Sometimes the secret to getting an image you want is for everyone to just slow down a bit. Take a breath. Get still.

Lou. Studio. 

Seems the harder we try to be good at something the more elusive success is. I think the old masters of every craft knew that rushing things ruined them. That patience is a way of letting 

what you are learning soak in. That calmness is a path to beauty.

Yesterday's simple and fun event photography for Texas Appleseed.

the poster show begins to ramp up.

I'm trying to throw off the mental shackles from a time when a clean ISO 400 file was a miracle to behold and when flash absolutely ruled all aspects of night time event photography. There's a penalty for having decades of experience; sometimes you are held back by old information and truisms that are no longer even remotely true.

Using the Jpeg setting on my Fuji X-H1 I am fearlessly (hmmm....) racking the ISO dial all over the place while shooting at events. And yesterday I substituted the little, tiny Fuji EF-X8 flash in the hot shoe of my camera instead of a bigger, more traditional flash unit. Kinda nuts but it worked.

Texas Appleseed is a non-profit you can learn about here: Link to Appleseed.

In order to fund their initiatives they do the usual fundraising but they also do a bunch of event stuff that I think is fun and cool. Yesterday was their annual poster show. Working with sponsorship from the largest ad agency in town they select a group of artists/graphic designers and get them to design posters that incorporate current messaging about justice and legal issues people face in Texas. The top print houses in town donate the printing, and the posters, signed and numbered by the artists, are sold for $75 each; both at the show and on the Appleseed website. It's exciting because it brings in a segment of Austin's very hip advertising community and not only raises money but also creates community awareness in a new demographic.

And, of course, nearly everyone in Austin loves an excuse for a good party... There was ample catering by Austin restaurant, El Dorado, (EldoradoCafeATX.com) and several open bars. No charge for admission to the show and no charge for drinks or food. Felt like the old boom days in Austin...

The pop-up gallery was at 800 Congress Ave., just a few blocks from the capitol, in the middle of downtown, and people started trickling in when the doors opened at 6pm. By 7 pm the place was packed and posters were flying out the door.

In the days of yore I would have been concentrating on making big flash work. I would have a large guide number, articulated head flash in the hot shoe and it would be topped with a Rogue reflector or a large, DIY foamcore reflector, held up by tape and rubber bands. I'd be working at f5.6 to f8.0 if shooting full frame, and I would be working around ISO 400 to ensure noiseless files. As darkness closed in I would come to rely on the AF-illumination light to get focus in the dimmer areas of a big ballroom.

I did none of that yesterday. I put on the 16-55mm f2.8 and used the lens mostly between 2.8 and f4.0. Near the big windows on the east side of the large room I used ISO 1250 and, instead of pounding flash and watching the background go to black, I was shooting down around 1/60th of a second and being very, very mindful to catch people in pauses where subject movement wouldn't ruin my photos. I got some blurry hands but I decided it doesn't matter and I didn't care.

In the back half of the room I worked around ISO 3200 and, in really dim areas I took a deep breath and set the ISO dial to 6400. And, amazingly, it worked. It all worked.

Most of the time I wasn't just depending on the ambient light, I was using the small, included-with-the-camera flash to fill in and get me a little closer to clean color. I had the flash set to minus 2/3rds of a stop, in TTL, and I worked a bit to get a reasonable level with the ambient light; sometimes (usually) opting to keep it about a half a stop dark. Seemed just right for the combination of tiny flash and room light. They worked together to get me very close to a perfect exposure out of camera.

Here are a couple samples showing the ambient + flash in action:

The small, EF-X8 flash seems to come with every Fuji X camera that I buy and I had ignored them for a while. Now I'm keeping one on the top of my camera almost all the time, just in case it comes in handy. 

The EF-X8 doesn't take batteries; it uses power from the camera's battery(s). I used to worry about battery drain but I was using a battery grip last night and after shooting from 5pm (set up and posters) till about 8pm (party winding down...) I was still on the first battery in my grip. Not bad considering all the stuff it was running....

All my photo stuff fit in my small, Think Tank backpack. I brought along the Fuji X-E3 with an 18-55mm f2.8-4.0 kit lens as well as a 35mm f2.0 Fuji-cron, neither of which I needed to use; but you know my feelings about always having a back up.... I also brought along a big, Godox flash, dedicated to the Fuji system as well as a radio trigger. This did come in handy for shooting the posters as I could have someone stand ten feet to one side of, and at a 45 degree angle to, the art work in order to get clean shots without a lot of fall off and with no glare. 

I could get used to a minimal kit like this! In fact, someone should write a book about it...

The last thing I wanted to mention was transportation. I could have taken the super high performance Subaru Forester downtown and parked it in a garage. I could have spent $26 and taken an Uber from the house to the venue. But in the same spirit of carrying everything I needed in one small pack I thought I would also reduce my travel footprint. To that end I chose to take a city bus to work. 

The bus comes to an intersection about a half mile from my house. An easy and leisurely 15 minute walk. The bus costs $1.25 and gets me to downtown, within a block or two of the venue, in about 25 minutes. Easy-Peasy. I cheated on the way home. Belinda is working downtown and has garage parking at her agency. She met me at the show and when it was time to head out we walked two blocks to her garage and then sped off into the night. In a Subaru Impreza. All fun. 

That's my take on yesterday's photo festivities. Hope you aren't pining too much for the days of complex flash, slow film and the need to deliver stacks of color prints to your clients. It wasn't really that much fun. This is better. 

