Key Notes

When I do these blogs….many times I do these for ‘myself’ as opposed for others. I use these blogs as one approach to note taking. What am I doing right or wrong or why isn’t something working etc.

For instance….I was working on a recent book/zone project where I was going thru some of my past images and attempting to make a narrative from them…a visual form of an essay. But it wasn’t working. I was telling Deb just this morning that ‘it isn’t working’….and then I proceeded to create a list of 5-6 things as to why it wasn’t working. Then I mulled around with it once more thinking I could make the project work and no, it didn’t. Then I mulled a bit more and finally it occurred to me why it wasn’t working. And yes, it goes back to the way I shoot, the look I want…what and how I shot yesterday compared to today etc….

This is what I came up with. In order for my images to work and my overall workflow to be successful I need to make sure I hit upon ‘my basics’…or the thing that motivates me. Not what I hear from You Tube or know from other great photographer, but from me. What do I require.

First….when I go out shooting….I go out with a purpose now. No longer just shooting but a purpose in mind. So that really curtails the number of shots I take (film usually but digital is okay). I have a purpose and I seek to find that within my images. That is essential as I enjoy putting together zines and books that represent the central theme.

Second….I want the following in my images. I want movement. But, what is movement? I had to define that. Movement to me can be actual movement as in someone walking or running. But movement can also be action within what that person is seen as doing or represented as doing. So…take a look at these two images below.

Is this movement in the traditional sense? No…but what action is being presented here is movement. It shows this lady who is reflecting upon an image and caught within two separate images, not quite mirror of each other since I stepped back and shot in a refocus. But, the movement or action here is represented in her ‘reflecting’ and wondering to herself about this painting. Movement. Now take a look at the second image below.

This one is shot from behind the person as they walk down a narrow alley. Traditionally this might be thought of as movement but not in my eyes. The act of moving is caught by having his head turn back to me and look at me. That is movement. He is responding…acting….reflecting on ‘what I am doing’ as I take a shot of his movement. That is movement

In goes on and on….as to what qualifies but it has to have my definition of movement. A question that comes up after the fact about the image just taken.

Third…I want visual impact. If I take a nano-second to look at an image…does it create an impact within the viewer that stirs them? Does it make them go Wow?…If not….I don’t have a good picture. This impact can be done in several ways but many times, if not all it is accomplished by the shadows, light….and most of all geometry of the two as they play against each other. Okay, take a look below. What do you see initially? Do you like it?

Look at this one time and do so quickly. Like it or not? I think you will. Then look at it more thoroughly. Look at the shadows below…the harsh light above as it masks whatever he is pointing to (movement) on the table as the other guy looks on wondering (movement). Look at the angle of the table….the pole above the shoulders of the waiter etc… All off center. Angles….angles…. together with shadows and light. A great visual image from the start.

So….that is what I finally came down to today. What works…what doesn’t and why and why isn’t my current project not working? Because it lacks all three components to a degree. Theme, movement and impact.

Film? Far From Bias I am, right?

This is a post that perhaps some….well for sure, those who shoot digital…will not grasp. For those that shoot film, well…..you are the ‘some’ that I am speaking to for you will grasp this.

What is art? ;….. art as in photography. For me, it is film and nothing more or not less, yet in my mind, digital photography is a bit less. And why might that be? Questions to ponder and for the most part those questions are responded to by imagery represented within film, and the process one takes to derive it.

Let’s go back, whether to Mathew Brady or Ansel Adams or anyone in between or forth that shot film. It doesn’t make a difference if you are medium or large format or 35mm or even if you are shooting video of the same film line. The process that is needed to truly shoot and capture that ‘slice of life’ in a way that represents true art, humanity…the essence of that ‘slice’….has to be done via the process of shooting film.

I was just in a forum the other day where Ricoh came out with a new GR digital which has a new feature to better capture the look of film. But why….why not just shoot film in the first place? It has utterly been decades since digital photography came out and it seems that the nirvana of many camera makers is still to develop a digital process that produces film-like images. Photographers can sense an image that just ‘gets it’…. or many semi-professional/pro’s can tell when an image is film. Why would manufacturers such as Sony, Fuji, Ricoh, Leica, Canon, Nikon, and Olympus/OM System….continue to want to capture film-like images and do so via digital gear? Because many people like that feel; be it black and white or color. Recent firmware updates and in-camera settings that have the mood and character of film….and use various filters embedded in the cameras that attempt….and I use that word judiciously ….’attempt’ to have as an end product, a filmisque quality about it. Even today, with decades between us and when digital first came on board…..many photographers inherently see a need for the film-look. They keep putting forth new products and cameras and software and mega-pixels and ND filters and mist filters and whatever…. Some digital photographers even return to early. digital such as the Leica M8 or M9, the early versions of Contax or Ricoh GR….all because someone says that they come ‘close’ ….(but never achieve) the quality of film.

