fondling and ogling, we sat with the X100 sitting on the table in front of us. Then one of them asked, "So, what else can it do?".

I had to pause, because the question was based on the supposition that a camera needed to do more than enable (enhance) a positive shooting experience and produce good-looking image files. One could argue that features (features!) enhance the shooting experience, but really that's a determination for the purchaser and the intended audience/end-user. An abundance of features means one thing to the buyer of a compact camera and something else to a professional shooting with a DSLR.

Then, like a diamond bullet to my forehead, I remembered what I wanted from this camera, and really, what I had wanted from every digital compact and MFT camera I’d ever owned. The remembrance shook off all my previous digital photographic experience like rain from a raincoat. What I really want this camera to do is to perform—as closely as possible—like a rangefinder camera. I want to be able to shoot a digital camera the same way I shoot a film RF camera--quickly and with as much control as possible. And, aside from a Nikon DSLR that I purchased several years ago to photograph my kids sporting events, that goal has been the impetus for my excursion into digital photography up to this point.

I didn't buy my digital compact and an MFT camera, because I wanted or needed them for any particular purpose (yes, I have found the situations where these cameras function at their best, and I use them in those situations). I bought these cameras because I saw in them the possibility of using them as I would a film camera, because I want that same experience every time I shoot with a camera. And, really that's what this niche market, the target audience for the X100, is primarily about, quality output, rangefinder camera-like handling, and film camera performance.

So, after failing to achieve that single purpose by trying to coax RF camera performance out of my Canon G11--through a seemingly endless combination of settings and features (including face detection)--and by twisting a seemingly endless number of M-mount lenses onto my Panasonic G1, I now hold in my hands the Fuji FinePix X100. The camera hits on a lot of RF-like points, great ergonomics, an excellent lens, bare-bones feature set, manual control, fantastic high ISO performance, an f-stop ring, and an honest-to-goodness viewfinder. Straight out of the box--and aside from a Leica M8 or an M9 (neither of which I can afford)--this is the first camera that comes the closest to achieving that wonderful goal. Could this be the camera that allows me (us!) to achieve that end? The best test for determining this is (as always) usage.

To be continued....

---
Photo of camera in red Luxecase belongs to Gary Hagan.
Photo of camera with Thumbs Up attachment belongs to Jamie Pillars

Fuji X100: Clamoring for Imperfection

2011-06-06T13:28:00.000-07:00

Well, the Fuji Finepix X100 is finally a released product, and after a delay in shipping (because of the earthquake/tsunami disaster in Japan), the camera is in the hands of early adopters and getting a real-world shakedown. Sample images and usage reports are appearing in online galleries and forums, and Dpreview.com, the highly respected digital camera site recently posted their much anticipated assessment of the camera. All this feedback confirms what a lot of us thought it would; the optical viewfinder, the lens, and the camera ergonomics are excellent. The feedback also confirms what a lot of us hoped it would; the camera image quality (IQ) and high ISO performance are also proving to be exceptional. So that’s it then. The camera appears to be a success.

Well, hold on now. Delving a little deeper into the Dpreview report, we find that the reviewer found a lot of (what I’ll call) "nagging issues". These are seemingly less significant issues (certainly less significant than the bigger issues of IQ, high ISO, lens performance, and ergonomics), but they are issues nonetheless. And as every photographer who has ever had to deal with cryptic menus, fiddly buttons, or buried functions will attest, when it comes to digital cameras, the devil is in the details, or more precisely, it’s the little things that end up impacting the user experience the most. However, most of us usually put up with the few minor nagging inconveniences inherent in every camera, because (again) as every photographer will attest, there is no perfect camera. And, from all accounts the X100 is not a perfect camera, yet, the clamor for the X100 within its target market is nothing short of impressive.

Here is an imperfect camera—and there are a lot of people outside of the target market who will point out its deficiencies—that the projected end-user simply cannot wait to get into their hands. At the time of this writing, the camera is back-ordered at every online outlet. I called one of the big online photo retailers and spoke to an exasperated representative who admitted that the wait list was several hundred deep and that every other call was an inquiry about the X100. Combine this with the buzz the camera is creating at online forums, and it’s obvious that Fuji really nailed this one. They listened to their target market and came up with a winner.

I guess that begs the question: who is the target market? Who is this end-user that is clamoring for an imperfect camera? Well, I won’t attempt to define the market, because if you’re in the target market, you know it. And, if you can find no appeal in what Fuji is offering with the X100, if you find yourself incredulous over $1200 USD for a fixed lens camera, and if your incessant pixel-peeping forces you to bemoan the imperceptible presence of mustache distortion, then you are not part of the target market.

If you’re convinced that you are part of the target market—but your rooting around in spec-sheets cannot allow you to get past the imperfections of the X100—then you need to step away from the in-depth online reviews and come to the realization that the perfect camera does not exist, and, more importantly, it’s not coming—especially if you continue to look at every new camera at the level that doesn’t allow you to see the forest for the trees. At that granular level, no camera will ever be perfect enough. What you need to do is feel this camera, pick it up and look through the viewfinder, because if you’ve chased through the MFT and NEX systems and countless point-and-shoot and compact cameras in search of that one quality, you’ll know you’ve found it when the Fuji X100 lands in your hands.

Steidl Books

2011-04-07T13:23:00.000-07:00

If you're a browser or a collector of photography books, then chances are you've seen or you own a book by the publisher, Steidl. For me, the name Steidl is a mark of guaranteed quality. I have never worried about book print or construction quality when I'm "blindly" buying or ordering a Steidl book online or from a bookseller, and repeatedly without fail, I have yet to be disappointed. Of course, that kind of consistency can only come from a publisher with a passion for high quality fine art printing. As a recent NY Times article attests, Gerhardt Steidl has that kind of passion.
Here's a look at the inner workings of the Steidl publishing house in Gottingen, Germany.

It's No Toy. It's the Nikki NK-2626 Camera!

2011-03-23T18:39:00.000-07:00

OK. I’m not going to waste too much time on this, but I feel obligated to make this post. When I first relaized that this camera was coming to me, I immediately began to search for information. I knew nothing about the camera and found very little information online. I’m sure I wasn’t the first, nor will I be the last to try to find information on the Nikki NK-2626 35mm camera.

First of all, the camera is marketed under a couple of different names. Here are a handful of the names that I’ve come across:

Nikki NK-2626
SUNNY S-2000
Olempia Big Royal Camera
Olympia DL-9000
Olympia GM8426

First Impression

My intial impression (before actually holding the camera) was that the Nikki NK-2626 was a ‘toy camera’--a camera aimed at the toy-camera enthusiast market. That intrigued me. Since having the opportunity to inspect the camera, I’ve come to the conclusion that the NK-2626 is not a toy camera at all—at least not in the same sense as the Holga or the Diana camera. The Nikki definitely falls into the same low-cost camera bracket (however, it is more stoutly built and has a tad more sophistication). Instead I think it's accurate to view the camera as a cheap Chinese knock-off of an SLR, and probably more accurate to view it as a cheap Chinese knock-off of someone’s idea of an SLR camera, an exploitation of a real 35mm SLR. That alone could endear the camera to some folks, and I have to admit that holding the camera in my hand and inspecting it up close did generate a very brief photographically-illicit cheap thrill sensation. The camera is covered with hints and claims seemingly designed to fool the clueless into believing the camera is something considerably more than what it actually is (a big motor-driven point-and-shoot camera). It doesn't take much photographic knowledge to 'get' the inside joke of such claims as 'red-eye reduction' and the center circle line in the view finder.

Regardless, with the flash attached and fully loaded with batteries, the camera has decent heft. It has a good right-side grip and a clear viewfinder. The motor drive is l-o-u-d, as is the self-timer beep, which is probably one of the most annoying beeping sound I've ever heard. There's definitely nothing stealthy about the NK-2626. If you want a camera that announces your arrival, then the Nikki NK-2626 is your camera.

NOTE: The weather hasn’t been very agreeable for camera testing, so I’ve not had a chance to shoot this camera. I found a couple of samples on Flickr, but it’s difficult to get a feel for what the camera can produce. I'm in no rush to shoot with this camera, but when I do, I'll post some images here.

The Nikki NK-2626 35mm camera

The camera has 50/6.3 lens. This shot shows the lens set at the maximum aperture (f6.3).

To adjust the aperture to one of the other two settings (f8 or f11), twist the outer knurled ring.

The f-stops are also designated by little weather report-type icons, cloudy (f6.3), partially cloudy (f8), and sunny (f11).
There's a three position switch with settings for off, on, and rewind. The camera is motor-driven, so there isn't a film advance lever or a rewind knob.

On top of the camera there's a waist-level finder. The image through the finder is really distorted. It's not very good, and I'm not sure that there's much value in this "feature", really.

Below is a shot through the viewfinder. There's a frame line and a center circle line. There isn't auto-focus or a meter on this camera, so there really is no purpose to the center circle line, except to indicate frame center for framing.

Here's a front-side detail. There's a self timer, and a red-eye reduction claim. The only red-eye reduction feature on this camera is the side/bracket-mount flash.

That's it. That's the Nikki NK-2626 35mm camera.

Love Film, Love a Holga – From Hater to Lover

2011-03-09T21:33:00.000-08:00

Mention the Holga camera to a group of photographers and you’re likely to get many different opinions. Cool. Hip. A cheap waste of time. Overpriced junk. Supporters are likely to show you their cameras, bragging about its idiosyncrasies, pointing out a pinhole light leak, or the special marking that identifies a particular camera within a stable of cameras. Detractors are likely to sneer haughtily or dismiss the camera as doofus-hipster junk. Likewise, in the squeaky clean world of digital capture there isn’t much love for the messy imperfection of the low fidelity (lo-fi) aesthetic, of which the Holga camera is the flagship. For a time, I counted myself as a detractors. I’ve since come to terms with the toy camera and lo-fi aesthetic, and now I count myself as a supporter. I love shooting with film, so I have learned to appreciate the Holga. The camera is energizing a whole new generation of film users. That means more people discovering the magic of using film, which in turn means a continued demand for film and film-related products.

I was first introduced to the idea of using toy cameras as a ‘serious’ photographic tool back in the early 80’s when a close friend of mine showed me his recently acquired Diana camera. He passionately explained the unique peculiarities and possibilities of the blue and black plastic camera. It was cool, and it seemed like fun. But then he loftily announced his intention to use it exclusively to explore the depths of photographic expression for our upcoming photography class. I had my doubts about how successful he would be. At the time, I remember being impressed that the toy camera movement was fairly well established, and by extension so was the lo-fi aesthetic. I had to admit that there was a definite appeal to the atmospheric images and to the push-back attitude that thumbed its nose at the zone system mentality that permeated our photographic education back then. However, despite being intrigued and partially aligned with what I saw, I was having none of it, for two reasons.

First, the thought of using a plastic toy camera for serious photographic study was incomprehensible. I wanted real quality gear, and I wanted it so badly that couldn’t conceive of settling for anything less than what I had. My thought process was something like “life is too short to not shoot with real glass or a real camera”. It was only onward and upward for me. Besides, one would never be taken seriously shooting with a toy camera, so why bother? However, my opinion changed significantly when my friend used the camera to take a prize in a local photography competition.

Second, the thing that bothered me the most about the Diana camera was the one quality that made it so desirable, its uniqueness. Because of the out-of-control manufacturing variables (particularly with regard to the lens), each camera that tumbled off the assembly line was unique. If you happened to get a ‘special’ one (having the right amount of lens distortion, flaring, vignetting, or light leak), you could make art. You were an instant artist. You didn’t need talent, skill, or the craft required for special processes, you just needed to know where to point your ‘special’ camera. For this reason, I considered the camera more of a gimmick. I admit that I still exhibit a lingering bit of snobbery toward all things photographically ‘gimmicky’ (I still struggle with the Lensbaby!), but back in those days, I relegated the Diana camera to the same low level of esteem as the dreaded star filters.

I admit to the error of that line of thinking. After all, it is not uncommon for photographers (including this one) to chase the quality and the unique characteristics of cameras and lenses. For example, if you’ve followed this blog at all, then you know that I’ve developed a fondness for shooting with c-mount lenses on my MFT camera. And really, is this any different than being fond of the characteristics produced by a toy camera? I don’t think so. The same goes for those ‘bokeh-chasing’ photographers, who spend thousands on a piece of glass so they can shoot it wide open and leverage the special qualities of the out-of-focus area. So yes, in the years since that first introduction, I’ve learned to open my heart to the Diana and other cameras of its ilk. I’ve long since shed those prejudices toward toy cameras, and I am no longer a hater.

Instead, I have grown to appreciate toy cameras, not so much for what they are, but for what they represent. For me, the toy camera movement, and especially the Holga camera, represents the persistence of the appeal of using film as a means of creative expression. The toy camera movement is not so much about the camera as it is about film, discovering film, shooting film, and enjoying the magic of it. Obviously, the camera makes all this possible.

Over the last decade or so, most film-camera manufacturers have succumbed to the pressure of the digital marketplace and scuttled their remaining film camera production. Sure, you can still buy a new metal and glass film camera from a very few select manufacturers, but the pickings are slim and expensive. However, the toy camera and lo-fi aesthetic remains afloat and in-production—thanks to a dedicated user base and a few dedicated outlets.

The main outlet for toy cameras, Lomography.com, has a full range of new cameras with wide variations in design—including special edition collector cameras. It’s easy to see that the site appeals to a younger/youthful market. The result of this marketing is that the Lomo brand has produced an exuberant and dedicated following amongst this younger group of photographers—all of whom are using film.

Indeed for some, the Holga camera was their first introduction to film, and perhaps this explains why this group seems to have a freshly different perspective with regard to film than the photographers of previous generations. The biggest step to getting people to shoot film is to actually get them to want to shoot with film. These new users, who are coming of age photographically in a world with numerous image capture options, want to shoot film, and they seem to have a far more positive outlook about film. A lot of the ‘older’ generation of photographers that I know abandoned film as soon as digital photography became ‘good enough’. Their abandonment was wholeheartedly complete and in some instances downright vengeful. One would think that film had caused them years of pain and suffering. For the newer generation of film users, film is fun, because the camera makes it fun. It’s different. It’s easy, because the camera makes it so.

As a result of all this fun, these younger photographers are discovering the creative possibilities of film, and often they are film’s most fervent adherents. For some the appeal might simply be the contrary nature of shooting film in a digital world. For others, it’s a dedication to something requiring a degree of craft, of process, of effort, or it might simply be a love affair with film itself.

Since exploring film with their Holgas, many have moved past the camera and are exploring the photographic possibilities of shooting with higher quality metal and glass equipment. I see younger photographers shooting on the street with old SLR and rangefinder cameras all the time. I also see a lot of medium format cameras as well (because of the familiarity of the format used with the Holga camera). Of course, I still see the occasional Holga, and when I do I pay my respects by thinking good thoughts.