I remember the line that Ian Fleming wrote at the end of "Diamonds are Forever." He was talking about James Bond's life as a spy. He wrote, "It reads better than it lives." Brilliant. Just brilliant. 

Back in the water. Coming back from an illness is rough. I guess the secret is to never get sick...

Boy Howdy! That last week was a doozy. I had a cold, a cough that wouldn't stop and a nasty bout of insomnia on top of everything else. I was out of the pool from Sunday the31st all the way until yesterday (April 9th) because I literally couldn't get one lap in without stopping to cough like a three pack a day drifter...

The combination of having been sick, deprived of about half my usual sleep and out for so long was felt in its entirety during my first swim back. I woke up early yesterday, packed up and headed to the pool. It was still dark at 7:00 when I hit the water. My stroke felt perfect but there was very little energy behind it and I tired quickly. I finished the hour and fifteen minutes but only by judiciously skipping a lap now and then; taking a few liberties with the written workout. That's a masters swimmer's prerogative. 

I came home, ate breakfast, drank coffee and then hit the couch (Gosh! I love our couch!) and took a nap for the better part of an hour. I needed a bit of recovery before I could drag myself into the studio and start making calls. I'm looking for a talent for a shoot on Tuesday. The whole thing came up rather quickly and finding just the right talent takes....time. If you know a male, late 40's/early 50's, caucasian, who is in good shape and can take some time off on Tuesday, be sure and let me know..... I'm looking for someone to play the part of a doctor in scrubs, face mask, etc. And, yes, there is a talent fee in there somewhere...( Austin area ). 

The rest of the afternoon was dedicated to unpacking from our condensed video shoot last Friday (didn't have the desire to grapple with gear while infirm..) because those rechargeable batteries are not going to charge themselves, the batteries in the wireless microphone receivers and transmitters tend to leak if you leave them in for very long and, it's nice to know the camera lenses are snuggly back in their slots in the equipment case. Ready and easily findable because....they are in their correct spot.

                                 
The most important part of the whole organizing and unpacking process is the getting the memory cards backed up. I'd already pulled all the video files from our shoot out and put them on a little SSD for my client/collaborator; the guys who is tasked with doing the actual edit. But he's still on the client side and my paranoid expectation is that if there is a way to lose, corrupt, misplace, reformat-over, the files I gave him it's almost a client's imperative to attempt it. I wanted to get a complete set of the files on two identical 7200 RPM G-Tech drives that I use when I edit. Now that I've done that and asked the client to back up to their server I am finally able to re-use those SD cards. I like my new Delkin Devices Black 128GB V60 UHSII cards. They are fast and new. All the better to play with...

Mulling over some nerd-side new gear acquisitions for the office. I'm toying with the idea of replacing my (2015) Apple 27 inch iMac with the new i9 processor iMac. I'd like to get one with a 1 TB SSD for the OS drive and 32 GB of RAM. I also want to trick it out with the fastest video card they offer just to give me a bit of a speed boost for video editing. The current machine is absolutely fine for photography file processing but I'd like to give the h.265 video file format available in the X-T3 a spin and I've read that the h.265, while a space saver during shooting, requires some intense processing to edit.... (yes, I am sure you are super smart, brave and infinitely skilled and can make your own machine for 1/10th the cost but I think I'll save a bit of time and just buy one ready made, thanks!).

And, over in the realm of the irrational (one of my specialties), now that I've worked out my one audio issue with video recording on the  X-H1, I'm actually toying with adding another one while the camera+grip+three batteries are still on sale as a package for $1299. We used three of them on our video shoot Friday and as we slip further down the greased slide of video production toward the revised mosh pit of commerce, multi-camera shoots seem to be the routine and not the exception. And how often can one acquire a full on back up, with accessories, of one's current favorite camera at such an advantageous price?

I'll wait on all the purchases since my recent illness has made me a bit loopy. My bank called to ask me "what I intended?" on my last deposit. Apparently, I transposed numbers left and right.... Glad someone is watching my back. Thank you! Bank. Maybe I'll be thinking straight after a few more swims and a bit more recovery time.

Photographer retracts criticism of Fuji X-H1 headphone sound while monitoring.

File this one under: Don't I feel stupid.

The issue: I heard some distortion through my headphones while testing an X-H1 at my desk last week. I tried changing out all components but still had a niggling distortion. I even tried my two other X-H1 cameras in the same configurations; all while sitting at my desk.

I was not happy to hear the distortion and reached out for answers. Later, I used the cameras and microphones and monitors at a sound studio and did not hear the same distortion. I tried to duplicate the problem today in my living room, far away from electrical devices and was surprised when I could not duplicate the issue.

Here is my addenda to the article I wrote about the distorting monitoring circuit last week:

Edited on 04/09: Interestingly we did not have the headphone distortion problem on a shoot we did last Friday, using many of the same components. To be fair to the Fuji X-H1 I went back and re-tested again. This time I did it in my living room. Components all over my coffee table. But the times I tested the cameras before were all done at the desk in my office. I took the camera, headphones and a microphone back to the office, sat down and listened again and there was the distortion. So I started looking around my desk to see just what the heck might be causing the distortion I was hearing.

For starters my desk is the epicenter of about ten hard drives, each in their own enclosure, each with its own power supply. Then there is the 27 inch iMac about two feet from my little test area. Oh, and there's also a dual band modem/router, and, and, and...... As I moved the camera set up closer to the desk and tested it the distortion was a bit more obvious and when I moved away from the desk it diminished. And when I moved to the living room, about 30-40 feet from all electrical circuits, the microphone pre-amplifiers were as silent as mute angels.

