APhotoContributor

Digital Kool-Aid.

Let’s see … I know I’m many months late with my impressions of the Fuji X-Pro 1.  I’m sure there were “reviews” before the camera was even released.  Even if there weren’t I’m sure there were thoughts – probably numbering in the thousands – on forum sites.  Quite honestly, I didn’t read any of them.

Then again, I never really do.  How is the experience of a retired engineer or a forum-whore-turned-blogger going to help me?  They’re not.

I got the chance to play with the X100 when I was in Berlin last summer.  Loved how quiet it was.  I wasn’t, however, so happy with its AF focusing ability.  It hunted like the old Nikon AF stuff I shot back in the day with D-series lenses.  It wasn’t quite the same but it hunted.  In daylight it seemed fine but I wanted more than fine.  I compared – at the time – everything AF to the way my Canons performed.  Now, since I’m shooting Nikon digital, I compare everything to that.  And that’s pretty spectacular.

Interestingly I was having “issues” with my digital rangefinder, the venerable yet outdated M9.  There was a time when the M9 was my ambient light body as an accoutrement to the Canons I was using.  For some reason the SD cards would lock up.  I’d get that annoying red “writing light” more than I cared to see it.  Anyone that knows me knows it wasn’t because I was reaching the end of the buffer either.  It’s one thing to happen when you’re shooting for yourself but I also shot that camera system for clients, too.  If it weren’t for clients, I wouldn’t be able to make as many personal photographs.  Each is important yet when someone’s paying you to shoot your equipment must work 100% of the time.

With the M9 that wasn’t exactly the case.  I’m not an M9 hater.  I’m not a Leica hater.  I just think they’ve done boneheaded marketing moves but I still like the company.  I mean … I was one of the original beta-testers of the M9 when it was the P864.  I know I’ve made almost as many frames with that camera system as anyone on the planet.  That folder has in excess of 100,000 photos in it.  Personal street, stuff I shot at the request of engineers on the original design … and work stuff.  The M9’s that went through my hands saw everything from street photos all over the world to Metalica to The Prince and Princess’ visit to California last year.  Speaking of which I was overjoyed that the M9 worked flawlessly on that assignment. 

It tended to do that when the light was good.  When ambient (good CRI only) was 800 or higher and you were about halfway on a battery you’d get banding.  Ya’ know … and even though they released firmware update after firmware update the response I got was “use older cards with it.”  Nikon and Canon have never told me that.  Then again, working photographers DEPEND on their cameras and most who shoot with Leica are more concerned that the strap matches their bespoke jacket and hat. ;)

Last summer my love affair with Leica digital ended.  I started shooting my daytime street photography with my MP almost exclusively.  The lab was happy.  Now, though, the lab is sad because I’m souping my workflow.  From USD22.00/roll to under a dollar.  Way under a dollar.  Forgot how much I loved doing my own analog workflow.

Besides … when I push the release on the MP I know I am making a photo and not possibly doing a battery-pull-reset on the M9 and losing a frame (s) I liked.  I know some – and I used to say in the past – that digital street is heresy.  Well, it’s not.  It’s just different.  I know it’s different for me.  I missed having the ability to reliably shoot a digital rangefinder-ish camera.  That was until this Spring.  I got my hands on the Fuji X-Pro 1.  My only memory of shooting anything Fuji – besides their lovely black and white and E6 film – was the X100.

When I first looked at the initial frames I thought “gone is the nicely rendered CCD colour images from the Kodak sensor.”  They weren’t exactly gone because the Fuji looks different than my Canon and Nikon files.  Not worse.  Different.  They were, again, different than what the M9 produces but … not worse of better.  They’re just different.  And I grew to love those files!  Still do!

Admittedly, most of the colour files from the X-Pro 1 become monochromes via Nik’s Silver Efex Pro 2.  That was one of the things I credit the M9 with:  It got me used to and enjoying street moments in colour.  I like having the option.  Besides … if I showed up to a shoot and told a client, “This camera only does black and white images” I think they’d look at me funny and tell me to use one of the others.  Never quite understood the Leica mM as it’s a solution to a problem that didn’t exist in the first place. 

Unless you’re rich and want the newest fetish in camera wear.  Or, of course, that you really enjoy monochrome HDR images.  You’d be an mM-man.  I have no doubt they’ll sell every single one they make, though.  Funny thing is I know more kids with Canon digital Rebels doing better work than 99% of the guys wearing a Leica.

I found that I enjoyed looking at X-Pro 1 images and making them monochromes in post just as much as the files I saw from the M9.  They were just different.

It always struck me odd that I would use a seven grand camera and have to manually focus it.  Even though the X-Pro 1 was “challenged” in certain light to grab AF on a subject I found that it liked certain areas better than others.  I also found if I used the EVF in the viewfinder it seemed to focus much quicker.  I’m sure if you used this camera for a few days and didn’t know how to work it you’d be a bit frustrated.  Cameras don’t frustrate me.  I just learn their weak points and strong points and use them to the best of their ability.

I got pretty good with the X-Pro 1.

Never had a problem writing to any SD card either!  Old cards.  Newer cards.  The little-ish Fuji wrote to them all (I use only Sandisk cards of the SD or CF variety but use Sony QXD cards in the D4) without the complaint of a batter-pull reset.  In fact, I’ve never had to pull the battery on the X-Pro 1 to stop it from doing something I didn’t want it do.  I heard people say they didn’t like the menus on the X-Pro 1.  I get through them just fine.  Their RAW conversion program is another story altogether, though.  Saw it once and never launched it again.

In the back of my mind I always said, “Oh, but your favourite glass, man:  it’s not gonna look the same.”  My go-to lens on my Leicas is the 1.4/35 Summilux-M.  With film I rarely go above 800.  Funny that with the M9 one couldn’t go over 800 if they wanted useable photos.  The closest lens on the Fuji system was the 18mm f/2.0 XF R.  A stop faster than what I normally use for the ambient body.  Having the ability to shoot the X-Pro 1 at 3200 and 6400 ISO made that extra stop irrelevant.  I could actually shoot in situations I would have just put the M9 back in the bag and forgot about it.  

I found that the 18mm f/2.0 XF R was faster focusing than the 35mm f/1.4 XF R.  Could have been just me but seemed that way.  Both of these lenses are fantastic.  Are they less expensive than the Leicas?  Totally.  They performed every time I asked them to.  The results are beautiful.

It seems Fuji has a pretty good idea how to make excellent lenses.  Are they excellent?  Well … for someone that actually uses them for work … they perform amazing.  I’m not an MTF-freak.  Both the Fuji 18 (about 28mm in full-frame parlance) and the 35 (about 50mm in full-frame) are in my opinion spectacular.  When one factors in the cost associated with them and contrasting them with Leica lenses the difference is staggering.  Is the performance difference staggering?  Well … Fuji’s are AF and the Leicas will probably never be AF.  Ya’ know …. Even though it’s 2012.  Shoot a jumping puppy with an MF Leica digital and see if you can get what you want. 

I heard a quote from Leica back in the day, “We’re not interested in AF:  Our customers know how to focus.”  Think that’s bitten then in the ass to tell you truth.  Leica digital’s footprint on the digital photography landscape is pretty small in terms of users.  I don’t think they’ve ever wanted mainstream acceptance.  They want customers who want to take pictures in Cuba. 

Another thing it seems to me is that Fuji designed a digital rangefinder-ish camera from the ground up instead of trying to appease a group of Leica owners who are older than those sitting on the Supreme Court.  I think that Leica used to think of the photographer first before they became a lifestyle brand but I guarantee Fuji thought of the photographer first.  You can tell by using the X-Pro 1.

I’m done with any digital system that isn’t AF.  Digital should be AF.  Why the hell would anyone want an MF-only digital camera in 2012?  Not only that but when the M9 develops new problems and Leica starts to consider it a “legacy system” I have no doubt they’ll try to just up-sell the customer to their newest model instead of fixing it.  I was genuinely concerned that my M9 would end up a paperweight instead of a viable camera.  That’s one of the reasons I sold it.  I'm not interested in mounting my Leica glass on the X-Pro 1 either unless it's the 2.0/75 Sumicron-M perhaps for tight portrait work.

I’ve gotten literally a hundred emails from guys who ditched their M9’s, bought the X-Pro 1 and have never looked back.  A Leica and “passion for the perfect picture” doesn’t mean you’re going to make great photos.  A camera is a tool.  The photographer makes the photos.  The camera just records what he/she saw.  The X-Pro 1 does that exceptionally well.

Another thing that used piss me off about the M9 is the shutter sound.  An MP it definitely is NOT.  The X-Pro 1 is a whisper compared to the M9.  I like being as inconspicuous with my camera as possible.  The Fuji may be a bit bigger but … it’s way more silent.  The Fuji is way lighter, though.  Does lighter make it more prone to break?  No way.  So far the X-Pro 1 has fallen from the backseat of a car to the ground (2 feet), knocked off my shoulder by the gf (about 3.25 feet to concrete) and a couple feet to a wooden floor.  It's still making fabulous frames and hasn't complained.  It's also been knocked into door jams.  Not on purpose, of course.  I can tell you that when you knock a Leica hard it's going in for an RF adjustment. 

I’d spent more than a few months with the X-Pro 1, gotten used to its AF quirks and still loved what I was seeing.  Then … the engineers did the 2.0 firmware upgrade.  They unleashed a beast.  Fuji makes you update camera firmware AND lens firmware.  Whatever the hell they did made the AF really really good.  I mean … almost great.  I switch back and forth between the optical viewfinder and the EVF and find that they both perform way better than before.  The files write to the cards faster.  I was used to Leica updates and being wholly underwhelmed. 

This update was OVERwhelming.  So nice to see a company actually care about people who want to make beautiful photos instead of appeasing people who wear a camera.

The wake-up time has drastically improved as well.

I couldn’t be happier shooting the X-Pro 1.  When I just “grab and camera” and go I either get the X-Pro 1 or the MP … or lately a Nikon F100 with the 2.0D/35.  If I’m purposefully going to make street photographs I use both the MP and the X-Pro 1.  One of the bodies is normally in my bag, though.  They are nice accoutrements to each other.  Both wholly different but … they’re both amazing in their own ways.

I couldn’t have been happier exiting from the Leica digital upgrade path.  Spending 7K every time they upgraded their lagging technology wasn’t something I was interested in doing.  I’m a photographer; I’m not a fanboy; I’m not into looking like I’m a discerning picture taker.  I was in a Sur La Table in L.A. one day and a check-out clerk seeing the MP says, “Nice camera.  Do you actually use it or carry to be cool.”

I told him he probably had outdated headshots and wasn’t getting the commercial work he hoped for and that he was arrogant.

Seeing the look on his face made me also think he was probably “an improv guy” and was improvising with me in a jocular way. I doubt he’ll do that to another customer.

Honestly, I don’t care if it’s a Leica or a Fuji on my shoulder when I want to make photos.  I make photos because it’s one of the reasons I live not just because I want to look cool wearing a Leica as the king of dilettantes likes to say.

I just want to make the photo I want to make when I push the button.  The X-Pro 1  allows me to do that every single damn time.  Not to mention really silently!  I have more confidence picking up the X-Pro 1  more than I ever did when I wanted to make a photo with the M9.

I’m done drinking Leica’s digital Kool-Aid.  From what I’m hearing so are a lot of others.  Their work isn’t suffering whatsoever.  Neither is mine.

Bravo, Fuji, Bravo!  You guys really went above and beyond.  In fact, I think you guys out-Leica’d Leica.

The only caveat with this camera is that for some reason Apple hasn’t released a Camera RAW update for it.  All of the photos I’ve posted in this entry were processed through Lightroom 4.  I know.  Heresy for a diehard Aperture user.  Perhaps someday… I mean they've never ignored a camera but ... seriously ... wtf?

Beyond having to use Lightroom 4 when doing post on the X-Pro 1 files this is the digital rangefinder-ish camera of choice for me.  My last Leica M9 has a nice new home and I hope that guy is making lovely photographs with it.  

In the eyes of the Kool-Aid drinkers, though, seeing that Fuji on my shoulder must mean that I don't know how to make proper photos ... and that if I could possibly like an affordable camera ... I'm not as cool as they are.  That's all good.  Let them think that ... It's all good with me.

The Fuji does a better job at street photography than the M9 could ever dream of doing. I have a feeling that the market segment that used to only use Leica will "see the light" as it were sooner or later when they're tired of chasing an upgrade path that costs as much as a car.

And if you're a red-dot-Kool-Aid drinker and see the Fuji and think I'm less of a photographer than you are, well, go ahead and keep that "passion for the perfect picture" going on in your head.

Oh, yeah, buy the X-Pro 1 grip-thing, too.  It's way better with it.  And, I'd also get at least one extra battery.  I don't know if it was the battery that was originally sent with it but ... I wasn't too stoked on its performance.  The crappy M9 battery almost seemed good compared to it.  The second battery I ordered seems to be way better.  Funny when you look at those prices.  The battery is half of what Leica would charge and it's probably a better battery.  Who the hell knows what a grip would cost for a Leica but I'm positive the Fuji's grip is at least a cheaper by 80%, too. ;)  Sorry red dot ... the Kool-Aid is starting to taste a bit overly sugary yet rancid.

Cheers from La-La-Land. Best wishes for making nice photos!

p.s., check out my homey Rinzi's work on his blog ... he's uses the X-Pro 1 well. 

the dilettante and the red dot.

A friend of mine pointed out an article (loosely defined) published in an online magazine (loosely defined) that would probably never see the light of day. Because I'm feeling charitable today I'll shed some light on it.

The article isn't an interview because an interview is done by the interviewer and the subject.  This was written to look like an interview but was written entirely by the subject of the interview.  No one who actually works within the legitimate photo industry would know that EVERTHING written in this interview is false.  If you are a Leica fanboy and post in the l-camera-forum or on Huff's site, because your only connection to photography industry is merely a surface understanding, you may think this interview contains real information.  It doesn't.

First off, the writer has no real world knowledge of what he's writing about.  That doesn't really stop a guy like this, though.  The first question was pretty funny, "In a nutshell, what are the differences between general photography and photojournalism?"

He answered his own question as follows, "Yes, there is a difference. Generally speaking - and let that be a warning to anybody seeking a career as a photographer - photojournalism seems to be most popular with people who seek photography as an interesting career and thus take an education to become a photographer, eventually end up illustrating stories tailored for newspapers. This might sound a bit negative, and perhaps it is, because the majority of photojournalists end up as angry men in a photo pit shooting pictures for others. But some rise above the randomness of the one having to illustrate the news stories, there're notable photographers such as Terakopian in London and Jan Grarup in Denmark who do really nice work and enjoy what they are doing."

There are no photojournists hanging out on the l-camera-forum or Steve Huff's forums.  None.  They're working.  They're chasing dayrates.  They don't have time to hang around gear-fondlers that put "Leica Photographer" in front of their names.  In fact, if you were to actually see a photojournalist in the wild, you'd never see them with a Leica hanging around their necks for several reasons.  Working photojournalists for the most part can't afford a Leica.  If you were to read the credentials of the guy writing this, he claims to be contributor to The AP, WireImage and Getty Images.  Aren't those newsgathering organizations?  If you click each one of the links you'll see an aggregate of perhaps 326 images contributed over the last five years by someone who wouldn't seem to respect anyone who does that for a living.  My friends and I can file more photos in an afternoon much less years than this guy has done in many years.

What someone should read between the lines is that Thorsten was never really "accepted" as a photojournalist.  Except for teaching workshops to wealthy Leica owners he doesn't earn his living making photographs.  When one reads, "because the majority of photojournalists end up as angry men in a photo pit shooting pictures for others," what you should also read is that he never really got the chance to do that and it upsets him.  He limited himself to only using out-of-date photographic equipment while everyone else uses state-of-the-art.  He couldn't survive on his dubious photographic talent alone.  When the situation dictated a colour picture with an ISO over 800 his equipment couldn't handle it.  When someone misses a photo because they don't have their long zoom it's called "being under-lensed."  In this guy's case he's "under-camera'd."  Perhaps he's even "under-talented."

What other morsel of photographic wisdom does the king of lifestyle photographers make?  "So that is the real difference between the happy photographer and the unhappy one: If you are taking the photos that you enjoy taking you will be happy, but fulfilling a job as one who takes home images will make you unhappy. The more you wanted to create something, the less happy you will be with not creating your own images."

Basically, because I've called him out friending everyone who was my Facebook friend, adding them to his address book and marketing to them with his newsletters -- subsequently defriending him and blocking all of his email addresses from ever again contacting me -- and I wouldn't "play along" with his charades he's basically characterized me as unhappy.  In fact, some of his "manufactured interview" was a vieled hit piece on me even though he didn't name me specifically.  Quite honestly I love the fact I'm hired to make photos for the most read magazines in the world, the biggest brands known to mankind and cover some of the most illustrious events that have ever been held.  The fact someone pays me to do this amazes me.  In fact, most photographers I know who actually make their living in the photographic world feel the same way.

The only unhappy ones are those who were never really accepted ... such as Mr. Overgaard.  There are many others such as Overgaard.  They know Search Engine Optimization, networking and their own version of marketing very very well.  Their infectious enthusiam for gear gains them fanboys.  

Using company names such as Getty, the AP and WireImage on your business card, your website and basically anywhere else you need to "establish the fact you're legitimate" is fine if you actually get assigned and contribute.  300 photos?  Does that really make you legitimate in a field that you clearly don't like?  I think a reasonable person would agree with me:  It does not.  I also think a reasonable person would agree that you're clearly embellishing on the truth to give yourself credibility.