As easy as it might be to dismiss the lo-fi plastic toy-camera movement as gimmicky hipster-chic, it’s hard to fault the success of the camera for kindling the magic of shooting film for a new generation of photographers. It might be selfishness on my part (ultimately, the more people using film the better for all film users), but it makes me happy to see that when film is presented as an option, people will choose to use it, especially if there's a camera that can make it possible.

Tiny C-mount Lenses on MFT Camera

2011-02-20T15:00:00.000-08:00

One of the cool things about c-mount lenses is their size. Some are very small. If you're a rangefinder camera user (as I am), or if you're into the MFT system because it offers RF-like functionality (again, as I am) then this is probably something you'll find appealing (small fast lenses on compact bodies is a highly valued combination for RF users, because it facilitates quick discreet shooting in a wide variety of lighting situations, which is great for shooting in a photo-journalistic fashion (e.g., street photgraphy) or taking candid photos). However, all is not rosy and perfect. These little lenses can have their drawbacks, some of which can affect how you end up shooting with them.

My recent c-mount lens hunting and gathering produced these two beauties, which are ridiculously small.

Wollensak Cine Velostigmat 1-Inch f3.5

Wollensak-Keystone Cine Raptar 1-Inch f2.5

I pulled The slower lens, the f3.5, off a Keystone A3 16mm camera. The Keystone A3 is one of those wind-up pill-shaped movie cameras. The other lens (f2.5) also has a 'Keystone' designation (on the lens), and although I haven't yet verified it, I'm guessing that this lens was attached to a similar type camera.

Both of these lenses are considered normal focal lengths for 16mm film (they are 1-inch or about 25 mm). So, one would think that these normal lenses coupled to a MFT camera using a c-mount adapter would work without a hitch. But they don't, and this brings up a point (or two) about dealing in the wild world of c-mount lenses.

About the only thing standard with the c-mount "standard" seems to be the mount width and the thread (pitch, etc.). Also, while it's convenient to think of c-mount as the mount for 16mm film cameras, it is also the mount used for video and CCTV cameras, and these formats can have their own normal focal-length lenses. Sensor sizes vary considerably, so be careful when bidding on auctions or when hunting and gathering video and CCTV c-mount lenses.

These two lenses present a couple of issues of which one should be wary when purchasing or gathering c-mount lenses, particularly older 16mm lenses. First, just because the mount is a standard don't assume that the lens will work with a MFT camera and adapter. Case in point, note the thread depth of the lens on the left in the photo below compared to the thread depth of the lens on the right.

The thread for the lens on the left (the f3.5) is too long for a MFT camera. From the base of the lens, the thread extends about 4-5 mm. When attaching this lens, it threads past the adapter and contacts the beveled interior of the camera. In the photo below, you can see where the lens rubbed up against the camera interior.

Forcing the lens to mount flush with the adapter certainly would have damaged something, so when mounted, the lens sits away from the camera.

On the other hand, the thread for the f2.5 lens extends around 2.5-3 mm. This lens screws in firmly and sits flush with the adapter.

None of this really matters, because if you look closely at these two little beauties, you'll notice something is missing. Yup, there isn't a focus ring. These are both fixed focus lenses. The f2.5 lens doesn't provide an in-focus image at any distance, and the f3.5 lens—by virtue of its inability to mount through to the adapter—provides a focus distance of about 10-12 inches. So, what does one do? How does one use these lenses on an MFT camera?

Well, to focus the f3.5 lens, I unscrew the front element.

The f2.5 lens doesn't have a detachable front element, so I focus the lens by unscrewing it from the adapter.

This actually works quite well—in both instances—and probably more so with the f3.5 lens, because the threads on the lens are finer than the mounting thread. With the f2.5 lens I can focus the lens very precisely, but the amount of slop in the threads means that I have to either "focus" the lens and allow it to 'hang' from the mount, or I can hold the lens firmly against the mount as I focus. The difference between the two techniques produces significantly different focus points. I prefer the latter method.

With both lenses the processes can get a little fiddly as the aperture ring and the mounting (in the case of the f3.5 lens) have a tendency to move as well. The amount of dexterity required can slow down shooting considerable, and one loses that RF-like advantage of shooting quickly with small fast lenses.

As an alternative to loosening the front element or the mount, another possible way to focus these lenses is by using shims or extenders and setting an acceptable fixed-focus distance. One can then refer to a DoF scale to determine an in-focus range and use the camera as a fixed-focus point-and-shoot—that is, use the lens as it was probably intended.

This method is more applicable with the f2.5 lens than the f3.5 lens, because the latter lens is already "shimmed" by virtue of its inability to mount completely—hence the 10-12 inch focus point.

I picked up a couple of shims, a 1 mm and a .5 mm and three 5mm extenders.

With the shims, I can get focus points of about 6'8" with the .5 mm shim and 3'4" with the 1 mm shim.
The .5 mm shim at a higher f-stop could be very usable for shooting as a fixed-focus point-and-shoot. (I'd really like to pick up a shim or create one that will allow me to set the focus at infinity.)

With the three 5 mm shims I can get six inches with one, three inches with two, and 1.5 inches with three.

Obviously, the macro possibilities when using extenders is interesting.

So, these diminutive little lenses have an appeal, but they have their drawbacks—the least of which is the odd looks you might get from the DSLR crowd (we RF users are used to that mild annoyance). Compatibility and focusing could be an issue, and these are things one should consider carefully. In the end, what good are these little lenses if one can't use them for the intended purpose. Of course, the real appeal of c-mount lenses is the signature they are capable of producing, and it's really one of the biggest reasons to delve into c-mount-to-MFT.

The two lenses discussed here compared to a focus-capable Wollensak 25/1.5.

Woe to Film Users

2011-02-10T14:02:00.000-08:00

The following chart shows the price of silver over the last five or so years.

It's the same chart that Freestyle.com is using in an open letter to their customers announcing an 8-18% increase in film prices.

C-mount Lenses /Camera Photos

2011-02-04T23:31:00.000-08:00

I've been posting images here and on Flickr from the c-mount lenses I've been using on my m4/3 Panasonic Lumix G1. Here are the lenses mounted on the camera.

Lytar SOM Berthiot 25/1.8

Lytar SOM Berthiot 16/2.8

Kodak Cine Ektar 63/2

The lens is attached to the camera with a
s-to-c mount adapter.

The Curse of Film

2011-01-29T12:15:00.000-08:00

A Portion of my latest order from Freestyle

There's a show on TV about hoarding. I've never watched it, but I've seen the commercials for it. I'm pretty sure I don't have to see the show. I get the gist. It's about people who "collect" a lot of one kind of thing. They collect it in a desperate, maniacal fashion, and soon things gets to the point where it's obvious to others that there's a problem.

For example, I saw one commercial for the show that featured a woman who hoards cats. There's a shot of the woman standing in her kitchen surrounded by hundreds of meowing cats. It's obvious that things are out-of-square in her life.

I was accused of hoarding recently when a co-worker saw my freshly delivered Freestyle order of eight cans of 100' 35mm Arista Premium film. I felt a bit silly and afflicted as I tried to explain the how and why. There was pity in his eyes as I described the dwindling supply of film and the narrowing of film options by the film manufacturing greats, Kodak and Fuji.

"Well, supply is dwindling..." I began to explain.
"But you said film is not dead." He said.

He was referencing another conversation we had when I made that proclamation in reply to his accusation that I just couldn't let go of film. He had suggested that film was dead, and that I and everyone like me needed to let it go, let it die.

"If it's not dead, then what's the rush, why hoard the stuff?" he asked.
"I'm not hoarding." I said.
I checked the space behind me for cats.
"I'm stocking up." I added.

He was persistent, just like everyone else who seems to want the demise of film.

"So was there a sale on this stuff?" he asked, picking up one of the cans and examining the label with a disgusted look.
I relieved him of the offending object and placed it back in the stack with its brethren.

"No." I replied.
"Well, sort of.."

You see, it's been a worst kept secret amongst film photographers for some time now that Freestyle's Arista Premium films are actually rebranded and repackaged Kodak film. Specifically, Arista Premium 400 is allegedly Tri-X, and Premium 100 is supposedly Plus-X. Many swear by this. On a couple of forums, the tale has persisted about the friends of friends who have the ability to test and compare the emulsions of both the Arista films and Kodak films using "scientific methods".
From a post on RFF:

Arista Premium IS plus-x. There's no question it is, the film is American Made, has the same dev times as Plus-X and there were even a couple of chemists on APUG who tested the emulsion scientifically and determined it was chemically identical to plus-x. Arista Premium 400 is Tri-X and was verified the same way.

There's also the group who are out shooting and working with the film (including yours truly) and who have noted the similarity. If that's not enough, then Freestyle's shrouded message on their website about "a new partnership with a major film manufacturer" should get the ol' conspiracy juices flowing.

So assuming this is Kodak film rebranded, and comparing the prices of the film at Freesyle, one would be a fool not to at least pause before adding a can of Kodak Tri-X or Plux=X to one's cart. In both cases, Arista Premium by comparison is heavily discounted. For example, Premium 100 lists at $34.99, and Kodak Plus-X lists at $69.99 (!!!).

So, yes. It's kind of like getting the film "on sale".

"But that's the regular price." my co-worker deduced.
"Yup!" I announced proudly.
"Is the stuff being discontinued?" he asked.
"No."
"Going on a trip to some remote location?"
"No."
"Then you are hoarding!" he countered, as if announcing checkmate.

I had to make a quick decision. Would I allow myself to be pegged as a hoarder, or would I have to uncover my deep-seated fear that indeed I do envision a day when film would be clinically dead?

The cat lady appeared in my mind's eye with her parallelogram life of service to a one-hundred-headed meowing monster.

I hung my head. There was a way out. The truth was best.

"I acted on a rumor." I admitted.
"So, I stocked up."

On the same (previously mentioned) photo forum, a rumor popped up that Freestyle was about to show 'no stock' on their Arista Premium films. The word was that the company was selling Kodak back stock, and now, the back stock had run out. The supply listed was to be the last. Acting accordingly—as a panicky user would—I made the order for the eight cans of film. It was all I could afford at the time. Otherwise, I would probably have drained their supply and my bank account.

"Admit it." my co-worker insisted.
"Film is dead."

I'll never understand why this is so important to these people. What joy can they possible find from the demise of film? What joy can they find from the loss of pure magic? Have they never exposed and processed a roll of Tri-X in an elixir of D-76 or some other solvent developer? Have they never imagined the fizzing violence of the developer activity occurring on the microscopic level? Have they never pulled a freshly developed roll from a developing reel and held it up to the light? Have they never exposed a negative onto a piece of paper fat with silver and slid it into a tray of developer? Have they never seen the magic of the image appearing in the safety of a darkroom, and rushed a out into the light with a wet print glistening in a tray?

Have they seen a silver print hanging on a wall emitting a light of its own? Even barring all of that experience, have these people ever really looked at or held a strip of negatives in their hands and realized the preciousness.

What is wrong with these people? I've come to the conclusion that this is proof that pure evil does exist. This bug-eyed enthusiastic anticipation for the demise of film is like a mad pack hunt for the last unicorn.

Yes, I fear for film. I fear for a time when Tri-X, Acros, Plus-X, and other films will be unavailable. We've already seen manufacturers such as Kodak and Fuji cut their lines to a select few film types, and it certainly feels as if they will be out of the business all together. There is much flux in the film manufacturing segment. Film is not dead, but the offerings will dwindle even further and the prices will increase. Those who wish to continue to use film will be able to do so, I feel certain of that. So, as I maintained in my conversation with my co-worker,

"Film is not dead." I said. "And, I am not a hoarder."

I don't have an affliction. It's more like a curse. You see, I'm of the generation that grew up in a film-only world. For me, for a while, film was all there was. I have that experience. I know the magic. I want the magic to continue, and I am guilty of panicing on that level alone.

I know people who have shot film and have left it completely to shoot digital. I also know those who shoot both film and digital (including yours truly). I know those who have left digital frustrated and returned to film, and I know newcomers to the craft who are discovering the film process for the first time (they are often film's most ardent supporters). There's digital, and I use it, but I will shoot film for as long as I can.

Long live film!

Some C-Mount-to-micro 4/3 Results

2011-01-21T14:52:00.000-08:00

Continuing with c-mount lenses on my Panasonic Lumix G1 (µ4/3 camera), here are some results and commentary.

The first two images were made with a Lytar SOM Berthiot 25/1.8. I think these images are indicative of what is appealing about shooting with c-mount lenses. Note the vignetting, the color saturation, and the smooth bokeh that has a tendency to get 'swirly' in busy areas.

The vignetting is a result of the focal length. Wider focal lengths seem to produce the strongest vignetting, and the 25mm focal length seems to offer a nice trade-off.

The Lytar SOM Berthiot 16/2.8 vignettes pretty fiercely (sample below). I've also shot with a Wollensak 17/2.5 that produced similar results. The vignette look of both lenses lenses has a 'tunnel vision' effect. I've not played much with either lens to be able to discern whether the lenses offer or add much value within the image area. I've seen wider lenses that offer a distinct fish-eye effect.

I'm not finding much value in the 'tunnel vision' effect. I prefer the coverage, and, going forward, I'll probably avoid any c-mount lens wider than 25mm or 20mm.

Here's the Lytar 16/2.8.

Noting the flare, I think the lens might have some fungus or lens damage. I haven't been able to determine the condition. The lens elements are very small and the front side is deeply set within the lens, so I haven't been able to evaluate the condition nor confirm that my cleaning is thorough enough. However, this is an improvement from the first few shots with the lens.

The next images were made with the Kodak Ektar Cine 63/2 lens (more images available in an earlier post). Notice the lack of vignetting.

This is an interesting lens. It's pretty sharp and the bokeh is rather nice. It's an all-metal lens with a length around 3.75 inches (less the hood and including the removable s-to-c-mounting), but the weight is very manageable on my G1. The lens has eight blades, and the close-focus marking on the lens is 24 inches. I'm thinking this lens can probably be had at auction for cheap, so if you would like to try a fast longer lens in a c-mount, keep your eye out for this one.

CES Video Shot Through Fuji X100 Viewfinder

2011-01-16T10:44:00.000-08:00

More on the Fuji X100. It looks like the camera is on-target for its march release.

Here's a video from CES shot through the Fuji X100 viewfinder:

Voice From Beyond - More on the Maier Story

2011-01-12T13:44:00.000-08:00

I don't normally post twice in one day, but I had to get this out there. It's nice to see and hear Mr. Maloof. All Maloof naysayers need to see this. I think he comes off as genuine and sincere. At points he appears to be in over his head with regard to photography and art, and at other times, he appears to be quite savvy with regard to his find and his responsibility. I don't envy the tasks he has before him, especially when I see him scanning this work on an Epson V750 (the same scanner I have). His setup is not unlike mine, and, as I stated in a previous post, I know what a grind it can be.