So, this is a big mea culpa. Sometimes we imagine that technology has perfected all the routine stuff and that it will work perfectly no matter how much we try (wittingly or unwittingly) to fuck it all up. The pre-amps are a bit sensitive to huge, giant, unsavory electrical fields. Can you blame them? 

I am now chastened and must send an e-mail to my friends at Fuji to apologize to them for blaming my bad technique on what I see is now a nearly perfect camera.

In addition, all the audio that we ran into three X-H1 cameras at our video shoot last Friday is perfect. Not a trace of distortion or noise. 

I'm sorry to have been so far off on this and will try to be much more careful in my testing of microphone and headphone circuits in the future.

As you can see I made a bone-headed mistake and mischaracterized the performance of the camera. I am sorry for that and I also want to apologize to Fuji for unfairly dissing their camera instead of eliminating such an obvious source of interference. 

Now I will never be able to say that I am without flaw again. So sad. But that's the nature of a mea culpa.

The future of traditional photography? I don't have a crystal ball for that... Camera sales? Here's the latest bad news...

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/photographic-industry-in-freefall-camera-shipments-down-a-shocking-35

Sales of real cameras (not phones with cameras) have collapsed by 84% since 2010. Canon's CEO recently predicted the market will implode by up to 50% more in the next two years. Just comparing this year to last year (which was not a stellar year for cameras) is sobering; a drop of 34% so far.

I know what this means for camera companies and I suspect that you do to, but what do the numbers tell us about the practice of, and the business of, photography?

I'm currently waving goodbye to any camera, lens or lighting company that doesn't have deep pockets. Really deep pockets.



04/09: adding a few links to older posts that discuss this trend: 

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-graying-of-traditional-photography.html

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2015/10/some-observations-after-speaking-to.html

https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/09/after-gold-rush-where-is-photography.html

seems like we've been thinking about this for a while....

I have officially shaken off all vestiges of that nasty cold I wrote about last week.

Here's my favorite thought about colds: My doctor says most colds resolve in seven to ten days. He gave me a miracle drug. He said it might cut down my suffering by a day. He just wasn't sure where in the 7 to 10 days that day might fall....

Two Samples Made with the Fujifilm 90mm f2.0 Lens. My thoughts...

First off, I have to say that I'm absolutely loving the Zach Theatre production of the play/musical, "Matilda." I have the song, "My Mommy Says I'm a Miracle." bouncing around in my head most days now. The play is wonderfully written and the huge miracle is that a cast of Austin, Texans can do a better English accent than most people I know who are actually from the U.K. 

As you know, one of my favorite assignments is going to the theater for the dress rehearsals (many times it's the first performance with full costumes and completed scenes and props!) to make photographs that will be used for marketing, public relations and other uses that effectively sell tickets; even non-profits have budgets to hit...

I like to lean on tried-and-true equipment for the shoots so I don't stumble because there aren't any "do-overs" but lately I've engineered in some comfort factor that allows me to be a tiny bit more ---- experimental. The new padding is that I now hit both the technical rehearsal and the dress rehearsal. There's no audience at the Tech rehearsal and there might be one or two visual rough spots that the crew is still working on but I get a great preview of the show which helps me understand how to best shoot it. I also shoot hundreds of shot in the first night so I can go back to the office and see how everything worked out.

If all is good then I am more disposed to bring a new toy or two along to the dress rehearsal. 

And that's exactly what I did last week. Twice. One monday I brought along the 14mm f2.8 lens for a bit more emphasis on wide stage shots. Then, on Tuesday, I brought along the 90mm f2.0 XF lens to see if it was really so super groovy as everyone says. 

Of course, it wouldn't be much of a test if I took a fast, well corrected, single focal length lens and used it stopped down to f5.6. That would only tell most of us what we already know; that almost every prime out there is great once you've stopped it down past the trouble spots...

So, I put the 90mm on an X-H1 and shot it wide open. f2.0. And I took a good look at the files I got. They were all pretty much as good as I thought they'd be. Which, if you think about it, makes talking about all really good lenses a bit boring. What do you really say after you've mentioned how sharp they are and how nice the blur is and how well controlled the flare is? I guess you could dive into the rough and talk about focusing speed and accuracy but those seemed fine, too. 

If you don't mind spendy, and you have a recurring need for a moderately fast prime that's about the equivalent of a classic 135mm on a full frame camera, then this is the best choice in the Fujifilm collection. It's also the only one. Unless you include the same focal length setting on a zoom. But if I wanted that I would have used a zoom. 

Where this lens shines is the close portrait; from waist up, or even tighter,  in an environment where there is fun stuff to put out of focus in the background. I wish I had a couple of jobs like that right now. Maybe I'll go out and look for some. Could be fun. 

Do I regret splashing out for the 90mm? Not at all. It's a nice, classic focal length and (sometimes) fits my style of shooting. I must say though, that shooting live theater is always easier done with nice zooms. Framing on the fly is golden. The 90mm is one of those "serious" lenses you pull out when the focal length is right and the potential for an extremely beautiful photograph exists. At least you'll know you pulled out all the stops...

A Note to Prospective Clients: Please don't consider handing me a contract that has:

"The agreement that we are entering into is a work-made-for-hire agreement. You agree that we (Satan Productions) are the sole copyright holder, sole owner and soul owner of any work you create while even just in close proximity to us. You also agree that our exclusive and total ownership of the work strips you completely of all rights of authorship."

