I was sorting prints to see which I should toss and which I should save when I came across these in a portfolio box...

 The images span film and digital, were created using all kinds and brands of cameras and were printed large (13x19 inches) and intended to end up in a print portfolio. All the prints shown here were printed using an Epson 4000 printer and mostly Epson papers. Now that every portfolio is on the web I'm not sure what to do with hundreds of similar prints that have been stacking up around the office. Most in archival portfolio boxes but some in stacks on shelves. 

originally shot on film in a Pentax 645 camera. 

An early digital camera file.

Annual report image shot on a Sony R1 camera. 

I laid all these out on the floor and photographed them with a Lumix S1 camera

and the Lumix S50mm f1.4 lens. Just as documents...

Life moves on.

It's Friday. The start of a calm weekend. A nice day for a walk.

It's been an odd week here in central Texas. The days have been sunny and warm and the night temperatures race back down into the 50s so we can all get a good night's sleep. It's almost Pavlovian but when the skies are blue and clean and the days are warm all manner of Austinites don on their shorts, running shoes and t-shirts and rush outside to amble around and soak up the heat. Indoor tables at restaurants are easy to come by but seating out on the patios is precious and hard to come by. We all know too well that in a month or so the heat will descend on us like an itchy blanket and we will only have weeks, maybe days, to enjoy the outdoors the way other people will be able to for months to come. 

Today it hit the middle 80°s. Next week we might crest the 90°s. Walks will be prioritized earlier and earlier and, as the sun heads further south and rises too early in the morning, we'll have to make a shopping trip to get fresh sunscreen and maybe some new hats. 

As nice as my office and my house can be I just couldn't stand the idea of sitting in front of a computer all day and not getting out into the perfect weather. For me, these days, it's much more about walking and just looking at stuff than it is about relentlessly photographing. Today I embraced imperfection. I put a lens on a Leica rangefinder camera for which there are no dedicated (or available) bright frame lines. Nor is there an in-camera lens profile. I was working without a parachute. But what's the worse that could happen? I'd throw away some digital frames. So what?

The camera was one of the black paint Leica M240s. The lens was my first M mount purchase of the digital age, the Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton Classic. The lens is tiny and sharp and, at 40mm, requires one to take a leap of faith when it comes to framing in the eyepiece of the M cameras. You can always cheat and use the live view feature to check composition on the rear screen but I chose to turn off the live view feature and just let it all hang out.  Too loose is better than too tight...

I did my loose framing using the 50mm frame lines and reminding myself that I'd have a bunch of extra room around all four sides of the frame lines that the camera was showing me. Since it was the walk that I craved (more than the pix) I was happy to just wing it where making photographs was concerned. I did shoot in .DNG so I could make up for most of the mistakes I might make but.... 

The most interesting thing I photographed; at least most interesting to me, was a series of clouds that had a repeating pattern and held together as a unit as it came across the sky. It looked to me like a snake's skeleton.  I made that cloud display part of my "walk project" today. And I made it a project by trying to find new angles for a familiar skyline of buildings with which to frame the clouds. 

I have been using the M cameras pretty much non-stop since October of 2023 and I think I've settled in well with the way they work. The way they render color. And the way I have to interpret their exposure eccentricities. I've gotten into the habit of assessing an exposure triangle that works for me and not changing a damn thing unless I step into open shade or go inside a building. The result is absolutely the most consistent exposures I've gotten in a long time. Far better consistency than any camera's matrix metering set-ups. This is something I think everyone who wants to shoot fast and get consistent results should try. It's basically a variant on using an incident light meter, ignoring the subject colors and tones, and settling in to getting your money's worth out of consistent daylight. 