"It helps a lot in photography to have a purpose. If you had to have a photo of some people demonstrating, you get the courage, the eye and the efficiency the purpose requires. Because you basically know from the beginning, what the picture you need to get must contain, or hold emotions off, for it to communicate. " Really, dude, you've covered a demonstration?  Or is this just superfluous puffery to, AGAIN, make it appear that you know what you're talking about?  Indeed.

"The pictures showing royal families or celebrities in their worst or 'funny' situations are products of hunters with a camera, working for indecent medias. They basically have nothing to do with journalism or photography."  While I deplore the paparazzi and their indecent intentions, Overgaard should really do some more searching into the image catalogs of Getty and Wire; they both have paparazzi contributors who do exactly what he talked about.  Whilst it bothers me I know there's nothing I can do about it.  If it really bothers you, why would you list outlets to augment your perceived connection to the photo world that supply the very photos you deplore?  Dilettante.  In Webster's there should be a photo of this guy next to that word.

I honestly love when people compare themselves on their websites as "His work has been compared to Piscasso," generally written by someone with a surface understanding or p.r.  Or written by someone who has perhaps read "The Five Minute Expert's Guide to Marketing" and writes something like "The great artists in music and film I know are all very organized, and I am too."

Yes, sir, much like aligning yourself with those you feel are more successful and talented than you are ... comparing yourself to "a great" makes you great.  Sorry ... that's deluded.  Wonder how much it cost to find that pearl of information.  

When talking about workflow I saw "When I edit pictures, I do them all, I add all information to the image files while I remember names and places, and save editions in a set of sizes for any possible use on my website, by picture agencies and clients."  Well that's funny your agencies have a total of three hundred photos with your name on the byline.  You must have the slowest workflow known to man.

Real photographers have editors. ;)  Editors that we appreciate and respect.

"I also think that it is important to make your own choices. I shoot what I want, with the equipment I want to use and have developed a style, which is what my clients want."  

You mean your website is your client, right?  Because I'll put money on the fact your real income from being a photographer is less than what I spent on coffee so far this week.

"You’ve got to develop your own style and your own specialty, which you will get known for. Not when you grow up or become rich, but from the beginning where you don't have five kids and two cars to support. And it goes remarkably fast to build a style and a clientele, I would say you can start getting food within weeks from your photography and have a real style that generates your income in a couple of years."

Within weeks you can begin making money with your photograpy?  If ANYONE believes this, they deserve to part with their €1000 or more.  Trade schools tell students that so that they sign their life away and take student loans.  Now dubiously wealthy Leica owners masquerading as working photographers tell people that to entice them to leave their boring banking, engineering or dental careers?  Really?  I don't see how people sleep well at night when they make these claims.

"With dSLR, you tend to plan the photo and then get that. With the Leica M9 rangefinder you see the picture possibility and it's more a matter of trusting your instincts than actually ensuring a given result. In a way, with Leica M9 your confidence is in yourself, whereas with dSLR it is often in the equipment."

I dig using my M9 so that I can use my Leica-M glass.  It's wonderful.  This quote, however, is written by someone who has not one clue about working photographers.  Except for a Magnum guy here or there and some music shooters you will not find even .0001% of the photos that play on front pages or leading news picture galleries taken with an M.  I know of not one working photojournalist for Getty, the AP, AFP, EPA, etc., etc. that uses anything but a dSLR.  This santimonious Dane is going to call my contemporaries people that "rely on their equipment more than their talent"?  This guy relies on bullshit more than talent.

It is so frustrating to read things written by a dilettante and glorified forum guru.  It saddens me that true enthusiasts of photography -- who may have no intention of ever using their camera to make a living -- are subjected to the kind of information they're presented with.  It's beyond sad.

"I travel quite a bit, with a Leica M9 around the neck, a few lenses, a light meter and a reflector. Sometimes an extra M9 in the bag too. Life is so much easier when you walk through airport security without a 25 kg trolley full of dSLR equipment."

And if your client or agency requires you to make a photo that requires ISO 6400 and long glass, your Leica M9 can handle that?  No.  I've shot just as many frames with an M9 and know just as much if not more about how it handles.  It's impossible.  I could -- if I didn't actually work as a photographer -- compile an extensive website for gear-bators to droll over ... but I won't.  Ever.  

I've carried a much heavier roller bag with me all over the world.   And I'm still smiling because I know I'm actually working as a photographer instead of trying to make people THINK I'm a photographer.

"The shooting style is very much like a dSLR and as long as the light conditions are good, the result is perfect, detailed, 3D and accurate colours without much work in Lightroom."

Indeed the S2 is a lovely machine but, yo, Thorsten I thought you didn't like dSLR's?  I thought you didn't like heavy cameras.  He doesn't even realize when he contradicts himself.  Total dilettante.

Back in the day when Thorsten approached me he seemed like a nice guy.  Please ask him who introduced him to editors at some wire services.  I regret doing so today, of course.  Not only were the outlet names used only to further a marketing campaign instead of doing real photographic work but ... it seems it may have also been used to further religious views within "news coverage," which, again, of course, I wholeheartedly disagree with and deplore.  Inserting any of your views in news photos is completely against what news photos are about.

And, yes, Thorsten, I intended for you to be sent a screencap.  You may fool the entusiasts, the rich Leica owners and others ... but ... you really don't fool me.

Besides ... I saw photographic work at a county fair recently that was much better than your exhibition.

Leica ... You guys should be really careful who you thinks tipifies your brand.  Shouldn't it represent great photography and NOT guys who wear a camera to look cool?  Don't worry Thorsten anyone with a truly qualified eye knows you have zero chance of actually working as a true professional photographer.  Keep up the charade with your workshops!  I'm sure it has to be spiritually fulfilling to fleece the pockets of the idiots you rope into paying you. ;)

One last thing ... if you are "spiritually clear" why on Earth would you need to be addicted to anything like cigarettes?  Just wondering.  

NOTE:  The article referenced appears to have been taken down.  It was originally located at http://connoisseurs.my/8ththorsten

 

Multi Selector slut...

Although I’ve shot Canon for the last 8 years, it wasn’t something when I decided to switch that I thought I’d do forever.  Prior to buying my first Canon Eos 1D all of my professional gear was Nikon and the Mamiya RZ-67 Pro II system.   Prior to that I’d used Canon A-1’s, Canon AE-1’s, a Zenza Bronica EC, Rolleiflex 2.8 and the venerable Pentax K-1000.  I’ve just so dated myself.  Prior to Leica but during my Nikon F4s days I’d shot the Contax G2 system, which was the reason I started shooting Leica M’s.  I don’t want to get off-track but the AF on the G2 system sucked and the MF was practically non-existent.

The day I sold my Nikon F5’s was a sad day.  To be relevant in the market I was then shooting in it was all digital.  Scanning film was finished as part of a serious workflow for most or us.  The Nikon D1 was revolutionary.  It was the first camera – felt a lot like my Nikon F5’s – that wasn’t one of those cobbled-together USD20,000 beasts made by Kodak for Nikon and Canon.  Those bitches weighed a ton and they sucked.   The D1 answered a lot of questions for me … ya’ know … with those massive 128mb and 256mb CF cards.  I think I have enough of those things to actually use them as poker chips.  Could probably complete a set pretty cheap I’d think.  Aren't they like a nickle a piece now?

The 16gb and 32gb XQD cards I’m using now are way more like SxS cards than they are like either CF or SD’s.  Looking forward to seeing video output from the Nikon D4 with hopefully less banding than I saw come out of the Canon 1D Mark 4 when I shot at more than 800 ISO.

Don’t get me wrong the Canon 1D Mark 4’s were great -- we deserved even better, though.  Even though they were crop-frame cameras I found them to be the best Canon had produced.  I know people bitched and moaned about the 1D Mark 3’s inability to handle autofocus well but the only Mark 3’s I had were of the 1Ds-variety; they worked exceedingly well for me.  I punished those things and they all worked as well as I expected them to work.  The 1Ds Mark III also did the best on DxO compared to other Canon bodies.

Unlike the Nikon D1X’s from back in the day that failed on me time after time, it was nice to be using gear that didn’t burn through shutter boxes.  For whatever reason all of my bodies tend to do that frame 9999 reset to frame 0001 around the same time.  Sometimes it’s literally during the same shoot but most often at least during the same day or 24-hour period.   Always seemed odd to me.  During the time I was being told by one of my agencies “you better get a Canon and start using one if you want access to the lens pool:  We’re switching in a couple months” I had not one or two but three D1X’s fail on me.  Funny thing is that I had two 1DX’s fail on me within one two-hour period and one fail the next day.

After returning from the Nikon repair depot I immediately picked up a Canon 1D and the lovely 70-200/2.8.  I thought I’d dip my toe in the Canon world by using it as my ambient body alongside my primary Nikon 1DX’s.  Honestly, I didn’t hate it at all.  The colours were interesting ... different than what I was used to but ... interesting.  The body worked really well.  Even though Canons aren’t know to be “as durable” as Nikons it felt pretty good in my hands. I beat the shit out all of my Canon bodies and they did really really well.  I'd made a Nikon 1DX crumble once so I was pleased.

What didn’t feel good in my hands was that stupid-ass big dial on the back of the Canons.  Gone were the days of truly simple AF sensor selection.  Yeah, I know diehard Canon guys say it’s “just as easy to hit the button and then turn the dial” but I never got into it.  In fact, eight years later I was still not digging it.  It never made sense to me after having used the Multi Selector on the F5 and then on the D1 and D1X I was a Multi Selector slut.  The Sub Selector is pretty damn cool, too. 

One of my Canon-loving friends said, “Say goodbye to easy aperture control, man.”  Oh really!?  You mean the stupid wheel that would rub against my hip and change my stop?  I always like the Sub-Command dial much more for selecting my aperture.  I don’t mind the Main Command dial for Shutter speed at all. The little joystick on the back of the D4 is nice, too.

I will say that going back from Canon’s odd zoom direction has been a bit odd … not to mention the fact putting lenses on bodies is different as well.  I’m hoping this wears off quickly.  Having had Canon bodies and lenses in my hands literally tens of thousands of times over the past eight years has made the Nikons feel much different in my hands.  Feels ergonomically 10x better.

I’m actually pissed at Canon so I’m equating the “difference” of feel … mentally … as a way to deal with how much they pissed me off.  Changing systems is not something many really want to do.  It’s hella expensive and just a pain in the ass.  Cables.  Batteries.  Flash cables.  Not to mention ALL of the lenses.  And … the flashes that are almost approaching the price of proper studio strobe heads – unless, of course, you’re using Alien Bee’s.

As an aside I can’t tell you how many people I know who actually work as photographers who are switching from Canon to Nikon right now.  I’m shocked yet from what I hear there is a flood of guys switching to Nikon.  I don't know anyone who's switching to Canon, though. ;)

I was able to use some Nikon D3s’s during real assignments and commissions – wholly different than wanking about with a bunch of gear geeks at a glorified meet-up and cooing about bokeh.  I prefer the word unscharfen bereich.  I doubt it will catch on, though.  Whatever.  The D3s’s in the real-real world and not what starfucker lackeys call real world … were … brilliant.  Honestly, I’m not sure any manufacturer marketing rep has a qualified eye or they’d be able to see through the equipmentbator-driven page views and stop giving most idiotic blog writers evaluation cameras.  Then again, I consider DPReview and their "cadre of the unqualified" complete shit.

Sorry.  Canon.  The D3s’s did what Canon could not even dream of doing:  Making TTL flash actually work.  In as much as I’d love to never have to use on-camera TTL flash that’s not my reality.  If I did ambient or studio strobe work only, I wouldn’t have been as motivated to switch systems.  Again, that’s not the case and from what I saw with the Nikon D3s and its ability to perform with TTL flash.  It was superb.  Every damn frame.  Perfectly exposed.  Light background, dark subject … perfect.  Dark background, light subject … perfect.  Not having to fight my equipment is a high priority for me.

Funny that when a lot of us were fed-the-fuck-up with Canon’s lackluster TTL flash performance someone from Canon said, “Well, you’re a pro, you should be shooting manual flash.”

So I buy USD500 flash units to shoot friggin’ manual?  Yeah, okay.  Sure.  That makes a lot of sense.  I never used the Nikon D3 and have no idea if it was as good as the D3s but damn was the D3s good.  What I expect from TTL on-camera or even off-camera flash – I doubt Canon will ever get the off- part right – is that 90% of the flash exposures should be spot on.  The Canon 1D Mark 4 was right about 70% of the time during great conditions and much less in questionable conditions.  The original 1D sucked and exposures with flash looked blue/green-ish.  I got over it.  Still hated that stupid wheel but … ya’ know … if you’re in a bad relationship but just don’t want the hassle of breaking up or changing, you just put up with it.  At that point I had a Canon 1D Mark 2 and flash was a bit better but still not great.  The 1Ds Mark III was pretty good but still intermittently bad.  I think the only time I used on-camera or off-camera flash with the 5D or 5D Mark 2’s was when I was seriously dragging the shutter and using the flash pretty much manual so I can’t really say if they sucked as bad as the rest of the bodies.

There was this other thing, too.  I got some email that had CPS on it so I totally thought it was CPS-oriented.   RSVP’d as I was interested in seeing the C300 cine camera Canon was touting.  Turned out it was a Canon Live Learning event yet they spammed their CPS members for good measure.  When I was in line I could tell that perhaps 1 in 50 of these people actually used their cameras to make money.  The rest were lookie-loos taking time off from “forum patrol” or cruising for porn on DOMAI.  That’s totally cool and good for them but I don’t want to be surrounded by these fucking donuts when I want to see some equipment up close and personal.  Besides all of that … they ask the dumbest questions on Earth.  Even though CPS is a pay-to-play service now at least they kind of weed out some of the people and allow real working photographers to actually demo the equipment. 

I’d been playing with the idea of really switching but after that P.O.S. event Canon my decision was solidified.  Actually, though, the odd thing is that my kid bought me a lens coffee mug as one of her Christmas presents to me.  It was a Nikon lens mug.  I asked her “You know I shoot Canon, right!?”

“I thought you said you didn’t always so I bought you that.”

 Fair enough.  I guess it was a sign.

Whilst on the subject of CPS I’m sorry but seriously … you can buy your way in?  Didn’t used to be that way but now … anyone can join and reserve lenses to borrow.  Nikon Professional Services still requires tear sheets, letters from editors, references from other NPS members and approval by NPS.  Sorry I know that sounds exclusionary but it’s way better than buying your way in.  Seriously, it’s kind of like photo schools that don’t require a portfolio for admission.  Same mentality.  I love the fact that NPS requires sponsorship from two current NPS members.  It really does cut down on the rich wannabe’s who just want to flash an NPS card.  Those kinda donkeys also reserve new equipment that could have gone to legitimate working photographers.  Ya’ know … the equipment that’s very tough to get at present.  Many times they're the same ones who get a body or two before the masses and sell them on eBay.

Besides that lame Canon Live Learning bullshit, using the D3s and loving it, the fact my kid bought me a Nikon coffee mug … I left Nikon because the 1DX wasn’t the greatest camera and I sure as hell wasn’t going to be buying a camera with essentially the same name but made by Canon.  Really Canon?  You couldn’t have come up with a better name?  The Eos 1D-X?  I think that Canon's brilliant marketing people must have thought, "It's extreme:  We'll call it the X."   Not only that but I knew it’d be delayed in typical Canon style.  Since the AF is nice on it ... I wonder what friggin' issue they're trying to solve now?  TTL flash perhaps?

I think their success with the 1Ds Mark 3 killer revolutionary 5D Mark 2 made them arrogant.  I’ll never forget them telling me to “shoot manual flash” or spamming me with Canon Live Learning pedantic bullshit all because I was on their CPS list.  Donkeys.  Dumb donkeys.  I feel bad saying that as I like donkeys.

A few weeks ago I had a couple friends over.  One is a staffer from a Canon-shop and the other from a Nikon-shop.  It was hilarious seeing the Canon guy's face when TTL flash exposure after TTL flash exposure on the Nikon D4 was absolutely perfect.

“Think you Mark-fucking-Four can do that, man!?”

He shook his head and the Nikon-shop shooting friend said, “We’re all getting those in a couple weeks.”  Should be interesting to see the stills come out of the Olympics in London soon.  Canon should have released their 1D-X’s long before that event but … no … just a delay. ;)

Since I was swapping systems, I thought a lot about the lenses I was shooting, too.   The standard set up I shot back in my old Nikon days and the current Canon days was the 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4.  At one time I also had the 300/2.8 but lens pools make it so you don’t have to own that beast or any of the other beasts.  I thought a lot about how I really shot and what I really needed.

I know it sounds like heresy coming from me but … ciao-ciao Zeiss ZE manual focus primes.  Yes, they’re nice but they tended to have lateral fringing when shooting backlit subject matter.  Not only that but when shooting a concert I’m done using manual-fucking-focus unless it’s a Leica body I’m using.  I can’t focus as fast as AF … especially the Nikon AF that’s in the D4.  Jesus.  Amazing.

The one lens I was always pissed I felt like I had to buy was any 24-70/2.8.   For me this lens was what I used when I was commissioned or assigned to shoot some fancy event or party.  No, not on the outside but as the official inside photographer.  I love when I get comments from anonymous commenters saying “you’re a paparazzi.”  Sure, you uninformed forum troll neophyte … I’m a paparazzi.  Anytime any entertainment-related subject is who you’re shooting there is some landscape-only shooting forum troll who thinks you’re a paparazzi. 