 No. We would never agree to that. I create the work and I own the creative work. You and I would be entering into a usage licensing agreement. As part of the agreement I would only convey to your company specific usage rights for use of the material I create on the project. I am happy to negotiate and make sure you get the rights you need for your project; potentially even future projects, but you don't get "ownership." And, as if I have to tell you, paying a one time fee doesn't mean you now own the camera we shot the project with or the lenses, or the lights, or the car we used to bring all the gear and staff to your location. It doesn't. Although I'm sure your accountant would love to grab for $50,000 or $60,000 worth of gear in exchange for one small day fee and a reasonable usage fee. Right? Not gonna happen.

(note to the person who proffered the contract to me):
I know your strip mall attorney wrote all this stuff and you've probably never read it but you should. And if you did you'd be embarrassed.

Back the meat...

When we come to your project we're not just trading some working time for some money. As I wrote above we're generally bringing along gear which we use to do the project that has value far in excess of what we charge for most projects. I'm also bringing along my ten thousand hours(+) of expert experience in doing photography, or video, or writing. This means you are not directly paying for a long and productive learning curve, six years of higher education, 30+ years of hands on experience, a valued perspective, a practiced approach. Those are intangibles that are part of the value we bring to every project; no matter how small.

You are also not purchasing outright, for small change, my point of view, taste and cultural understanding. You'll get it in each shot but judging by the rights grab agreement form you might want to have people sign you desperately need to get this from an outside supplier because your contract makes it clear that you have a very limited perspective, a winner take all attitude, and very little in the way of good people skills. In fact, I would say the proffering of any such contract points to a diminished capacity to understand negotiation and effective agreements, which should benefit both sides in any business deal.

Your contract should also never have this:

"You will indemnify our production company and our client in all matters arising from the use, or mis-use, or negligent use, of the intellectual property we are trying to grab from you. This will include your commitment to legally battling on our behalf should anything ever go wrong with our often misguided use of materials over which you now have no control, no stake, and no ownership. And Satan just whispered in our collective ears that we'd also like you to cover our attorneys fees in perpetuity." 

Sure, I use hyperbole a lot in my writing but I swear I got an "agreement form" last week that had the above indemnification clause in it, almost verbatim (note to their attorney: that's Latin for, "as spoken."). I would have laughed if I hadn't wasted time discussing a project with the company previous to receiving this form. At that point I just wanted to pick up the phone and scream for a while....

Essentially this means I could go on location and work under the direction of this client to make a photo of "Chip." Chip might be a willing subject. Chip is happy to be involved; he was, after all, employee of the month. He might even sign a model release. I turn over the images to the client. They decide, a few months down the road, that Chip is a dick and they fire him without severance. Then Wendy in accounting, who had a bad break up with Chip takes the photo from wherever client keeps the photos and gives the image away for free to the Russian mafia who use it in a series of seriously nasty ad campaigns which picture Chip in a "bad light." Chip in a choke chain. In an savory threesome. In ads for erectile dysfunction. And then they run a series of joke posts about Chip's political beliefs for an American politician.

Chip gets a lawyer and sues his former employer who turns around and sues the production company who comes back to me waving their indemnification clause in their agreement form. All hell breaks loose.

Signing an agreement to legally cover anything that arises out of the mis-use, or negligent use, of photos which you no longer even own is like selling someone your used Dodge Charger and then signing a lifetime agreement stipulating that you'll be responsible for any and all repairs. Or accidents. No matter who is at fault. Forever. For a car you no longer own. What client would not love a warranty like this? But it doesn't make it right.

Finally, when dealing with a reputable photographer, videographer or other artist, your contract should never have a part that reads something like this:

"We are only responsible for paying the artist after we inspect each and every image and find each and every image to pass our inspection for quality, usability and general coolness."  

Yes. I've actually seen this as well (without the "general coolness" clause....)

Suppose the client is hiring a photographer to document a day in the life of their service staff. Any good photographer will shoot more than one image per set up. Given a tightly scheduled day hundreds or even thousands of images will be made. In some a client provided talent might blink, fart or look melancholy in such a way as improving said photograph is beyond the skills of even a world class retouching team. Suppose the product to be photographed has rampant defects and is the only one available. Perhaps the room the client insists you take photos in desperately needs to have the walls painted. The graffiti removed. This contract would give the rights grabbing client an easy out to not pay the photographer. Even if there are similar photos that are perfect, and many other variants available as well.

What passes for advertising strategy these days seems to change at the drop of a hat. Consider that the client could hire the production company to hire and supervise the photographer; all working under a very, very specific brief or scope of work. While the production company and photographer are creating content the client's ad agency gets cold feet about their (worn and sad)  concept and decides to have a "focus session." In the focus session it's discovered that the idea they sold to the client totally sucks. It's almost as bad and useless as an all rights/indemnify me for everything contract. The client and agency decide to change gears entirely. Now all the images that the photographer has created for the campaign are useless to the client-- even with all rights and a nice insurance policy against legal disasters --- but now the client doesn't feel like they should have to pay for work they no longer have a use for.

The production company has a rare "Aha!" moment and realizes that the nasty contract the artist signed has a convenient escape clause. They get to inspect and approve the photographs. They decide not to like them. They use the contract in order to not pay for any of the photos, or the time it took to create them. They never bother to tell the artist that the project was killed before they even looked at the work....

