Battling the malaise induced by recognition of the oncoming Robot Apocalypse. Or how I learned to be happy while generative A.I. disrupted white collar jobs.

 A quote from Greg IP's article about the ramifications of generative A.I.,  in the Wall Street Journal:

"To paraphrase the old saying about recessions and depressions, technological disruption is when your neighbor is automated out of a job; the robot apocalypse is when you are automated out of a job. Professionals, including people who write columns for a living, now know the fear of obsolescence that has stalked blue-collar workers for generations."

Just hanging out with a Leica CL waiting for the Terminators

"Help me Sarah Connors!"

Photographers are at an interesting spot in their collective history. We're either headed out the door of commerce or we're working at figuring out how to stay relevant in a quickly changing world. The disruptor this time is generative A.I. Software that can create written material such as blogs, reports, proposals, books, articles and reviews (I wonder when the first A.I. critic will disparage the first fully autonomous A.I. novelist). Powerful software that can aggregate immense amounts of data, digest it, and then present it with a high degree of accuracy and clarity will almost certain cut huge swaths through the ranks of our current white collar, college educated workforce. The ripple effects will be enormous.

But it's equally effective at creating photographic images from scratch. Or from suggestions. Or from source materials such as snapshots or drawings.

What I hear from people outside the tech industry and outside the photo industry is that this sort of rising autonomous ability on the part of machines is creating overblown news stories and that the sort of capabilities required to replace trained, human professionals is years and years, or decades away. But when I look at tech resources and even at the cutting edge of my own industry I can see that this will be like the "Kodak Delusion." 

The Kodak Delusion was the belief, supposedly supported by rich data, that the world's biggest imaging company would be able to rely on film sales for decades past the nascent introduction of digital cameras. Dozens of Kodak PhD, economists, on the payroll, assured the board of directors that progress would be slow and linear in the digital field and that the slow and steady progress Kodak was making toward sliding into the digital market was right on the pace. Right on the numbers. And then everything went to hell as the acceptance and demand for digital products skyrocketed and accelerated logarithmically and left Kodak in the dusty museum of once great companies, sidelined within a small handful of years. Film, for the most part, just vanished. So did labs. So did processing chemicals in nice yellow envelopes. So did support for hundreds and hundreds of college and vocational photo education programs. So did their valuable professional support programs.

I wrote earlier about how quickly I thought the new tech would disrupt the market for business portraits; headshots. I've now, at last count, had about 45 people email me links to a number of ads offering the following service: You take a group of selfies with your phone. You choose a style and a background you like. You upload these files to the service which puts your images into a source file which software deconstructs using standard face recognition techniques (space between eyes, height and structure of cheekbones, nose structure, mount structure, etc.) to build a "new you" from all the parts. The new you is enhanced, cleaned up, rid of scars, acne and rough skin. Stripped of your previous double chin. And output as a series of new "candidates" for you to choose from. All for about $29. Turnkey.

The slower thinkers among us reflexively say that there isn't enough "resolution" on the phone selfies to make great images and so current professional headshot creators needn't worry. They totally miss the point that the supplied photos only supply the framework or the overall facial grid coordinates for the final digital portrait construction and that the appearance (and reality) of detail, texture and overall resolution and sharpness are made when the program "skins" the "frame". The resolution of the source material is immaterial to the final quality of the images; as long as the source images (selfies) provide broad information (hair color, facial metrics, complexion tones). To put it simply, the A.I. programs are looking at your supplied selfies the way a painter might look at a model or source material when doing realistic painting. They get the broad strokes from the small photos and then paint large. As large as you might want. And with as much fabricated but apparently real detail as you might want. 

I have a few friends who understand this new technology very well and say to me that the sky is the limit, that we are at early days in the "takeover" and that this will free up mankind for more leisure. Neglecting to acknowledge that most of the off-boarded knowledge and creative content workers will need to find new sources of income to replace their existing salaries. I guess the counter argument is to not worry about it if you are a stockholder of a company that benefits from endless, free content creation by machines because the embrace of the robots will reduce operating costs and raise equity value... An argument that brings little solace to those made redundant....

So, the sky is falling. The robots are kicking down the doors. bullets bounce right off their titanium alloy armor. Why don't I care?

Hmmm. I guess it's because I am confident that most bright people who are temporarily displaced will find a new way to make money and thrive. I'm also of the belief that a certain percentage of the population doesn't read the news, doesn't understand the coming changes and the ramifications, and that they will continue on doing things the way they have been until forced to change. 