I wrote once about a trip I did to Paris for two weeks, in 1991, to shoot for Agfa. They were launching new films and I was asked to be a tester. Mostly, for me, it meant free film and processing, and airfare to my choice of cities in Europe and then back home again. I used a Canon EOS-1 camera for a lot of the photography but I also took over my favorite, old Leica M3 camera and  50mm Summicron and 35mm Summicron lenses. As I'm sure you probably know, the M3 was a meter-less camera. The EOS-1 had all sorts of "new and improved" exposure tools and, admittedly, it did a decent job in most situations. 

But with the M3 I used a different method. I pulled the little data sheet that came in the film boxes of Kodak films back then and cut out the part that had recommendations for exposure settings when using the film outdoors, during the day. There were five different settings including settings for direct sun, sun with clouds ("cloudy bright"), settings for overcast and at least one recommended setting for open shade.  I taped the paper guide to the bottom of my camera, on the baseplate, using Scotch Tape. The tape covered the paper entirely which helped my guide sheet last a long time (no batteries required) and I referred to it often at first and then less often as the settings became second nature. 

The takeaway was that the exposure settings based on the camera base plate, paper guide gave me much, much more consistent exposures because there was no tricking the "meter" by pointing it at dark or light subjects. Almost like using an incident meter that meters the actual light falling on a subject instead of the (variable) light reflecting from the subject. Looked at the contact sheets today I can see that the M3 exposures were mostly right on the money and gave me great, printable negatives. The EOS-1's advanced metering was a firm second finisher when it came to exposure accuracy. Darn all those trendy people wearing black on black on black outfits....

So, now that I've ventured back into the Leica M camp I seem to be channeling my metering methodologies from thirty some years ago. And based on today's results --- it all seems to be working. 

I suggest everyone who is interested in shooting quickly in the streets try that old method. Figure out the main working exposures and make a little chart. Walk around and shoot with those settings for a couple days, a week, a month and see if your exposures aren't (for want of a better word) better. I'm betting they will be. All bets are off when you go indoors. Bars, restaurants and even shops are lit worse these days than they were in the old days. You might struggle a bit there...

Getting a great exposure was much more important, I think, in the film days than it is now. We have so many post production tools we can save ourselves with but wouldn't it be really nice to master daylight exposure? To be able to consistently nail stuff in the camera? It just takes a bit of practice. 

Speaking of practice, you'll get better and better at most things if you spend time frequently and routinely working at perfecting your understanding of photographic techniques --- and customizing the exposure techniques to match your subjective tastes. Light and airy or dark and moody. All are good but mastering exposure sure will get you into the ballpark that you prefer a lot quicker. 

Semi-retirement is going swimmingly. I seem to be settling into a series of fun routines. We've been to two new restaurants in the last week. We're meeting my brother and his wife at a new (to us) restaurant tomorrow afternoon. It's fun. After that we're off to a fundraiser for a senate candidate. Probably will turn out to be the most expensive couple glasses of wine I've ever had. The donation requested is about adequate to finance a new Voigtlander lens. But I guess I've got enough of those VM lenses already. And I sure would like a new senator... 

No. I'm not saying who.

I have seen this pine tree against this wall for years. I finally felt compelled to walk down the alley and make its portrait. It's weathered a lot in the past three years. Ice storms, dramatic high temperatures and also horticultural loneliness. I spent some time assuring it that I saw it...

It's all about the  clouds. A weird band of clouds that persisted for about half an hour. I thought it was quite cool. Loving f11 on a lens. Lots and lots of depth of field. Yum.
 

I'm very happy that Fuji updated their X100V to the X100VI. I think it's a great budget alternative to the Leica Q2 or Q3...

 

Leica M + Zeiss 28mm

At one point a couple of years ago I owned both a black and a chrome Fuji X100V. They very nice cameras. The 35mm equivalent lens was very good and the images I could get out of the camera were competitive with anything else even close to the price. I didn't really like the way the camera felt but that was something I'm pretty sure I could get over, if necessary. It was missing one or two things but in total it was a smart solution for an every day carry camera. Now it's (at least on paper) better. The APS-C sensor has been engorged with 40 megapixels which means you can make better use of the in-camera cropping. But the big new item is the addition of image stabilization --- which everyone in the universe seems to crave. 