Imagine how hard life would be for restauranteurs if they offered the same sort of agreement for their customers. One could order a nice, gigantic Waygu steak, a caviar and lobster appetizer, a 1964 Bordeaux wine from the cellar, and then some vanilla ice cream for dessert. Upon assessing the bill, and having already stuffed themselves with wonderful food the customer decides that the ice cream is different from what he is used to getting from the local convenience store and that he does not like the taste as well as that of the ice cream to which he is accustomed. He calls over the waiter and tells him, "the ice cream isn't pleasing me. I'm declining to pay for this meal. Maybe we can try again in the future..." 

Insanity. And not a business model I'm putting to work in my business. I'd rather garden and read on the couch.

In the end it's the actual clients that get hurt when their intermediaries vastly over reach and try to force a bad contract on a quality provider. Any artist or writer who understands the value of their own work will walk away (or run quickly from the smell of brimstone, etc.) from a bad or totally one sided agreement. Why would they accept such bad terms? Why bend over for a rights grab?

The rights grab essentially means that the person signing over their rights can't use the images they created in their own marketing or in their portfolio. Can't enter it in an awards show. Can't use the work to get more work. Can't use the work as an example of their abilities. Why essentially donate valuable tools and valuable skills for the meanest, almost token cash exchange?

The indemnification clause puts the artist in legal peril for a long time and from every angle. Not an issue you say? Slow down and remember that in America anyone can sue for any reason. Happens all the time. You might not even be safe from being sued by your own client ---- remember, they were spiteful enough to hand you that nasty contract --- right? Is a fee of a couple thousand dollars (if you can get paid!!!!) worth the potential of months of even years of legal hassles and lawyer fees? You get to pay the lawyers even if you win!!!! Lucky you.

And the final clause, the inspection before payment clause. That's the capper. After the job is cancelled for whatever reason (the company spokesperson kills a bus full of nuns...) someone will leave it to a junior staffer to field your call (you know, where you ask for the money you are owed) and tell you, with phony regrets, that the work just didn't pass their stringent sniff test. "Sorry! We look forward to working with you again soon."

So, when the client's agency, production company, or in-house legal department run off/piss off all the good and capable independent artists they will be left with the people willing to take the smelliest contracts. These are bottom feeders and someone at or near the top of the client organization will realize they are no longer getting the "A" talent for their projects. Heads will roll but it may be too late to undo the damage of bad work used, and the worse damage which is to the client's reputation, painting said client as an unsavory and unreliable collaborator.

It's sad. The people who push contracts like this act like those agreements are the industry standard. They aren't. Bad rights grab contracts are like payday loan contracts. They are not illegal but they only benefit the finance company and lead the vast majority of people on the other side of the contract into financial ruin. Let's not let that happen in our industries. Fair contracts for fair use of good, solid intellectual property.

Oh, and the thing that triggered all this, beside actually getting one of the worst contracts I've ever seen? The nasty contract had a blaring typo/grammatical error in the first paragraph. That's just so embarrassing. Would you accept a contract that was almost guaranteed to screw you over even after you saw a double negative show up in the second sentence? I didn't think so. Me either.

All material ©2019 Kirk Tuck.

Stuff that worked well on Friday's three camera video shoot and stuff that could be improved....

We did a video shoot for Zach Theatre yesterday, in a hidden recording studio just west of downtown. I just transferred and reviewed the footage and I'm giving 95% of the stuff we shot an enthusiastic two thumbs up. We have more than enough primary footage, second camera angles and b-roll to create multiple final videos as well as three really great interviews. But part of the process of reviewing results is to see where we could have done better and whether or not some piece of gear let us down. 

This was our first three camera shoot on which we used the Fujifilm X-H1 cameras and I'll start out by saying that I love the look of all the files and personally think that the "Eterna" color profile provided in the X-H1 and X-T3 is the most beautiful profile I've ever worked with. Bar none. While I might consider using a log profile if we are shooting in contrasty Texas midday sunshine I'd want to really, really test out that choice because the stop or stop and a half of dynamic range the log file might  provide would likely be offset by lots and lots more time trying to get the color grading right while shooting, metering and light correctly while working with the Eterna profile would give us a file I could use right out of the camera. A big win for Fuji with the Eterna color profile. Nice, soft, flat but not too much... (I like it so much I used the Eterna profile all day long on a corporate job that was mixed daylight and flash, since I was shooting raw I didn't have to have any regrets but, for the most part, the Eterna files were very malleable and, with minor tweaking, looked just great). 

The image stabilization in video, using non-stabilized lenses, was very good. Not quite as good as some of the amazing Olympus camera bodies (EM-1.2, EM5.2) but good enough for me to handhold up to about 60mm with success. 

The video menu is great and very straightforward to master. Love that all in the stuff that doesn't  work in video is already greyed out. The ability to punch in for focusing and then back out to full frame couldn't be easier. The EVF is wonderful and the rear screen with touch controls makes using AF in manual focusing good. I was so happy to find that, when in the video mode, you can actually select 1/48th of a second shutter speed giving you a true 180 degree shutter angle when shooting 30 fps. Finally, I was super happy with the sound quality I got from the cameras. Not just when we were able to pipe in a beautiful feed from the audio engineer's mixing board but also when I was recording interview audio directly into camera via wireless lavaliere microphones. 

And you knew the list of things I want improved was going to follow right along, right? So here goes.  What the bejeepers is the deal with the battery grip and complement of batteries???! Here's the premise: Fuji: "Yes. We know our camera bodies suck juice out of our puny batteries at an alarming rate. Here's what we've done to make that better, we're making a battery grip that will hold two batteries while you keep a third one tucked into the camera. Cool, huh?"  Here's the real (tormenting) issue: The batteries switch over from the two in the grip, sequentially, and then finally hit the camera battery ----- but only when shooting stills! If you are shooting video and your first battery in the grip runs out the entire circus comes to a screeching halt. The camera just stops shooting. It doesn't care if you have two other fresh batteries in the same product, just brimming with fresh, juicy electricity, it just stops recording. 