The real treat in this YouTube video is hearing the voice of Ms Maier herself. The excerpt strangely foreshadows this incredible story.

C-Mount-to-m4/3

2011-01-12T10:07:00.000-08:00

Is there no end to the fun and versatility of mirror-less digital camera systems? Besides being diminutive cameras with image quality on par with larger and heftier DSLR cameras, the current batch of mirror-less systems support an impressive number of adapters that allow you to attach non-native lenses to the camera's mount. This opens up these systems to an impressive selection of lenses.

For example, I have an M-mount adapter and an F-mount adapter for my Panasonic Lumix G1. Those adapters allow me to attach Leica and Nikon-compatible lenses (respectively) to the camera. I recently acquired a C-mount adapter ($20 off eBay). This adapter allows me to attach and shoot with cine and CCTV lenses.

I probably wouldn't have bothered with the C-mount adapter if I didn't already have a Bolex 16mm camera with three C-mount lenses sticking to the front of it. I'm glad I did bother, because for me the adapter has opened up a new world of exciting optical possibilities .

The photos below show my Bolex camera with two of the three lenses attached. I'm shooting with the third lens, a Kodak Ektar Cine 63/2.

The other lenses are Lytar SOM Berthiots. One is a 25/1.8 and the other is a 16/2.8.

There are a lot of C-mount lenses out there (both new and used/older)—many with names I've never heard or with names that I haven't heard mentioned in over 20 years. While I'm just beginning to understand the characteristics of these lenses on my m4/3 system, one of the things I've noticed is C-mount lenses are fast. Generally, most of the lenses I've come across in my online viewing and research land in the f0.95 - f2.8 range. I'm sure there are slower C-mount lenses, but it's the lenses in this range that are creating a stir.

From what I've seen, the quality of these lenses can run the gamut from Holga-ish to Leica- and Zeiss-like. The results have been impressive.The effects range from images with heavy vignetting and flare-y softness to 3D-like images with creamy smooth bokeh supporting razor-sharp in-focus areas. Images with seemingly impossible DoF shifts and images with spot color saturation are not uncommon either.

The photographic world pretty much caught on to the c-mount rage a while ago, so if you're looking to pick up a couple of these lenses, you can expect to pay a premium or engage in some heavy bidding wars. Regardless, as of this writing, the lenses are still a bargain compared to what you might pay for fast lenses in other mounts. However, as I stated above, there are a lot of these lenses out there, so there are also a lot of unknowns. Do your research and know what you're getting. It can be difficult to assess what you can expect from a C-mount lens on a mirror-less system. This is where a service such as Flickr is invaluable. The site has groups dedicated to C-mount lenses, and it's in these groups where you can find the image samples you need to help you make a decision. You can leverage the efforts of those brave souls who venture into the unknown and scoop up some no-name CCTV lens.

If you are going this route, remember that mirror-less systems have a crop factor. In the case of the m4/3 the crop factor is 2x. A lot of the current samples in online groups are 25mm lenses.

If you're interested in checking out some images created with C-mount lenses, then I recommend starting at the Flickr group, C-Mount on Micro 4/3. And once you get to shooting with your C-mount lens, do us all a favor and share your results.

The Fuji X100, Vivian Maier, etc.

2011-01-06T18:08:00.000-08:00

Here's a digitalcamerareview.com post about the Fuji X100 at CES.

I've also added a couple of links to the Link section.

Particularly of interest is the link to the blog site for the late Vivian Maier. If you're a photographer who 'gets around' online (e.g., forums or Facebook), then it's doubtful that you haven't heard of Vivian Maier. Vivian Maier was a mid-twentieth century Chicago street photographer, who shot a lot, processed little, and did even less to promote her finished work.

Apparently, the blog's author, also a photographer, came across a stash of her negatives just after her death, and, when he realized the value of his find, he decided to put forth an effort to get the work seen. And why not? The images are very good and obviously have some historical significance.

Unfortunately, Ms. Maier also left behind several hundred unprocessed rolls of 120 film—without processing instructions—so the author has his work cut out for him. The job of processing, scanning, and prepping the images is no small feat. I know the amount of effort required for this undertaking. It is time consuming. I also know the immense amount of effort that was required on Ms Maier's part, the hours spent on the street looking and shooting.That's a lot of combined effort on both parts, a lot of responsibility on his part. So far, the author has done a good job and has produced some beautiful scans.

For his effort, the author is looking to compensate himself through the presentation of the work and the retelling of Ms. Maier's life story. And again, why not? He owns the negatives, and he could end up expending a lot of money on this venture. Besides, he purchased the negatives and probably would lke a return on his investment.

Regardless, his self promotion has brought him before the inevitable tribunal of the internet judges, who as always can be counted on to weigh in heavily with opinions, and as expected he is being both praised as a hero and scorned as a bum and a thief. Such is life on the internet. Most likely, the truth lay somewhere in between those two poles, but then the same can be said for probably 90% of us.

I won't weigh in with my opinion, but instead I'll leave it at this: In the end, I hope that both individuals end up benefiting from this effort. I'll follow this story, because it's a good one, and because the photos are good. I'll also continue to follow this story because I think much of this hits close to home for all us who pick up a camera and shoot. Check it out for yourself.

Oh, yeah. If you're reading, Happy New Year!

A First Preview of the Fuji X100

2010-09-24T23:41:00.000-07:00

More information is becoming available about this camera (Fuji X100). Here's a hands-on preview of the camera. There's still a lot of speculation. Interesting points: the VF has three modes, an OVF w/digital overlay, a pure EVF, and a playback mode. Also, it looks like manual focusing might be achieved using a method called, peaking--where colored pixels generate around areas as they come in focus (maybe in EVF mode only, though?).
This image purportedly shows the X100 VF in optical/hybrid mode:

FujiFilm X100: A Breakthrough!

2010-09-22T06:29:00.000-07:00

Yum! Fuji stole the show at Photokina 2010 by announcing the Fuji X100 12.3 MP camera--targeted for released in early 2011 (price unkown).

Photo from dpreview.com. Go there after reading this blog for some of the best camera news and reviews on the 'net.

A quick perusal of the marketing specs for this baby over on dpreview.com shows that this is not just a another retro-styled digital camera aimed at hipsters looking for shoulder-slung adornment. No, no, no. Do not be fooled by its "classic" styling and charming good looks. The X100 is a high-end point-and-shoot style camera aimed at the professional/enthusiast market. The camera will feature a pro-level build quality, a fast fixed focal length lens with aspherical elements, a big sensor (APS-C), a hybrid optical viewfinder (VF), and manual controls on the body and the lens. [RANT ON] Now, before you freak out and start whining about its fixed focal length lens, know that the X100 is not some photographic freak of nature. There is a long and sturdy tradition of high-end, high-quality fixed focal length cameras going back several decades, so there is a proven market for this type of camera.[RANT OFF] However, :-) the most exciting single detail about the camera for me is the viewfinder (VF). It's a rangefinder-style optical VF, but it's a hybrid. That means its an optical viewfinder with digital information superimposed, which also has the capability to playback your shots.

This is exciting, because as production of film cameras has faded out and digital cameras has faded in--and as the emphasis in camera size has inched toward the diminutive--the optical finder has found itself literally squeezed out of the picture. The bulkier DSLR with its through-the-lens viewing (TTL) has been the one of the last design holdouts for the optical VF. But, sometimes a photographer wants relief from the neck-wrenching weight and unpocketable bulk of a DSLR. Therefore, photographers, who want to shoot with something less bulky than a DSLR have to compromise and settle for LCD screens or tiny, squinty, tunnel vision-styled optical viewfinders as a means of composing their images. Despite the beauty of some of the high-resolution LCD screens, the act of holding a camera at arms length to compose a shot has no correlation in the world of photography where the camera is held to the eye and up against the face (unless you care equate the grab-all blind overhead shooting techniques of journalism and sports photographer or ground-glass viewing and focusing of some medium and large format cameras with composing with an LCD). Besides, shooting in broad daylight with an LCD screen is damn near impossible! So, yes, an optical VF is a very welcomed addition to a digital body.

If the camera proves successful we could very well see the trend back toward optical viewfinders or even toward higher-quality electronic view finders (EVF). For now the X100 is a major breakthrough whose announcement has created a stir that hasn't been seen since Panasonic debuted the first micro 4/3 camera (the G1).

So, be excited all you enthusiasts. Be very excited.

Vivitar Offers a Novel Solution to Digital Photography's Weakness: Getting Prints

2010-09-16T18:36:00.000-07:00

I'm hoping this shows up, but if it doesn't here's the YouTube link. There's some truth to this video, as silly as it might seem. This kind of goes along with my previous post (err...rant). Film is easier for some, and during the heyday of film, camera (and film) manufacturers were able to provide consumers with point and shoot cameras that were very easy to use (ranging in quality from the very expensive titanium models to cardboard disposables). These 'dumbed-down' cameras were capable of producing excellent results. With the technological advances in film emulsion manufacturing and the proliferation of photo labs, there was no reason for not having quality prints in your hands. I wonder if the print output from those kiosks that crowd or replaced the one-hour photo in your local drugstore comes close to output produced by those same labs.

Anyway, think of this video the next time your mother or grandmother passes her little digital point and shoot with the three-inch screen to you so you can see the pictures from her cruise.

The Magic

2010-09-07T16:05:00.000-07:00

Still shooting film. That's me and a lot of the people I know. We still shoot film, not exclusively, mind you. Well, most of us anyway shoot both film and digital, but the fact remains, we still shoot film. For me, the reasons why I continue to shoot film are complex to most non-film shooters. It's pretty simple to me, but to others it causes head-scratching and smirking. I guess I can't expect those individuals to understand. Most of these individuals didn't enjoy film photography as I did back when it was the 'only thing going'. Most complain and offer excuses about the things that caused them to make technically poor photos, or they complain about the inconveniences and the overly complex nature of what they refer to as 'analog' photography. What I hear mostly is that digital is better, because it's easier. It's easier to make better photos.

That's what most are saying when they cite the merits of digital photography, and it's hard to argue that digital isn't easier, but argument is what they want. If you've ever engaged in such discussions or found yourself defending the virtues of film, you know exactly what I mean. These types want an admission, particularly (no especially) from a die-hard film shooter. Well, I won't admit that digital is better, but I also won't admit that film is better either. The fact of the matter is, I really don't care. To a certain extent image capture is image capture, and all that truly matters is the final product. I have as many 'final' digital images as I do 'final' film images.

What I enjoy about film, the thing that hooked me some 30 years ago is the magic, the magic of the ritual, the alchemy of the magic of souping your own film, the pleasure of holding a loupe against a strip of negatives or a contact sheet, a simplicity of a stack of slides, the wonderment of seeing a silver print hanging on a wall, seemingly emitting its own light.

So you're 'back into photography' now that digital has made things easier. Honestly, that's great. If you ever come up against a film shooter (don't stereotype them as old, because I know a LOT of "kids" who are bigger luddites than I), don't try to convert them or make them admit that digital is better. We are of the old school of photography, the school that appreciates the magic in the craft. You aren't. You never were, and that is the difference between you and I. You are as happy about that as we are. We can enjoy digital photography, but you can't and never did enjoy 'analog'.

Announcing

2010-08-16T21:59:00.000-07:00

Well, I finally finished it. I'll give details in a later post, but for now, here's the badge that leads to a customized preview of the book:

Days Divining

A book of answers

By raymond angelo

Book Preview

Poignant Reminder of Kodachrome's Earliest Days

2010-07-28T14:28:00.000-07:00

With the announcement recently that the "last" roll of Kodachrome was exposed by photographer, Steve McCurry (he shot the 36 exposure roll on the streets of New York), I reminisced a bit about Kodachrome and how it was use to record images of my past--mostly on 8mm and Super 8 movie film. Therefore, there's something very poignant about this video. It shows the early origins of the film, the beginning really. Here's a 1922 Kodak Kodachrome Film Test. It's very nice YouTube production. You just might get a little misty eyed.

Book Proof 2

2010-04-26T14:12:00.001-07:00

Contact Sheets: The Americans, Jim Marshall—Proof

2010-03-19T18:20:00.001-07:00

As an amateur photographer whose photographic experience extends over several decades, I've done my time in many honest-to-goodness analog/wet darkrooms—including the several years I worked as a professional printer. I don't miss it. Sure it's a magical experience, pure, closer to what "real" photography is all about, but for me photography has always been about the other side of the equation. I prefer to shoot. Spending time in the darkroom was a necessary evil that I thankfully do not have to endure anymore. But there is one thing I miss about the darkroom, contact sheets. Without a doubt, the only thing I liked to do in the darkroom was make contact sheets. I LOVE contact sheets, but then again...

all photographers love contact sheets.

I don't think I'm going out on limb or taking a huge risk when I make that statement. It might be less true now, but I'm certain that even photographers with little or no analog experience appreciate the value of the contact sheet. Besides the fact that it used to be an important part of the photographic process, and that it's a great photographic learning tool, it is absolutely pure photographic joy, a treat. So when photographers have the opportunity to peruse a contact sheet, they will seldom pass it up.

Therefore, it's been a blast over the last several years to see the release of photo books that include contact sheets of important or iconic images. The one that had most of the photogs I know drooling is Robert Frank's Americans: Looking In. This book is a real feast for photographers. It has over 80 pages of contact sheets from Frank's epic journey around the U.S. It's such a wonderful pleasure to peer into these treasures and to see how Frank went about creating the images that eventually became what is arguably the most important photographic work ever created.

Likewise, back in 2004 Chronicle Books released a book of iconic images + contact sheets, Jim Marshall: Proof. Proof is a cool book with some very cool images. It's also much less of a beast of to wrangle with than the Frank book, which is just a bit too big to deal with comfortably. Instead, Proof has a nice open feel. It's 12" x 10" and less than an inch thick. The Frank book is 11" x 9" and just over two inches thick.

Most of the images in Proof are portraits of celebrities from the sixties and the seventies--with a good percentage of those images being shots of musicians. If you were cognizant from the sixties to the nineties and mildly interested in popular music (rock and roll) and current events, then you'll recognize the images and the individuals. There's the famous shot of Bob Dylan rolling a car tire down a New York street with a stick and iconic images of Johnny Cash (with the often replicated 'camera flip-off'), Janis Joplin, Cream, Jimi Hendrix, Woody Allen, Allen Ginsberg. There's even a more recent shot of Ben Harper and Laura Dern that is really nice. And of course, you get the contact sheet from the roll that produced the image.