I never shot the 24-70 at full 2.8 aperture.  Almost ever.  Seems like a waste of about a grand just to have a two-eight lens that I’ll never use at its fullest potential.  I only ever used this lens at events and whilst on the wide-side was fine with fullframe sensors but a bit tight with crop-frames like the Mark 4 on the long-side it just wasn’t tight enough for me.  This is the lens that would also get beat to shit just from working.  Yeah, beat an almost two grand lens just for the fuck of it.  Fun.

Not only that but the Canon 16-35/2.8 always seemed wonky to me.  Things didn’t look right to me.  I could always tell when I looked at someone’s photo and it was shot with that P.O.S.  Honestly, 16mm never seemed wide enough to me either and what the hell do i want a 2.8/35 anyway.

The 70-200/2.8 Canon lens was pretty damn good, though.  Then again, the one I just replaced it with is just as good if not a bit better at AF.

This time around I purchased the following lenses:

AF-S NIKKOR 
14-24mm f/2.8G ED

AF-S NIKKOR 
24-120mm f/4G ED VR

AF-S NIKKOR 
70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G

AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G

AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D

All of these lenses on the D4 have been superb.  The 14-24/2.8 is ridiculously good.  The 24-120/4 is way better than I expected.  I know a lot of staffers who’ve been given that lens to use and if they love it … I felt I’d probably love it, too.  I do.  The 70-200/2.8 kicks ass as I thought it would.  My past Zeiss ZE primes were great except putting them on one of the best AF platforms to ever hit the planet seemed antithetical.  That … and I’m getting older. ;)  The Nikon 50/1.4 is pretty damn nice and doesn’t seem to lateral fringe like the Zeiss or that P.O.S. Canon 50/1.4 did.  I know.  I know … I should have bought the 50/1.2 or the 85/1.2 for that matter.  Well, I owned the 85/1.2 and found the AF slow as shit.  The 50/1.2 was the same.  Heavy and slow and expensive for what it is/was.  Nikon's newest iteration of the 85/1.4 is so lovely.  I got the 35/2D to shoot on either an F6 or F100 for some street photography. :) Heresy ... shooting an SLR for street, right?  And, no, I didn't opt for the 24 or 35 1.4 Nikon primes. Given the fact the D4 has such good high ISO performance there really was no reason.  Shooting 6400 clean is a gift.  Thank you, Nikon!

Besides … why the hell would I want to have same “special sauce glass” that all of the mamarazzi-turned lifestyle-picture-takers so loved to shoot and post on blogs proving to their suburban white friends they’re amazing?  Not that suburban moms have a "qualified eye."

The Canon one-two glass is a gimmick.  Did I mention it was expensive as hell?

With the Canon system I had the 24/1.4 but honestly it was big and heavy and seemed like a chore to carry.  Hence the reason I didn’t get either a 24/1.4 or 35/1.4 with the new Nikon kit.  Great lenses but … seeing as how the D4 handles 6400, which is the highest ISO I’ll ever use, I didn’t need one-four glass on that prime.  Two-oh is fine.  No, it’s not a fancy AF-S but the little AF-D focuses really fast.

Did I mention that the D4 – and for that matter the D3s – and the Nikon SB910 kick Canon’s ass?  Oh, yeah, I did.  It makes me happy that I don’t have to fight my equipment to make it work.

Perhaps the 1D-X does a better job with whatever new flash they’ll throw at the problem but I don’t think it will.  In fact, I’ll bet it will still suck.  Wasn’t gonna spend seven grand to find out.  I’d waited them out long enough to get it right.  They didn't.  In fact, the 5D Mark III is kinda how D3S users feel about the D4 if they already owned the 5D Mark II.  Ciao Canon.

Honestly, I think that because Canon develops their own proprietary sensors – unlike Nikon that uses Sony sensors – they lag in other areas. I don’t think they put enough research and development into AF or TTL flash for that matter.  Now they have the whole video-thing to worry about so … more R&D into that and less into things that matter to stills-only photographers. 

The Nikon D4 completely leap-frogged Canon in every way possible.  I know that there are guys who say the D4 isn’t sharp and doesn’t have enough contrast.  Others say there’s some weird colour-cast.  Others that say it didn’t work tethered.  First off, this camera is sharp as hell.  Since shooting motion projects with the 5D Mark 2, I always set the camera to a flat picture style to suck all dynamic range I could out of it.  Have you ever seen RAW Alexa or RED picture before?   To those with a surface understanding they’d look like shit.  Once you do a little post … they look amazing.  Whilst this isn’t the case with the Nikon D4 completely I like to shoot flat and D4 files look flatter to me.  I’ll add the contrast and sharpness myself, thank you.  I don’t need a camera cooking files for me.  Then again, I prefer shooting RAW.  Coming from what I was shooting D4 files looked lovely!

I’ve never seen any colour cast in my D4 files.  They’ve looked fantastic.  And before I ever used any camera on an editorial job I think I’d check to see – ya’ know seeing as how the camera had been out for a day or two – if it was compatible with my tethering software.   I know at least a few guys who’s D4’s are still in the boxes as they haven’t had time to completely familiarize themselves with it.  Anyone who would bring an untested new camera to a shoot deserves the problems they had with tethering.  No matter if they think they’re cool and live in Brooklyn or not.

I could NOT have chosen a better time to not just “come back to Nikon” but swap systems … for a MUCH better system.  The D3 led a lot of temporary Canon shooters either to or back to Nikon but the D3s really turned the tide.  I suspect The D4 will bring even more Canon shooters to the Nikon system.  Haven’t even talked about the Nikon D800.  Another time.

Agencies and photographers don’t want to have to switch from one system to another.  It’s expensive.  It’s a hassle.  There’s a learning curve.  I gotta say, though, if you do what I do for a living, there’s no way you’re going to still be shooting Canon unless you’re a total fanboy and are deluded to think that a better tool doesn’t exist to do your job.

The learning curve has been easy.  Menu systems are great.  I have buttons on the back of my camera that light up because it gets dark in VIP areas and in the pits of concert venues.  Canon never gave me that.  Canon never gave me truly great AF like the D4 has been giving me.  Mind you … I’m not a sports guy.  The most sports I’ve shot has been golf and those fuckers don’t move very fast.  I think I’ve shot two soccer games in my life.  I have shot my share of polo games all over the world and some high school water sports at the behest of my kid and other parents.  Hmm … I’m sure most wouldn’t consider the showing of dogs a sport. 

That doesn’t mean I don’t want really good AF.  I do.

Canon’s also arrogant for charging USD6,799 for a 1D-X body.  Sure it’s got barely 2mp more sensor-wise.  Is there much of a difference in me doing my job with 16mp or 18mp camera bodies?  Um, no.  Those are concerns of gearwank blogs.  Canon thinks their camera is worth almost a grand more than the D4?

Honestly, I think they think so.  I mean … they thought the C300 was worth almost twenty grand  … and revised that.  I’ve also heard that sales of the C300 have sucked.  Bad.

The difference in price between  buying the D4 and passing on the 1D-X bought half of the beautiful 85/1.4.   What I got for the Zeiss 85/1.4 ZE bought the other half.  Effectively, it was a complete wash.  Is the Canon 1.2 USD500 better than the Nikon 85/1.4?  Perhaps, only to those needing that fraction of a stop because optically I prefer the Nikon.  I also prefer 9 bladed apertures over 8.  Is the Canon 50/1.2 at USD1,599 a grand better than the Nikon 50/1.4?  Well, again, if you really need that fractional f-stop, sure.  Optically, it may be a bit better but when I shot the one-two I saw a lot of lateral fringing.  The Canon’s got 8 aperture blades and Nikon, again, 9.  Call me an elitist but the Leica lenses I’m most accustomed to have 9 and 11 blades respectively.  Only my seventy-five ‘cron has 8 blades like Canon but I don’t think it could physically have any more if memory serves.  Hell … my Nocti’ has 11 blades. What does Leica and NIkon know about using as many aperture blades as possible that Canon doesnt?

I think the more blades a lens has the better the unscharfen bereich.

Pretty sure I’ll add a Nikon F6 as well but I may end up with an F100.  I’d love to see how this new Nikon glass renders to film.

I haven’t decided if I’m going to include photos with this blog.  Anyone who really knows me knows where I post and I think I’ve grown tired of including photos in a long-form blog post.  I’d much rather tumblr a photo stream than do photoblogs.  Doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy checking out traditional photoblogs but it’s way too much work to post.

Thank you Canon for making my decision so easy to once again shoot Nikon.  Funny enough, though, a friend of mine tells me that the new 1D-X actually does focus much faster than anything Canon’s produced so far.  TTL-flash was still questionable and I hear the wireless capability of the 1D-X isn’t that great.  So slow ... it's almost unusable. ;)

So, yeah, still happy with my decision! :)

Hope this finds everyone well!  Wish I could do these more often but when you actually work making photos these kinds of things have to take a back seat.  Pretty much the commenters I care about interacting with are FB friends anyway. ;)

And, no, I decided I'm not posting photos to go along with this entry.  Go find me on tumblr for photos.

Caveat emptor.

Yeah, it’s been almost a year since anything has been posted here.  I think uber.com was ahead of their time:  I didn’t want to think the long-form blog was over.  I kinda think it is now.  The long-form is best served by the kind of people who roast their own coffee beans, dream of the life they read about in Playboy in the seventies, wish they had a sports car and probably listen to jazz.

 Because of the sheer amount of content “out there” I’m not sure I even have the attention span any longer to write more than a short caption.  I think there is a collective A.D.D.  It’s all about the quick bite.  Now, at least, of course.

I can still look through a long photoblog, well, one actually.  I prefer tumblr.com now.

But can I write a rant on tumblr?  Nah, not really.  It’s not designed for that.  For that fact alone I guess I’ll keep this alive even though typepad really sucks.  Give me a maximum width of the photos I want to post!? Really?  Hence I tumble.  But a good rant is fun to write once in a while.

I mean … I don’t write equipment reviews.  I’ve written about equipment but I dunno if I’d characterize them as reviews.

Besides … why compete with the legions of ex-forum-voices-now-with-a-blog and even their OWN forum.  Fancy.  I’m not going to name names in this post.  Think of it as a giant blind item post.  I love blind items.  My publicist-friends love items, too.

Items can be used as currency in that world.  “Perhaps if you don’t write this about this client I can give you two items about someone else.”  That’s actually the way it works.

So … what’s pissing me off?

First off, real working photographers fuck with each other.  It’s just the way we are.  We’re extremely competitive yet we’ll always go out of the way to help those who deserve it.  But we call each other out like mad.  What I’ve found in dealing with a sub-genre of photographers known as the Ex-Forum-Blogging-Experts (EFBE or effbee) is that they have no sense of humor whatsoever.

One guy who I’ll just call “Mr. Luxury” said “you’re a waste of time” when I asked him if he feels comfortable calling himself a “working photographer” or “photographic contributor” if he barely has 2500 photos on the legitimate outlet names he LOVES to flaunt to anyone who’ll listen.  Many legitimate contributors have that many frames in a month.  Some … in a week.  Some, believe it or not, in one day.  He’s been “posting” for at least a few years.  Relevant?  Not in the real photographic world he would so love to be a part of.  He said, because I won’t “drink his own brand koolaid,” “… you’re a waste of time.”  Yes, sir, I am, I’m not gonna kiss your ass because you have some entitlement issue.  I think if you were truly evolved and not just a “five minute expert” you’d realize that the only reason you’re allowed to use the outlet names on EVERYTHING you write is because someone helped you.  Trust me, I’m more careful now about letting someone use my name.  Altruism scorned.  It’s funny when you see contributors pushing a political or religious agenda, too. 

Aligning oneself with successful and talented people does not make oneself successful nor talented.  Normally, it means you know how to identify people to move yourself closer to your ultimate goal of malignant narcissism self-gratifying quasi-success.  I like to call them “light suckers,” pardon the pun.  Mosquitoes almost.

These kinds of guys know luxury.  Oh yes they deign to be fancy.  Wearing a nice hat.  Smoking a cigarette.  Ya’ know … bein’ artsy.  Yes, right down to the eyeglasses frame selection.  Funny that they don’t have a real knowledge of wine.  You can always call someone’s bullshit by what they know about wine.

They don’t seem to like dogs much, either.  Do you like people who don’t like dogs?

People who don't like dogs also think their photographic gear is sexy.  Gear is not sexy you vonce.

They’re more in love with the idea of being somehow relevant in the photo-world than actually making photos.  Sad.  Laughable to those with authentically qualified eyes.  Even sadder is the fact they’re deluded enough to believe their own bullshit.
And charge others – mostly rich digital rangefinder owners perhaps truthfully on a quest to better their own photographic talent – USD1500 for this intellectual masturbatory snake oil. 

I’ve heard they get to eat at nice restaurants and hear sermons about photographic philosophies.  I’ve heard that it’s almost maddening.  Do they actually learn how to be better photographers or just leave with a stomach full of supposedly good food and a mind full of “quips” or pnemonics?  I’ll be their hit up to pay for “other modules.”  Modules like workflow.  A subject they know nothing about.  Nothing.

What’s sadder than a Mr. Luxury?  Wow.  So many choices for that.  I think sadder would definitely have to be Mr. Zen.

Always beware of the Mr. Zens of life.  Definitely don’t let your daughter (or son) date one of these guys.  They preach brotherly love.  And they charge for glorified meet-ups.   They also dream about being a ninja.

It’s so funny – again I’m only saying funny because interjecting humor into something gainfully sad makes it easier to palate – to see what people have done to street photography.  During these glorified meet-ups they’ll include others to justify charging any money.  They feel like stars having twenty or so people around.  The people that attend are pretty much like the teacher’s pets of the forum.  And they’ll give you an earful about street photography.  They’re effbee’s … they know everything.  Lazy marketing guys love effbees.

Like Mormons that have a vacation home in Utah – they’re more Mormon than thou.

They’ll parade “teachers” or “speakers” who, in the “real world” have absolutely no relevancy at all outside of the circle-jerk of a forum.  But because of their own twitter followers or over-saturating whatever market they’re vying for relevancy others just assume “they’re a big photographer.”

Shit … they gotta be big if they’re friends with our exalted moderator.  Right?  Ooohhh … moderating your own forum:  Doesn’t that sound like the photographic dream of a fucking lifetime?  I mean, shit, if that’s all ya’ got, cool.  I mean … not really, though.  Perhaps they got kicked off a forum – one that they got pretty popular on – and in the back of their minds they said “As long as I own the forum no one can kick me off for anything.”  They love validation.

These are the same kinds of guys, these Mr. Zens, that would also attempt to instruct – for lack of a better word and sorry for the loose definition of instruct – others in “how to be popular on the internet.”

Yes, the end-all-be-all of being a photographer is being popular on the internet.  Get that pro Flickr account.  It says “pro” so … get those pictures of the heavy-hitters up on that vision board … if you think it … it will come to you.  I wonder if they jerk off whilst looking in a mirror?  I’ll be there are Samarai swords in the background in that mirror.

And ya’ know the funny thing about a Mr. Zen – not that all of it isn’t funny – they’ll still post photos of trees or a chain link fence or a parking lot or all friggin’ three in a review of some ubiquitous piece of photographic gear that will NOT make you a better photographer.

There was hope for them at first because they actually put some of their validation-loving soul in the first attempts to “woo their forum buddies” and then fell into the horrible trap of trying to provide constant content and just “ran out to a parking lot” to shoot fucking trees and do “bokeh” tests.  Yeah for you!  You just confirmed your own mediocrity.  You succumbed.  I know.  I know.  Your legions love you.  They’ll “get the point” if you post a photo of anything no matter how much it lacks anything interesting to look at.  You’re at the top of your own forum, though.  You’ve made it.  You’re the moderator-in-chief!  No one can kick you off for posting inappropriate S&M photos.

When all you wanted to find was inner-peace you found an audience.  Can starfuckers ever really find inner-peace?  Actually, they find their inner-peace in doing box-opening videos they hope to go viral by hash tagging the fuck out it.

There are guys who I’ll call Mr. Saturation as well.  I know they have no inner peace.  There’s no way they could.  Ya’ know … instead of actually shooting street photographs they’d rather be making a cam-girl style video and posting it to their minions every fucking day.  They even seem to be out of breath most of the time.  Minions, I may add, that are waiting with baited breath for the next utterance of their blogging Jesus. 

They are the consummate imitators.  They haven’t innovated shit.  In fact, whomever they can copy they just chalk it up to “finding their own style.”

The Mr. Saturations of the world gain their relevance by posting multiple times a day across crazy amounts of platforms.  You friend them on Facebook and they friend every single fucking one of your friends.  Anyone who comments and leaves a real email address they’ll search it on Facebook or Twitter or G+ and immediately friend, follow or add them.  Unless you set them to some highly edited news stream you will be barraged by endless posts about their views on photography … and especially street photography.

Even though, of course, they have no real experience as a photographer.  They even call themselves “Professional Street Photographer.”  Even though, that doesn’t exist.

The lazy marketer – of whom I’ll get to shortly – sees their twitter followers and gets a chub-in-the-trou over how many people they can reach … ALL for free or next to free.  Ya’ know … even though … it wholly bastardizes their luxury brand and in the quest of free marketing … cheapens their brand.  Honestly, it leaves a skid mark on their brand.