What is the work around? Um. Um. Hit the record button again. A (sarcasm laced) great idea for the middle of an interview.... Just start over.

I must be missing something. Maybe putting the camera and grip in boost mode changes the battery usage order. I guess that's the next thing to test.

But let's not take the battery grip out of the hot seat just yet! One reason videographers grudging part with over $300 per camera for an added battery grip is to get the headphone jack that they finally just included on the body of the X-T3. It didn't exist on a stock X-H1. Yes, the camera body has a microphone in jack but no, the body without grip has NO headphone jack. So, across three camera bodies I have about $1.000 worth of battery grips; proprietary to one camera model, just in case I want to run audio at each camera location (and need to monitor it for quality!!!). 

(All the stuff in the strike throughs below is faulty information. Read the added material just below the strike throughs. Thanks, Kirk 04-09.)

If everything worked the way I think it is supposed to then I would be hearing beautiful sound through my headphones but, sadly, this is not the case. Lucky, I discovered an audio glitch when I tested the camera more or less feature by feature before committing to using three of them on assignment. At first I thought the whole audio chain was compromised or required some very special (and unobtainable) microphones or something. I would set the levels so they would never go into yellow, much less into red, and even with a minus 12 to minus 18db level I was getting some distortion in the headphones. The headphone level setting was set in the middle of the range as well. In fact, the setting level for the headphones had no impact on improving or worsening the distortion I was hearing. 

I thought it might be the headphones so I tested the camera+battery grip with AKG headphones, Audio Technica headphones, Apple earbuds and even a set of Bose noise cancelling headphones. Each had the same issues. I thought it might be a microphone mismatch so I tried a box of different mics and a squadron of microphone pre-amplifiers. (yes, we disabled the internal mics for our test). I even went so far as to disable the external mics and to test again just using the internal mics. 

Edited on 04/09: Interestingly we did not have the headphone distortion problem on a shoot we did last Friday, using many of the same components. To be fair to the Fuji X-H1 I went back and re-tested again. This time I did it in my living room. Components all over my coffee table. But the times I tested the cameras before were all done at the desk in my office. I took the camera, headphones and a microphone back to the office, sat down and listened again and there was the distortion. So I started looking around my desk to see just what the heck might be causing the distortion I was hearing.

For starters my desk is the epicenter of about ten hard drives, each in their own enclosure, each with its own power supply. Then there is the 27 inch iMac about two feet from my little test area. Oh, and there's also a dual band modem/router, and, and, and...... As I moved the camera set up closer to the desk and tested it the distortion was a bit more obvious and when I moved away from the desk it diminished. And when I moved to the living room, about 30-40 feet from all electrical circuits, the microphone pre-amplifiers were as silent as mute angels.

So, this is a big mea culpa. Sometimes we imagine that technology has perfected all the routine stuff and that it will work perfectly no matter how much we try (wittingly or unwittingly) to fuck it all up. The pre-amps are a bit sensitive to huge, giant, unsavory electrical fields. Can you blame them? 

I am now chastened and must send an e-mail to my friends at Fuji to apologize to them for blaming my bad technique on what I see is now a nearly perfect camera.

In addition, all the audio that we ran into three X-H1 cameras at our video shoot last Friday is perfect. Not a trace of distortion or noise. 

I'm sorry to have been so far off on this and will try to be much more careful in my testing of microphone and headphone circuits in the future.

Moving on. Let's talk about lenses. While I love the Fuji XF-18-55mm f2.8-f4.0 you can already see the problem. It loses a stop from the wide end to the telephoto end. If you think of it as an f4.0 lens and don't shoot at f2.8 you won't see the exposure change as you zoom through the range but many times, in low light you'd pretty much kill for that extra f-stop. 

I queried Fuji about their cinema lenses but someone suggested that for corporate video work the really nice, red badge, constant aperture lenses from the XF line up would work just fine. And I'm happy to say that if you never want to zoom that's probably really true. They are very, very good lenses. But, sometimes you want to zoom during a shot; or the client wants you to zoom during shot and so you go for it and give the system a try. On Friday I was a little shocked. I was using a 16-55mm f2.8, constant aperture lens and I needed to do a slow zoom in from a medium composition to a tighter composition and somewhere, mid-zoom, there was a disconcerting and abrupt bump up in illumination as though passing through a certain focal length range triggers a compensation that opens up the aperture to compensate for the light lost when zooming longer. It's a design glitch. I could hardly believe it but I tried it twice more, here in the studio today and was able each time to replicate this issue. 

We need to find a zoom for the system which doesn't do this (I guess that's why I was asking about the cinema zooms...) while zooming. I love the images from the 16-55mm but I'll never be able to do a zoom shot with it in video. And even though zoom ins are generally overused it's still a tool we need from time to time.

Moral of the story? If you don't do your own tests, on every piece of gear you own, problems will come back and bite you on the ass. But don't think this glitch bitch is just about Fuji, I can well remember more than a few heat related shutdowns from a number of Sony cameras. All full-framers....

Seems the only perfect digital camera ever made is the Sony RX10 IV...

Enough about the cameras. We'll get that stuff sorted out. The video looked astounding. The rendering of flesh tones was the best I've seen from a less than $10,000 video camera. I think it's a bit above the benchmark Sony FS-7, less noisy than a Panasonic GH5, and fun to shoot with. Loving the front and rear tally lights....