I did some work for a large, regional advertising agency last week. We made portraits. They have a burgeoning I.T. department filled with very bright young people. To a person they found the new tech "interesting." But, importantly, they weren't rushing to adopt it in their own work. The portraits I was shooting were for use on their website. If a progressive (in terms of development; not in the political sense), tech forward, young company isn't rushing to use these new resources then there is some breathing room for current photographers. At least for now (but see the Kodak Delusion above...). 

Last weekend I needed to get out of the office and away from the computer. I walked downtown through familiar territory. Everywhere the trees, lawns and gardens were green and growing. The weather was textbook perfection. And all over the touristy spots of downtown Austin the landscape was busting with portrait photographers taking graduation portraits, engagement portraits, model portfolio portraits, family portraits and even portraits just for fun. All of the customers, if they had deeper knowledge, would be perfect candidates for much cheaper, retouched A.I. images --- if they were aware of the existence and value proposition. But they seemed happy to work with photographers who were working exactly the same way they did last year and even a decade before. The majority of photographers I saw were Gen Z and Millennial females, almost all wielding the almost cliché Canon DSLR and one of two zoom lenses, The venerable 24-70mm f2.8 or the 70-200mm f2.8. Some used flash but most were just winging it in the shade of the tall buildings. Gotta like open shade. It's the best. 

Here's my take. I think there are a lot of guys like me who really get into the technical stuff. We're on top of the latest gear and the latest techniques. We can imagine, clearly, the consequences of this sort of evolution.  But it takes a lot longer for people who aren't welded into the industry in the same way to "discover" the value of new technology. 

I remember years after I bought my first two wildly expensive Kodak digital cameras running into a friend/peer/competitor at one of the local processing labs (we still needed prints back then for clients) and he was asking me if I thought digital would ever supplant film-based commercial imaging. This was in 2004. He thought not. He thought his Hasselblad film cameras would be adequate for at least a decade more. And then, BAM! He was thrust by his own clients into the fast learning curve of digital at the time and a year later sold his last film camera to retool. It took the lab a long, long time to convince him that sRGB files were, indeed, what he needed to output his files as for printing. He tried to get good results giving the lab ProRGB files (incorrectly rationalizing that the wider gamut would provide better quality) for a long time before he understood. But eventually he came around, shoved along by the momentum of commerce. 

We're at the same kind of inflection point right now. We might be able to adjust in a number of ways. We can learn the new software and try to add our own value to it. We might pivot to a different specialty that values primary, human interpretation. We can delay the invasion of automation for a few years more by turning to video production instead (but the writing is already on the wall there too...). Or we can find the clients who don't want to change, don't know about the new tech, or just don't care how we do the job as long as it gets done. 

As an older generation (our demographic here trends "over 40") we have two real choices. We can learn as much as possible about new innovations, new trends and new tools like A.I. and incorporate them into our creative existence/workflow or we can hide our heads in the sand, deny that anything has changed, soldier on with an ever decreasing market share for our traditional wares until we are left barren of customers/audiences and distraught. 

There is a third option. We can just exit the market. If you don't need the income you can choose not to choose. But if you do need continuing income from creative content then you'd better get busy learning new ways. 

Sad to think that my old laptop and ChatGBT might just be the next Vladimir Nobokov. Or Richard Avedon. Now where did I store that cache of EMP weapons? Currently baiting the robot traps with lithium batteries....

Time elapsed concepting, researching, writing and editing: 1 hour 30 minutes. I owe it all to my typing teacher at high school... 

"Happiness is a learnable skill."  -Jewel

So much news. Sigma introduces two (or three; depending on your formats...) new lenses. All of which will be very, very popular.

 Today Sigma unveiled two lenses I want and one lens I'd like to have but don't really feel the need to rush out and buy. So, let's cover them in order of their value to me. 

The first two lenses are part of Sigma's i-Series. This "series" is a collection of smaller, lighter but no less potent single focal length lenses that are built entirely of metal and glass, have aperture rings and are beautiful to look at and happy to hold. So far I've purchased the 24mm f3.5, the 35mm f2.0, two of the 45mm f2.8s, the 65mm f2.0 (don't buy this one if you want to continue to think your other lenses are worthy...) and the 90mm f2.8. The 90 and the 24 are tiny. Definitely the kind of lenses you want in your travel kit. The 35 and the 65 blow away their competitors when it comes to sharpness and good optical behavior. 

There are also a couple of lenses in the i-Series that I don't own because, well, I'm not interested in the mix of features, etc. One is the 20mm f2.0, another is the 24mm f2.0. I have lenses that cover these focal lengths and they work just fine. Why duplicate for the sake of owning the complete catalog?