What does it matter, though?  They’re getting’ the clicks.  Clicks look good to the bosses who understand almost NOTHING about social media and the way it works.  They should be able to qualify clicks.  Like the healthcare industry there’s no money in curing.  Why on Earth would they want to qualify the click.

Or the audience.  Ten percent of that audience could be interesting to a real marketer but that’s not what impresses someone with barely a surface understanding of photography in general not to mention social media.

Mr. Saturation will talk for hours about Doisneau, HCB, Vivian Maier, Erwitt or whomever they feel is an important subject for a talk and can fill up a couple of hours.  

It’s funny that one could have coffee with someone like this,  let them ask questions and then use the entire topic of discussion as the subject of their next workshop.  They need to keep up the saturation stream.

Like Mr. Zen they don’t workshops in as much as they do glorified meet-ups.  Oh, to meet the face behind the litany of posts.  But only a true douchebag would charge for a meet-up.  That’s why they don’t call them meet-ups; they call them workshops because they can charge for it.  Mr. Saturation is the low-end of the workshop market.  If he charges the least, he’ll make up for it with volume.  He’s all about volume.  Not volumes of good material … just volume in general.

If you are making 95% of your money by doing workshops, I can guarantee you are full of shit.  Perhaps you’ll be able to mimic your favourite prof and just wax poetic about any subject. Doesn’t mean you’re not full of shit and could only impress those with little more than thinking street photography is taking pictures of streets.

Mr. Saturation is almost always personable.  Infectious.

The other funny thing they do – because they’re usually young and wholly SEO-savvy – is tag relevant people in their blog posts as part of their “tag list.”  If they do this on every post every day, their own name will show up on google even when you may have only searched for the person in their ever-growing tag list.  Confront them about it and they’ll giggle like an embarrassed hentai school girl.

There are stock photographers who because they have seniority or other interests important to “the agency” that have said to me “… post everything you can.”  Why?  Certain agencies “weight” the searches and give preference to certain photographers.  If you post 5 times the amount that others do and you do it for years and years and years, you’ll succeed in making people think you’re the only eyes out there.

Mr. Saturation is there to stay … if he keeps saturating, of course.  Once he stops saturating … his “buzz” will end.  And the lazy marketing guy will move on.  Smiling like a tree-loving rodent.

Equally annoying are the guys I’ll call Mr. Artsy Glasses.  They think they know their audience.  They’ll claim things in their bios and C.V.’s that they think will impress – usually but not limited to others with equally-as-artsy-glasses – but the claims are usually puffery.   Almost always puffery, actually.

“From the best work published in …” and then they go on to name huge-ass dailies or other publications.  You contact your friends in the editorial department and drop their name and they say “who the fuck are you talking about?”  They search the name in their respective systems for searching bylines and they find “a hand-out photo” was published.  Yep, that’s your best work, mate.

But you got your artsy glasses and a good line of bullshit.  Wonder if that’s good enough to sell prints?  Kinda think even luxury brand afficianados are smart enough to know that behind that almost-two-thousand dollar price is a hefty dealer commission leaving them with an expensive piece of wall art.  Good luck selling that donkey on the secondary market.

Funny that one of the types impressed by Mr. Artsy Glasses is usually Mr. Lazy Marketer.  “He can hold an audience, though.”  The audience is mesmerized by the glasses and perhaps a few photos.

When it doesn’t get to the second printing will they still love you?  When the next project isn’t getting the “warm reception” you got with the first will that sink you to irrelevancy?   The chances are very high.

Hope that day job didn’t get abandoned.  The gift of gab is a lovely talent.  Too bad it doesn’t usually translate to consistently making good photos. 

Is it really about making good photos?  The lazy marketer doesn’t really care.  As long as it can plausibly allow someone to make better photos he cares not.  Why would he?  He wouldn’t know a good photo if it had teeth and bit his face.

He’s usually the guy who got drunk on the wine of social media – still with no real understanding of how it really works.  But doesn’t his product give him a entitlement that he has a photographic sensibility in the way he sees something?  Nope.  Not really.  Photographically he’s blind.

Why else would the lazy marketer hire Mr. Luxury, Mr. Zen, Mr. Saturation or even Mr. Artsy Glasses?  Because he, too, believes his own bullshit. 

I almost forgot about Mr. Hype.  He’s close to Mr. Saturate but he’s been “out there for a very long time.”  Mr. Hype’s minions are landscape guys.  He taught them about differing contrast layers and then gave them the heroin shot-in-the-arm … HDR.

It’s hard to tell if this guy loves photography or loves the fact legions of newly born Photoshop jockeys pray to him.  He’s one of them.  He rose to the top.  Now he even gets to shoot sports!  See … if he can do it, surely, you can take one of his workshops and you can do it, too.

Even though he has no experience in fashion or portraits he’ll “show you the way.”  For a price.

Mr. Hype is a marketing genius.  Much more so than Mr. Saturate.  He’s the marketing genius Mr. Luxury wishes he could be and the genius Mr. Zen puts up on the vision board.

Mr. Hype is very close to Mr. 100 Speedlights.  Mr. 100 Speedlights will show you how to professionally light a portrait with 30 or 40 speedlights mounted on brackets that, yes, he sells, too.

Funny that I’ve never met a working photographer who uses 10’s of Speedlights to do the job of a proper studio strobe system.  How much do multiple Speedlights cost anyway?  Surely, it’s probably cheaper in the long run to just go out and buy a used or demo’d strobe system.

Not according to him, though.  And, yes, he’ll let you pay him to “show you the way.”

There’s another kinda guy out there, too.  He’s The Curmudgeon.  He wishes the world wasn’t the way it was.  The good thing about him is that he doesn’t host workshops.  In fact, he doesn’t even like meet-ups.  He’s shy and likes to hide behind his words.

He dreams about a solitary Playboy-kinda life.  Listening to jazz.  Indeed listening to jazz in a sports car.  Alone.  Nothing with words, of course, because he’s got plenty of words rolling around in his mind.

He dreams of being a curator.  In fact, that’s the kind of workshop he’d love to lead.  Problem is he has no experience as a curator.  He doesn’t even have much experience as a photographer but that never stopped him from telling you what a good photograph is … and isn’t.  He’d like to think he has a qualified eye and his sheep wait for his posts with baited breath, which probably stinks of bad cheese and coffee.  Dunno why.  I’ll bet he’d love to tell you how to structure your portfolio even though he’s never had experience as an art buyer.

I’m sure he will have some kind of workshop some day.  It’ll probably be held in a rest home … where most of his readers presently live.

The buyer should beware out there for sure.  I think it’s horribly sad to market something to an audience that must have at least a percentage of those who truly want to learn something to make their travel photos better and all they get is pretention, inaction, poetry and puffery.

Before you attend a workshop do yourself a favour and put “Photo by [name]” into the search line of google and see what comes up.  Trust me on this.  One or two pages?  Really?  Even if there are more than a couple pages you can immediately discount those associated with the name’s political or religious affiliations.  They don’t pay for content.

Instead of spending a few hundred or even a thousand with Mr. Luxury you’d be better off buying non-instructional books by photographers you like and looking at how they shot something.  I mean unless you really need to get away from the wife to “hang with the boys” at a meet-up.

A meet-up you paid for.

Be even more wary of those who have learned from marketing luxury brands:  Luxury doesn’t come cheap.  If you charge enough, you have to be good, right!?  Except in rare cases this is never true.  

Brand-led workshops are a whole other beast.  They will tell you one can only make street photographs with their own gear.  Many times their leader will display only cursory knowledge of both photography and the brand’s equipment.

But HCB used it so you should, too.

One of the most maddening things that the brand-led workshop tries to teach – again, sorry for the loose definition of teach – is workflow.  Workflow?  Really?  I would love to know what Mickey Mouse knows about workflow.  He probably knows about the same as Mr. Zen when it comes to workflow as they’re both browsing images of trees, lawn furniture, photos of their own and other’s children – photos that the children will hate later in life – and  pictures of their cats.  Mr. Luxury’s workflow consists mostly of pictures of people from his workshops yet he’ll tell everyone because he’s a contributor he knows the “real world.”  Mr. Saturate is too overwhelmed by the thousands of meaningless photographs he makes so his take on workflow is akin to listening to someone who has no idea what they’re talking about.

When you’re choosing a workshop ask the presenter/organizer questions:

What magazines are you published in?

Do you have tear sheets?

What percentage of the money you earn is from photographic commissions?

Who commissions them to make photographs?

Are they only giving a workshop because they want to “promote their own brand”?

Will paid product demonstrations be made?

Have they ever been a working photographer?

Do they like dogs? (I’m only semi-joking about this)

It’s so easy to hype anything on the internet.  Just know that not everyone out there has your best intentions at the forefront of their interests.  Their interests are being popular, being relevant and … taking your money from you in the guise of teaching you something.  Perhaps a workshop from one of these people is good for someone who just watched a box-opening video, got all hot and ordered their very own NEX-7 from B&H.

Given the choices out there most people are much better off buying books, studying work by those they like, not hanging out with blowhards who espouse volumes of bullshit and eating at a fancy restaurant with their girlfriends or wives and not a bunch of forum guys who love a nice circle jerk.

And instead of commenting on yet another meaningless post only posted to drive traffic … go out and use the gear you already have.  No workshop presenter or glorified meet-up organizer is gonna help you find that magic bullet.

You can only find that on your own …

Making photographs yourself.

Cheers!

(Not sure I’m gonna allow comments on this one.)

 

R.S.H.N.... Pink Eye... welcome to LA.

I think those are the key words of the trip. :) 

Los Angeles... well, I've been meaning to visit for a while now. Back in 2006 when I found Chris' work it made me look at photography in a completely different way. I was sixteen and my biggest photographic inquisition was how I could create out-of-focus areas in my photos because with my camera at the time it was not possible. I was shooting with a little point and shoot which back then I thought was as high-end as cameras got. Shortly after discovering Chris' work I bought some camera equipment and was now able to create out-of-focus areas in my photos whenever I wanted. It's been an incredibly memorable five years since then looking back... and it's amazing how it all roots back in one way or another to finding Chris' work. 

We developed a friendship through the Internet which transitioned into phone conversations about all sorts of things and advice on real-world work as I had started getting jobs shooting. Finally five years later, we hung out and shot together. How many people can say they've done that with their first inspiration? It's funny because I was meeting many of his friends who I had been familiar with through his blogs in Toronto at the film festival. And now I met him. It goes without saying that it was a great feeling and I had an amazing time. I'm amazed at what the Internet can do and the doors it can open.

I also found Sev's work through Chris' blog (that link brings back some good nostalgia) and it was amazing to meet and shoot with such a talented person. Sev and I got along really well (it must be the Euro connection) and I think his passion for photography is from another planet. He's an amazing dude... and I think we're gonna get R.S.H.N. tattoos after this trip. ;) 

I was very appreciative of Frank Jackson's work after seeing the street photography video and meeting him was a totally amazing experience as well. I love his approach to photography and he really is a true character. Meeting people like Richard Polom, Nhat Nguyen, Andy Bond, Paul Posadas, Andres Izquieta, Michael Hacker and everyone else was also very amazing and surreal at the same time. The Internet is an incredible thing and it was so cool how it brought us all together. 

I only shot film with my Zeiss Ikon coupled with my Zeiss Biogon 35mm f/2 lens as well as Chris' Leica Noctilux 50mm f/1.0. I left LA with 14 rolls of a mix of Kodak Tri-X, Plus-X and Rollei Pan 25. I developed and scanned them about a week ago but going through all the photos and trying to sequence them is very tough. Especially for a trip that I believe was very important and memorable. 

Out of the 504 photos, there are close to 300 in this blog... which is a pretty good ratio I think. I posted more than every other photo I took there and I maybe should have cut it down but I hope you'll enjoy it. I will do a feature for my dot com of about the 20 best photos... that will be super hard to choose so if you have suggestions I'd love to hear. But for the blog close to 300 is fine. ;) 

Beginning with my mom who dropped me off at the airport. By the way, if you open these images in a new tab/window they will be about 100 pixels bigger... I just had to size them down to fit in the body of this blog layout without getting cut off. 

I was just in Florida for a full week and returned to Toronto a day before I left for LA so I was kind of exhausted of being on planes back-to-back. But the view was nice with the clouds... 1/2 second exposure. 

I arrived to Chris' place late at night and thought the doormat was pretty fitting to his sense of humor. :) 

We went to bed soon after I arrived because it was already pretty late and the next morning we were off to Chinatown for the first day of Street is Serious. LA's Chinatown is way cleaner than Toronto's and doesn't smell like a R.S.H.N. either... I was pretty impressed actually. We were walking to a restaurant to meet up with everybody. Funny how these people didn't feel like strangers...

This next picture is SO Picasso body shop... :) 

In between chatting I took some photos of whatever was around me. I was trying not to think too hard about what I was shooting and filtering out photos in my head which I do in Toronto. While in LA I constantly reminded myself that I was only there for four days so I should shoot as much as possible. I find that a lot of the times judgments change anyways and a photo that wouldn't have "made the cut" in my first draft of selects would end up in the second. 

Shooting street there was really really fun. I found that no one really payed attention to it even though at times they were getting photo-gangbanged. I guess everyone there wants to be an actor or director. Even these ladies. ;)

I thought this was an odd scene with awkward body language.

What an awkward position... there were a lot of kids in LA... lots of wannabe child stars. ;) 

I love this photo. Look at the look on her face... maybe they were enemies in a past life?

Notice the four legs and feet?

Lunch break in the parking lot?

We also have a College Street in Toronto and ours is part of Chinatown too. 

After a few hours we went back to Chris' house and I had to make at least one "pretty" photo for my Mom. :) She thinks it should have been in color... maybe she's right. But I actually took zero color photos while I was there. 

Later that night I met up with Richard and we walked along Sunset Blvd. which I thought would be super packed and full of people and parties but it was literally deserted. It was actually a really bizarre feeling and very unexpected. It was also freezing...

This ad would definitely not fly in Canada...

After over an hour of walking and some great conversations and stories, we decided it was too cold to stay out and shoot even for us Canadians. I was on my way back to Chris' house around 1:30am but I got lost since the streets in this neighborhood are dark and it was my first time getting there. It was really quite a trip to be lost by myself at that time on Sunset Blvd. I felt almost like I was on set in a movie or something.

This "Chapel" was very strange to me. I can imagine there being a meth lab in the basement or something. Weird vibe.

The streets in LA were surprisingly really dark at night... and there were lots of weird things to be seen, but I finally made it back with some GPS navigation help from my girlfriend in Toronto. ;) 

The next morning walked to the subway to head to Hollywood Blvd.

This scene was to be expected.

Not sure which one I like better...?

This is probably one of my favorites as well. I love the film in the background... very Hollywood. And I love the division of the photo into three's from all directions. 

Typical scene when we got out. She told me that the actress had the same name as her and they were looking for that star all day... I forget who's it was.

Vassup?!

There is a very subtle detail in this photo which is the only reason I took it. This would look incredible as a big print. 

Awkward scene in Hollywood. And a cool trench coat and car. ;) 

It was Oscar weekend after all:

Interesting position. I think she was trying to find a lighter.

Classic west coast car. I wish it was Snoop in it though. ;)

I thought this was a very Hollywood-type photo. 

Dazed and confused in Hollywood. 

We wandered into some sort of market off of Hollywood Blvd. Totally different vibe.

I wonder if this woman really shops at H&M? I'm not sure if she is really their "target market." 

I love his this man and the young girl are almost the same size. Kind of an awkward pair I think.

Found my way back to Hollywood Blvd. but lost the group for a while... found some short grannies. 

This chick was yelling from her car to stop taking pictures. Hilarious!

Found a Banksy. Felt like taking a mirror shot almost. ;) 

Where are all the celebs?! Either that or they weren't sure where they were going.

Moved the group to Olvera Street.

Took a ride with Chris, Jamie, Sev, Brenna and Richard... the LA way. 3 up front. :)

Took the bus at some point too but I can't remember when... I think Chris has a video of me taking this photo.

And this one too...

After a few hours Chris, Sev, Richard, Michael and I went to Echo Park to shoot. Grabbing Richard from his hotel... not sure what these dudes were doing.

This is for my friend Russell. :)

1/2 second exposure... not easy. But I think the mood comes across. 

There were a lot of punks out this night.

I found some life on Sunset... I think this shows how dead it was. 

Punks vs. police. Not sure what happened... 

Sketchy taped together car. Someone was getting out of the backseat right as I took this. I'm telling you, Sunset Blvd. is a strange place... 

Love the items in the car. The cross is what makes it for me. 

Could never forget I was in America. :) 

I thought this said LA PRESS at first and that's why I took the shot because I liked the juxtaposition between that and the "DEAD" tag on the other side. It was intended to be a commentary on the state of the press. But I found out after I scanned it that it actually says "LA XPRESS" ... I think it still works though. 

Weird situation on Sunset. 

Went into a restaurant to get some food. Had an amazing red velvet cupcake but this place had a weird vibe for me. Switching to Chris' Nocti right now. Shooting 1.0 saved me in these lighting conditions. Two shots... I think I like the second one better.

The next day Sev and I went downtown. Jamie was so awesome and dropped us off. Thanks Jamie. :) This was very American:

I actually love that this dude didn't want me to take his picture. Looks cool this way.

?

We found another Banksy.

I like how his face is in shadow... subtle detail but I think it makes the shot.

This seemed to be a common thing with the pay phones in LA. 

This is one of my favorite photos I think...