But my favorite piece of video gear is fast becoming my Beach Tek DXA-2T audio interface. It's not powered  and uses really clean transformers to convert a balanced signal from XLR connected devices to a signal that is perfect for most camera's microphone inputs. I love the device because it makes professional microphones sound and perform better with most consumer hybrid cameras but it comes at no cost in terms of signal loss. And there are no batteries to forget or to run out of mid-shoot. I would tell everyone to run out and buy one but I think the product is now discontinued except for a copy-cat variation from Saramonic. I love being able to grab one of the knobs on the small unit and pad down the signal to the camera rather than having to go into the camera's menu and touchscreen to accomplish the same task. I won't go to a shoot without one of these. It may have been a perfect audio product. I'm sad not to find one on B&H's site or on Amazon. 

Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't again make the point that in video handheld shots are, to my mind, special effects shots that get really boring and annoying really quickly. If you value your audience you'll put the camera with which you do the majority of your shots on some sort of stabilizing platform rather than defaulting to image stabilization. I love having a locked down version of a shot, using a good tripod. A moving shot, also using a good tripod, and then, in order a shot from a "chicken foot" monopod with a fluid head, a monopod with no head and finally, a gimbal. The less jittery the shot the happier the audience. 

There are a lot of good $10,000 video tripod and head combinations in the marketplace and most are probably made for cameras in the 18-30 pound range. I've got a Manfrotto video tripod with a 501 head and I think for DSLRs practicing a lot with one of these probably trumps the results of someone who uses their pricier tripod a lot less often. As with anything else, it's not the Speedo or goggles the determine a good 100 butterfly, it's 99.9% the swimmer. Same with adequate versus perfect tripods. 

wow. That was a lot to wade through but it's helpful to me to put it all down so I can process my most recent experience. Would I have changed the way I shot, lit or ran audio? Probably not. If anything I would have pushed my partner to spend more time of some sort of camera support and dissuaded him from too much "Jason Bourne inpired camera movement (fight scene kinetics...). But it's all a big learning process, right?

If anyone is interested my cold is receding and I'm giving credit to Mr. Nyquil for getting my first good night's sleep of the week last night. And this is how I reward you? With a long, rambling blog about video? Almost criminal.

Exposure. White Balance. Stable platform. Enough headroom for audio. The foundation for successful video production. 

Yeah. It's a post about video. I know... you hate even thinking about video. That's okay. I may write about something different later. Have more coffee.

On Saturday, Sunday and Tuesday, last week, I concentrated on making 

marketing photographs for the Zach Theatre play, Matilda.

Then I did a corporate event job last night.

Today was a change of pace...

(Image: Jimmy Moore as Ms. Agatha Trunchbull). 

If you do the same stuff over and over again your brain will turn to jello and life will seem like a Moebius strip of unending and repetitious boredom.  People will move away from you at cocktail parties, fearful that you will once again tell that story you tell all the time about those same things that you do the same way all the time. I do a lot of photography (maybe too much) so every once in a while, when I get to do a video project, it's like breaking an unsavory habit.

The folks at Zach Theatre's marketing department seem never to sleep. No sooner do they finish the amazing project just in front of them, and watch the curtains rise on the labor of love they've been selling for the last month, than they clear their brains and advertising palettes, and dive into the next project. By the time that project is ready for an audience they will have moved on yet again.

I got a note a couple of weeks ago asking if I'd be willing to help with a video project for an upcoming play that involves two people who fall in love and help each other (metaphorically) help each other unpack their baggage. There is a lot of great music in the play and both of the actors who are cast in the lead role are performers whom I admire and love watching on stage. The theatre's smart, young director of social media and interesting video content wanted to know if I'd collaborate with him to produce content for several videos and three interviews; all of which we'd shoot today. I love collaborating with people who are far less than half my age so I was on board in a flash.

The formula was that Joshua (the theater guy) would bring the concept, the directorial vision and the editing prowess if I could supply the camera work, the audio savvy and the lighting. We talked the project over well in advance and I liked his concept: the two lead characters would go into a recording studio and produce the sound track for radio, television and anything else we needed for our project. We would video them singing this incredible song from every point of view that made sense, add in a bunch of b-roll that we'd also shoot during our afternoon in the recording studio, and then, if we had time, we'd interview each of the actors as well as the musical director for the play; individually.

It was decided that the optimum way to handle a time-limited production like this would be to use a three camera set up which would allow us to shoot the recording session with, simultaneously, a wide central "A" camera, then additional cameras for me and Joshua so each of us could concentrate on cross shooting the talent as they sang the money song over and over again until the sound engineers figured they had everything just right. Lucky for us I just happened to have three exactly matched Fujifilm X-H1 cameras and a Think Tank roller case filled with Fujinon lenses.

I was a little under the weather today. I'm still battling a cold and a cough, and I worked on a job for a tech company called, WP Engine, until late last night in San Antonio, driving back and arriving home just after midnight. That's why I pre-packed most of my stuff for the video shoot the day before. Packing should be done when one is rested, rational and deeply satisfied with existence (pick any two). 

It's never fun to get somewhere and realize that in a Sudafed inflicted haze you have forgotten the most needed piece of gear; the linchpin for everything else...

The studio was one of those typical Austin Old Music affairs. Hidden behind an electrical supply company, no signage anywhere, no parking; it's almost like they are daring customers to find them. But these places seem to attracts some genius engineers who can create great sound and some of the Austin music royalty seek them out. I knew we were in the right place when I saw the Studer one inch tape recording machine in one corner, and a mixing board older than the creative director with whom I was working.