So… that viewpoint is ‘out there’….it simply exists. Now let’s take a leap into the artistic world. And this is where the split between digital and film take another twist.

They shoot horses (scratch that; I mean film)…don’t they? When shooting film the emphasis is on ‘prior to taking the picture’…as opposed to ‘after the shot has been captured’ which is more akin to digital photography …..I argue there is a certain artistic talent that relies upon that pre-step of the process. For instance, when I shoot film, I know ahead of time what I want my image to become and sometimes I actually achieve it. When in the field….I am forced to truly comprehend the relation of sun/light and shadows. as I read the scene. I am watching and waiting and sometimes that wait corresponds to minutes and half-hours …or more…or I return to the scene later on. I wait….I set my ‘triangle’ of exposure and understand the relationship between all three parts of that triangle. I react to it….. F8 or F2 or F16….and use the exposure comp dial if the lsubject and light might dictate it …. Do I dial in 500 shutter or 250 or maybe a 1000 but no more, since my old camera is limited to no more. ISO (or is that ASA?) is set as I place in the film…… either way, I just go for it. One press of shutter at a time and then, guess what? I do it all over again before I press the shutter for image number 2. I add in other minor things such as if I want to use a ND, depending on my lens…. An ND of 2 or 4 or 6 or 8 or ? …. I see the connection between everything. I overexpose or underexpose….. I am not about “post’ processing, rather…I am concentrating on the ‘pre processing element’…. I stand up, or take a step back using my prime lens…. I move and circle my subject and I embrace the situation.

Phew…. I take a shot…I have captured it. But I have absolutely no immediate feedback to tell me what I did right nor wrong as film cameras have no ‘live view’. I just have my intuition as an artist….as art. I move on. I might have captured 1 to 5 photos of the same scene and in most cases, one shot, or maybe two. It isn’t that I negate any post-processing, but with. the exception of a bit of contrast (which film just plains lacks), I am done with just touching up on the contrast, as opposed to…well; read on.

Now…..I am not going to repeat the process for digital, for it is for many….the vast majority now I dare say….an act of placing the camera in ‘auto’….. or….just snapping and going back to photoshop with my thousands of shots taken, and pressing buttons until visually I see what I want. The so called ‘art’ emulating from this process is not a matter so much of skill (yes, bash me…..), but rather which button and which sequence and to which layer in photoshop do I deal with and ultimately accept as art. Or, a digital camera can present ‘live view’ where the photographer sees exactly what the image is and presses an ISO, or Exposure or shutter or aperture and without any real knowledge of why or how they interrelate, the ‘live view’ tells them the image is fine.

But admittedly, there are also excellent digital photographers who bring to the table a finely honed craft and set of skills. I will never diminish them. I simply state that the manner or process of getting images differ from film and digital. And, the digital never quits looks like film and film never looks like digital. Let’s understand that.

To me art…..is the process of creating via my brain and my intuition and my skill….as opposed to having a software program thick with AI, create for the image as many do. AND, don’t even get me started on phone photography.

There …..it has been written….and as Ramses supposedly might have said years back in the ages of the Pharaohs and ancient Egyptians…..“So let it be written, so let it be done”.

The photo below isn’t an award winner….but it is a creation. You see the light or I should say, where it is? I needed to take that into account. I used the shadows below the ladies eyes to my advantage and exposed for what was visible as opposed to getting her entire face and in perfect exposure, for …in this particular ‘slice of life’….this is how she presented herself to me and her unique raccoon look. Why change that? the deep shadows….the darkness…the slightly overexposed chest or the bright nose of her partner….there were all naturally occurring in the scene. That is what the image ‘wrote’ in reality’…and that is what was captured. This is indeed a slice of life; an art exposed and composed to represent what was in front of me (in black and white of course)….. :-), with only one shot taken…one and only one.

Redirection

The other day I went out with my Olympus OM2sp + 50mm F1.4 Zuiko and Fomapan 400….but prior to leaving I ‘redirected’ a few things. It helps to think, experiment….try things out and see what comes of it.

The first thing I did was to adjust how I might shoot….I purposely over-exposed by a few stops as I shot BW film. I did this to make sure that I didn’t lose the shadows and sometimes I feel my shadows get a bit lost, as in ‘faces’ etc…. Although I ‘spot meter’….and expose for a particular area, as opposed to center metering or having the entire image metered; by hitting my light exposure in the middle….just wasn’t what I wanted here.