What compels someone to do this?! I don't think this was her "weekend hobby" either. I'm just glad she didn't bite/scratch me. ;) 

JESUS SAVES. Sev and I made a joke that the ultimate street photo would be to have the LA Jesus running out of this building on fire with a girl in his arms, saving her from the flames. So I guess this shot is a work in progress for now. ;) At least we have the location scouted. 

I love this guy's physique. 

I needed this license plate on film. :)

This woman was scraping the gum off of that... 

Sev made a new friend with this dude who was showing us his camera...

Switching to the Nocti now. This lens is really something else... all at f/1.0. It's not easy focusing that on a moving subject. Even if he was moving slow. ;) Love the jacket and the Dickies. 

The light here was great... my girlfriend thought this was with a tilt/shift. Just f/1.0... :) 

Another photo for my Mom. :)

Said ciao to Sev after this and put back my 35/2 to shoot a bit more downtown. I love this photo for some reason but I'm still not really sure why... it just really reminds me of downtown. 

I asked her how to get back to Silver Lake and she told me she used to be a photographer. She wanted to take pictures of me so I gave her my Zeiss... they weren't bad! Better than I thought they would be.

Got back to Silver Lake at night and had to kill some time until Chris got home. I think Sunset Blvd. was my favorite place to shoot in LA. 

Weird grass on the sidewalk... 

I think this is one of my favorite photos from LA.

I met up with Chris when he got home and we went to our friend Natalie's Oscar after party. It was nice to see everybody who I only see at the Toronto International Film Festival in a different environment and in LA this time. Paul edited my photos a few years ago during TIFF but he wasn't there last year. Hope to see him in September.

Mario! I knew Mario's face from Chris' blogs and the street video and when I saw him in the hotel for the film fest two years ago I went up to him and told him I just watched the video the day before. We ended up shooting Drew Barrymore beside each other a few days after that at my university's theatre. Mario's an awesome guy and another inspiring shooter and I'm glad we got to hang out both in Toronto and in LA. Again, the connecting power of the Internet absolutely amazes me.

Mario's lovely girlfriend Heather with Mike who's also a wicked photographer.

Jamie and Sev:

The next day was my last in LA so I said goodbye to Chris, Jamie and Sev in the morning because they were going to the desert to shoot and I had some things I had to do before my flight. I had a meeting with someone during the day and then had to lock up my luggage before heading to LAX so I went to Venice Beach to kill the last few hours and because I was curious what it was like. Actually, it was not at all what I expected. It was pretty dead but it may have been because of the weather.

It was seriously windy that day. No wonder Venice Beach was kind of deserted. 

I love how he's flipping me off. :) 

These "doctors" were everywhere in Venice Beach... literally every other store.

Another very American car.

Check out the hand... :) This would be a cool big print too. 

This trip was really memorable and amazing on so many different levels. It was incredible meeting everybody who was there and being able to hang out and shoot with the person who inspired me to get into photography was just amazing. It's hard to put it into words. I was looking forward to meeting Angelo from deviantART to thank him for that site... but hopefully next time! Huge thank you Jamie and Chris for the hospitality... it was such a pleasure & I appreciate it. I can't wait to go back to LA again... shooting there was so much fun. 

While I'm on the topic of how cool it is to meet people from Uber (RIP), dA, etc... Dan Entwistle was in Toronto for a few months and I got to hang out and shoot with him a few times and Dmitry Koupriyanov and I have become good friends. I will also be hanging out with Philip Schulte for dinner & shooting in a few hours in Toronto. Seems pretty amazing to me. 

Cheers,

Arthur Mola

http://arthurmola.com

http://twitter.com/arthurmolaphoto

PS - I did a cleaner edit of a smaller selection of my LA photos on my website. 

regime change starts at home.

So ... I thought I'd be getting the post before this post out before this one -- those of us with real world photo jobs can't possibly post every day.  Every week.  Every couple of weeks.  Okay ... once a month.

Seems as though the workflow/digital asset management blog has a life of its own.  Wanted to wait to see if a cd polishing company could save 30-odd discs before I finished.  A month and change ... 1.25 million images and growing ... lots and lots of terabytes later ... and I'm almost done.  The thought of ingesting more damn cd's/dvd's kind of turns my stomach.  Imagine a big-ass plastic container with 16-odd spindles full of optical media and pulling out that first disc...

Yes, it took almost one month of serious ingesting.

It's funny seeing the evolution of cameras.  There are Nikon D1 (2.74 mp) images, D1X (5.3 mp), Canon 1D (4.48 mp), Canon 1D Mark 2 (8.4 mp), Canon 5D (12.8 mp), Canon 1DS Mark 3 (21.1 mp), Canon 5D Mark 2 (21.1 mp), Canon 1D Mark 4 (16.1 mp), Leica M8 (10.3 mp), Leica M8.2 (10.3 mp), Leica P864 AKA Leica M9 (18 mp) and Leica S2 AKA The Saudi's Choice (37.5 mp) images ... as well as tens of thousands of scanned negs/chromes, too.  

Every once in a while I'd peek in a folder -- kind of for data integrity but mostly because I was being nosey -- to reminisce.  I'd rather reminisce than shoot photos of walls.  

I'm sure that's much more "real world" than actually tidying up your ACTUAL WORLD digital asset management and actually doing WORK that is workflow.  Perhaps not. ;)  Photos of friggin' walls.  I mean ... really!?  To me that kind of "real world" is about as relevant as a retired dentist masquerading as a photojournalist.

The latter of which has a website that isn't 10% as good as MANY friends on dA and flickr.  Totally laughable. Funny when guys of "that calibre" call you/me a paparazzi.  Honestly, it used to make me mad when the uninformed and clearly ignorant of the "real photo market" would say this shit but ... now I pretty much laugh at them.  Yes, I've shot on red carpets but none of my photos are unauthorized. Something I'm sure the dentist-turned-wannabe-pj couldn't do.  Not that he'd have ANY chance of being credentialed.  Probably as much of a chance as real worlders. ;) 

Ol' retired tooth-checker has as much of a chance of actually receiving a "real commission" as Kim Kardashian does winning an Oscar®.  I mean she did show up to the SAG Awards, though.  I thought of a Facebook status of "Since when did porn actresses become SAG members?  In other words how the hell was Kim Kardashian allowed to come to the SAG Awards?"  I didn't put that up because ... I don't think it would be appreciated by some people.

I can write it here because I doubt they have time to read my blog.  'sall good.

What's not all good is when marketing companies at the camera manufacturers figure out supporting bloggers wasn't that great of an idea.  Honestly, dunno what it is about the red dot but I think it's almost like Viagra for some.  I'm sure their internal dialogue goes something like "I can't make a photo to save my life but damn is my camera sexy."  They're the same ones who probably bought the Titanium one. Personally, I wouldn't touch their camera unless it was sprayed down with a disinfectant.

Just remember "... an erection for more than 4 hours could be a serious medical condition and should be treated by a doctor."  Red Dot = Blue Pill.

I know.  I'm not nice.  On to the point...

When I saw the discs within that 40-plus pounds of spindles entitled "Space Ship One" I was trying to remember if I was nice or not.  I thought back to the media room and setting a .wav file to play 3 minutes of wet farts of varying lengths with a good amount of lag between them.  I set it to play well after I'd gone outside in the heat to smoke.  I also distinctly remember being able to have an eye on the MBP.  In the "real world" gear gets stolen in media rooms.  Happens all of the time.  

My real reason for keeping an eye out, though, was to see the face of some wannabe reporter for some Christian-based new service that I'm sure was nothing more than a newsletter you find on the ground outside a coffee shop in Barstow.  Homeboy didn't have a sense of humor nor did he appreciate being within 5 feet who didn't use "I'm so blessed" or "awesome" or "my word" as ways to express themselves.  In the "real world" working shooters speak a lot like truck drivers.  ;)

I've made a truck drivers blush.

Anyway ... after about 2 minutes the ol' MBP started to have intestinal issues.  And, yeah, the volume was up kinda high.  Homeboy the play-reporter -- to me like a hobbyist housewife who thinks she's a "real photographer" -- hears a pretty wet greasy one.  He lost his shit.  Lost it.  Sorry about the pun.  I could have run back in and hit mute or pause but I was too busy laughing my spleen out through my nose. Yes, like milk in 2nd grade my gatorade came through my nose I was laughing so hard.  Dunno why that guy couldn't tell it was an MBP making the sounds but ... he left.  I didn't really give a shit.

Pardon the pun.  Again.

Perhaps he got the last word as the Gatorade left a sting for a while.  I don't remember milk hurting that bad.  It gave the "coloured sweat ads" a whole new meaning.

My photos were moving and I'd spent a couple days in the middle of the desert watching grown rich men light homemade rockets to see if they could get some poor soul past the technical boundary of space.  

That and hearing some engineer bum our Grey Goose vodka and recount stories I'm positive his surely tight-lipped employers would expect him to be as well.  Friggin' desert, man.  Strange shit everywhere.

*forgot to ftp the images to photobucket*

The desert really brings 'em out.  I think that's actually the last shot.  So, yeah, I'm leading with the last instead of something near the first but I think it illustrates that the desert really does ... something ... to people.

Although there are some scans from the assignment paid sojourn to the mojave, I don't think they were done by my lab correctly.  I didn't see them in the 2004 folder around the date they would have been processed.  Whatever.  How much has changed since 2004?  I was still shooting dual systems ... Canon (1D and 1D Mark 2) and Nikon (D1X).  Now I'm all Canon.  Have been for a long time.  Funny looking at those "little files" compared to big bitches of today.

Funny comparing the machine I was using compared to today, too.  I think it was still system 8 or 9.  It was mac but it kinda sucked.  I love version 10.6.6.  I'm starting to love NIK's Silver Efex Pro 2, too, which I've been evaluating within my workflow -- one that doesn't include friggin' walls -- for the last few weeks in beta.

I thought ... ya' know ... to illustrate it to you guys ... I'd see what it made the files of yesteryear look like.  Actually, I was way bored of watching status bars grow and started dicking 'round with the files on the Space Ship One discs once they were ingested from the optical discs.

I'm pretty sure this is the Kodak Tri-X 400 variant filter in Silver Efex Pro 2.  I like how, similar the actual film stocks, it holds the mids and highlights better than Delta.  

Tri-X as opposed to ...

The Delta.

Wish you guys could see these on the calibrated MultiSync PA241W.

This is Paul Allen of Micro$oft fame and wealth.  He had a range of emotions the day before "they lit it."

We referred to him privately as a code word.  I've heard he records every single broadcast of every single broadcaster in the world so ... I'd image he may google himself, too.  I don't think google should be capitalized as it's more of a verb these days.

I used Nik's Color Efex Pro 3.0 on this one of Paul, Mike (the test pilot) and Burt Rutan.  Used a nice Kodak Portra 400 NC filter/process.  I wish the wires would let us use these kinds of filters.  I think they give a photograph a better look than just a plain old jpg that they allow us to file.

One of the reasons I loved Nik's Silver Efex Pro 1 is that I grew up on film and like the aesthetic.  That's about all film has become.  Has better dynamic range and shadow detail and yadayadayada but it can't be digital's speed.  Speed of which a couch-blogger needs to post photos of walls.

I would much rather look at any colour photo processed through -- without becoming a contrived HDR mess -- Nik's Color Efex Pro 3.0.  Again, wish they'd let us use these film filters.  They don't make a material change to the editorial content whatsoever.

Perhaps in time.

Seems giddiness was the general mood for the pre-launch day.  I couldn't just file "happy photos," though.  What if things didn't go well?  They'd need something else to play.

Serious.

And, yes, some Color Efex Pro 3.0 film effects thrown in.

Pensive.  I like how the lens of his glasses refracted (?) "One."  I love the look, simulated with Nik or actual film, of grain.

Pensive or just uncomfortable in a room that was some old military surplus kinda room with air conditioning from the 1950's?

We got to Mojave via some other god-forsaken friggin' desert locale at 04:00 or some shit.  Rarely, do I wake to see a sunrise ...

Levels/Contrast-adjusted "camera original" -- can't wait to hear the hobby-bloggers start using that term. I mean we do a workshop with three instructors and ... of course ... the imitators have to add two to their one-man show.  Funny.

The Silver Efex Pro 2.0 version of the boneyard.  Here are a couple screen shots showing the differences in their emulsion filters...

The Kodak BW 400CN Pro filter/process, which Mr. Jackson likes in the "real form," acts a lot like what it does ... in the "real form."  I compared it to a film I like in "real life" Fuji Neopan ACROS 100...

With a touch more contrast -- and especially with this new feature called "Soft Contrast" -- made this the winner for me.

... a little judicious-cough-cough Velvia filter in Color Efex Pro 3.0...

That's seriously more what it looked like than what the "old cameras" saw.

Played with the sunrise in Color Efex Pro 3.0, too. ;)  I miss Velvia.

There were thousands there just to see Space Ship One.

A little more Velvia action with some control points.  I was pretty awestruck when I saw the White Knight and Spaceship One beneath it.  NIK's Control Points are pretty amazing, too.

The Velvia and Provia filters in Color Efex Pro 3.0 are pretty damn nice.  Photoshop also allowed me to turn some Canon original into an X-Pan. ;)

Members of the media or elements of composition ... through a nice emulsion filter in Silver Efex Pro 2.0.

The White Knight seemed to lumber down the runway and almost seemed to "just get off."

Yes, more iVelvia. ;)

This is an extreme crop from a 4.0/600 Canon.  And, yes, iVelvia in Color Efex Pro 3.0.  They were way the hell up there.  With the naked eye they were hardly larger than a speck.

Kinda like the "speck of a man" looking at the "speck of a transporter/spaceship."  Honestly, I think the Control Point feature of Silver Efex Pro 2.0 kicks Photoshop CS5's burn-dogge collective ass.  The above is the "control point applied" photo. This is the unapplied ...

When guest stars or "housewives with cameras" satisfying creative whims try and dodge and burn most of the time they get halos.  Big ones.  Even my gf can spot a photo where someone "tried to bring something up" and it's pathetically obvious.  Selected just a bit of the lone dude standing on the truck.

When I applied 18% brightness within that Control Point it didn't just bring up the man; it also brought up some features on the old airplane but in an even way instead of a tell-tale way when someone plays with something they know nothing about but should if they refer to themselves as "a photographer."  Pretty amazing I think.  Housewife-photo enthusiasts all over the world should buy this plug-in.  I know.  I can't ever be nice.

One of my favourite things in the world is the "blind item."  They're lovely.  They're like sudoku for the shallow.

Everyone tried to shield their eyes from the bright morning desert sun...

Nice and flat camera original from a Nikon or Canon in '04.

And a file I think looks way better because of a NIK plug-in from '11.  Pretty sure it was Portra 160 VC. iPortra 160 VC.  Sorry.  I know there are people who are sticklers for that shit.

They usually live in forums.

And don't shoot.

At least I haven't dropped an f-bomb. ;)

Even the guys behind the launch -- one with money and the other with engineering skills -- tried to see it coming back.

I'm pretty sure I remember hearing it fire it's engines then proceed up to the fringe of space.

It was early.

I'm not a morning person.

It was when iPods still had disc drives.

It was a bitch to see that morning.  

Just some levels/contrast ... pretty much a camera original ... and then a little Color Efex Pro 3.0...

Just pops without being obnoxious.

Went with one of the less contrast iEmulsions on Silver Efex Pro 2.0 for comparison.

Seriously, when it comes to digital monochrome conversion I don't can't stomach looking at something that hasn't been processing with Silver Efex Pro 2.  The first one was amazing as well.

And then she came back to earth ... gliding.  Her escort was a prop-job; NASA gets jets.  Whatever.  I don't think NASA could have done this project without hiring 30x the people needed and wasting shitloads of money, though.  These guys had a mid-seven figure budget.

This is more what the original file looked like.  The previous had a little iVelvia applied.

Perhaps a bit here, too.

She was launched from an insect-looking airplane, fired a rocket made from rubber or some shit, blasted its way toward space and then glided home.  Pretty amazing considering the budget.

Rutan and Sharky were stoked...

I was pretty happy for all involved.

A little post-flight play-by-play and Silver Efex Pro 2.0 iMonochrome.

Water.  I woulda had a bottle of bourbon.  Then again, I don't have a pilot's license nor should I ever.

When you launch Silver Efex Pro 2.0 it brings it displays it in "neutral."  After a little Control Point on Mike's face ...

A bit better.  It makes the face pop, which is kind of what the whole frame is about.

He was pretty happy to see the benefactor!  iProvia.  Brings up red in the face a bit much for me, though.

And the Silver Efex Pro 2.0 version...

A nice i100 ISO variant.

It's really close to what real Velvia looks like and does to skin tone.  Horrible film for skin tone.  It's also pretty fine-grained.  A grained-up iEmulsion version through Silver Efex Pro 2.0 looks like ...

Think it's one of the 1600 iISO's they have.

The look of Rutan in his glasses is priceless.  I'm pretty sure I was on some long glass for this one.  No, I'm not gonna go look at the EXIF.

Here were my two choices I was looking at the most ...

And the one I went with here ...

It was pretty contrasty light and I thought this best represented what I remember seeing.

Another nice thing about Silver Efex Pro 2.0 is that when you're selecting your iFilm Stock you can just hover over it and it changes your main viewing screen really fast.  I didn't really mind 1.0 being a bit slower because I loved what it did for digital monochrome.  It kicks ass now, though.