The "live room" where the talent and our two man photo crew worked wasn't particularly large but the acoustics were absolutely perfect. We figured out where we wanted to position our talent and then set up the "A" camera on a tripod. A 14mm lens was the perfect choice for our wide, static POV. I roughed in the lighting as Joshua styled the set, adding some great older guitar amps to the background and taking out stuff that doesn't fit the milieu we were creating for the show.  I used three big LED fixtures bounced into 4x4 foot reflectors and used up pretty high. We also turned on all the soft, old fashioned "practicals" (table lamps) in the room which softened the shadows and warmed up the overall color balance. 

Joshua and I cross shot the scene. Each of use shooting the person on furthest from us. It was all about getting the right angles. Joshua shot nice medium shot, handheld, while I went in tight with a 90mm f2.0 balanced on a monopod. Once we each had good coverage from our initial angles we switched sides and switched the talent we were shooting. Me getting tight shots of the person he'd shot wide previously, and vice versa. 

The recording studio was actually creating the song as we worked and when they nailed down a perfect mix we used the mix, piped into the performers' headphones, to help them lip sync exactly so that no matter which versions of video clips we used in the final edit we'd have a better than average shot at everything syncing up well. We ran through the song in this fashion enough times to do dolly shots for each person, in close up, Some push in shots, and some super tight stuff on the performers' mouths and eyes. Really striking stuff but hard to keep in focus. (I'll keep practicing). 

I talked in a recent post about having a problem when monitoring audio through the battery grip headphone plug on my XH-1s. There seemed to be a little bit of distortion. I tested them enough to know that the issue was with the headphone circuit and NOT what was being written to the memory card but on a project like this, where audio is all important, I wanted to be doubly sure. 

Here's my work-around: I used an Atomos Ninja Flame, 7 inch, 4K monitor/recorder as an "A" camera mounted monitor. It served several purposes; the play's director and the theater's marketing director were able to get a good idea of what the whole visual effect was. I would get second (back up) recording of everything we shot on the "A" camera (but only in 1080P, laid down as Pro Res files). And the most important benefit of using the Atomos was that it has a headphone jack and monitors what is being recorded to the SSD in the Atomos. If that signal is good then so is the audio coming out of the HDMI jack on the camera. I still don't have a clear idea about the camera's headphone jack.....

So, the "A" camera is locked down on sticks and fitted out with the 14mm lens. Joshua is using maybe three different focal lengths like, 23mm, 35mm and the 50mm, while I'm mostly using the 16-55mm f2.8 with a close in "assist" from either the 90mm or the 60mm macro. 

We wanted to warm up the whole set and a little trial and error with the Kelvin setting convinced us that 6300K was just right. We used that setting on all three cameras and never varied it. We also kept all three cameras locked in at ISO800 and the video files are virtually noise free. I preferred to shoot the longer lenses on a "chicken foot" monopod while a non-caffeinated and 27 year old Joshua took his chances and shot handheld with an assist from the in-body image stabilization. Finally, I now swear by the Eterna profile in the camera. It does a beautiful job holding onto highlights, with the tenacity of a terrier, and provides nicely open shadows as well.

The "A" camera took a line feed of the beautiful audio coming off the mixing board while the other two cameras just used internal mics to provide tracks we can use to sync up clips in post production. The line out from the board is the wrong level and impedance for consumer video cameras but a Beach Tek DXA 2T does a nice job matching balanced XLRs to unbalanced camera inputs. It also provides a dial for each channel to pad down levels. Still easier than trying to change levels on a touch screen any day. 

After we shot the music section of our production we re-set for individual interviews. Now we were off the safety net of the sound studio's audio system and I had to change hats into my "sound guy" beret. I decided to go with a lavaliere microphone instead of a cardiod or super-cardiod microphone on a boom pole. You'd be so proud of me, I tested both sets of my Sennheiser wireless systems earlier in the week and drilled with them until I could set them (almost) blindfolded. The real trick is knowing exactly where to place them on each person for the very best audio. I only own six sets of lavaliere microphones and have used "lavs" for paid and personal work since the mid-1980s. I'm still just a student when it comes to microphone placement. Today I lucked out and did a good job. 

I had the receiver in a cold shoe on my camera cage and ran the output from the lav receiver into the Beach Tek again just to have total control over levels. The audio sounded good to me and I handed the headphones to my young collaborator to get his buy-in. All good. 

We shot a classic, two camera interview set-up with almost "classic" three point lighting. Joshua had written down his questions for each person which endeared him to me in no small measure. I hate "seat of the pants" interviewers...

We went a bit over our reservation time in the studio and had to pack and be out in a bit less than half an hour. I spot checked footage all the way through and everything looked good. I had an inventory list in each case and I'm happy to say we didn't even forget a bongo tie. We marched into the recording stuff (well I shuffled, what with a profound lack of sleep and cold virus induced headache) at one p.m. shot a lot of good content and were loading cases back into the incredibly sexy Subaru Forester right at 4:30 pm. I slipped into rush hour traffic and listened to "real" news on NPR all the way home. 

Sometime tomorrow I'll transfer all the footage onto an SSD drive and hand it off to Joshua. He's pretty excited about hitting the edit and showing off a bit. I can't blame him; he did a masterful job of imagining this project and putting all the pieces together to pull it off brilliantly. It's the kind of collaboration that can only make my reel look better and better.