The middle exposure setting is just that; the middle….and all told, and in theory it works…..and I could always lighten up in software after the fact; it was something I didn’t want to do. I wanted to get exposure ‘right’ the first time around. Thus, I overexposed on purpose but certainly not ‘blown out’.

The second thing I did was on the opposite end. The image was already taken and now I am in the dark room developing my film. My plan was to expose in the developer an extra 30%….so my regular 12 minutes with Fomapan turned into 15-16 minutes in the tank.

You see…the first half of development, or even the first 5 minutes is for the shadows and the second part is for the highlights. By keeping my negatives in the tank an extra 30%, my highlights will be that much whiter.

Then….when I get into my scanning process, I can expose with additional contrast; bringing in the shadows to make them deep where I want to,….OR…..I can just scan regularly and while in some software I can lasso different aspects and layer in additional contrast where I want. Either way, I think it worked. See the image below….. thoughts? Some might think I am ‘overexposed’ in the face…but. to me, this was the look I was going for. Highlighted and not dark and certainly not perfect.

Egads

I was with a friend today….to whom we just met in physical form as he came up from DC. to Philadelphia. Up until now, we have zoomed…texted, and shared images.

But a realization became apparent; that was he is a ‘digital’ nomad while I am a ‘film nomad’…. Not a lot of either of us blends to the others likeness when it comes to the end product. It is like I prefer an old dusty spy novel from the 1940’s and he prefers the latest from Lee Child or the like.

I eat up on random noise….I enjoy a scratch or two on my film….stray dust particles are a welcome site….water marks from developing is an imperfection element of perfection. Even stray light from an accidentally opened film canisters are a thing of beauty. … To me, sharpness is a bourgeois concept …blur is character. I enjoy shooting ‘into the sun’…. or purposely exposing wrong.…. or speed set too low to create a blur…. expired film…. The list of what can be done continues, not to mention the fuzziness of wide contrasty subjects and a general feel of messiness inherent in film.

My friend…. ‘none of that’….. No, none. He enjoys nose hairs on his images to be perfectly sharp. In fact, ‘sharpness’ is central to his thinking as focus peaking is key. Auto-mode is necessary. Using ‘live view’ and adjusting some toggle switch to set exposure and end product. Or, taking 5x the number of images I take and still end up with one good shot. Now I know he has knowledge, so don’t get me wrong. He has an excellent understanding of photography and I know that includes camera basics as he goes back in photography time, as long as I do.

But somewhere near Albuquerque we each took another turn and haven’t looked back. We both grew up in a film world….both embraced the Digital age as it hit upon us like a surfing wave. But yes, somewhere, sometime…our paths as photographers separated. He kept going down the Digital Nomad path and now has and believes in having the best camera and lens one can get. As he says, you only live once. And yes, I agree. I took the path back to the ‘film nomadic’ approach…..While on occasion I do ‘look back’ to that time we both were in Albuquerque (metaphorically speaking), yet each time I go out to shoot, I grab the film camera. Like him, I want the best….and have deemed my Olympus OM series from the late 70’s to mid 80’s as best; coupled with my vast array of Zuiko lens. And to boot, I do have a Leica MA plus lens if I prefer that route. All film though.

Now, we both go out and find approaches to viewing a scene or subject….we both look for light and wait for the scene to appear. Nothing really different. Just that the nomadic approaches we each have become married to, has been dictated to us almost via osmosis. Digital and Film… equally as different as painting with Acrylic or Oil or Water Color. That is recognized in the painting world, and now, we need to recognize that same difference in photography.

Reading Light

I had someone the other day come up to me and ask, how do I know my images are correctly exposed? Well, this is not difficult. One just has to put in the time and understand light, your light meter, your camera settings (Aperture and Shutter, ISO)….

Now for me….I always shoot 400 speed film as I work mainly in street photography. So given that, my ISO is always 400, right? That is one leg out of the way and now I just have aperture and shutter as variables.

First….trust yourself…. learn to shed those inhibitions or worries of taking the ‘perfect photo’ for yes, we all have our photos which come out a bit under-over exposed. So what? …. It isn’t the end of the world. So get away from the fear factor of imperfect photo’s.

Second…. learn the Sunny 16 rule. As mentioned, I shoot with 400 film so I know part of the tri-leg is ISO. Using the Sunny 16 rule I then try to keep my shutter at 500 since I am using 400 film, so I set my shutter at or near that ISO speed. From that, I look at the weather, the sun, the light…. If a hot day and the sun has sharp shadows, then I go for F16. If a sunny day on somewhat blurred shadows, I go with F11. If a partial cloudy day with shadows someone and going, I shoot F8. If cloudy, I shoot 5.6.