The contact sheets allow you to see Marshall's M.O. It's a blast to see how he worked with his subjects to get the final shot, especially the non-portrait shots where he seems to be floating around an event and recognizing photo ops. This is the real value of this book for photographers, especially those interested in portraiture. It's not hard to see and imagine how Marshall interacted with this subjects to get what he needed. He adds a short blurb of information and storytelling to each image that bring the shoot to life. All the blurbs are informative and some are pretty funny, such as when he told the Allman Brothers band that he wanted a "laughing" shot for the cover of the album 'Live at Filmore East', and that if he didn't get it, no one would get any coke.

Photography is a learning experience that never ends. If you've ever shot on the street or made an attempt at portraiture then you already know how fluid events and sittings can be—despite your best effort to control everything. Other than mentoring with an experienced photographer, the next best thing just might be perusing the contact sheets of an experienced photographer.

Book Proof!

2010-03-19T18:20:00.000-07:00

The 'proof' of my next Blurb book arrived last weekend. On the whole, I'm pleased. I like the book size, the cover, and the fonts, but it's going to need another iteration. I need to do adjustments to several of the images, a few for tone and a few for size.

The tones are close, much closer than with World Away. I chalked that up to using the printer profile to check the adjustments. (I did not use the profile with World Away.) I should clarify that the new book is a mix of black and white and color images, with the majority of the black and white images having heavier shadow and mid tones. The printer that Blurb uses really struggles on these types of images; it has a tendency to add contrast and weight to the tones.

I like the book size; although, several of the images are too big, so I'll need to scale those down. I used a variety of page templates, because I just couldn't get a feel for what the Blurb software was going to do around the crop lines, so seeing now what I need to see, I'll have to change the layout.

Anyway, I decided to take a breather and give it a week before I jumped back into it.

Blow-Up Magazine

2010-03-05T11:43:00.000-08:00

What can you get for $9 these days? Well, here's an instance where nine bucks guarantees you 26 different takes on the world around you from 26 different photographers. This latest edition of Blow-Up magazine (named for the 75 member Flickr group) is heavily influenced by the street shooting element within the San Francisco-based group. Kudos for this edition's production goes to group member and local photographer, Brad Evans, who compiled the photographs from the group pool and did the layout.

The images that Brad chose--while not indicative of the group as a whole--are definitely indicative of the stronger and more interesting street shooting contingent within the group and of an identifiable San Francisco-styled approach to the genre.

These are all very strong images, so don't get this expecting your typical Flickr artsy/calendar-worthy photography (although, I''d buy this if it was a calendar (note: please don't make this a calendar!)). As good photography should, these are images that resist and challenge. These are images that look back at you and stare you down in an unrelenting fashion. That ain't a bad entertainment value. After all, we could all use a good stare down.

If you want this edition, you should buy it soon. These PoD magazines are limited run and can sell out quickly, especially since the publisher, MagCloud is offering a special St. Patrick's day discount.

Eskanzi's Wonderland

2010-03-03T22:38:00.001-08:00

I finally got my hands on this book, Wonderland by Jason Eskenazi. The book is one of those titles that has been sporadically popping up in my little world over the last several years. It seems I would hear it mentioned in a positive light (which would pique my interest), and then I wouldn't hear about it for a while. I would forget about the book, and then it would pop up again as a positive mention in an online discussion forum, blog, or in a magazine. The persistence of a thing seems to always be a very good sign, and Wonderland is no exception. This book has instantly become my favorite photo book.

First of all the book is actually called Wonderland: A Fairy Tale of the Soviet Monolith. It's a small book, and it has a handmade feel to it. The front and back covers are made of a thick cardboard and the binding is exposed, which allows it to lay flat. That's a good thing, because most of the photos cross over the gutter and utilize both pages. With this binding, you don't lose a goodly percentage of the image, because it doesn't disappear into the crease, and believe me you'll want to see every inch of these photographs. The printing is very good, and the photographs are just incredible. The compositions are tight and every image is strong. This is classic documentary and street-style photography. They remind me quite a bit of Koudelka, because like Koudelka, the photographer seems to immerse himself in the mix of the environment and the subjects. He is so up close and involved that he is seemingly invisible.

The photographer is Jason Eskanazi a New Yorker (and MOMA security guard) who felt compelled to leave his job to travel and photograph the former Soviet Union after the fall of communism. He became intrigued with the concept of a nation suddenly coming to grips with the downfall of communism after almost a century. Eskanazi summed what he was trying to photograph as a nation dealing with the "difficulty of losing what you always thought would be there."

What Eskanazi came away with is an incredibly beautiful collection of some of the strongest images I have seen in a long time. The images are striking in their strength and sensitivity. The compositions are charged and dynamic. I put the images in this book on par with the best of Koudelka. The great lesson that Eskanazi came away with was "the realization that the people I was encountering had a nostalgia for tragedy." That realization is very much a part of the beauty of Wonderland. The sense of that is in every single image.

Finally...Book Sent for a Proof

2010-02-28T12:11:00.000-08:00

Well it took a while, but my next photo book is off to Blurb for a proof. I should see the book in about a week. The book is set up as a hard cover, which allows more options when ordering. For this initial proof, I ordered a soft cover—mainly to check the quality of the printing. However, I'm still wrangling with the concept of cover flaps, and right now the flaps are blank. So while I wait for the proof to arrive, I'm playing around with some ideas, including adding a very serious-looking selfy. I don't mind the blank flaps. Looking at the online preview of the book, the blank flaps kind of lend a cleaner/indie look.

Salmon Blogged

2010-02-19T15:29:00.000-08:00

Tichy

2010-02-11T16:43:00.000-08:00

I picked up a book of the work of the controversial outsider artist photographer, Miroslav Tichy. He is the voyeuristic, peeping-tom, recluse photographer; a Czech who dressed in rags, lived a life of solitude, and secretly took thousands of pics of women in his village using cameras he made from toys and other junk (such as tin cans and toilet paper rolls). His work is fairly recently discovered and obviously very "low-fi".

Book: Miroslav Tichy (Fototorst) (Russian Edition)

Photo: Miroslav Tichy

The work is interesting, especially if viewed within the scope of 'outsider artists'. Most artists fitting the description have no formal training (Tichy did) and usually have a sort of mental illness or obsessive compulsive nature that results in a certain type of prolific repetitive creative outpouring. Some are considered savants, some are or have been institutionalized.

Run some searches on 'outsider artists', 'miroslav tichy, or check out wikipee for a list of notable outsider artists.

I assume the book is pretty much indicative of Tichy's work. The photos are not everyone's cup. They are at times beautiful, ugly, quaint, original, inspirational, creepy, cutting edge, and just plain weird.

If you're interested, the Fototorst book can be had fairly cheaply. It contains both english and russian text. But if you are interested, definitely read what you can about the man. There's plenty online and in the book.

Chips, Salsa, and Beer

2010-02-04T17:26:00.001-08:00

Deadline Come and Gone!

2010-02-01T22:19:00.000-08:00

Bummer. I'm still working on my photo books, and here's the thing, I haven't even started one of them, yet. I thought I could get two done by the end of January, but I've been bogging down on the first one of the two. This is a lot tougher than I thought it would be. My first book just fell together for me. I hadn't planned that one to be thematically based. I really just wanted a sample book to carry with me when I shot. It ended up becoming something else, something finite and manageable like a narrative. I can't seem to articulate this next book. I have the images, the theme, and a working title but man it all seems to unravel as I put it together. I'll get there.

Days Gone By

2010-01-28T10:28:00.000-08:00

A copy of the IPO.

The Last One

2010-01-27T21:11:00.001-08:00

The Process

2010-01-04T06:48:00.000-08:00

Rest in Peace, Al Kaplan

2010-01-02T12:21:00.000-08:00

The photographer, photo-blogger, and lovable online gadfly has left us. You can spend some time with Al by reading his blog, The Price of Silver Rest in peace, Al.

Happy Thanksgiving ....er, New Year!

2009-12-31T12:13:00.000-08:00

This time of the year, this day, is a time for reflection on the year past. For a lot of us it becomes the real Thanksgiving day, because not only do we reflect on what has occurred over the last 365 days, but we also give thanks for those things that did (or didn’t) transpire. So I will take this time to give a few selected (non-comprehensive) photographic-related “Thank You” shout outs to some of the positive stuff from the year 2009.

First and foremost is Flickr. I give thanks that the big social-photo site is still there uniting people socially around photography. I dove rather heavily into Flickr in both 2008 and 2009, and I finally ran smack up against its limitations about the middle of this year. After repeated sour experiences on the social end of Flickr, I came to the welcoming and refreshing realization that this was not what I wanted for my photography. I still use Flickr. I’m still a “pro”. I still peruse the uploads of those on my contact list, and I still venture out looking for new contacts. I’m still an admin on a couple of groups, but I’ve pulled back considerably with regard to the meat of what Flickr is all about, group postings, social networking and contact management. I uploaded six photos yesterday, but my plan for 2010 is to not broadcast uploads. I plan to be more selective with what I show. So, thank you Flickr for the experience and for helping me realize how much I value my photography.

SFMOMA. I became a member this year, finally. It’s been one of the best investments I’ve made in a long time. Thank you, SFMOMA for the great exhibits this year, especially Robert Frank’s Americans and the William Kentridge exhibit. What a great summer.

Thank you, Castro Theatre for showing Godard’s Made In USA and thank you Roxie Theatre for your Film Noir series. I know you’ve always been there, but this was a return for me to the art-house cinema of my youth.

Thank you Panasonic and Olympus for your µ4/3 products. What an incredible development and what fun if has been to get truly excited about digital photography. A couple of months ago I attended a gathering of local rangefinder photographers. At the table were several panasonic µ4/3 cameras and twice as many lens mount adapters. I was able to affix Leica M mount and LTM lenses, Nikon lenses and Olympus lenses to my G1. I hope someday everyone gets to see a GF-1 with a Noctilux attached. What a blast it is to meld the old with the new.

Thank you photo book publishers. I think I invested in more photo books this year than any other, and there has been no shortage of fascinating and cherish-able offerings. Some of my favorite books this year came from Steidl. I’m thinking particularly of the expanded edition of Frank’s Americans. Eighty pages of contact sheets!

Thank you Apple computer for your iPhone and iPhone-related products. I’m thinking specifically of the iPod Touch, which I acquired when I bought my daughter a MacBook for her freshman year in college (I don’t have an iPhone). Images from the iPhone camera have been showing up everywhere and combined with the cool apps the results have been impressive. For the Touch, I’ve found several apps that have really changed my photo processes. I’m most impressed with the Digital Truth Massive Development Chart app.

Well, that’s probably enough for now. Happy New Year!!

I’ve Got a Couple of Book Projects Working

2009-12-03T20:59:00.000-08:00

As soon as I finished my first photo book World Away, I immediately began thinking about the next book. I found the photo book process creatively invigorating. So much so, that the thought of the end result (the book) began to factor in to how and what I photographed. It helped me put some structure to what I shot.

I always shoot with some intent, beyond the immediate. There’s always a thread or two or three that I pick up and tug on as I shoot. I might put a thread down for a while, but there will always be something, a shadow, a gesture, a situation that causes me to pick it back up again and tug and play at the ideas that tug back at me. But, that process was always sort of a nebulous thing, kind of a wandering. The experience of putting together World Away reminded me that there was another level of creativity awaiting the results of my efforts. And, that did a lot for me.

When I’m going through the cycle of shooting and scanning and posting, I find it’s easy to bog down and forget about what inspires me. Sitting down and arranging images and seeing them again, anew, side-by-side with other images and noticing how they work together, against one another, provides a level of rediscovery that surpasses that initial sense of discovery I felt when I saw the image as I shot it or as I processed it.

I’m in the scanning, sizing, and layout stage right now (yes, I group all that in as one stage). So, needless to say. I’m in a good spot right now, because I’m playing with images. My plans are to finish both by the end of January 2010. I think I can meet that deadline.

Books that Don't Play Well With Others

2008-12-14T17:04:00.000-08:00

I apologized to my host. What could I possibly have been thinking bringing Joel Peter Witkin to a party? Sure the call was to bring photo books to the upcoming holiday gathering of our loosely knit group of San Francisco Bay Area-based Flickr photographers, but why bring Joel Peter Witkin? I was doing fine with my original choice of books—a nice cohesive collection of POD (print-on-demand) samples. I had packed my recent Blurb publication, World Away, for obvious reasons (gratuitous self-promotion!). I brought along Keith Goldsstein’s (Keith15 on Flickr) DIY hardcover, For Earth Below, which I obtained when he and I swapped books. I also wedged into my sack, the second RangefinderForum book, RangefinderForum Photography—A Gathering, which is a nice collection of photos produced using Lulu that unfortunately suffers from some really bad printing. So it was a good sampling of books with an interesting theme, photo book production. Then I had to go and add Witkin’s ‘Disciple & Master’ to my satchel.

Disciple & Master is my latest acquisition. Its been on my list for a while. More accurately, it’s been in my Amazon shopping cart, and while I was doing some online Christmas shopping, Amazon, in its ever vigilant effort to keep me appraised of potential purchases, announced that the book had dropped in price. They just thought that I might like to know about this...opportunity. They were right. I bought the book. Thanks, Amazon!

Disciple & Master is an interesting book. If you are familiar with Witkin’s work, you are probably aware that the photographer’s images are as rich in subtext as they are full of shock value. This book validates the assumption that Wiktin was influenced/inspired by the photographic work of others. Disciple & Master shows many well-known Witkin images alongside the images that inspired them, and precedes the pairing with a brief explanation by Witkin. It’s a interesting concept, particularly when applied to Witkin. If ever there was a photographer who needed such a book! I was psyched. But alas, I forgot about the initial impact Witkin can have on the both the uninitiated as well as the unconverted.

My eager unveiling at the party was met with hesitance, reluctance, and trepidation. Amongst the small group standing nearby, only my astute host had experienced Witkin. The others had that confused look of having seen the oddest and rarest of juxtapositions. Witkin doesn’t mix well or play well with other photo books. Back-to-back viewings of one of his books with most other books is a very odd experience. A nature or animal book was on the table, as well as a few street photography books. Setting Witkin on the coffee table amongst that collection would have been like bringing a possessed Regan MacNeil to a sweet sixteen birthday party at an ice cream parlor.

I apologized to my host for bringing Witkin into his home. We shared a laugh as I tucked Disciple and Master back into my satchel. My other contributions made the rounds and played well. But playing well has more to do with those doing the mixing than it does with those being mixed. Witkin proves (in Disciple & Master) that his images can play well.

I won’t fight the good fight on behalf of Witkin, except to encourage photographers to give him a chance and to read the fascinating text that accompanies the image pairings in Disciple & Master. We should all have such a love and reverence for the art and history of photography that Witkin has.

Photography is a personal journey. Witkin fits nicely on my shelf right next to Doisneau and Friedlander.

World Away

2008-07-18T20:49:00.001-07:00

I finally finished my first photo book. It's called, 'World Away' and it's available from Blurb.