Every one of the i-Series lenses that I have purchased and used is wonderful. The 24mm 3.5 at f5.6 is perfect. The 45mm is full of character when used wide open but bite-y sharp when used at medium apertures. The 65mm might as well be a standard Leica SL lens. The 90mm is sharp right from f2.8 on down and is nice and small. But I've always been pining for one lens in particular and it's finally arrived. It's the 50mm f2.0. 

The 50mm, according to the specs, is not a budget "nifty-fifty" lens but a more modern version with 11 elements in 9 groups. If features aspherical elements and an HR element as well so it should be highly corrected and very usable at f2.0. The lens is about half the size and weight of its sibling, the 50mm f1.4 DN DG lens. So, it's a combination of balanced features that I think will be great for people like me who want a really well corrected 50mm "standard" lens but don't need the higher speed aperture and really don't want the size and weight of a big "Art" series lens for walking around and casually making photographs. 

The i-Series lenses are beautifully made; even down to the metal lens hoods and the metal, magnetic lens caps. All of the lenses I've bought in that system have been sharp even wide open with the exception of the 45mm f2.8. But the performance of the 45mm is not faulty. It was intended to be a lens with a different look profile when used at its widest aperture and especially when used in close. As in portrait photography and closer still life situations. It was designed to have residual spherical aberrations wide open with a more mellow look intended. And it really does work. In fact, I like it so much that when an additional one came bundled with a used camera I decided to keep it and have a low cost back-up for the first one.

But the new 50mm was designed by Sigma, in my opinion, to have 99% of the performance of the faster Art series 50mm from f2.0 onward and what you gain from giving up the stop of widest aperture is all about handling and usability for people who need mobility combined with high image performance. Yippee. That's me. 

I had considered buying the new Leica 50mm f2.0 Asph but I'd heard rumors about Sigma's intention to fill the gap in the i-Series between the 45mm and the 65mm and decided to wait and see what they would introduce. I'm happy I did. I have no doubts that the Sigma 50mm f2.0 will be just a good a performer as the Leica; or for that matter, the Lumix 50mm f1.8, but I gain an aperture ring on the lens barrel and a handling format that's familiar and comfortable for me. And, if you are industrial design sensitive you also get a lens that's a good visual match for any other i-Series lens purchases. 

Many will compare the new Sigma 50mm to plastic Canon, Sony and Nikon lenses and grouse about the premium price but looking at the optical design one has to realize that it's a more capable and more expensive product.  Of course, we could all make great photos with old, used lenses from the 1970's but I think that might be beside the point.

The second Sigma lens in my "wanted" list is the 17mm f4.0. My reasons are starkly utilitarian. I sometimes am asked to shoot interiors, exteriors and industrial landscapes that can benefit from a wider angle view. I've used a variety of wide angles over the years and the choices are usually demarcated between costly zooms or overly fast primes. Each comes with their own set of compromises.

Zooms are good at some (but not all) of their focal lengths and worse at others. I know some are highly corrected but like the super fast, wide primes, the best tend to be big, heavy and expensive. I can't figure out why I would want, for example, a 20mm f1.4 lens but in fact I bought one a couple of years ago and hated using it. There was no advantage to me, for the kinds of situations I use wide angle lenses in, to a super fast aperture. And optical engineers have indicated that each stop of increased speed requires 4x the precision of manufacturing to execute at the same level as a slower lens. 

The idea of a 17mm with "only" an f4.0 maximum aperture seems like a very good idea to me. The lens can be made smaller, lighter and much less expensive while delivering (at like apertures) at least as good performance as a faster lens of the same focal length. 

The 17mm, and lenses like it, are ones that I almost always use with a tripod so the slower aperture is meaningless to me. In fact, in most use scenarios I am much more likely to be using such a lens at f8.0 in order to get maximum depth of field. Maybe even f11. Combine that with smaller, lighter and cheaper and you have a great compromise for casual ultra-wide angle users like me.

I was surprised that the cost of the lens was so reasonable. Only $600. So, maybe a barebones kit for a traveler or someone who just wants to lighten the load might end up being the 17mm, the 50mm, and the 90mm. A lot of range for the money and at a lighter weight than would have been possible before. 

The final lens is a different animal. It's not an i-Series lens but is instead a "Contemporary" lens from Sigma. And it doesn't cover full frame; it's made for APS-C camera and also Micro4:3 cameras. The lens is the 23mm f1.4 which translates in full frame language to the every popular 35mm focal length. A favorite of so many streets shooters. This lens joins three other Sigma Contemporary prime lenses that have all been high performing favorites of APS-C oriented photographers. Those lenses are the 16mm f1.4, the 30mm f1.4 and the (absolutely awesome) 56mm f1.4. While these lenses aren't the smallest available for the format I can comfortably state that they have great optical qualities --- based on my experience with all three. While I'm not one of the rabid fans of  the 35mm experience I'll probably add the 23mm f1.4 to my inventory for all those times I want to take advantage of the charms of the Leica CL cameras. I have two of them and am impressed with the images every time I use them. 