Yes, even I'm patient with things I like. :)

And Mike looked right at me quite often.  Perhaps he agreed with what it said on my shirt. ;)

That was my choice for this exercise in getting to know software -- using Nik Silver Efex Pro 2.0 on prior workflow instead of making some nice flower-cat-wall-boring photos.  Here were the iEmulsions I was "hovering" around...

The normal stand-by, iKodak Tri-X 400.

The iAPX I went with ... and ... just for the hell of it ...

Some super-iGraininess.  Wasn't bad, actually.

Loved this and could have "pulled a Detrich" to remove the post-thing but ... didn't.  This is neutral and I wanted an iEmulsion with some contrasty pop!  I would never pull a Detrich by the way.  We (those who shoot for wires for a living) are allowed to do some contrast, unsharp mask (to make up for our CMOS's softness), levels, colour temp and resize. That's it.  I'm sure couch-bloggers sit around all day making irrelevant adjustments to irrelevant wall photos and looking at their Google Analytics page. ;)

Much better.

Kinda like when you're shooting a Caucasian face against a bright background and the subject is wearing a dark suit against a mid-tone background element.  It's a bitch to expose.  Although we aren't allowed to file a photo with a wire service using a Control Point -- or burn or dodge in Aperture or PS CS5 -- it would sure be nice.  Because of idiots who were stringers for Reuters, dumb asses like Detrick and real dumb asses like Walski we'll probably never get to either.  Doesn't change the editorial integrity of the photo but ... the idiots ruin it for the rest of us.  Just like how couch-bloggers will end up ruining it with the manufacturers.

The soon-to-be-favourite tool of people who wake up one morning and print up "Professional Photographer" cards are gonna love these Control Points!  No halos or whatever you call it when you see someone who doesn't know how to use burning and dodging or whatever they call it in Lightroom.

Et voilá...

The face is perfectly lifted from the shadow of his hat with a bit of brightness adjustment and no halos from heaven.  I've heard these halos are very popular in some parts of the world.  It makes people look holy.

There were lotsa big lenses that morning!  A bit more iVelvia. ;)

The skinny Italian hard at work.  My 600 wasn't.  Those gimbles -- even though I rarely need long glass -- are amazing.  Perhaps some couch-bloggers can ask a celebrity to borrow one. ;)

Like the privately launched rocket when would we ever see this again?

Seriously, this was one of the coolest things I've seen.  Nik's Silver Efex Pro 2 is also one of the coolest things I've seen.  Instead of shooting brick walls, flowers, cats and horribly cropped canines -- then again, that's kind of what the most vocal forum members and guys who do portraits sitting next to their cameras do -- I wanted to marry the two.

Digital monochrome looks like sharp crap no matter the depth of field.  Nik's Silver Efex Pro 2 makes it look lovely.  

Funny thing is that I went to Epson's HQ's in Long Beach to demo and get trained on the new Epson Stylus Pro 9890 very recently and got to print some massive ... prints.  One of the files was from the M9, another from the 5DM2 and another from the 1DM4.  Since these were for me, I could process them above and beyond wire service standards.

And, of course, I applied some lovely Nik Silver Efex Pro 2 filters.  The prints looked amazing.  Whereas "plain ol' digital" has too much of that "sharp edge" when you use Nik Silver Efex Pro 2 you soften the edge and make it beautiful.  I know ... if you're intoxicated by the red dot, everything must be sharp.  So contradictory to what "the street forum's god," said:

"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept" Henri Cartier-Bresson

Seeing sharp digital monochrome photos -- beside what I do for wire services -- really makes me throw up a little in my mouth.  Seeing them printed makes me throw up a little more than just seeing them on a screen.  Ask around ... someone's seen me do it.  

Hope you've enjoyed a new interpretation of my little sojourn into the Mojave with the skinny Italian assignment seven years ago with today's newest software. :)  I think you're gonna love it.

In fact, I'm gonna select a random commenter's comment randomly ... and give them a copy of it when it's released to the public!  MAKE SURE YOU USE A REAL EMAIL ADDRESS.  Each comment will receive a number on a little piece of paper.  I'm gonna put the little pieces of paper in a bag and mix them up.  I'll close my eyes and pick one.

Hope you win!

I'll do a short blog announcing the winner and where they're from unless I finish that archiving blog.

Hope you're all well and having beautiful weather. ;)

Cheers from somewhere warmer than where you are!

-C

pretend jesus pt. 2

I think I left off with photos from San Francisco, right!?

*checks post*

Indeed.

In the Domke bag on my left shoulder sat the Leica M9.  Was funny how often I just wanted to “switch to what I know.”  Undeterred I kept shooting the Canon 5dm2 and either the 2.0/35 Summicron-R or the 1.4/50 Zeiss ZE.  I left the 1.4/50 Summilux-R at home because I already had a heavy-enough Think Tank Airport International V2.0 to carry ‘round.  That bag is a joy.  From big-ass four-sevens to little RJ's ... it's fit everywhere.  Thank God no one ever weighs it like the wanks at BA.

When I checked the iPhone 4’s weather app I noticed that the weather in Seoul wasn’t much different that places in the E.U. I’ve been to in the Fall.  Well … when I got there … they were experiencing a cold snap.  My light jacket didn’t even cut it whilst walking to the Hyundai Department Store.   Should have known Korea gets cold having watched every episode of M.A.S.H. way back in the day.

I wasn’t in Korea to just shoot street shots.  I was there on assignment.  Funny that I was doing the public relations photography and Doug Menuez was doing the other photography.  I hope you click his name.  His work is lovely.

I don’t usually share details about assignments but … I was doing a walk-through with the p.r. people and a pretty famous actress.  We’re walking around this billion dollar facility and a guy wearing a coat, whom I assumed was a doctor because there were doctors everywhere, walks up to us and says, “You’re Chris Weeks?”  The actress gave me some kind of look.

I said, “Yeah” to which he responded “My friends and I read your blog.”  In one fail swoop at the end of him saying that he raised up his Leica M9.  “You pushed me over the edge to buy one.”

I invited my gf’s uncle to one of the Leica Road Shows (prior to it becoming a dentist’s convention) and he ended up buying an M9 as well.  Then again, I believe some rather wealthy dude bought two M9’s and pretty much at least one of every piece of glass with a red dot on it as well. 

Thinking all these things and knowing that I committed myself to shooting street with a D-SLR left me perplexed.  I mean … from what I was seeing out of my car’s windows I knew I wanted to get out and shoot but … with … a rangefinder not that clunky D-SLR.  But whatever I wanted to prove to myself that a) I didn't need a rangefinder, b) if that's what someone used to shoot street I wanted to know its limitations intimately and c) didn't want to be accused of being exclusionary.

More on (b) later. ;)

Very effective napkins those rolls of teepee.  I shook off the cold.  When I left L.A. it was in the middle of a heat wave.

I'm used to long-ish exposures hand-held.  I like making them with a rangefinder for lots of reasons but I couldn't rule the D-SLR out of the game.  I made the exact photo I wanted to make.

I know nothing about Buddhism.  I failed at yoga.  That's all I know.  And I'm not sure either of those two are connected in anyway besides having to take off your shoes before you enter.

Sometimes I wonder if I "shoot to theme" and then really can't place one theme on what I look for when making street photos.  Had a conversation with Doug about patterns in human behavior. A few things made sense after that.  

Even though there's a lot of activity in Seoul once you tune out the din of traffic a place like this temple -- sorry no idea what the name is -- can become quiet as a tomb.

I worried that I knew I may interrupt homey's moment with the loud twack of the 5dm2 but ... surprisingly he didn't pay attention to me.  Guess I didn't have to worry.

Some call Bruce Gilden a genius ... and he's literally right in your face.  So ... it's all good I guess.  

See I was almost-mean just there.

And wasn't.

I just don't like to be seen and I want my photographs to reflect that.  I guess that argument is as esoteric as the meaning behind a bazillion buddhas.

That's not intended to be a street photo.  And I have no idea if they're, in fact, buddhas.

The Zeiss is so lovely.

This was the district I was "centered" in.  I have no idea what it's called but I know the G20 was to be held the following week in the same location.

Seoul reminded me of a cross of Vancouver, Los Angeles and something vaguely European.  The traffic is worse than L.A.  It wasn't quite Naples-crazy, though.

I like smoking photos only because I'm jealous they're smoking.

This mega-mall dwarfs anything besides that place in Minnesota.  4 Starbucks ... and Seoul is definitely a Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf town.  Huge and seemed very lonely.

I'm pretty sure this was like the next morning after arriving.  Went back to the same temple.  It was fun to watch all of the kids looking at their "art assignment" from so many different perspectives.

No one paid any more attention to me than normal.  I think I was looking for a reason to just switch back to the M9.  

Since I live in a culture-less city, it's so odd to see such stark differences between the old and the new and how they co-exist here.  Okay, LA's not completely without culture. ;)

I hear that apt. bldg. in the background is super-expensive.

Then again, the monks are sitting on a pretty nice piece of real estate here, too.

I don't quite get the surgical masks.  Every time I saw one I thought of Michael Jackson.

And ... I don't know for sure but I'm willing to bet that the 5dm2 on AWB handled this mix of multiple light sources better than the M9 would have.  The M9 sees things so differently sometimes even when you tell it what to see.  No so much with the 5dm2.

I have absolutely no idea why these guys were here about the same time a few days in a row but they were super-stoked about something.

In the U.S. I would have thought they were reborn Christians.  The best thing I've heard in a few days is that "Christians are just jews ... who want an insurance policy."

Not Scientologists, though.  Seems a bit overt for them.

I love how girls everywhere love having their nails done.

I asked a friend from "the center" about some places to see.  He took a map and circled a few things.  I took the map to the front desk and told them where I'd like to go.  They then took out a card, wrote something in Korean and handed it to a driver.  Wherever I ended up was 45 minutes away.  

There were a lot of restaurants.

Side streets.

I knew I had my address in Korean.  I knew no matter how lost I could hope I to get I'd still be able to get back to the hotel.

Seoul's an amazing place, really, for making street photographs.  People are pretty chill.  They're used to cameras everywhere.

Frank liked the barstools.

The people of Seoul seem outwardly happier than in L.A. I think.  I love using the Zeiss glass on the 5dm2.  The way it renders the negative space is just lovely.

Everyone's also selling everything to EVERYONE else here.  And, again, the 5dm2 does quite nicely at slow hand-held shots.

Kinda kicks the ass of any rangefinder, too, when you wanna get closer than .7 meters.  

They stood around this stage for at least a few hours bombarded by karaoke and adverts.

I think he was cold.

And as good as those smelled I still went to a "proper restaurant" but wasn't super-stoked about the color of the "chicken."  I'm almost positive whatever the hell I ate was ... dunno ... 

I'm sure it was ... it's just I'm no Anthony Bourdain.

There are a lot of heads in that shot.

I would end up looking as stoic as homey frame left if I had to stare at all of that for too long.

Kind of reminiscent of Hollywood and Highland.

Right after I got this I put the 5dm2 into the bag the M9 was hiding in.  I'd proved several things to myself about shooting street and went back to the rangefinder.

Focusing at night with a rangefinder is way better.  Was the first thing I noticed when I put the camera up to my face to make this photo.  I find focusing on the 5dm2 with even the "better" focusing screen still kinda sucks for quickness especially in the damn dark.

Workable, definitely, but when you're used to one thing ... 

You know how it is.

The tones and the moment worked really well for this.  I like how the M9 has a colder feel than the 5dm2 even when I use a flat picture style.

I always wonder what people are thinking in those 1000 yard stares.

I think for me ... ya' know ... 'cause I'm older ... that focusing a rangefinder is quicker because i'm matching shapes, recomposing if I have to and then making the frame.  With the D-SLR there was a little hunting with focus.

I like to get in and get out as quick as possible.

I'd rather not have to use my magic panacea to get out of the "getting caught moments."

I know.  It looks like he's taking a dump.  I'm 14.

I like when things are shutting down.

That karaoke-advert stage-thing was still going on.  People seemed happily distracted.

So much order.  Totally bucking khaos.

Yet not when buying/selling socks of all kinds.

I wonder if they're buying cheap Chinese imports and threatening their own well-being like we do!?

All I could hear was a shrill voice coming through a horrible speaker with more horribly distorted music coming through equally bad speakers.

But she was happy.

I don't think you could possibly see this girl and see how happy she was and not let it effect you.

If not, dogs don't like you.

And you know it.

My other talented-friend-named-Doug whom I met on the way back to LAX thought this one should be kept in the blog post.

What are the odds of meeting two ultra-talented dudes named Doug in 72 hours?

Everything kinda smelled good-ish.  I'm just a freak.  I'm used to restaurant rating signs in L.A.  Even if they had those in Korea I wouldn't have been able to understand them.

I was so anticipating that I would experience a "Lost in Translation" kind of feeling about Asia but ... I was wrong.  Not once.

Like I said, "... everything smelled good-ish."  There were a lot of places to eat.  

And I picked the busy-questionable place.

I remember eating street food in Downtown L.A. once.  Once.  Like getting sick off of alcohol.  Once.  I know better.

Gave him a card with the location of my hotel written in Korean and didn't happen to hit any traffic whatsoever.

Then I think I reeled from the dinner choice.

And slept a few hours so I could eat breakfast and go ... work ... actually.

I'm pretty sure I worked that night as well.

Decided to meet up with my friend, David.

And instead of the 5dm2 ... I brought the M9.  In as much as I got used to the feel of using a D-SLR for street I've gotten quite used to making street photos with a rangefinder.  Shoot me.

I seriously don't think that homey had a bluetooth headset.   Perhaps he was having internal dialogue.

Yes, I know ... a bit Bruce-whatever-his-name-is but ... he wasn't looking at me.

Directly.

I think this guy may have been trying.  Leica M9 or the 5dm2 I think I would have gotten his attention.

Not that I was trying.  Of course.

Always so much activity in Seoul.  So much.  Everywhere.

Okay ... can't say everywhere because I didn't tour Korea but ... suffice it to say there are a lot of people moving around there.

There's another thing about shooting a D-SLR ... I don't have a Noctilux for that body. ;)  I'm not sure if it was the ND or just the fact the Nocti vignettes when you're wide open ... in daylight.

I do know that that Buddha was really friggin' big.

When I realized what was going on around me it dawned on me:  I'd never made photos at a funeral.  I have friends who have but ... me ... never.  I'm not quite sure what Buddhists call what I saw going on. I watched for a significant amount of time.  

And made a small series of frames.  I know they know I was there but kinda pretended, I think, that I wasn't.  

I know everyone has an opinion of rangefinders but I was so appreciative of the fact the M9's silent mode really is pretty quiet.

Very interesting ceremony.  

This whole experience, of course, juxta-fucking-posed to being in some other temple and, oh, just a nice piece of lead noctilux hitting something that was about as loud as a drum from only a few inches. Could have been more but it seems to work. 

If I prevented anyone achieving whatever they were to have achieved that day, I'm sorry.

Almost no laces.

They're smart.  Untying laces sucks when you realize you've done it six times before.

I think they worked somewhere in giganta-mall.  This place gave me a whole definition of "food court."

They were a little touchy about photos anywhere in this general vicinity ... not that it kept me from doing the same.  Perhaps the army of police dogs and Oakley-wearing Korean soldiers should have tipped me off.  Perhaps.

I even shot a roll of film.

A roll of film that's still in the body.  I think there are two other rolls by the t.v.

Korea is definitely somewhere I hope life finds me again.  Thank you Dr. Kim and Mr. Choi.  

I know I didn't scratch the surface in Korea but perhaps one day.  Then again, I don't really have the chance -- besides in Los Angeles -- to do more than surface scratching when I'm out-of-town.  Most of the time when I'm out-of-town street shooting is just an adjunct to working, which I consider much more "real world" than "writing a blog about something."

All of the photos -- besides the colour ones -- were processed in Aperture and through Silver Efex Pro. Been screwing around with Color Efex Pro and Viveza, too.  More on that later...  

Been skyping and emailing with a mutual friend of ours about doing a couple workshops.  I'm hoping to that Mr. Jackson will be able to do some Los Angeles dates, too.  He's such an interesting foil to the kind of street I like to shoot.  Although we're working on the first one for the winter in Los Angeles, we're looking at other dates and cities that make sense.  It's something I've always wanted to do but doing long-range planning as a freelancer is ... well ... I wish I got more "what does your calendar look like in the second week of february" instead of "... you working tomorrow" or "do you think you could get over to (insert location) today/tonight?"  We're gonna keep it reasonable, too.  This will NOT be tied to any manufacturer.  People -- with a solid knowledge of using their camera -- can shoot anything they'd like.  More details soon.  

I gotta edit some photos.

I'll keep you posted.  There's some really good stuff coming up.

FYI ... I don't think I was mean to anyone in this post. ;)

Cheers from chilly Los Angeles.

-c

Note:  Between the time I initially composed/edited this was one month ago today. :(  Time friggin' flies.  The next one will definitely cover switching from a laptop-based workflow to a Mac Pro-based work flow using RAIDs and all sorts of IT stuff I never really wanted to know about.  Managing a 2.5 TB active library is all sorts of fun.  And all I want to do is push a button at the right time. ;)

pretend jesus pt. 1

It’s been a while.  Wish I could be like the other blog posters and do an update every day or so but, well, that’s not going to happen.  It’s much different when you make photos for a living.  Wonder how many of the semi-popular bloggers gave up their day jobs?  If they did, they’ll be selling their Leicas. ;)

Unless you’re getting the page views of someone like Ken I doubt the “clicks” are much currency.  What drives them?  I remember Angelo told me “It’s not the popularity they want; they want human interaction.”  And instead of wondering what drives them I wondered what they’re missing from their lives that they need SO MUCH attention?