Is it street?

2007-07-28T23:04:00.000-07:00

It's interesting to try and define it, but I think ultimately trying to define it is futile, because the one thing that makes the genre so interesting is its ambiguity. I think it's tough to define the genre with words. In doing so one usually distills down to defining the concepts of spontaneity and reality. It might be easier to define the genre photographically, as in "yes that is" and "no that isn't". Maybe then you can begin to deconstruct it and define it, but eventually you'll run up against the fuzzy ambiguous edges, the “could be” images, and really I think that's where things get interesting. I think the really interesting images push at those edges and cross and encroach on those "lines," which is what makes the genre so attractive.

If you want to study classic street photography [B]elements[/B] I recommend one of my favorites, Robert Doisneau. I think he captures what most of us would unequivocably define as street photography. Oddly enough a *lot* of his images are constructed or posed, designed to look "spontaneous." The elements of what a lot of folks would call street photography are all there, under his control, in his very clever compositions. At first viewing you would probably call his images "street," because they are so real and spontaneous. It can often take several close viewings to get past the artifice. Is it really street? Does it really matter? Ultimately it boils down to what Picasso said, "Art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.“

Send Good Thoughts

2007-05-18T23:01:00.000-07:00

Send good thoughts to Robert (Honus). Robert is a great guy, with a family. Life has dealt him a challenge, as it will all of us. Keep him in your thoughts.

Be well, friend.

.

How's the OOFA?

2007-04-25T22:21:00.000-07:00

Leica Summicron 90/2 wide-open

OOFA, out-of-focus areas, how important is lens' OOFA, or bokeh? Over on RfF we're somewhat fond of "lens tests." Threads go deep and long if the subject line states "lens test" or "lens comparison." Big debates (arguments) spring up over the validity of lens tests, particularly when they seem to challenge common wisdom regarding which lens is "better," or, more to the point, if someone has spent beaucoup dollars on a particular lens, and it fares poorly when compared to less expensive lenses. In this case, something must be wrong; the test must be flawed. As any tester will tell you, "no good deed goes unpunished." If you post a lens test on RFF, you'll get the appreciation of those that know the time and effort involved, but you'll surely get your wet-rags that'll let you know where and how your test has failed. That's OK.

My favorite lens tests are not the clinical MTF curves and chart and graphs—although those are important (I guess). My favorite tests are lens comparison tests that show the two characteristics that I look for most in a lens: an understanding of the lens' contrast, and the OOFA. Poor OOFA can surprise you and make-or-break a photo. Quality OOFA, or bokeh, as it is more often referred to, reveals itself in a creamy subtle softness. Highlights, particularly points of highlights appears as perfectly smooth and round. Poorer OOFA highlights look like rings, and even poorer OOFA highlights look like football shaped rings.

Here are some recent links:

Roland (ferider) posted a 40mm lens test on RFF: HERE. Sure it's a comparison of 40mm lenses, but it is a test that shows the two factors mentioned above. If you don't know OOFA and bokeh, look at Roland's test.

Todd (Todd.Hanz) just started a W/NW thread on RFF asking for wide open shots. Check the thread out for good and bad examples OOFA and Bokeh.

I Don't Like Mondays

2007-04-17T21:02:00.000-07:00

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Oddest Book Title Award: And the Winner Is...

2007-04-14T12:53:00.000-07:00

The Stray Shopping Carts of Eastern North America: A Guide to Field Identification. By Julian Montague

I haven’t seen the book, beyond the Book Tease on Amazon, but from perusing it there, I couldn’t help but nod in approval and smile. It certainly is an admirable effort, a great marketing idea for packaging a photo project—and from the looks of the Tease it really seems to be just that.

If anyone has this book, or has seen it, please let me know what you think.

More Book News

Amazon has Koudelka by Delpire (et al) for 37% off.

A Recent Addition to the Brood—Gearhead Alert!

2007-04-10T21:10:00.000-07:00

I’ve a guilty pleasure I’d like to confess here and now. I have a thing for...point & shoot cameras. Not just any p&s mind you. I like quality p&s cameras, the ones with really good lenses, or “special” features, like silent-mode, fast lenses, manual capabilities, etc. So of course I had to pick up a Ricoh GR1s, with its sweet little 28/2.8, backwards loading, and perfect ergonomics.

Here’s an image made with the Ricoh GR1s wide open.

Sweet, Huh?

And here’s a “family portrait” of the point & shoots:

Clockwise from the top: the Konica Hexar AF, the Ricoh, the Fuji Natura S, a Motorola Q cell phone for size comparisons (Q=iPod size-wise), and the Leica Minilux.

Promises, Promises

I’ve been trying to get together a comparison test of these cameras. This recent addition, makes that harder, but I’m going to try and get this together and post the results here.

A Worthy Cause - Flickr Group

2007-04-02T19:51:00.000-07:00

I thought I'd pass this one along. It makes for a very interesting perusal. If you post online, particularly at Flickr, then it may be worth your time to join this group and support the cause. Beware though, if you've ever been paranoid about posting your images online, this is one of those groups that reinforces the old adage about how paranoid people actually know what's going on.

Flickr Internet Highway Robbery

Join the group and learn about the robbers that are stealing your images, how they do it, and the warning signs of when a thief has been wading through your stream. The Group has already got over 580 members in her group, so you won't feel alone, nor will you feel like some solitary paranoid conspiracy theorist.

Eye Dominance

2007-03-30T21:37:00.000-07:00

Are you left eye or right eye dominant? Here’s a helpful link to an archery site that contains a very simple “do it right-now test” that will help you determine, or reinforce what you know about, your eye dominance.

Determining Eye Dominance

Have fun and good shooting.

The Commute (1)

2007-03-29T20:57:00.001-07:00

The Commute (1)
Originally uploaded by ferider.

Here's a shot I love. It's by Roland, or ferider on flickr. In typical perplexing online fashion, this stirred-up a little controversey on a certain "forum." Anyway, it's a cool shot, and part of a daily commute that I'm not unfamiliar with.

Link to a Diane Arbus Audio File

2007-03-27T21:56:00.000-07:00

Here's a link to a lecture by Diane Arbus. It's a great listen, and gives you a chance to hear one of the great ones.

Diane Arbus Almanac Magazine

Supposedly recorded about a year before her death.

Blogging my Friends—Honus

2007-03-25T20:39:00.001-07:00

door stop
Originally uploaded by _Honus_.

This is the first in a series of Flickr-based posts, highlighting some of the folks in my Contact list. Go see!

.

Winograd at Work

2007-03-25T19:51:00.001-07:00

Downtown Noon

2007-03-21T22:25:00.001-07:00

Downtown Noon
Originally uploaded by quinine03.

I met up with several RFFers last night. We drank a few beers, knoshed, and showed off some gear. It was great to meet Honus and see Kaiyen, Vrgard, and FeRider again. I got a chance to check out Fe's Canon 50/1.2, which along with Honus' Leica 50/1.4 Asph., was the highlight of the night for me. What an incredible light-sucker that thing is. Like a black hole.

We talked a bit about everything, including why we as a group seem to be moving away from RFF, and more toward photo-related sites like Flickr. We pretty much all agreed that Flickr is an excellent forum for looking at photos, much better than the RFF gallery. I made a mental note to try to participate more in the Flickr M-mount group. How could I not with 2/3 of the Adminstrators for the group sitting at the table?

Take note all. Honus and the gang have added LTM screw mount tags.

Anyway, starting off with an image from last summer, when I was working in downtown San Francisco and shooting five days a week. Sadly, those day are gone, because I got a new job well south of San Francisco, in Silicon Valley.

DST

2007-03-13T22:51:00.000-07:00

So I picked this up on Amazon the other day. Actually I bought this book and another Mitch Epstein book, but , as Amazon loves to do on occassion, I received ONE book a day sooner than the scheduled delivery date, while the other is winging its way to me and living it up in airplane cargo holds and mid-west transfer stations.

The real shame here is that I discovered the books from PhotoEye's monthly e-mail mailing list/junk mail, which is my all time favorite "do not delete" junk mail, but I bought the books on Amazon.com. That's screwed-up, I know; but for the price of one of these two books, I got both. I even opted out of the chance to buy an autograph copy at PhotoEye. Autographed copies are the really cool part of PhotoEye. Amazon can't compete on that front, but then again, Ican't afford photoeye's pricing, especially when the deals are so irresitably a no-brainer.

2007-03-09T20:14:00.000-08:00

Common Places, Common Things

2007-03-09T13:36:00.000-08:00

George Carlin, the gnarly American comedian most famous for his bit on the seven words you can't say on radio and television, used to do a routine back in the late 70's during which he reflected on the idea that urinals are 50% universal. It is true, because there are only two types of people in this world, those who would/could use a urinal, and those who wouldn't. Hearing that routine back in those days was both funny and enlightening. Here was this thing that was so common to 50% of the population, and yet to the other 50% it was an unknown, a mystery. I used to have this impulse to photograph a urinal (which I did) and frame it and hang it on the wall (which I didn't)--solely for the purpose of enlightening the other 50% of the population.

Photographers know all about the common and the uncommon, making the common seem fresh and different, and bringing the uncommon home, so the viewer can identify with it. Whether it be the 30th pepper, a Sambos Restaurant parking lot, or the atrocities of war.

This is a Song About a Superhero Named Tony...

2007-03-04T17:04:00.000-08:00

...it’s called Tony’s song. Well, not really (my apologies to the Pixies). It’s called Xtoid, and I just added a link to it on the sidebar. Xtoid is Tony Remington’s blog. I’ve only known Tony from his photography on Flickr (see The Photo Essay post) and never knew he was an artist (of the sketch and watercolor variety). It’s a cool blog, very entertaining. Go see!

Single Coated: Published (*): Congrats to Oscar!

2007-03-04T10:57:00.000-08:00

If you get a chance visit Single Coated, specifically the post linked below, and give Oscar a big CONGRATS on getting published. Oh and while you're there look around a bit. It's a really good blog.

Single Coated: Published (*)

Never Say Never Part II (or Why Retailers Shouldn't Own Forums)

2007-03-03T09:50:00.000-08:00

Ouch! The new owner of Rangefinderforum.com, the retailer Stephen Gandy (a.k.a., CameraQuest) showed his colors yesterday when he deleted an entire forum dedicated to discussing ebay transactions. The common line of reasoning by supporting members suggests that he did this for fear of being sued by eBay. If he's using that as a reasoning for deleting an entire forum and hundreds of member posts, then he shouldn't own the forum or he should train his moderators to distinguish and ferret-out any bit of potentially litigious comments. Better yet, maybe he should hire lawyers to moderate his forum. Online forums like this are built upon opinion and "rumor-mongering,“ and besides what was the litigious content within that forum that justified deleting ALL of it?

Never Say Never

2007-03-02T19:11:00.000-08:00

Arrgh! When will I learn? Yes, I wandered naively onto eBay and won an auction for a Hexar RF with a 50/2 lens and a flash in the original Konica display box. Even though the equipment was spotless, despite stinking of cigarette smoke, sadly it didn’t work, and I tried to make it work. I wasted four rolls of color film and a fresh set of batteries and three days of trying before I gave up. I was heartbroken. I wanted so badly for that camera to work.

The Hexar RF is probably the only analog/film camera that I was willing to lay down some cash for. I’ve been wanting to use that camera for quite a while now, and this experience has left an awful taste in my mouth.

I said “Never” once before when I purchased a Canon P and a chrome 50/1.8, and the camera arrived with a lens that looked like it had been cleaned internally with steel wool. I’m saying “Never” again to buying cameras on eBay. The Canon P ordeal took several weeks to rectify. This one is taking equally as long to resolve, and of course the buyer is always at the mercy of the seller. I’m hoping this seller is on the level.

Take care on eBay. If you haven’t had a bad experience buying cameras, you probably will.

Some News

2007-01-19T22:28:00.000-08:00

It's been a busy 2007. I've been keeping busy, and I hope you have been as well. I've been busy with a new job, but outside of my concerns here's some news that will make January 2007 notable:

My beloved RFF has changed ownership
Jorge Torralba has "transferred" ownership over to Stephen Gandy of CameraQuest. I've mixed emotions about this transaction. I prefer the idea of a public forum, so the thought of RFF in the hands of a retailer makes me feel that this is a marker, a stick in the sand, a plot point. What happens from here on out, will always reference back to January 2007. However, there's one thing that every_single_RFF_member knows: within the whole wide world of the internet there has been no greater proponent, no greater friend to the rangefinder camera and the rangefinder camera user than Stephen Gandy. In fact, the only greater entity is the mass that is the membership of RFF—facilitated by Jorge Torralba. There's great potential for huge success in this union, and unfortunately, great potential for all out disaster. Thanks Jorge and good luck Stephen!

M-mount (Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander) Flickr Group
Finally. Finally, someone has nutted-up and put together a Flickr group that attemps to do for M-mount lenses what the Nikkor Flickr group has been doing for Nikon F-mount lenses. That is, provide a single point from which one can categorically peruse images created with any lens made for a specific mount. The group is called M-mount (Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander), and its realization is due to two dedicated RFF'ers: Alkis Plithas (RFF screen name: Telenous) and Robert Vincent (RFF: Honus).
This is huge for fans of the M-mount, a project that everyone can take part in. If you own an M-mount lens, use it, and send the photos to the group. Be mindful of using the correct tag. If you don't have a M-mount lens, then this is the place for you. Visit M-mount (Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander) and peruse images made with your favorite focal length simply clicking the linked tag. Of course, right now the group is a little bare (it was launched yesterday), which is why anyone reading this who owns a M-mount lens is invited to join the group and contribute.
An RFF PAW on Flickr
OK. This isn't groudbreaking, but it's fun, and it's new for me. Ray_G on RFF has started up a RFF PAW. I was hesitant to join, because I've always been skeptical of these things, but I figured I'd give it a try. The PAW group is pretty cool, because there's no restriction other than an RFF membership. That means one doesn't have to use RF cameras or film.

OK. I'll sign-off with an image:

Are We Documenting Enough?

2006-12-29T22:07:00.000-08:00

I love the work of Walker Evans. I'm fascinated by his images. While perusing 'Lyric Documentary' I began to wonder why. I found that I really liked that the images depicted a certain time, that they froze a time for me, that they were a historical record. I wondered if this was what Evans was trying to capture, if he was aware of what he was doing, if he was aware that his images would be viewed by someone like me, decades into the future, wondering at a bygone time. I found that possibility profound and breathtaking.

Looking to my images and other images online I found that most were lacking as historical records. Some images were so stylized or so personal that they lacked a temporal reference point. The only real reference point was the posting date, or some other point known only to the photographer. Looking at images I could find no way that they would ever date themselves. They seem only to exist now, for now, disposable.

Are we documenting enough? Are we including enough historical information in our photographs? Or, are we making our photographs for the here, the now?