It may be that 23mm on the smaller frame will work differently for me than a 35mm on full frame. Who knows? It may even become a favorite. But it's way down on the list of things I want to pay for right now.

Even though we've become very L mount-centric around here I should make it clear that all of the lenses mentioned here are also available in the Sony E mount. That expands what is available for the Sony A7 series and a6000 series camera quite nicely. It gives Sony users more choices. And very good ones at that.

For me the 50mm is the top priority. I'll get a lot of use from it. But I'd love it even more if the focusing ring gave me repeatable distances and had a distance scale on it. I'd love the option to zone focus when needed. But....that's what the older "legacy" lenses are for, right?

Now, where is that Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Planar I had around here? 

OT: Healthy Photographer, Happy Photographer.

Strong enough to lift and entire Leica CL up to my eye...

It's hard to work or play if you don't feel good. And it's easy to get side-tracked by medical issues if you don't stay on top of them. Recent studies indicate that exercise helps not only to prevent sudden medical events like heart attacks and strokes but can also reduce the risk of developing dementia by up to 40% !!!

People often argue that they "hate" to exercise but I can't imagine that living with excess body fat, low energy and the aches and pains caused by being sedentary is any bit more fun. Or that unchecked decay is any less time consuming or less expensive than exercise.

On the advice of my swimming coaches I added a bunch of strength training to my weekly exercise "diet." I've extremely happy with the results. My swimming has improved as has my overall energy level (although I've never been mistaken for a person with "low energy.").  I added three days of strength training at a local gym to my usual five to six days of swimming workouts. And, of course, I still try to get out and walk as often as possible. If work interferes I just try to reschedule the work. Or cancel it altogether...

I wondered at 67 how much benefit I would see from both the exercise and the healthy diet that B. and I try to maintain (admitting to an occasional pizza or hamburger...) so I was pleasantly surprised by the second part of my annual physical with my doctor today. Last week I endured all the blood tests, stress testing, an EKG and a bunch of other measures. Today was the "hands on" part of the physical as well as a review of the results from all of last week's testing. I'm happy to see that I've lost 4 pounds in the last year, my BMI is now 23. My A1C is normal and my cholesterol is at a happy ratio with low triglycerides.  All testing looked good and the machines that test for things like body fat, conductivity etc. calculated my "metabolic" age as being: 50. 

While I don't believe I can turn back the clock or that I've found the fountain of youth I do know that it's much better to spend whatever time I have left to practice photography in the best health I can and with the energy that comes from being pain free and unencumbered by largely preventable maladies. Knowing that I'm on the right track also helps me sleep well.

Once again, I know a lot of you are already doing pretty much what I do to stay in shape, but for the folks who are on the fences I can't emphasize strongly enough that the prevention provided by aerobic exercise and strength training (coupled with good eating habits) is more valuable than all the money or other treasures I can conceive of. Given the choice of being poor but healthy or rich but infirm I'll choose the former any time. Best of both world's? It's something to aim for...

P.S. It's not enough to show up. You have to do the work. 

 

Two very different versions of Austin's downtown. As seen from the Pfluger Pedestrian Bridge.

 

Camera: Leica SL. Lens: Panasonic 20-60mm. Focal length 20mm.

Camera: Panasonic S1R. Lens: Panasonic 24-105mm. Focal length 24mm.

I'm reading more and more about generative A.I. and it doesn't sound like a good thing for the vast majority of working photographers. Especially portrait photographers. It's not an existential dilemma for hobbyists, fine artists and all the folks who love the process of taking photographs but are not dependent on making money from their craft. Critics can dismiss the samples they've been shown on some websites as "fake" or "inferior" but I've seen some really convincing images and I would suggest that we're already seeing a workable quality in computer derived portraits even though these are the very early days of the new applications of A.I. in photography. 

On one level I really care about the incursions into the business side because it would be nice to eke out a few more profitable years doing the kind of work I really have enjoyed over the last 40 or so years. This revolution in imaging might not affect the very highest levels (Annie Leibovitz? Platon?) of photographers but for most others it will mean a significant devaluation of hard won abilities, talents and marketable products. 