Makes me examine why I post anything online.   I have plenty of human interaction and usually run from things involving more than four people when I’m not working.  Online popularity?  Is that what I’m after?  Being rather pragmatic I don’t think so.  Unless you’re Ken there’s no real money in posting what celebrity friends tell you about something … a day before an embargo.  A pro would never do that.

There are a lot of things a working pro won’t do.  Posting every friggin’ day is one of them for sure.  Between maintaining relationships with clients and phone calls and Fedexes and emails … then there’s the actual work and transit and post-work-flow.  Most of my pro friends … in fact … almost none of them even have any sort of blog nor post anything more than an iPhone 4 photo on FB.

Funny how it works in the real-Real World.  Funny how almost none of the people using that term have any idea what "real world" is.

When I read the phrase “real world” I think of shooting an NBA game for a wire, covering the Boxer victory party as a staffer or perhaps behind-the-scenes (BTS) on a national spot.   I guess I consider location scouting for a automobile commercial or editorial real world as well.  When I did the BTS on a Norman Jean Roy shoot it was so "real world" watching one of Vanity Fair’s best do his thing.  Sorry.  No links.  A client owns that stuff.  The “real world bloggers” wouldn’t ever know what that’s like.

Is a blogger playing with a camera “real world”?  Is a dentist, former ad-exec or engineer traveling to S.E. Asia a REAL photojournalist?  Is someone with barely 3.000 banal stock photos a working photographer?

 It’s all relative.

Instead of posting photos on sites such as Flickr or dA and relying on comments, favourites and pageviews some of those out there like to sit on forums.  They wear a 1,000 post  mark like a badge.  The most “popular” on forums lack a qualified eye.  Go ahead and hate.  If you do, you probably have more than 5,000 posts.  Maybe even 10,000.  You're looking forward to 20,000.  Couldn’t that time have been spent making photos with the cameras you know EVERYTHING about? 

Yes, EVERYTHING.  EVERYTHING besides the actual execution of a nice photo.

I know.  I know.  Your flower, cat, snow-covered lawn furniture photos, banal fashion photos … all … very sharp.  The people with the most posts usually have the sharpest photos.  And within a little group … they have a following.  A sad pathetic following but a following nonetheless.

Having any kind of online following is such a two-edged sword.  I have a small audience in mind when I write.  I like the fact that most of the people I correspond with by email, comments or FB are pretty damn good shooters.  I like the fact they tell me when something inspires them, they get a gig, want to share a file (photo), get repped or published.  It makes up for the “other comments.” 

Unlike most bloggers I don’t care if everyone likes me.  I care if editors like me.  There’s a huge difference.  Editors, assignments and commissions are “real world”; walking ‘round with a camera and telling your forum buddies "this or that is cool" is “not real world.”  Perhaps it's practical but it's NOT the real world you're trying to make people think it is.

I think so many photo bloggers care too much about what people think of them.  They’re still under the impression the pipedream will come true and their site will be the next dpreview.  In their defense the content is usually about on par.

In as much as I don’t care much about the negative associated with any online presence there are some comments that make you think.  When I did that street thing on dA or made the street video last summer I enjoyed 99% of the comments.  The ones that made me think were:

“Why only use Leica?”

“Is Leica the only kind of camera you can use for street photography?”

“I use an SLR and do street photography:  Why is a rangefinder better!?”

"I read some of Chris Weeks Street Photography for the Purist and was disappointed that he knocked the SLR Street Photographers, we are not all in a position to afford a Leica..and just because you dont use a Rangefinder doesnt mean you can’t take good Strret Photos..as someone new to Photography I was very disappointed & surprised by this.."

A former FB-friend would tirelessly comment upon anything shot with a Leica with comments such as “I can do that with an SLR.”  Sure, cool, perhaps.  I didn’t really give a rat’s ass.

For the most part I dismissed those statements.  I know … how very exclusionary of me.  Right?  Honestly, I have way better things to do than sit around and discuss rhetorical questions with randoms.  I’d much rather be making photos for either my clients or myself.  I simply don’t have the time to just sit around and write bullshit fawning reviews of anything with a red dot on it.  In fact, I think it’s funny that some have replaced writing responses on forums and have turned that into writing blogs with 10 readers. ;)

It did make me think, though:  Was I really being that exclusionary by only shooting street with a Leica? 

Having finished my first motion project and looking at lots of hours of “footage” in post shot with Leica R glass and the Canon 5d Mark 2, 1d Mark 4 and the 7d I wondered what it’d be like to actually shoot street purposefully with a D-SLR.  Don’t get me wrong … I’ve shot street with a Holga, my old trusty FM2n with it’s 1.4/50 Zeiss ZF lens, a Rollei TLR and even my iPhone 4.  Shooting with the aforementioned was basically an accoutrement to my Leica rangefinder shooting.  Or like the time I broke two Leica M’s and HAD to use the FM2n.

I always defend my use of Leica to my friends who are REAL PHOTOGRAPHERS.  Ya’ know … the ones who are the ones getting published all over the planet through traditional and emerging media.  The staffers.  The freelancers.  The stringers.  Funny thing is … I don’t know anyone who’s a WORKING photographer who uses Leica.  They use Canon and Nikon.  All of them.  They rent ‘blads.  Most of those I know who own the expensive digi-‘blads are not what I’d consider innately talented at anything more than bullshitting clients. ;)  They know who they are. 

In as much as I love my M9 … My MP … My M6 …. My M3 … I wondered what it would be like to just take out a D-SLR and give it a go.  I know there are smaller bodies out there but all I had was the Canon 5D Mark 2.  Okay … I have 1Ds Mark 3’s, too, but that would have been ridiculous.  I still think shooting street with the smallest footprint possible is the smartest way to go.  Who knows, though.  Can’t really say unless you really go out and do it.

I know … now I’m gonna get comments that I’m being exclusionary toward big D-SLR’s.  I’m sure those comments will come from those with 1000+ comments in forums.  FYI … if you use 1000+ comments as a badge of honor, you’re a wank.  Just FYI.  Just STFU and make photos, loser.

Anyway … a few weeks ago … I left the house with the Canon 5d Mark 2 … a Cameraquest Leica R to Canon Eos adapter … a Summicon-R 2.0/35 and a Summilux-R 1.4/50.  Felt so so so strange to start walking ‘round Downtown L.A.   There was a bit more “heft” on my shoulder as compared to having a trusty M-body on my shoulder.  When I picked up the body I didn’t see frame lines.  I saw a matte screen and felt a bit disconnected from reality as I wasn’t seeing reality through a crystal-clear window. 

So funny that when I started this experiment/project I had a certain view of life.  The very next day of shooting, though, I had a wholly different view of life.  It had nothing to do with the project/experiment whatsoever.  Wholly unrelated to photography but very very nice.

Making the first few frames seemed awkward to me.  The heft went from my shoulder to in my hands.  It felt so strange to have such a massive body shooting street.  The focusing seemed different, too.  Wasn’t wholly different, though, from shooting with F3’s, F4s’s and F5’s back in the day … ya’ know … before autofocus.  Yes, I know that F4’s and F5’s had autofocus but I mostly used manual primes.

I could have used some AF prime on the 5DM2 or even a zoom to really dispel others.  But, no, I love Leica glass for myriad reasons so … I wasn’t going to cheat myself out of the visual pleasure later.  I like fast glass.  Shoot me.  I like fast GOOD glass. ;)  Sorry … meant to clarify.

The first time I went out I was hunting for some light I’d seen on Grand before.  Sadly, I was a bit late but walked around anyway.  I think it was more mental than anything else but I felt like “everyone could see me making photos” with that massive D-SLR up to my face.  Such a different shooting aesthetic than the M9 or any of the other M’s for that matter.

Focusing is so fast with a rangefinder, too.  5dM2’s are meant for AF … not manual.  Whatever.  I was doing this project/experiment/folly and it was gonna happen no matter what.  There are photos I totally missed because I’m so used to the precision I’ve come to love with focusing a Leica rangefinder.

As time when on I got much better.  The 5dM2 sings in low-light with beautiful files up to 3200 where as the M9 struggles with anything above 800.  Don’t get me wrong the files are useable but they’re not as beautiful as the 5dM2’s files.  If only the quick rangefinder focusing as opposed to the not-so-fast-focusing of the 5dM2 in the dark could be coupled to a nice new sensor solution that could sing as well at high ISO’s. ;)  Guess we’ll have to wait and see. ;)

I don’t know what it is with the M9’s AWB but it “wasn’t as good” as the 5dm2.  I know minor changes can be made to RAW’s but if I don’t have to tweak it, why would I want to?  The monitor on the M9 is a bit too reminiscent of the M8’s when you look at it and then look at the same photo made with the 5dm2.  I’ve gotten used to it, though. 

In practical use it was very interesting.  The 5dm2 is noticeably louder than the petite M9.  My girlfriend said “You should really use the Leica if you’re gonna do that.”  Yes, the subject was pretty damn near and within eye-/earshot.  Just FYI … they didn’t say anything nor look at me.

There was one instance in Echo Park where a dude was “less than pleased” that I just photographed him.  I’m not sure if I had the M9 that he still wouldn’t have said something.  And … FYI … I’ve found the best excuse yet for making street photographs.  I’m not, however, going to say what it is.  Yelling at someone in Italian that I’m a tourist and don’t speak English works pretty well but the new one … ah … it’s perfect.

They even leave smiling. No, I'm not telling you what it is so some wank with over-processed HDR street can attempt to teach some pedestrian course about street photography.  Perhaps, though, I'll be able to tell select groups in person. ;)  More on that in the next post.

Except for the ex-/current Mexican mafia dude in Echo Park everyone else bought the "new excuse."

Honestly, I don’t care if I get caught making a frame.  If there’s someone with me, I care but … if I’m alone, it’s all good.  There's one dude in Central Eastern Europe with some kind of "Leica print" I'm sure is still on his face. ;)

Let’s see … what else can someone say?  Okay … yeah … I could have used some Canon glass and tried AF street photography.  Thing is … I don’t own any canon AF primes – the Zeisses are much better.  Wasn’t going to put a CPS order in either.  I can say that the footage I saw with the Canon 1.4/35 and 1.4/24 is lovely.  I kinda thought that the Canon 1.4/35 was too big for street.  For street with the 5dm2 I used a couple Leica lenses via adapter and the beautiful 1.4/50 Zeiss ZE.

I tried to use the motivation that I wanted to shoot street but didn’t have a Leica.  I was directing myself.  Let me tell you … directing is fun.  Since I didn’t have a Leica and all I had – my projection of myself to myself – was a Canon 5dm2 and a few nice manual focus primes. 

Funny that the price of 5dm2 and the lenses in question could be purchased with room left over for a roundtrip ticket and accommodations when compared to the M9 body alone.  But if you’re a retired dentist/engineer and a current forum wank what’s a few grand, right?

“I have the red dot; I’m qualified.”  That’s what I assume they say to themselves.  Too bad they can't buy a "qualified eye."  Too bad even the paparazzi I know are better photographers than they could ever deign.  I'd much rather work some red carpets for clients than "pretend-work" in the streets of S.E. Asia for sure.

Since my life and assignments had me all over L.A., the Bay Area and Seoul, Korea, that’s where my experiment/project took place.

In as much as there were situations where I wished I had the M9 with me, I remembered my motivation and did the best I could.

And then I look at the material to edit and find out that, in fact, I started this experiment/project/folly way before the light disappeared on Grand.  It began on a walk with a doctor-friend to brunch in our wonderful little neighborhood on a Saturday morning, which means 2:00 p.m. in our this 'hood.

only in los angeles do you see mariachis figuring out a parking meter.

After walking back from brunch i decided to go to a place my friend Dan and I call "Mexican Wedding Fountain."  It was straight up and down light but whatever ... I can't shoot in flat light every time I want.  

Every weekend there are wedding parties lined up after wedding parties to shoot formal photos.

Not everyone is part of a wedding party at the fountain.

Was odd ... Even though I had -- what seems massive to me in terms of street shooting -- this D-SLR in my hands and no one really paid any more attention that normal.

Yes, I was using B+W ND filters.  I use them all of the time.  I usually have to tape them on to the Leica R lenses as they have some brilliant-ass filter scheme that no one uses.  Well ... except for guys in forums who would rather talk than shoot.  

Interestingly, and not that you're gonna see it here, but like shooting D-SLR video I used a certain picture style making everything flat.  In doing that it seemed like the dynamic range of the 5dm2 was better than the Leica M9 as well when the picture style was flat.

Was totally surprised no one really paid all that much attention to me.  For having shot 99.9% of the street work I've done in the last however long with an M9 ... it shocked me.

To me it was so ironic -- i like to look for patterns in human behavior -- that some out there would "tag" this area when so many of their own culture use it as a place of beauty.  I'm not being racist as I live in this neighborhood as we know who the taggers are.

The previous two photos show how different NIK Silver Efex can be.  The dude and the tag and the fountain I processed as high ISO whilst the legs and the bride and the tag were done using a low ISO process.  I love NIK Silver Efex.  It takes the edge off of photos that are too-sharp ... too-digi.

In fact, for me it's a factor that levels the playing field when shooting digital street.  Seeing a too-sharp street photo makes me throw up in my mouth a bit -- whether the file's from a Canon, Nikon or Leica M9.

I'm pretty sure it was that night we took the metro into Hollywood. 

I found that the 1.4/35 Summicron-R was quite nice for a hipshot.  No, it wasn't wide open.  I wanted the photo and wasn't waste the moment on trying to be a hotshot at f/1.4. ;)

It's one of the things that I love about Leica focusing scales:  They're right the fuck on.  Ah oh.  I said fuck.  Hmm ... wonder which of the donkeys I just offended.  I'm sure some marketing-pussy will hear about it. ;)  I've NEVER found the Canon scales to be anywhere near accurate.  The Zeisses do almost as well as the Leica R-glass.

Had no idea Avatar character-impersonators-buskers were there now.  Hollywood ... You really glitter all that's gold.

All fun must be topless, right!?  Homegirl's having lotsa fun.  Those bastards driving those buses get in our way all of the time.  I've come to really dislike them.

Ever since late June of last year homey's been working it day and night.  My Leica M9 couldn't have made this shot any better than what I got here with the 5dm2.

I always wonder what tourists bring home with them and if it's how they really remember what they thought they saw.

Having "stood around" listening I know that these guys on Hollywood Blvd. basically entice customers into these sight-seeing vans.  They say that the next one leaves in 10 minutes.  Well ... that's not usually the case as they're trying to "fill 'em up."

So they can drive slow and piss us all off.

I think it's creepy to want to drive around and see private homes of public people.

Honestly, I think it's as creepy as sex tourism. ;)

Or getting a puppy from "a breeder" at 5 weeks old ...

Hope he raises it right.

Along with the tweaky dudes and way-too-young-puppies, junkies, tourists, character impersonators and the like ... there are those trying to get others to do "personality tests."  Oh my.

Famima:  Where Two Supermen and a Willy Wonka recreate.

Reborns:  Using the young and gullible to save souls. ;)

I know.  I know.  I know.  Not all reborns are crazy.

Along with the previously described list ... there are a lot of pizza-by-the-slice places.  I guess it's no different than Amsterdam, really ... save the kebab joints.

And ... for the dudes whispering in your ear "Coh-ca-ina," "Ecstaaaahsee" and "Russian girls, young girls!?"

As good of a place as any I suppose.

1/40th at f/1.4 and 1000 ISO.  Guess a big ol' D-SLR can handle slower shutters.  I mean ... when I do some atmosphere photos for clients I regularly handhold a quarter or a half so ... whatever ... perhaps I'm well-practiced ... but I found shooting someone's candid moment just as easily as I would have with the M9.

I've always wondered what a drunk guy wearing Affliction on his way to "get some bottle service" at Drai's would see.

Merchant of pipes bored out of his mind.

Behind closed curtains.  The captions keep on coming, though.

Same lovely out-of-focus negative space as the M-glass.  Then again, it's glass made by the same company so I'd hope it'd be pretty consistent.

Luckily, R-glass is pretty easy to find and not all that expensive.  Poor R-System shooters.  Lucky us, though.  Wonder if that fate will ring true for other systems besides the M?

Metro antics.  He told me he practiced a lot to do that.

By this point in time I'd gotten over the fact I didn't have an M in my hands.

I seriously have no clue where I made this photo.  It's LA-somewhere.

I would have thought the kinda-loudish sound emanating from the 5dm2 would have killed this moment. It didn't.  Before I would have tried it I would have thought the ONLY camera I could have made this with would have been a rangefinder.  

Contemplative-life-shots are some of the ones I'm always looking for.  Once they see you, though, and you get eye contact I think the moment is ruined.

LA ... one of the only places where you can make street shots from the car. ;)

I always see the Luminous Landscape-kinda guys with their d700's, wide glass and a tripod here but ... was so happy to see a moment that also provided scale.

Can't say much about the difference I feel in life between this series of photographs and the next photo. The next photo doesn't symbolize anything other than it was the next frame I made after learning some news.

Some have a life-changing experiences like the poor dude under the sheet and some have other life-changing experiences.

Life is strange.

Light and the reflection thereof are things I'm amazed by.

Wish you guys could see this on the big screen.