Holidays on the Dark Side

2006-11-26T09:46:00.000-08:00

With the holidays upon us, my camera takes on a different purpose: recording family events. For this I've come to rely upon my digital cameras. Yes, I'm venturing into the dark side of digital.

At the recent family Thanksgiving extravaganza, I took three cameras: A Leica M, a Nikon SLR, and my Nikon DSLR. Because of a recently purchased Nikkor 20/2.8 AF lens, every shot I took was with the Nikons, and primarily with the digital. I'm not a super wide kind of guy, but it was fun shooting the film SLR with the 20 and sticking loved ones on the edges of the frame. On the DSLR the 20mm falls into the 30mm range, so it worked for me as a nice wide—perfect for recording the occassion.

I love my family and friends, but I hate scanning negatives of them, so digital works for me just fine. I had family calling the "day after" asking for the "good" photos from Thanksgiving (all the cell phone and jewelry camera photos had already made the circuit). I sent out several shots, but the film stuff will have to wait until I get them processed and scanned. Here's one that I would hate to spend time scanning:

I'm glad I had the digital for that one. Now I know why us film shooters can have an attitude for being high and mighty. I'd never have taken that shot using a film camera. Film is too precious.

Most of the shots I made on T-day were informal portraits, including the end of the day group shot. Here's a shot using the 20mm on the DSLR:

My brother-in-law was a Marine, and he let the boys wear a couple of the hats that he has acquired over the years in the service.

The Photo Essay

2006-10-20T22:50:00.000-07:00

I love words. I love images. Together, when combined just right, you get pure beauty. For a wonderful example, find Two Muses on my link list. While Lynn (at Two Muses) makes pure poetry, the photo essay in the strictest sense is a thing of beauty too, a gorgeous knot of words and image.

Whilst bumbling around on Flickr, I stumbled upon a local photographer who back in the late 1970's shot some wonderful images of a special place in San Francisco. Do yourself a favor and check out Xtoid (Tony) on Flickr. Here's a direct link to his Post Manilatown Archive 1978-1980 set. I'll leave it at that and let his words and images do the rest. If you do visit give him an "atta-boy" for capturing something special.

Single Lens Reflex Camera

2006-10-09T21:12:00.000-07:00

I love rangefinder cameras. For anything in the 28-90mm focal length it's the first camera I grab. Outside of that, in the macro and telephoto ranges, the mighty RF's usefulness begins to degrade. In those situations an SLR really shines. I own an SLR, and I use it, too. I shoot a fair amount of my kids' sports—soccer and karate mostly. For the soccer, the SLR comes in very handy. Here's my SLR kit:

It's a Nikom FM3A with an MD-12 motor drive. I use a 80-200mm, but the lens pictured here is the 55/2.8 Micro. Clean, huh? I also have a couple of Canons (AE-1 & AE-P) and a Nikon 2002, but the FM3A is my SLR baby right now.

Good deals can be had on SLR's these days. These beauties are being shoveled off for dirt cheap. Everyone is fearing that film will disappear overnight and they'll be left holding a useless lump of metal. So they're looking to sell of their metal to buy a lump of plastic. For a quick perusal of some heavy metal SLR's, the cameras that can literally take a beating and keep on clicking, check out RFF's sister site, DSLRexchange, and specifically THIS thread. We're showing off our kits. Note: You may have to join the site to see the thread.

.

The Deepest of Blacks

2006-10-07T22:58:00.000-07:00

The Clickless Favorite

2006-09-22T14:16:00.000-07:00

The Clickless Ones
I was bemoaning with an online photo friend about the curious phenomena of image clicks, and how personal favorites often are the ones that get the least amount of attention. I commented on one of his images and he was surprised. I've a few of those. Here's one:

The Girl Reflected

Color Street

I couldn' wait to get back to shooting black & white (real b&w, not color conversions or that C41 b&w stuff), and now I miss shooting color on the street. This one looks nice as a b&w, but I really like the extra element.

Orange

I like how these two images are tied together by color. Have a great weekend.

Back to Black and White!

2006-09-08T09:18:00.000-07:00

Last night I mixed 5-liters of developer. Now this may elicit a yawn from you, but for me it is significant. It means I can start processing some b&w again! You see I create my black and white developers from scratch. That is, I buy bulk chemicals (e.g., metol, hydroquinone, sodium sulfite, etc.), and create developers based on formulas, or recipes. To make developer from scratch requires a scale, and not your run-of-the-mill kitchen scale. The scale has to be fairly precise. Mine is digital and runs out three decimal places (one more than I really need).

I lent my scale out about a month ago (for a week) and was not able to get it back (until this last weekend). So, when my backlog of unprocessed b&w film hit 14 rolls, I stopped shooting black and white film and switched to shooting color film. I don’t need the instant gratification of digital, but I like to see how things are going, especially when I’m working in fairly unfamiliar territory—namely, color. So, by paying for “process-only/no-cut” color negatives from a couple of trusted one-hour labs I was able to satiate my need to see—without feeling the decadence of digital. I am still shooting film after all.

Converted from color negative film

I’ve shot with color, but not to the extent that I have with b&w. There is a big difference between the two, and not the most obvious one, either. For one thing exposure latitude is different. Knowing how to handle the f-stop ring when shooting with color takes a little getting used to. Color balance is tricky too, especially when over or under-exposing.

Shooting with color opens up a lot of possibilities and can be very flexible. You can make excellent b&w images from color negatives, especially if you’re somewhat proficient in Photoshop.

Shooting in color is a different mindset, entirely. Wayne a fellow RFF’er defined the differences between shooting color and shooting b&w (Here in this thread) as:

"I use color film if I want to show you something and I use B&W film if I want to tell you something"

I can subscribe to this, somewhat. It's an interesting and catchy distinction. When I load color film I don't make this distinction, consciously. When viewing color images I don't necessarily feel this distinction, either. But it's interesting, nonetheless, and worth thinking about.

When I shoot color, I find that I look for that extra plane, or level (color), when composing, or seeking out shots.

However, with Photoshop (as with most other image editing programs) knowing that I can "go to b&w" gives me the ability to shoot with color film and think in black and white, too.

However, while shooting color is pretty flexible, there's no subtitute for the real thing. It's nice to be back shooting with black and white film.

Black and white film or a color negative conversion?

I wish I was in Tijuana...

2006-09-06T14:59:00.000-07:00

Wow. A bit of a spike in hits. I was able to trace this anomaly to Chris Weeks site Barbecued Iguana. Thanks for the pointer, Chris. It was the response on RFF to Weeks’ Street Photography for the Purist PDF that sparked the idea for these hip shot posts. I enjoyed the PDF and felt it was a great injection of spirit and enthusiasm for all us who love street photography. The genre sparks much passion, and the document both polarized and united—a good sign. Does any other genre fire people up as much? I don’t think so. I’ve never seen a treatise on portrait photography or landscape photography, or factions of those genres drawing lines in the sand. Long live street photography, its indefinable glory, and its many and various permutations!

Fondlers and Artists Unite!
RFF took a beating for its response to the Street Photography for the Purist and rightfully so. There really was no reason to disrespect the effort behind the PDF . Some of the photographers/writers included in it are also members of RFF, and the work, and spirit behind the work, is impossible to fault. It’s too easy to discount effort while sitting back doing nothing. RFF can get smug at times, but certainly that’s no reason to snub the site. There are some really good people over there and what is offered is valuable to all photographers, especially those shooting street photography. After all, this is a site dedicated rangefinders, the camera responsible for defining the genre. It's a great place to learn about RF gear, and come up to speed on what works best for street-shooting. I’ve yet to see a question regarding rangefinders go unanswered on RFF. In the end, we use gear, talking about it ain’t a bad thing. It ain’t the only thing, I know.

A strong contingent exists within RFF that wants to pull it away from being such a heavily-weighted gear site, and that effort is paying off. While there’s actually value in knowing information like:

the Hexar AF is a great street camera, but its fastest speed is 1/250
the CV 35/2.5 is a great street lens (small, compact and sharp), but it’s contrasty
fish-scale bokeh can ruin a shot
the Leica viewfinder is nice, but the Zeiss Ikon might be better
etc., etc. etc.

in the end people want to see how all this translates into images. And who can blame them. RFF has got its fondlers, but it also has its “artists,” and people who want to see images. That’s why W/NW threads are seemingly always on the front page, and why critique threads started up. The gallery has a strong set of proponents and an equally strong set of consistent posters. Comments in the gallery are way up, and the Photos of the Week thread was recently revived—it appears every Monday. People are shooting street and posting in the gallery. There’s some excellent work. Check out:

J Borger, Kbg32, Graksi, foolproof, benilam,…to name a very few. There's also a nice little RFF splinter group on Flickr

Enough…it’s lunchtime here in the City by the Bay, and I’m going out shooting.

The Power of the Hip, part II

2006-08-31T21:53:00.000-07:00

The hipshot as a technique offers an easy transition toward confidence and competence for the tentative, or beginning, street shooter. However, it also is a useful tool for the more seasoned photographer, particularly those individuals interested in capturing the moment and shooting candid shots of strangers on the street. When going after these types of shots there are generally two approaches, two philosophies to shooting (if you will), and the hip shot has a place within each. One approach I'll call the direct approach and the other the indirect approach.

The direct approach entails seeing a moment, approaching it, intruding to make the photo and moving on. Photos made using the direct approach usually consist of images in which the subject(s) is looking directly into the camera, or where the subjects are obviously fully aware of the presence of the photographer. These are often very engaging images, because often we (the viewer) are looking into the eyes of the subject; we feel a part of the moment.

Busker in Chinatown

Photos made using the indirect approach, on the other hand, generally lack the engagement between subject and viewer. As viewers we feel we are looking in on the scene, almost as if we are invisible. There is sometimes a level of detachment, a sense of inaccessibility for the viewer, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing, nor is it always the case.

Selling on the Street, Chinatown

Both approaches are valid and the line between the two can be blurry, but I think the main point to consider as a photographer is how to confront the moment. Not every moment requires intervention by the photographer, some do, but some don’t. In either case the hip shot becomes a very valuable tool. A photographer skilled at using the hip shot can get very close to a scene and shoot without being detected, without interrupting the moment. Not being detected can mean getting off several shots, if need be, without (or before) being detected. It can mean capturing the truest or purest sense of the moment as it occurs, or working the scene to get a unique or descriptive angle. Something happens when the presence of a camera is detected, people change, situations change, so using the hip shot can mean getting closer to the moment and possibly capturing a truer sense of the moment.

This doesn’t mean that the hip shot is only useful with the indirect approach. It can be very useful with the direct approach, particularly if you’re using an SLR or rangefinder camera. With these types of cameras it can be useful as a means of keeping the camera away from the front of your face, which is off-putting to some people. Remember, that my definition of hip shot is any shot in which the photographer made the exposure without the camera at his or her face, without looking through the viewfinder. The first shot above of the Chinatown busker is a hip shot. The gentleman was seated playing his instrument. This fellow saw the camera and just stared into it.

To use the hip shot effectively means you have to know your gear. You have to know the coverage of the lens. You have to preset focus. You have to judge distances, judge exposure, etc. You have to be skilled at shooting, framing, and composing without looking through the viewfinder.

"Coin Collectors"

One of the toughest things about using the hip shot is making images that don’t look like hip shots, and that’s really the key. Your image shouldn’t scream “This a hip shot!” A big part of that is keeping the camera somewhat level. There are a lot of techniques and tools you can use, including using your camera’s strap (shoulder straps are great), and different parts of your body to keep the camera level. Experimentation and lots of shooting are really the only ways to build proficiency.

"Siren"

The hipshot is a technique that can allow you to capture the sense of a moment. It’s possible that when using the hip shot you may be able to capture a truer sense of the moment, because it allows you to shoot undetected. Regardless of the philosophy behind the hip shot, it is a useful technique that requires practice and experimentation. If you shoot on the street, the hip shot is a worthwhile technique to learn, a tool worth having.

The Power of the Hip

2006-08-28T10:10:00.000-07:00

I’m a proponent of the hip shot, the photographic shooting technique wherein the photographer makes an exposure without looking and composing through the viewfinder. While the hipshot gets its name from the use of the hip as one the possible shooting and framing supports, a hip shot, IMO, is any shot taken without looking and composing through the viewfinder.

As a proponent of the hip shot, I was amazed when “discussion” on RFF sprang up around the technique, and it was proclaimed to be “cowardly.” I was surprised to see this statement receive support. I defended the technique, and will continue to defend it as a valuable tool that all photographers should be comfortable and adept at employing.

I think the main reason that some consider the hip shot to be cowardly is the impression that it is sneaky. The below-the-belt connotation seems to imply that the photographer is shy, tentative and unwilling. Unassertiveness is considered unattractive and weak. Whereas a shy, tentative photographer may be unwilling to confront a subject directly, and may employ the hipshot to “get the picture,” it isn’t a cowardly act at all—even in this context. After all, anybody who actually goes out and takes pictures of complete strangers is not a coward. You have to have some guts to get out there and even try it. It’s hard to do and in this sense using the hip shot is a great way for the beginner to build confidence (and for the seasoned street shooter to get warmed-up). For the beginning street shooter it can be a developmental technique, an aid that can assist in overcoming the fear of photographing strangers, and becoming a better photographer. However, whereas we can consider the hip shot to be a good technique for the beginner there is more to the hipshot than this “training wheel” approach to street shooting.

As a technique the hip shot can be a powerful tool that can open-up an entirely different approach to photography, one that allows the photographer to add a different dimension to their shooting and one that differs radically from the more traditional approach.

To Be Continued

Some Recent Work

2006-08-26T12:48:00.000-07:00

I've much to write about, but won't delve into that now, because I gotta run. Instead, I'll post a couple of recent shots that are indicative of what I've been up to lately.

.

.

All three shots were made with a M4-P and a Cosina Voigtlander 35/2.5 lens.

Shot in the Back

2006-08-15T23:19:00.000-07:00

I believe that there are far too many unofficial rules in photography. I read one list that I assumed was created in jest—at least I hope it was. The list included so many "do nots" that following such an ordinance would leave the photographer paralyzed, inactive. One of my least favorite unofficial rules is the one that decrees photograpers should never photograph anyone from behind. I'm not sure the rationale behind this "rule." I believe it has something to do with having the guts to confront a subject. It seems to be the same macho side of street shooting that also degrees that shooting street with any focal length greater than 50 mm makes a photographer a wimp.

I find it all pretty ridiculous. I haven't shot much on the street with anything greater than a 50mm lens, but if I need to, or want to, no rule is going to prevent me from doing so. Likewise, no rule will prevent me from shooting a subject from behind. I really like the feeling of such images. True these images are far less engaging—in the sense that nothing quite grabs a viewer's attention as much as an image with the subject staring directly back. However the quality of an image in which the subject is shot from behind is unique. There is a detachment, or a detached quality. The detachment seems to strip a layer of understanding from the viewing equation, forcing the viewer to derive meaning from the subject's surroundings. It's an odd phenomena. Without a human face, but with a human form, we seem to search for meaning, deriving it from whatever we can.