On the other hand I'm somewhat insulated from the coming financial carnage by dint of being so close to exiting the commercial markets altogether. What does the generative A.I. onslaught have to do with me personally? With the exception of denting my self-identity as a portrait artist and reducing opportunities for easy billing, not much. In fact, I am so confident that taking images will continue to be fun and fulfilling that I ordered yet another lens to play around with. It should be here mid-week. It's the Nikon mount version of the Voiglander Ultron 40mm f2.0  SL IIS lens. I've been buying the DSLR/Ai Nikon mount version of some lenses like this one because the mount is so easy to adapt to any of the mirrorless cameras. And the selling price of the lenses in this mount are much less expensive than the M versions because the rangefinder coupling, which is expensive to implement well, is not needed or (obviously) included on the Nikon F mount versions. Yes, the adapter makes the lenses a bit bigger but on a relatively large Leica SL camera it hardly matters. 

I had the thought this morning that when all the cost efficient, bottom line focused businesses have fully accepted A.I. assisted or created portraits of their staffs, and all the landscapes are being rendered by Mid-Journey and DALL-E, that perhaps authentic human-made images, seen and captured with human thought, might become more collectible and have more intrinsic value to collectors and appreciators of photography. Also, the theatrical act of the portrait session might become more valuable as an experiential indulgence. An elite and economically lofty investment. One never really knows that much about the future. That's why it's so hard to predict accurately. 

Sitting around the studio printing out the tax return from the CPA. Damn! You actually have to pay taxes when you roll over funds from a tax deferred account to a Roth IRA. Who knew? (Besides my accountant).

 

The secret is to buy cheap lenses! No, that's not exactly right....

And, of course, I had to ask my accountant, when printing out the tax forms to put in the filing cabinet, "do the forms print better on an Epson printer or a Canon printer?" And, "should I use archival ink?"

I think we tend to concentrate on camera gear and photographic experiences on this blog site but we sometimes forget that my original thought in setting this up was to cover all the aspects of being a photographer and also running a photography business. To share what it's been like to go down the pathway of running one's own business. An undertaking that's very much about making and licensing art. Which means it's a business constructed and run to make a profit as well as fun photos. 

We generally set aside a full week each year to round up all the 1099 forms, find all the receipts for expenses and cost of goods, go through logs and invoices, etc. We have to be in charge of our own accounting, our marketing, our retirement planning and investment strategies as well as our healthcare costs and every other detail of business existence. It's a totally different mindset than that used to make creative products or to collaborate creatively with our customers and our supporting vendors. It's very much right brain versus left brain. And I'm never sure which brain is winning. 

I was joking around with my CPA (he's about my age) and I asked him what sort of accounting formula there is to determine when a person can or should retire. He suggested that as soon as your dividend income exceeded your profit from the business, year to year, that you could bail out without reducing your quality of life. Nice rule of thumb. I'll file that away for future pondering. Of course you could just spend down principal and hope you don't run out of $$$ before you run out of "runway." 

Every April I do a "State of the Union" for myself and the business. Our "Union" is strong. We billed more in 2022 than we did in the year before by about 40%. I chalk that up to the overall economy recovering from the Covid epidemic. Our camera purchases were no larger than in 2021. That was a good trend for overall profitability. We underspent on marketing (like, zero) and were still able to increase earnings year over year. 

We shed a number of business niches and clients that we deemed not to have a good profit-to-fun ratio (PTF ratio) and replaced those "time slots" with more swimming and strength training (which, incidentally, is paying off in the swimming). We've been studying the market for images and reorienting the business around our current predictions. Our research shows that we have a couple more years of potential, traditional photo market left and we'll work to maximize our profits from the business in those two years. After that we'll shut down.

As a result of long term financial planning we have been able to move all but a small percentage of investments from tax deferred accounts to Roth IRAs, or after tax brokerage accounts which will go a long way to minimizing the effects of RMDs (required minimum distributions) in retirement. We don't talk about things like this nearly as often as we do about lens edge sharpness or smoothness of focusing rings but maybe it's worth sharing for younger photographers who are now navigating the fun puzzle of building wealth. Tedious process but better than the alternative. 

Part of the plan was always to enter the last stages of the business with our mortgage paid off, our liabilities at zero and with enough cash in the "bank" to weather just about any foreseeable storms on the horizon. With inflation and down markets it's always a moving target but if you get the windage just right...and lead the economy by just a bit...

Photography has never been a remarkably profitable enterprise, especially on the small scale which we pursued it. We were able to eke out a decent living from the cash flow of the business but the real secret to building wealth is less about making a lot of money than it is about saving a lot of the money you make. And investing it wisely. 