In as much as I thought it would make a difference ... and ... seeing as how I've made almost 100,000 frames with an M9 ... It was me I had to get over when using the 5dm2 for street.  No one else noticed.

Strange for me was -- I have no idea why this was shooting with the 5dm2 -- that I would routinely use longer shutter speeds when I'd try and isolate a slow-moving or stationary-for-the-moment subject.

Like I said. ;)

Ya' gotta try Louis downtown.  There aren't a lot of things good about downtown ... but there are a few.

Shooting wide open with an ND got me a bit of vignetting but ... I'm used to that on M's as well.

So ... Whatever.

Wonder if the above tourist went home and posted that photo and said he was a cough-cough travel photographer.  Wait ... He'd have to have bought a Leica first to do that.  Sorry.  My mistake.

The beautiful light of Echo Park. 

Where haircuts cost USD6.00...

Would have thought they'd have heard the click and the diaphragm and whatever else the 5dm2 does when it's making a photo.  They didn't.

Fairfax is a trippy place.

Such a dichotomy between 2 or 3 blocks here ... not to mention a mile or so.

They caught me but their expressions were no different.

Hence the photo.

This brings up another thing ... 

Sometimes between frames time elapses.  I noticed that every time I picked up the 5dm2 it was ready for me to make a photo at a millisecond's notice.  

Unless you put it on a certain mode the M9 eats battery life.  I have it set to turn off after a minute and if i wanted this frame on this day carrying the M9, I wouldn't have gotten it.

What is aimed at whom interests me as well.  I like not-so-apparent things.  Really doesn't matter what camera I'm shooting, though.  No camera inspires what you like to shoot.

If I ever move from L.A., I'll miss the ghetto birds.  Traffic?  Not so much.

It wasn't as bad as Seoul, though.

They must spend so much money on jet fuel those guys.

So from Hollywood, the Metro, um, Echo Park, Silver Lake, the Mexican wedding fountain, Fairfax, Hollywood ... I ended up in fake Denmark.

Greeted by tea baggers.

I like the confused tourists.

Clearly, enjoying their native cuisine over some nice Abelskiver.

I see a momma-bird and baby-bird.  My friend, Sev, said "... a rarely working portrait format."  Something to that effect.  I would rather hear that from a guy like Sev than from 100 forum-farts with unqualified eyes.

Yes, your eyes can see frozen lawn furniture, cats, rivers, flowers and Asian models quite well.  No doubt in my mind.

So many captions ... so little time.

As opposed to the area best know for a Mexican gang called "Los Avenues"...

I find these as odd as I find the ones in Napoli.  Does Mary really want to be fenced?

Dunno why I saw their house this way.

But I did.

Don't think there was much business this day.

Clearly, lunch affected homey to exhaustion.

Would have thought anything but an M would have alerted faceless homey ... but ... no.

The Vista.  I wonder if she was "checking in" on "the social network"?

No one paid any attention to the 5dm2 and more than they would have if it were an M.

Was sitting having lunch with "The Maestro of the Moment."

We do get rain here.

Not often but it happens.

Then I found myself on a BART train.

Then somewhere off Market in SF.

It was raining up there, too, but it always rains up there.

I've been told that SF only looks good if you do HDR to your street work because you hear it's trendy and that's what the art buyers want.  Perhaps. ;)  Perhaps you'll sell the Golden Gate Bridge as well?

I like sniping people getting their hair cut.

I'm not sure the dude on the right is much of a fan of the waiter -- kinda made a bit more sinister looking by juxtaposition to light -- frame left.

Again, was surprised how low-profile the 5dm2 is in PRACTICAL use making street shots.

I won't say REAL WORLD.  I'll say PRACTICAL.

I mean I guess it's real world, too, to a degree.  

Just makes me laugh how much I see/hear the words real world used these days.

I knew that I snuck up pretty well but I also knew I'd better have had the focus nailed ... as there's no way -- even with a Leica -- that they wouldn't have heard the click.

They did.

I'd also switched to the 1.4/50 Zeiss ZE.  For me the out-of-focus negative spaces have a totally different look than the 1.4/50 Leica-R and M for that matter.  I'm sure there's some donkey on a forum who disagrees and thinks it's ugly but ... they're usually shooting a brick wall or their cat.

Or for their ModelMayhem portfolio.

Equally as uninspired and banal.

Of course.

It'd be fun to imagine that this guy is carting the cumulative contact sheets or printing from most forum members to the curb.

But he wasn't; he worked at a restaurant.

I'm pretty sure that's how 99% of her night was ... seeing as how most people were in North Beach and it was starting to rain.

I was honestly shocked that I could get this close with a D-SLR and pull off a moment as much as I could with the 5dm2.  They didn't see me once in four frames.

Whereas with any of my film M's I would really hope I got it before I could fast-advance, the M9 was better but ... it's no match frame-rate-wise with the 5dm2.  No match.

Has to do with that inherent lag when you have it set so that the battery doesn't drain.

Yes, I have extra batteries.

But still.

They didn't catch/see me either.

Yes, focus on the hand is intentional.

The old dragon saw me after about five frames but I ended up liking the second frame better.

That concluded my stroll 'round Chinatown and North Beach with my friend Martin.

Sorry ... that was the conclusion to the stroll ... a purposefully Dutch shot of someone who's confused. ;)

The next couple days were spent at a dog show.  Yeah, I know ... PETA hates me.

I'm good with that.

From there ... I flew to Korea for a minute where I continued my experiment/folly/exercise in futility.

Yes, "Pretend Jesus" has a pt. 2.

I never thought I'd do enough street shooting with any SLR much less a big-ass D-SLR to actually have enough material for a normal blog post.  Honestly, I was blown away by the fact except in rare situations I didn't really miss the M9.  Or really ... any M ... for that matter.

As my friend Martin said the other day ...

When I asked "what does a pro/working photographer mean?"

I'm sure that the masquerading forum guys who think they're "a pro" still think you can only shoot one brand or another.

I shoot both.

I love both for different reasons.

My Leica M9 compliments my Canons and vice-versa. 

But I'm still amazed that shooting the Canon 5dm2 for street was such a joy.  It's nice to have ISO 3200.

Ya' know ... usable ISO 3200 or even usable 2500 in the way the Mark 2's usable.

Unless I'm editing an assignment I use Aperture to do selects, make adjustments, put it through NIK Silver Efex and export to the blog.  For me it's seamless.

So ... on that note ... I'll try and get Pt. 2 done, too.

Hope you're all well!

Cheers from a fall-like-for-the-moment-LA,

-C

p.s., If you're still thinking you're a photojournalist, please look at this photo.  That's what real photojournalists do.  They do it for real.  They don't just call themselves a photojournalist because they're a tourist.

new york city: part one

i finally developed and scanned a few of my nyc rolls. there are still two more to go but they're 25 iso film so i need to figure out the proper developing times. all of the photos here were shot with a zeiss ikon + a zeiss biogon 35mm f/2 lens on either tri-x (normal and +1) and plus-x film.

look at all this stuff... consumption in the states is crazy. these store windows make me laugh.

apparently people like to chill on the sidewalk beside the street by themselves in times square. either on chairs or just on the street itself.

the next photo will explain what these people are waving at.

there was a giant screen projecting a live video of the street. i'm in there somewhere with my parents and aunt and uncle.

we made our way into union station. i really enjoyed making photos there. we have a union station in toronto too but it's not as nice. it's not ugly or anything but the new york version is a little more classic. people were either running or waiting. this photo shows both. 

this is kind of a required photo in new york. these things were everywhere. i think they look pretty cool visually. smoke usually does. but i think they look especially cool because of their size. you can see how big they are in comparison to the people crossing the street. i remembered seeing severin's photo of this in his new york series and i was remembering back when i saw it in front of me.

i had an amazing lunch at this restaurant's salad bar. i think it was my last meal in nyc before we went back to toronto. left with a great meal and a nice photo. 

you could make a series out of the odd jobs people have in nyc. i wonder if anyone pays attention to these signs anyways? it must bring some business if it's worth paying someone to stand there all day. i never saw a single person look at the sign while i was there though. i'm not sure people would really approach the dude holding it to ask a question either.

i loved the vendors nyc had. pretzels are one of my favorite snacks and we don't have pretzel vendors in toronto. i ate as many as i could, even for $5 which is what they were selling for in times square. i didn't buy anything from nuts4nuts. kind of a sketchy name. 

this guy was dozing in and out of sleep. i would too. i can imagine how boring/draining it would be to hold a sign all day. 

bon apetite. 

making street photos in nyc was so much fun. i went there with my mom, dad and my uncle and cousin from hungary for two days. we wanted to show them new york while they were visiting us because it was their first time in north america. honestly, shooting street there was amazing because people don't care if you take their photo. they are probably so used to it that they just go on with their lives and don't pay much attention to any cameras. everyone is making photos of something and it's so fast paced (especially in times square) that people just don't react to the camera. it was really cool... toronto's quite different in that sense so it was a nice change. 

big family. i love the grandma holding her two grandchildren (i'm assuming) in her wheelchair. 

not sure what happened with this photo... some kind of light leak? i like the photo anyways so i posted it regardless. 

my mom and dad in times square. 

my uncle and cousin on the right. 

this reminds me of a photo chris took in LA. it's in his street documentary.

someone left their hardhat and water on the track. 

my mom looking at a map.

this park was really cool. i forget its name but they had this book shelf that people could just grab a book/magazine from and read. i thought it was a nice concept. don't think we have these in toronto either. i've never come across one at least. 

we were learning about counter-monuments in class the other day. this kind of goes along well with that topic. kind of strange to put a monument on the ground that people step on with muddy shoes...

my mom and uncle joking around in a souvenir shop. who buys this stuff?! 

not even police can really control the traffic there. it's pretty crazy. people just walk/go as they please. 

this guy saw me take this picture and asked me for $5. i told him that if he makes me a pretzel i'd oblige but he kept walking. :) 

back in the hotel room. looking up directions on the computer for the way back to toronto.

good morning... returning back to toronto. my cousin wasn't ready yet. 

ciao new york.

part two coming soon.

cheers, 

arthur mola

baby killer.

One would think that 100+ media at a courthouse would mean something BIG was going on.  Right!?  Well ... In the lovely city of Angels suburb Beverly Hills ... that's not the case.  At least this morning it wasn't the case.

Instead we were all -- 10 legitimate photographers and about 45+ paps -- waiting in the beautiful morning sun of the city that will bring us all "The Persian Version" soon.  Think "Jersey Shore" but in black beee-ehhhm-douuuuble-uuuu's and girls with bad bad bad dye-jobs.

I didn't have an assignment today but thought about the spectacle and felt I wanted to photograph it myself.  In case anyone in Sweden doesn't know what's going on actress/model/clothes designer/singer/tabloid sensation Lindsay Lohan was scheduled to appear in court due to a possible probably probation violation.  Usually I'm inside an exclusive party with her but this was different.

You'd think there was a baby killer having a trial.  Seriously.  Sat trucks.  MULTIPLE teams from each outlet.  Remote cams.  Dudes with backpacks carrying USD50,000 transmitters with 7 aircards inside transmitting live feeds.  It was crazy.

I went, too.  A couple Leica M9's.  The 1.0/50 Nocti with a nice B&W ND, the old 1.4/35 ASPH (send the new prototype back to Germany with broken aperture blades) and the Voigtlander 4.5/15 (the old version with no focus coupling).  Oh yeah ... the shot I envisioned was up high so I brought the step ladder I use to get out pots and souffle dishes.

 And I was gonna do a post about a wedding I shot a few weeks ago.  That's gonna wait.  It was looking at the selects of that wedding that I decided that digital black and white conversions suck ass.  They may be monochrome but ... they're not the same as film.  Not even close.  Even the presets in Aperture and my favourite converter I use in PS CS3 -- no, I don't need anything more than CS3 -- "aren't quite right" as it were.  Not even close.

A friend was showing me some work.  After 8 beautiful film scans I got to a photograph and I said "Um." He looked at me and said "I know."  Shot with an M9 ... It was probably f/8 or greater.  Honestly, I'm not sure I want to look at M9 digital conversions to B&W shot with a tight aperture.  In fact, I think you have to be wider and perhaps get the exposures you need via ND filters.  If you're gonna leave them in colour, all good.  

I'd always heard of the NIK Software solution Silver Efex.  Well ... it's only like USD100 so I bought it and started using it with Aperture.  Switching from 64-bit to the 32-bit version because NIK doesn't have the 64-bit version out for Apple sucks.  Whatever.

I worked a lot of photos from the wedding and was way more pleased than just looking at normal B&W conversions.  Silver Efex "took the edge off" and gave noise a nicer grainy look.  So far, I'm very happy with that plug-in.  I just wish they'd get off their asses and put out the 64-bit version.

The following photos were all processed from DNG's in Aperture, then opened in Silver Efex and then exported from Aperture to a size photo that piece of shit typepad won't crop horribly.  

Unlike his normal routine Michael Lohan didn't spend 30 minutes being a fucking blowhard and talk to even the most obscure or irrelevant "outlet."  He just walked in.  I knew he'd have to say SOMETHING later.  

I asked if they were doing a school project.  Whatever.  I don't think they got sarcasm.

Her "note" was pretty funny, though.  Watch out talking heads in Los Angeles as this girl wants your job.

Was funny watching those two.  I had a lot to watch, though.  Getting up at 05:00 wasn't a total wash.

Guess I was noticed. ;)

Even talking heads -- always trying to "market up" -- have contemplative moments.  I didn't know they actually thought.

I have so little respect for video news-gathering organizations.  I mean ... fed bullshit by producers with agendas ... shot by "spray-and-fucking-pray" video-operators ... 

I think news video-operators probably have the least talent of the working visual pros out there.  

There's always one.  He kept yelling "Lindsay's not Mel Gibson."  I'm positive he was a plant from some television programme yet I couldn't identify who was taping him.

 

When the news choppers arrived I knew we were close to the kick-off.  Helicopters are so annoying unless, of course, I'm watching a splendid high-speed chase that we're so famous for here in la-la-land.

And then she appeared.  

And did the "perp walk" ...

Must suck having to do that.  Her mother, Orange Oprah, and her attorney, Shawn Holley-Chapman, trail her.  I'm pretty sure the "dudes in suits" are either BHPD or LASO.  Dunno.

I saw a lot of my friend's work and didn't think she looked as "worried" as she does in my take.  I don't know anyone who shot wide.  FYI.  It was 70-200/2.8 all the way.  Well ... unless you're a low-level pap with a fresh visa and you've still got the kit lens you bought in Sao Paolo. ;)

Imagine 150+ cameras on you as you're on your way to find out because of your disease you may be going to jail.  I know ... poor little rich girl ... but ... I've always had nice experiences with Lindsay.

I like this because it's almost like she's shielding herself from the light.  The light from someone's flash. No, I wasn't shooting with a flash.  

I think this is my favourite photo, actually.

And ten seconds later ... it was over.

And my photo-buddy Pulitzer Prize-winner Nicky Ut began getting his cards out of the cameras.

And everyone started ingesting, selecting, editing, captioning and sending to their desks.

I didn't.  :)

About 30 minutes later fifteen reporters burst out of the doors saying "She's not coming out; she's going straight to jail."  Since I was there to show what it's like to attract world attention for something pretty petty, I went 'round back for a position.

Like most white suburbs the cops have nothing to do.  This was a big deal to them and they surely treated it like it was.  

Some d-bag nicknamed "Malibu Bob" or some bullshit got a ticket for jay walking.  :)  Funny as shit.  He's one of those "in your face video-paps."  Honestly, I think they're the worst.

Because of that dumb-ass the po-po on bikes made it their life's mission to keep everyone on the sidewalk...

Instead of hiding behind bushes and nicking people for speeding he was wrangling.  Whatever.  I set my step ladder down and stepped up.  Didn't really need much else.

And once again ... she appeared ...

This time, though, behind heavily-tinted glass and some kind of other obstruction.  There's no chance any of the dudes with long glass got anything.  

Wonder how much that transport/escort cost?  Yeah ... all for a misdemeanor and a fucking axe to grind. Well played guys.

Lindsay's clearly angry father decided to speak (big shock) and ya' know 30 crews wanted to listen.

Amazing, really.  You'd think something really important was being said and instead it was bunch of grandstanding as this dim-wit has zero going on in his life and continues to live it by glomming on to someone else's fame.

Ya' know ... like all of those "equipment reviewers" (loosely defined) ... who came from forums ... and of which hardly say anything bad about anything.  They are so laughable it's ... well ... it's funny people actually listen.

He's making a point.  Homeboy behind him is one of those "pop star reborn Christian minister-types."  I was just waiting to hear him say "... and you can find more information at [insert evangelical name].com."

Something tells me I wouldn't want to be a woman in a relationship with pappa Lohan.  

Perhaps he really does need Jesus.

Crazy-plant-guy was lead away by the Sheriffs. ;)

A serious hard-hitting video journalist took contemplative notes.

And then he went on-camera for the recap.  I was more intrigued by the way one of his crew was looking at him.

And the AFP had their mobile office set up. ;)  Sending out the last few photos from such an important day of news gathering. ;)

Amongst the ENG crews and long glass ... I think you'll see something ... besides Lindsay, of course.  The above photo is ©Reuters.

So, yeah, an interesting morning.

And I'm loving the NIK Software Silver Efex!  It makes looking at normal digital B&W palatable.

Hope you guys all have amazing weekends.

I'm sure a certain baby killer won't be. 

Cheers from la-la-land.

-C