The first photograph that I can recall that distinctly and prominently featured a subject shot from behind, and the one that made a huge impact on me was an image created by Lisette Model. The photograph was of a large man, in a tight fitting t-shirt with thin horizontal stripes (sorry, I can't find this image online right now). The man wears a beret, and he is sitting on a bench. The subject fills about 80-90% of the frame . It is very simply an image of a large man shot from behind. It's an image I'll never forget having seen, yet I still don't know why it has had such an impact on me. Many photographers such as Joel Meyerowitz and Daido Moriyama have used this "technique," to create very memorable images, as well.

Damn the "rules"! Break the "rules"! Make your images.

Critiques on RFF & Japanese Photographers

2006-08-10T21:01:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the absence. I've been somewhat busy over on RFF setting up the new critique forum. If you aren't a member, or if you are and haven't participated in a critique, you should give the critiques a try. It really is a blast, and educational to boot.

I've been shooting, primarily with my M4-P and the CV 35/2.5. I have 15 rolls of b&w in the processing queue, and about 3 rolls of color. I won't have the b&w processed for at least a couple of weeks, but the color I hope to have ready to scan by tomorrow evening.

I've found myself exploring Japanese photographers. A recent visit to the San Francisco MOMA resulted in a ~$80 purchase of two books. Daido Moriyama's Stray Dog, and Nobuyoshi Araki's Subway Love. I also broke free during lunch today to see the Shomei Tomatsu's Skin of a Nation exhibit at the SF MOMA. I was very impressed with the show. So, I'm getting a pretty good education on some established Japanese photographers, who I had very little familiarity with. If any of you would care to recommend others, please drop me a comment, or an e-mail.

As much as I love the Moriyama book, it's the Araki book that has me curious. I can't help comparing Subway Love to Walker Evan's Many Are Called. It's a fun comparison of basically the same project. Both books deal with photographing unaware subway riders over an extended period of time.

The Evans' book is a careful study, the result of ideology and thought. From all reports Evans' culled the best images based on exposure, and framing, cropping them for presentation. Araki on the other hand is much different. First of all, he gives you EVERYTHING, every shot regardless of how well it presents. It's a wild presentation full of blurred images, under-exposed and over-exposed shots, contact sheets, sprocket holes, etc. It's an expressionistic portrayal of life on the subway. It may be driven by an ideology as serious a Evans', but the end result looks much different.

I don't know the plans for the Tomatsu show after it leaves the SF MOMA after Sunday August 13. If it comes to your city check it out. The SF MOMA has a book that accompanies the show. I may end up getting the book, but viewing it at the MOMA, immediately after the show, I was unimpressed. His images are so stunning that the layout of the book and image quality paled in comparison.

I hope to have some images by the weekend, so check back if you get a chance. I hope you're enjoying the summer, if you're in the northern hemisphere, and the winter if your south of the equator.

.

Point & Shoot Summer

2006-07-08T10:32:00.000-07:00

A point & shoot summer, with long days, an abundance of light, tight defined shadows, and color, blue skies, blinding whites.The contrast flattens the world and the world, if framed and cropped, looks like art.

Two views of a remodel of an old supermarket:

Fuji Natura S; Kodak 400 UC

The Penultimate Street Shooter?

2006-06-28T22:32:00.000-07:00

Summary

I’ve been shooting with the Hexar AF for about 2-3 weeks, and I think that I’ve been able to get a pretty good feel for the camera. Although it has some minor aggravations, the Hexar AF is an exceptional street-shooting camera. It’s discrete, easy to use, has a great lens, with an accurate light meter, and a quick auto-focus. Above all else, it is a "real" camera, with that "real" camera feel. A worthy tool, worthy of consideration by someone who considers himself (or herself) a photographer.

The Hexar AF
My version is the early black model, so it has the “stealth,” silent, or more precisely, low-volume mode. This was the feature (along with the black finish) that led me on to wanting to shoot with the camera; stealth is a desirable quality for me. The silent mode isn’t exactly silent. You can hear the camera’s AF and film advance, if you listen carefully and closely, in a quiet location. Outdoors, and on the street, where the natural din is always present, it’s virtually a silent, black camera, and therefore, stealthy.

As I mentioned, the camera has both auto-focus (AF), and auto film-advance. Neither feature was a selling point for me, because they both pushed the camera toward the dreaded point-and-shoot category. I love cameras that are manually operated. My acceptable limit for automation is an internal meter and auto-exposure capabilities; both of these features are present on the Hexar AF, by the way. The thought of shooting with the AF and auto film advance initially offended my sensibilities. However, I came to appreciate both features as very nice additions for shooting on the street.

Here’s what’s sweet about the Hexar AF

Silent Mode
This is just plain cool; but why? Does it make a difference, on the street, where the din can conceivably drown out the sound of the loudest of cameras? Yes, it does make a difference. I’ve been carrying with me, along with the Hexar AF, a Fuji Natura S, which is a true p&s that is about half the size of the Hexar. It is easily twice as noisy, and there is no way I could have taken shots such as this one with the Fuji and not made a spectacle of myself.

Turning the Fuji on would have been like ringing a bell on this train. Auto-everything cameras have a very distinctive sound. I booted up the Fuji while standing on a quiet train station platform, and people as far away as 40 feet heard the noise and looked my way. I booted the Hexar AF into low-noise mode, at the exact same location, just prior to turning on the Fuji, and not a single person noticed. On the street, even with the din, this can mean the difference between taking one or more additional shots of a scene, as opposed to just getting a single shot off. I’m sure my tank-like Leica M4-P, with its cloth shutter, is just as silent, if not quieter, so why not just shoot with it?

For me the answer is simply a matter of the convenience of size, as well as the quality of the compromises the Hexar brings to the table. I’ve been shooting while on lunch breaks at work. I take the Hexar with me to work on the train in my soft briefcase.

I wear a thin wind-breaker jacket, and when I need it to, the camera fits easily into the jacket’s side pocket. Additionally, the camera offers an excellent compromise between the quality of my M4-P and the array of lenses I own. The lens is no slouch, which brings me to…

Lens 35/2 w/a Built-in Hood
With the Hexar I get a sharp high-quality fixed 35/2 lens, with a built-in lens shade. The 35mm focal length is excellent for shooting on the street.

From what I’ve been seeing the lens is easily on par with my Cosina Voigtlander 35/2.5 lens, but probably not as contrasty as that lens. It’s a different signature that my capabilities can’t define. I might put it near the CV 35/1.7, but I still need some time with the camera to make those kinds of direct detailed comparisons.

Auto-Focus/Auto Film Advance
Without a doubt, auto-focus and auto film advance increase shooting speed. Pulling rapid hip, or quick-shots is no problem.

The Hexar also boots quickly, focuses rapidly, and has a long ‘on-time.’ When it does go into sleep mode (after a couple of hours), it reawakens rapidly with a slight probe of the shutter release. With the AF the photographer can hold the focus by maintaining pressure on the shutter release—after the AF locks. That’s a nice intuitive feature.

Manual Exposure Mode/f-stop Dial and Meter
There are three exposure modes on the Hexar: P (program) mode, A (aperture-priority) mode, and M (manual) mode. I rarely used the A mode, and seldom used the P mode. The M mode is a great way to shoot with this camera. The large f-stop dial on top of the camera protrudes just far enough, towards the front of the camera, that moving it while viewing through the camera is very easy. Once you’re use to the direction, adjusting exposure is a breeze. The camera has ‘+’ and ‘-‘ indicators in the viewfinder, as well as a green in-focus dot, 35mm framelines, and a small (almost useless?) sliding focus scale. To obtain correct exposure the photographer must obtain both a ‘+’ and a ‘-‘.

The meter, btw, is excellent, and like the AF the exposure, when in P mode, can be held, so the photographer can obtain a reading from the shadows (for example) and then readjust the framing. When doing this, it’s important to keep in mind that you’re also holding the focus. What I do instead, while in M mode, is assess the light (either visually, with the camera's built-in meter, or with a handheld meter), set the shutter speed, and adjust the f-stop. I’ll use the camera’s meter to take range readings, noting shadow and highlight.

I’ve gotten some excellently exposed negatives using both the P mode and the M mode. The meter is great for taking averaging readings. By pointing the camera at an open scene, and taking a light reading, you can get very accurate readings.

Here’s what is not so sweet about the Hexar AF

Too Quiet?
Can it be that silent mode is too silent? Yes, sometimes. It seems that sometimes silent mode is so effective that occasionally I’ll have to check to make sure I actually took a picture, and the little display window doesn’t easily cooperate with that task, preferring to cycle between the shutter speed (remember, I shoot in M mode) and the frame number. So, there’s always this little delay of about a second or two wherein I have to keep an eye on the little window to verify the frame advance.

Exposure Indicators are Hard to See Outdoors in Bright Light
The ‘+’ and ‘-‘ indicators located at the bottom of the viewfinder can be difficult to see outdoors, and usually are most effective when the camera is pointed toward a dark scene. This can be very frustrating, and puts a damper on using what is an excellent meter.

Top Shutter Speed is only 1/250
This is almost a deal-breaker for me. This is just too way too slow. I like a top speed of at least 1/1000, and I’d love to shoot with the AF’s cousin, the RF, a camera with a top speed of 1/4000.

Small Buttons and Cryptic Menus
The small buttons and cryptic menus are well known “characteristics” of this camera. I’ll only address the fact that adjusting shutter speed, though easy, is much easier on other cameras. Adjusting shutter speeds should not take all your attention to achieve. Like the f-stop dial on this camera, changing shutter speed should something you can do without taking the camera down from your eye. However, with a top speed of 1/250, and shooting on the street, you’ll probably seldom what to change the shutter speed anyway.

Conclusion
The Hexar AF is a joy to use. As a small stealthy street shooter, I doubt it can be beat. While technically a point & shoot, the Hexar when operated in M mode feels like a “real” camera. As someone who categorizes himself as a photographer, I’ve never felt diminished shooting with this camera. A co-worker saw my camera sitting on my desk, and picked it. She knew I was a photographer, and I think she was surprised to see that I possessed a camera that seems to scream, “I’m a point and shoot!” I found myself explaining the advantages and features of the camera to her, not defensively, but out of pure satisfaction and admiration for what is an outstanding camera.

To see more of my Hexar shots, visit my rangefinderforum gallery HERE.

July 13, 2006 Addendum: I was asked why I considered the Hexar the penultimate street shooter, as opposed to the ultimate street shooter. I had to pause as I thought this over. For some of you, it may truly be the ultimate street shooter. I know as I continue to shoot with the camera, I'm beginning to wonder how I would handle some of the compositions I've made (and the ones I'm currently making) using my Leica, which to me is the ultimate street shooting camera. Yet, the Hexar is just so darn fast to use that I find myself shooting without breaking a stride, often just coming to a "California Stop" (a "rolling" stop). If anything the Hexar has educated me on shooting on the street, and challenged my perception on what a street shooting camera should be. I plan on trudging the Leica and a lens to work with me next week, to compare the experiences.

Building a Backlog of Shots

2006-06-15T21:31:00.000-07:00

Busy, busy, busy, lately, but I'm carrying the Hexar with me and shooting regularly. Here's another Hexar AF image:

click to view larger
Hexar AF, Tri-X

I got a chance to mix up some developer, so I'll have other more recent images from my outings with the Hexar to post very soon.

Here's a teaser for you: I picked up another point & shoot camera. I'll divulge what that camera is and post some images in another post. I hope you are enjoying the summer. Get out and shoot, shoot shoot.

The Color Coordinated Scene 2

2006-06-09T22:44:00.000-07:00

The color-coordinated scene, I've written about them in a previous post, and posted a picture. Here's another.

It's not tidy, and it's a little ragged around the edges, but I kind of like that.

Hexanon 35/2, Kodak 400 HD

Hexar AF Results

2006-06-01T12:09:00.000-07:00

Hexar AF Tri-X

I recently acquired a black Hexar AF (with silent mode). I'm just getting the hang of it, and still getting used to using it. I plan on shooting a lot with this camera in the coming months, so I'll be reporting on and reviewing the camera. If you're interested in this camera you can get some great information at CameraQuest's excellent Classic Camera Profile page, and specifically the Hexar AF page.

Diane Arbus and a Civil War Re-Enactment

2006-05-31T10:48:00.000-07:00

I ended up at a Civil War re-enactment last Sunday. I was never big on the idea Civil War re-enactments, or period re-enactments for that matter, but I made a promise to myself that I would try to be open-minded, especially when it comes to photography. I'm trying to maintain the idea that anywhere can be a photo-op, and before I react with a "not interested," when propositions, invitations, suggestions arise, I immediately try to look at not only the photographic possibility, but the learning potential as well.

I think it’s important to let your photography be a vehicle for learning, for stretching your range of experience. What is interesting is that if you venture out with an open-mind, into the unfamiliar, the uncomfortable, you will inevitably come away with having learned something, with a new appreciation, or with a different perspective.

This attitude can guide us toward some unforgettable experiences and (hopefully) some wonderful photographs. It worked for Diane Arbus. My favorite Diane Arbus quote is from the first line of her famous Aperture monograph:

"My favorite thing is to go where I've never been."

I've always loved how this quote opens her book, a book of work that is a journey, for both the viewer and the photographer, away from the normal, and out to the fringes. It’s a great attitude for a photographer to have, and one that even the lowest rank of us amateurs can adopt and put to use.

I agreed to go to this re-enactment, primarily because it was a Sunday family trip, and also because the real purpose of the family trip was to ride a train through an old growth redwood forest. The re-enactment was just an OBTW happening ocurring on the grounds of this place called Roaring Camp Railroads. I figured I could make a challenge out of it, by doing something photographically different, but I ended up being surprised.

While the train ride was very nice, and a little less than I expected, I have to say that I was very impressed by the re-enactment, particularly the battle scenes (and the canons!). The level of detail and authenticity displayed by the participants also impressed me. They played the part very well, with a consistency that surprised me. For instance this fellow...

...was instructing my daughter on how a man and a woman, back in the 1800's, would hold hands while in public. It was all about showing respect for the woman, and taking care of reputations and appearances. Coincidentally, we later came across this couple:

Now, I swore to myself I wouldn't take pictures like this, but I had to take this one, because a photographer (not me!) was badgering this couple. This photographer had a big ol' DSLR (of course) and was trying to get this fellow to put his arm around the girl and hold her closer to him, but this guy wouldn't do it. He kept saying that his “…father would get mad at him." The photographer wasn't buying it and was getting pushy, but I knew why this guy would not put his arm around the woman. He was playing the part, and there was no way someone was going to catch a picture of him not playing the part. He never did it, and the photographer waved them off and walked away. That level of commitment and dedication to authenticity impressed me. It was something that I found from all of the participants, who actually camped in the park in these little white pup tents. This was serious business to everyone, and that commitment deserved some degree of respect.