Albert Einstein is said to have remarked that “Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it…he who doesn't… pays it.” I paid little attention to this reality for the first 40 years of my working life because I have been blessed to have a partner who understood it early in the game and set the right course. I was left to run on autopilot --- as long as I contributed my share.  And it's true. If you are well invested and get a 10% return (annually) over time on your money you'll double your net worth every seven to ten years. That's pretty cool. No....that's amazing. 

The secret, as explained by my partner, is simple. To quote our in-house expert: "Keep your damn hands off the money." To which I would add: "Always ask for the senior discount..." 

I will be officially finished with 2022 taxes on Monday when I transfer a "huge" (all relative) amount of money to pay for the consequences of that darned roll over. After that it's all fun and games until the well runs dry. And by "Until the well runs dry" I mean it metaphorically --- about cash flow. 

One of the lovely things about getting older is that you focus more and more on what you consider to be the important things in life rather than the bling. Friendship over prestige. Happy routines over flashy vacations. Shiny cameras instead of mistresses. Swimming over drunken debauchery. And a good night's sleep over bad habits or questionable judgement. Photography over watching sports on TV (which was referred to on a TV documentary about the ancient Greeks as: theater for stupid people).

That's the "State of the Union" for my small business as I see it today. And I'm pretty happy with the results. 

Hope you are barreling into tax day with huge profits and a better talent for organization than I possess. 

No April Fool's messages this year. Look elsewhere.  

hanging out doing post processing from yesterday's job and amusing myself by looking at new cameras and lenses. There's some fun stuff out in the marketplace. I'm not in a buying mood but I'm always curious.

 

Actor, Beth Broderick and concert pianist, Anton Nel just hanging out in the studio.

I'm pretty much still in the honeymoon phase with three different cameras. All three are Leica models. I like the SL2 for its projection of image quality dominance. I like the original SL for its almost indestructible build quality (and its panache that still shows after eight years in service). And I really like the Q2 for its compactness of purpose and its almost perfect design. I am amused to still consider that I am in the honeymoon period with the SL2 as it's been well over two years since I bought that camera. In the past my crushes on new cameras diminished to mere "confidence of purpose" within the first year and started out the second year as something "usable" while I looked around to see if there was something better. And at the end of the second year it was "ship jumping time" even if the grass wasn't much greener anywhere else. 

There are some brands though that keep nipping at my consciousness and imploring me to give em another try. And then there are some, like the Sony A7 series, that I consider unusable and unloveable. Like milk that's been in the fridge for months. Or a car that keeps breaking down on lonely highways. While no Sony has left me walking into the next small town looking for repairs they just aren't cameras that inspire me to do fun work. Or any work at all. I'm sure lots of people like them. I'm sure lots of people can point to good photograph which have been taken using them. But I'm equally sure that some number of people also sung the praises of the Pontiac Aztec while it was on the market...

I often wonder if I've overlooked some brand that might have finally perfected its offerings enough to give the Leicas a run for their money where I am concerned. Here are the ones I actively think about when I should be thinking about keeping the car in the correct lane, or pouring steaming hot water over fresh coffee grounds, or handling explosive materials, or trying to fix my own refrigerator...

There are actually two different Fuji APS-C cameras that I've been following since their introductions. One is nudging closer and closer to the dangerous, "What could it hurt just to try one, along with one, single solitary prime lens?"  That would be the Fuji X-Pro3. I know the sensor would make great images because, if I remember correctly, it's the same sensor used in the XT-3. That was a camera I used a lot and enjoyed very much. The appeal to me of the X-Pro3 is the rangefinder styling and the overall design of the camera and the controls. I've always enjoyed top mounted shutter speed dials and also EV dials. The camera looks sleek and beautiful while also giving an extensive nod to "retro" fashion. That body with something like the 35mm f2.0 lens, or the even more whimsical 35mm f1.4 lens would make a great "artist's" camera and I wouldn't mind walking around shooting with one. 

I imagine that I will pick up one eventually but I'll most likely have to wait for a year or so. They currently seem to be back-ordered everywhere and I figure they won't tumble into the aggressive used market for at least that long (a year or two) around the time when most lukewarm hobbyists give up cameras and photography altogether and turn their attention to riding lawn mower races or goading Europeans about their banking habits. 

The advantages of the X-Pro3 for me are the eccentric and happily silly flip down rear monitor screen with its illustration of film types on its rear panel when closed. That and the ability to actually use the camera like a rangefinder; not necessarily for focusing but for viewing directly. I'm sure you'll read a review of this product here long after the review might have been useful. Kinda like the Leica SL.... (circa 2015). 