Now…it also depends on what you are attempting to expose. Are you in the open or in the shadows? you have to adjust for that.

Third….practice the Sunny 16 rule. Get a portable light meter and just walk around with it all day. Anytime you see a potential shot, take a reading. But before you take that reading, attempt to guess at what you feel might be the proper settings? Do you want F8 at 500 or perhaps F11 at 200? They are the same. Do you want F5.6 at 500 or F8 at 200? …. The wider or closer you are might vary depending on what you want in focus? More….or less?

Practice….Practice….practice….. just take the meter with you the way to the grocery store, or running an errand and sitting in a car. Eventually it will become second nature to you. Whenever I go outside,….my brain naturally thinks of ‘metering’ the scene. Am I metering under a tree, or in the open?

So it is not a mystery….photographers have been reading the light for over a century and a half…. it isn’t rocket science. But you do need to practice. Today with digital photography and “P” mode’ and automate or AP priority etc…. people really are not ‘thinking’ when they do photography, they merely take a snapshot; knowing the camera will do the rest. Digital has forced laziness upon folks. The light meter inside their camera tells them which way to turn the F-stop. To the left, to the right….stand up, sit down, fight fight fight. But hey, you get it…… I am essentially connecting the dots and waiting for the red dot to light up in the middle to know I have exposure correct, or…..I don’t even do that and just have everyone on “P” mode, the ultimate lazy man’s way. To boot…look at ISO as modern cameras go up to 50,000 or more in ISO compared to my 400 (film speed). Gees….

So…challenge yourself. Find a manual camera film, or even a digital camera that allows you to shoot manually….. Learn photography.

Barnack's Update one day later

I had a quick go at the Barnack’s. I loaded up a 24 roll of 400 film and managed to escape the house before the wife had me do more Xmas chores or cooking. Sometimes she just gets a bit too carried away. So a well needed break for me.

Just walked our downtown neighborhood in Philly as this is a condo we have here on the east coast. I love Philadelphia for the ‘ street shooting ops’ as I can’t get this character of a city back west. I shot 9 shots which is rather high considering I was only out shooting for 30 minutes before I made my way to the grocery to pick up stuff (never quite got away from chores).

Within that time frame of 30 minutes…my 9 shots were not of anything I would call as shots I might normally take but, I want to run thru this roll of film to see how shutter speed is, light leaks etc. I shot at around F11 although the dial goes from F9 up to F12 but there seems to be play in between and I can visually observe the opening and closing so suspect I was at F11 or just under. I was at ISO 400 and speed of 500 since it was a nice ‘cold’ but sunny day. I eventually moved down to F9 as well.

My distance calculations was set at 30 feet as I wasn’t stopping too much to talk or grab shots. Perhaps that is for tomorrow. But 30 feet was fine, and a few even at 50 feet as I took from a top of a building looking down. The distance markers on this camera start at 1.5 feet min focus and work up to 50 feet and then to infinity. My Barnack shows distance in ‘feet’ and doesn’t show meters so must have been a camera meant for America.

Impressions? Pretty easy. I have to manually advance the film and that is easy with just a complete turn. The camera provides me with a warning of sorts as the winding mechanism gets a bit ‘tight’ when it is shows 10 + over the actual number I should be at. So, if I shot 9 shots and I advance the film, as I advance the mechanism should tighten up a bit around 20, which is 10 above where it actually should be. Then just keep advancing until you get to your number.

The “F stop is a bit more difficult to adjust. It isn’t impossible but does take a bit of doing as the lever to chance on the lens is small, difficult to grasp, difficult to turn. They should have made that bigger but, hey….I am not Leitz/Leica and obviously this camera was a winner so who am I to judge.

The shutter knob is easy to use.

The optic viewfinder is clear and bright although it took some getting used to as I had to ‘think’ where to place my eye as I am used to M cameras and the placement of the viewfinder. I will get used to this I am sure. Framing in the viewfinder was no issue.

Moving the ‘distance’ to match what I want is not difficult either but one does have to be in good light to see the slotted dot where it corresponds to the distance number. In fact, I have found that I have to turn my camera to bring some light to not only that, but also the small arrow on the film advance as well. Maybe thru years of use, those became less pronounced.

Tomorrow will bring a more productive day as I will have more time to actually work with the camera and walk around more. I want to play with shorter distances and become more proficient at dialing in the F stop, and getting used to the viewfinder placement.

All in all….a positive. I love the uniqueness of it….relying upon distance for focus….the compactness of this camera, lightness….look and feel that I get from shooting it. Again, not going to replace my MA but will provide a twist upon shooting.