All in all it was fun, and I would encourage all of you out there to try to see, not just the photographic potential of a place, or a happening, but also the educational potential and enlightenment (however small) that your photographic pursuits can bring you.

Here are a couple of shots that I'm happy with.

I took two cameras with me. This one, the Konica Hexar AF, had color film (Fuji Superia 200). I’ve several rolls of black and white that once I develop, I’ll post if they’re interesting.

Red Shopping Cart

2006-05-27T21:29:00.000-07:00

Hexar AF. Kodak 400 HD film.

90mm Comparison

2006-05-23T22:32:00.000-07:00

The 90mm lens comparison is in. Pictured above is the sheet depicting the lenses stopped down one from wide (f4). For the other two sheets and more details (and responses) click Here to go to the rangefinderforum thread.

The lenses pictured above (click to see image larger), starting from the top left and going clockwise, are Leica 90/2, M-Hexanon 90/2.8, Minolta Rokkor 90/4, Minolta Rokkor 90/4 (again, but at f5.6—one stop down from wide) and the Cosina Voigtlander 90/3.5. The film is Tri-X developed in D76 1:1.

90mm

2006-05-22T00:41:00.000-07:00

I've been shooting a lot with the 90mm focal length. The 90 isn't the most common/practical length, but I've found that I'm using it more and more. I've primarily been using my 90/2 indoors at my kids' karate classes, as well as to shoot portraits.

This image was shot using a Minolta Rokkor 90/4 and Tri-X film. I catergorize this shot as a portrait.

I shot a 90mm test using my three 90's, and as soon as I'm done processing the film, I'll post it up either here or on RangefinderForum.com. If all goes well, I'll post sometime this week.

The Day the Light Got in the House

2006-05-19T08:59:00.000-07:00

This strange afternoon light made its way onto the wall, reflected off the countertop; it invaded through the kitchen window, and like a bird in a house, maniacal, confused, it found a safe perch, and rested, and waited.

CaliGirls

2006-05-13T22:26:00.000-07:00

I'm appearing a bit like a voyeur here, but actually this was the first shot after a roll change. I looked up after changing the roll, put the camera to my eye, focused and clicked off several exposures. These California girls heading out to the mid-morning surf happened across the frame. This was the first clean exposure. You're looking at Tri-X shot through a CV 35/1.7

The Giant Camera

2006-05-12T09:23:00.000-07:00

On the western most edge of the city and county of San Francisco sits the Giant Camera.

The Giant Camera is actually a camera obscura, a walk-in pinhole camera and minor tourist attraction. Visitors to the Cliff House will find the Giant Camera ensconced on the lower back deck, close to another minor tourist attraction, Seal Rock. The Giant Camera doesn't fit the decor of the rather modern looking Cliff House retaurant. The camera's design is really almost tacky, but it is loved by San Franciscans.

The experience of being inside the Giant Camera is magical. Several visitors at a time enter the camera through the front doors and find a position around a central viewing area. Once inside a guide closes the doors, and the visitors suddenly find themselves in a very dark, very quiet space. They wait in the for their eyes to adjust to the dark with nothing but the sound of the Pacific and their whispers and giggles.

Allowing for the adjustment, the guide then opens the aperture, which is located on the pyramid-shaped structure on top of the camera, and an image of the Pacific Ocean magically appears on a horizontal surface in the middle of the room. The guide can rotate the aperture to provide different views of the ocean, and even Seal Rock.

Most tourists and visitors seem underwhelmed by the experience. Afterall, there's a much better and realistic view just outside the door, but for anyone who has ever been remotely serious about photography the Giant Camera is wonderful, pure magic.

Spiazzo

2006-05-05T16:35:00.000-07:00

This is a place called

Spiazzo

Fuji Superia 400

Mood Light

2006-05-03T11:53:00.000-07:00

Not a very cheery image; I know. The fog will do that. This type of light presents a challenge. It seems to have a built-in mood and seriousness to it.

What's Your Summer Photo Project?

2006-05-02T10:17:00.000-07:00

What's your summer photo project? I was asked this the other day, and even though I had a well thought out answer, I've always considered everything I shoot as a a shade of the one major project that we create over and over. Filmmakers make the same film, musicians write the same songs, painters paint the same painting, photographers make the same photograph. However, when we first choose a meaningful project it is a personal show of confidence, a sign that we are beginning to look at our work seriously, and (God forbid) take ourselves seriously.

I think projects are a good thing, especially when they are created in response to a concept, or an ideology. I love how Walker Evans' conceived his subway project, the work which eventually became the book, Many Are Called. The project idea arose from a strong ideological reaction to classic studio portraiture. Evans' felt compelled to create the antithesis of the studio protrait, and set about on his masterpiece. IMO, the result was very successful, a beautiful and fascinating body of work. To me this is the absolute best approach for a project. The desire to shoot cohesively should be driven by a greater need.

The wrong approach is one wherein the photographer seeks to handicap himself as a means of improving his "skill." Such projects usually entail the photographic equivalent to walking around for three days with your right leg tied back, in the hopes of improving the strength of your left leg. For instance, shooting strictly with a particular focal length, shooting only images within a one block radius of your front door, shooting only things that are the color red, are all handicap-based projects, especially when set about so simply.

For me, a self-imposed project should be an opportunity for discovery, or enlightenment, and it should be something that needs be written down. It doesn't need to be thematically grand, or ideologically driven. It can be driven by emotions and desire, but it should be purposeful and multilayered. For instance, it's one thing to want to photograph the simple beauty and the majesty of an old-growth redwood forest, but to set out to want to explore and convey, along with that beauty, the mysterious and mystical, or a sense of age and time, is taking the project to another level, a level that will challenge the photographer. By adding this additional layer the photographer adds a degree of measurability to the project that will help to determine whether the photographer was successful, or not.

The success of the project is ultimately determined by the viewer, so while a project can be a personal endeavor (and there's nothing wrong with shooting strictly for oneself), the feedback is invaluable, and any serious project should take into account the viewer, or the audience.

I hope to announce the completion of my summer project(s) here, and if anyone else is planning a summer project, and is posting online, and would like someone to view and provide feedback, I'll gladly help out in anyway I can.

Temptress

2006-04-29T23:28:00.000-07:00

A photo

of a temptress.

Untitled Places

2006-04-26T16:20:00.000-07:00

In an attempt to put some "form" to my pBase gallery, I regrouped my current work. My favorite new gallery is the one called This Place Has No Name.

This gallery groups together of all my recent images of places that have intrigued me into taking their picture. I do a lot of shots like this.

They typically don't get a lot of attention when I post them online, but I don't care. I'm really enjoy them and enjoy seeing them grouped together. It's like they have a cause now, a raison d'etre.

US 101

2006-04-23T11:10:00.000-07:00

Here's a very small section of US 101, the big gnarly freeway, a portion of which serves as a pipeline up and down the peninsula from San Francisco to San Jose. US 101 follows the entire contour of the western edge of the San Francisco bay. The well worn strecth of US 101, between the two cities, is unremarkable, and ugly, a utiltarian patch of concrete and tar, that is both, hated and cursed, and absolutely necessary.

Bumper-to-bumper at 80 MPH, the passing traffic kicks up dust and trash, the flotsam and jetsom of life, hubcaps careening, spearing toward the shoulder, rubber melting, oil spraying, and billboards.

Tri-X in FX15

Closer

2006-04-21T08:34:00.000-07:00

With the weather being the way it's been here on the west coast, I find I turn inward, inside, when I can't go outside. So, when inside, when I want to photograph, I look at things closely, closer. How convenient for me, then, that I recently acquired a macro lens, a Nikon 55/2.5, for my Nikon SLR. The timing was good.

If you've visited here before, you're probably well aware that I'm not a flower photographer kind of guy. So...

Here's a shot of some rotting berries!

When I look at these images, I realize just how much I enjoy shooting film. It'll be a sad day when we're no longer able to shoot film...I'd rather not end this post on a down note, maybe on a dark note:

Thanks for visiting!

Nikon FM3A Nikkor 55/2.5 Kodak 400UC, Fuji Superia 400

A Bridge (to cleanse the palate)

2006-04-19T10:57:00.000-07:00

The San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge from Treasure Island. This shot depicts San Francisco's notorious summertime afternoon fog as it sweeps in over Twin Peaks and Sutro Tower.

Looking For Purple

2006-04-15T10:18:00.000-07:00

~Click to see larger~

I sought something purple, but found nothing. I sought something "meaningful," and found this. An image for the weekend.

Minolta CLE, CV 28/3.5, Tri-X

My Better Half

2006-04-12T14:31:00.000-07:00

It must be half-frame time. Oscar, publisher of Single Coated (the photoblog) posted a delightful half-frame image on his blog, at about the same time I had taken to carrying my Pen Ft with me again. His image inspired me to actually attempt to finish the 36 exposure roll of Kodak 400UC I had trapped in the camera.

The half frame camera is a really wonderful and different format. It is the analog equivalent of the digital point & shoot. At 72 exposures/36 exposure roll, there's really no holding back. Armed with a half-frame SLR, anything and everything is fair game. Shooting with my Olympus Pen FT, and its double-stroke film advance, makes me feel like some 1970's hipster revelling in his cutting edge state-of-the-art doofus gear.

Printing half-frames normally usually results in images like the ones below.

Sure one could scan and size the individual "frames," but the side by side look is so inherently "cool"—like two frames from a 16mm movie, that breaking up the pairings is too hard to do.

Everything takes on such an unusual and cinematic look.

If you're interested in seeing some other photographers who shoot half-frame, check out Keith Goldstein there on pbase and on RFF as Kbg32.

RJ

2006-04-06T21:52:00.000-07:00

The Summicron 50/2 is a wonderful lens, a joy to use.

Here's a shot of my son. I love the glow and the bokeh exhibited by the lens. The lens and the boy are both beauties.

Leica M camera, Summicron 50/2, Fuji NeoPan 400

Railyard Outing

2006-04-03T17:22:00.000-07:00

I was invited to shot this last weekend with a group of local photographers, some of which are RFF members. It was a great excursion to San Francisco's railyard for old streetcars. The city maintains a "collection" of the cars.

I shot with both color and black and white. Here are some of the early results, a first whack really.

If interested, look HERE for more images.

A special thanks to Allan (Kaiyen on RFF) for putting this offer to shoot with his photo group out to local RFF members. I'm really glad I was able to come along.

I usually shoot alone, so this was interesting.

Details: Kodak 400 HD, Leica M4-P, M-Hexanon 28/2.8

The Haunting

2006-03-27T09:58:00.000-08:00

Last September, I screwed up this roll, and it haunts me to this day. The roll (and two others) represent about 3-hours of effort while shooting at a street fair, on a day when everything seemed so right, seemed to 'click' (pardon the pun). This was one of those rolls that I knew had some interesting shots. One of those rolls that photographers rush to process, and then pull out of the fixer at the earliest possible second, to view the results.

I accidently processed this roll in partially exhausted developer, and when I pulled it out from the fixer, I knew it immediately. At the time I was thankful and hopeful, because the developer had at least partially processed the roll(s).

In hindsight, however, I would rather have had the roll completely destroyed, because I can see the images, the compositions, and I know I had some decent shots.

The one above is about the best I can pull out of the roll with this scan and scanner. I recently picked up a new scanner, so I'll probably give the roll one more effort. I'm still hopeful.

BTW, I've not made the same mistake again.

Begin Again

2006-03-25T15:26:00.000-08:00

...

Rangefinder Photography Book 2 Available Now

2006-03-22T08:34:00.000-08:00

I'll take a little time to announce that the Rangefinder Photography 'A Gathering' is available from Lulu press HERE. This is the second book from the membership at RangefinderForum.com (RFF). BTW, the first book is also available from Lulu and currently sits on the publisher's Top 100 list.

'A Gathering' is a collection of images taken with rangfinder cameras. Ninety-seven (97) international photographers contributed 2 photographs each to the cause, providing a biography, photo titles & descriptions, and technical data.

On RFF a question arose regarding "who did what" on the project. I'll try to define that here. The book was created by a team of 5 RFF members. I am happy to have been a part of that team. While the "responsibilities" within the team, were defined, they were never strictly the province of any one member. Any and all decisions were discussed thoroughly by the team. The broad general roles fell something like this:

I, 'RayPA' (Ray Angelo) worked on compiling and editing the back-of-book information (bios, image descriptions, tech data).

'back alley' (Joe Rizzuto) a moderator at RFF, as well as a poet/photographer, wrote the dedication, and represented the membership of RFF throughout the behind-the-scenes process.

'Joe Friday' (Brett Solberg) worked within the "restrictions" of the first book's layout & design, and found a truly unique look for book 2. Brett basically laid out the entire book. He also compiled and managed images, applied the necessary sharpening, designed the covers and just about everything else having to do with the look and feel of the book.

'Rover' (Ralph Meliso) was essentially the team leader/project manager and editor. He held and managed the deadlines and submissions. He also acquired the permission necessary for the use of the essay (the winning essay from a RFF contest), gathered and compiled information, chased down missing information, vetted the final document.

'GeneW' (Gene Wilburn) was part of the initial project design and conception, helping to provide direction for the project.

'A Gathering' looks very nice, and is a nice acompaniment to the first book. While the first book had 25 photographers, two images each, 'A Gathering' took any and all comers who responded and made the deadlines.

We've an excellent collection of images and some real talent both here in this book and at the RFF gallery. If you get the chance, check out both.

From the San Francisco Orchid Show

2006-03-15T09:49:00.000-08:00

I'd never been, and was amazed at the passion surrounding these plants. People are fanatical about orchids, which is fine. Everyone should feel passionate, or fanatical, about something (guess what I'm fanatical about).

Plants were put up for display and lit up with lights, and affixed with ribbons and claims of "Best," "Runner-up," "Honorable Mention," etc. People with macro lenses on their cameras, and soft flashes, crowded around the winning entries like they were Hollywood stars.

I came totally unprepared with black and white film loaded in the camera, intent on shooting the periphery, the people. I felt compelled to "look the part," and snap a few shots of these strange little beasts. It's odd. I don't consider them flowers at all, because hearing stories about how and why some of these plants evolved into their existence was fascinating, weird, and seemed almost willful on the part of the plant, almost devious, intelligent. That's kind of creepy, cool, but creepy.

In the end, we came home with several new housemates. They're beautiful, but they're still not flowers to me.

And now for us fanatics: images caught with a Leica M4-P, Summicron 50/2 lens, Tri-X.