The next Fuji camera on the list is one of the latest ones. The XT-5. As I said, I liked the overall handling and image quality of the XT-3 but I traded it away because I was convinced, at the time, that I "needed" a more video extensive model. The XH-1 was close but plagued with audio issues. I moved on. 

But now I don't really give a crap about video production, would rent a real video camera if needed, and kinda love the idea of an upgraded and even more capable version of the XT-3. Fuji has solved so many of the issues I had with the older camera. Bigger battery and more shots per. A nicer, higher res viewfinder. I'd be torn though by also thinking about the XT-4 which used the older 26 megapixel sensor and I always seem to like the files coming from lower res sensors better; all those things the same. 

The XT-5 has some allure but really, it's the X-Pro3 that will probably find itself nestled in my shopping cart. I'd be interested to hear from past or current owners as to why they bought it and if they still use it.

Another brand/model of camera that constantly shows up in the hands of satisfied, serious photographers is the Nikon Z6ii. Nice, 24 megapixel sensor, nice body styling and size. And, according to many, a really nice and super performing 50mm f1.8. My favorite focal length and not so fast as to be a compromise between speed and performance or speed and handling. I was always pretty happy with older, DSLR Nikons I owned, as far back as the D2HS and the D2X cameras but also the full framers like the D700, D800e and the D810. My only problem with the later, higher res models was the angsty frustration of trying to get lenses to focus accurately. So many were either front of back focusing. When correctly dialed in the whole system of camera and lens was great. But getting there could be a nightmare. Of course, one of the many great things about mirrorless cameras is the accuracy of focusing. In fact, I think if I ever ended up ditching the L mount cameras two of the Nikons would be top choices as replacements. They are small and light, have good battery life, nice screens and pretty files. Nice color science. 

Those would be the Z6ii and the Z7ii. A couple of good zooms and that 50mm to start. But, as I said above, still in the honeymoon period with various Leicas...

Last in today's list of cameras I'd like to at least try out would be the Ricoh GR111x. Most people seem to like it because it's small. A lot of people like it because they find the lens to be quite good. I think I would like it because I think someone finally got the right focal length lens on the front of a point and shoot camera. A 40mm equivalent. It would harken me back to the days when I started out shooting with a Canonet QL17 camera and how much fun that focal length was (and still is) for me.

Sure, the battery life is shorter than a cup of hot coffee in a snowbank and sure, there isn't a nice EVF, but you can get a nice bright line finder and there is something to be said for a camera you can take with you just about anywhere. Even in the pocket of your tightest disco pants. If you are so inclined. 

I wonder how many of you have picked up the GR111x and what your thoughts about it are. Inquiring minds attached at the hip to credit cards want to know....

Next time we might want to cover some current lenses that whet the appetite. There are a few that keeping falling in and out of my online shopping carts. Now just waiting to see what the tax bill will be like before I pull the trigger. If I can even afford to trigger a purchase in the first place. 

Be well. Stay refrigerated. Demand good service. Pay your full share of taxes so I don't have to shoulder your shortfall. 

Thanks, Kirk

I worked for an advertising agency yesterday. It was fun. They were so nice to work with. It made me nostalgic for work.

I first met the person who now owns and runs the ad agency I worked with yesterday many years ago. It was the mid-1990s and he was working in the marketing department at Motorola. I guess, at this point we've known and worked with each other for around 28 years. The creative director of the agency and I go back even further. Their company is on my new shortlist of "companies I still want to work with." 

Their company has grown quickly over the last five years. They keep adding employees not just in Austin but across the U.S. We've been making portraits of the staff, in a certain style, for the last two years. We started out photographing the people in downtown areas/locations that were a mix of new architecture and industrial looking backgrounds. The subjects were subtly lit and the backgrounds were intentionally out of focus. 

Of course, since we were working outdoors and on uncontrolled locations we ended up having to deal with wind, rain, hail and security guards. Sometimes one at a time but sometimes everything at once. At some point, after carefully watching the weather forecasts only to be surprised by 40 mph wind gusts we decided to do the ongoing project in a different way. I made a "library" of interesting blurry backgrounds and then we started making portraits against white in a small studio at the ad agency's headquarters. 

This meant that, for the most part, we were immune to sudden changes in weather, etc. but it also gave me total control over the lighting. For the agency it meant being able to schedule more people in a morning or afternoon. And have fewer people traveling outside the office and into downtown Austin. That saved on the emotional wear and tear of driving through a frenetic and crowded cityscape and the sometimes difficult task of finding parking. (A note to our European readers: No. There is no mass transit between the agency location and our downtown location. Well, nothing that would take less than four or five hours of travel time and three or four bus changes/transfers.... on a route you could drive with a car in 20 or so minutes...).

Yesterday the agency was onboarding four new employees and there were five other employees who had joined the firm in the last 90 day and all of them would be at the H.Q., in person. So, we needed to make portraits of nine people. The project coordinator and I scheduled about a week in advance to set up around 10 a.m. and photograph between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. The late morning start meant that I could make it to swim practice and still have plenty of time. (Grueling swim practice...but that's a story for another post).

I've done this sort of job many times and my biggest surprise was the anxiety I felt the day before. It had been a while since we packed up and went out to engage with clients. Not more than three or four times in the first quarter of this year. 

I've been slimming down the amount of gear I bring with me on projects. Yesterday I packed light. Two battery powered strobes (Godox AD200 Pros), a couple of light stands for the lights, two umbrellas (a 60 inch and a 45 inch), two light stands for the short roll of white seamless paper/background, and the flash trigger+back-up. 

I thought a lot about cameras and lenses and in the end I defaulted to the Leica SL2 and the Sigma 65mm i Series lens. At first I thought about going completely "old school" with the cameras and lenses and shooting "long." As in, a 90mm to 105mm focal length equivalent. The traditional "tight" headshots. I would use the SL2 in the APS-C crop mode which would give me an ample 22 megapixels of resolution and a focal length equivalent of nearly 100mm. But on further reflection I decided to break out of old habits and just embrace the wider focal length of the lens. I shot all the portraits in the full frame mode of the camera. After all, I needed to shoot wider; waist up, in order to do clean drop-ins/composites with the images from the library of urban and industrial backgrounds. 

Why do I adore clients like this one? Well, they schedule projects with my schedule preferences in mind and they don't reflexively like to start early in the day. All of the people who have been there for a while are more like friends than clients. They really do care about their relationships with both sides of the work equation: clients and vendors. When I walked through the doors with my small load of gear I got hugs from 50 year old men. Offers to carry my gear by the young recruits. Hearty handshakes. Queries about my son's career and when he might want to jump ship and join their agency. Queries about B. and her retirement ( her last design project was actually for this agency for which the agency and B won Addy Awards at the most recent Advertising Agency awards show). And a genuine interest in learning what I thought might be big trends in the industry. Those guys know how to "work a room" but it was genuine.

I arrived at 10 and was set to go by 10:30. That's when the project coordinator dropped by the studio to check in and invite me down the hall to a lobby where they'd set up coffee, pastries, breakfast tacos and yogurts for agency meetings. "Help yourself." And not just "breakfast tacos" but "GREAT BREAKFAST TACOS" from my favorite restaurant. Outstanding coffee as well.

With the lights set and metered I was ready for a steady stream of "customers" and was not disappointed. I had a wonderful and long conversation with one of the original principals who does media training for execs at companies like Dell and IBM. I met the new executive creative director who was fun, nice and hilarious all at once. And every younger person was excited to be there and to be engaged with their industry. It reminded me of how much fun it was when B. and I were running a regional advertising agency back in the 1980s. (How quickly we forget the headaches...).

The Leica SL2, combined with the Sigma 65mm f2.0 was just perfect. Snappy eye-detect AF and, afterwards, luscious, detailed and color accurate files to work with. 

After I wrapped the gear and stuck it into my car they invited me to stick around for the "all hands" lunch that included various tuna, chicken and avocado wraps, fruit salads, pasta salads and more. The CEO and I swapped some old Motorola war stories and then I headed home to start on post production. 

A wonderful day and a reminder that there's still a lot of projects out there I want to do. I guess I'm not so much "retired" as "becoming increasingly pickier" about what I want to do and who I want to do it for.

On the domestic front: This morning I'm still dealing with the dreaded and recalcitrant refrigerator from hell. But today I'm wildly optimistic. I had four visits from a third party tech over the last month. From a third party company that contracts to do warranty service for GE. All miserable failures. A rude and smelly tech each time. And each time a refrigerator that went right back to its malign ways. I'd finally had enough and asked an attorney to take over this convoluted adventure. He got in touch with GE....

This morning at 9:45 a.m. two (not one. TWO) GE Appliance Repair trucks arrived at my house. GE Technicians (x2) got out and assembled real, actual diagnostic tools. Laptops, Fluke meters, cables and all manner of devices to finally, accurately figure out what the hell is wrong with the refrigerator. They will be here until it is fully repaired and tested. And tested.

An adventure in domestic appliances that I need to make into a novel. Gotta look and see if anyone  installed spyware on the machine...