I'll probably skip the new version. And a couple of years ago I sold off the previous version cameras. I have a Q2 and while it's a really, really good camera it has shown me that I more or less resent being limited to one lens choice. Or one lens lack of choice. I'm guessing that's why I bought some interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras. Similar body style but with a wide choice of lens focal lengths --- from very wide up to a usable 90mms. 

I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the X100V or the X100VI to people who want a single camera solution that's simple and, image-wise, powerful. People who are comfortable with one focal length. Folks who don't need to look at things differently on different days. The new Fuji is a wonderful solution for those who want to simplify but still demand great images. No question.

Someone out in the web mentioned the price creeping up compared to the old model and said that the new Fuji is approaching the point where it is becoming a "Veblen" product. An observation generated by the fact that the new camera is about $200 USD more than its predecessor. A 'whopping' $1600. 

I think some people are living in an alternate universe in which they feel that no product, and certainly no new product, should ever cost more than what they paid for a camera back in 1995. 

The introductory price of the previous X100V was $1399. It was introduced over four years ago. In the interim inflation here has gone up by 14.16 %. Even if the new camera had no improvements whatsoever its inflation adjusted price should be in the ballpark of  $198 + $1399 =  $1597.00. And those inflation numbers are for U.S.A. consumers, not international camera buyers who may have endured even higher rates of inflation. Add in the new features such as image stabilization and a higher resolution sensor and it boggles the mind that anyone would begrudge Fuji a fair profit on their very, very desirable product. People will vote with their wallets. I think the X100VI will win that election. 

To suggest the product might be verging on "Veblen" is bizarre at a time when its closest competitor in that particular camera niche is the (unobtainable/short supply) Leica Q3 which currently costs $6,000 --- if you can find one for sale. Seems silly, churlish to label a product that costs 3.75 times less as extravagant. 

For some the asking price of $1599 for the Fuji might put the camera out of reach. There are plenty of folks who would have to stretch to buy a $500 camera. But manufacturers are good at figuring out a package of capabilities and features that can be offered for a price many can pay. There are tiers for everything under the sun. Just ask any wine or watch enthusiast. Loads of ten dollar cabs. Load of $30 Timex watches.

It's time to stop being so hung up on the price of products that we absolutely don't need for our survival. It's up to every consumer to decide the value proposition of a new camera for themselves. It's not as if every maker of cameras out in the world has an exactly competitive product. And as long as a product isn't a commodity or a necessity the maker can set the price they want and reap the rewards for their initiative. If they price it too high sales drop; especially if there is a "slightly" more expensive alternative that has its own advantages...

You can buy clothes at Walmart and you can buy clothes at Nordstroms. And a lot of stores in between. You get to choose. That's the beauty of free choice and a capitalist system. 

I'd love to get everything for free but I'm pretty sure that's never going to happen. For now I'll select the products that do what I want at a price I think I can afford and be happy that someone made a product that really appeals to me. It's just not going to be a Fuji X100VI. At least not right now.

I had a job today. A portrait for a start-up company here in Austin. I love my job. Or at least the part of it I've kept...

Sam. ©2024 Kirk Tuck

I straightened up the studio this morning and started playing around with lights. I recently bought another seven foot diameter umbrella to replace one that got damaged. It was important to replace it since I really like the look of big, big modifiers. Especially when I put a one stop diffusion silk over the front to soften the light even more. When my portrait person, Sam, showed up we spent ten or fifteen minutes just chatting. We seem to know a lot of people in common and that's always a nice way to get started. She's a new hire for the company started by my former next door neighbor. The portrait is for his company and we did a bunch of variations that will match up well with our previous photos for them.

The "work" portraits were composed to include from Sam's knees to the top of her head (with some extra room around the edges). One of those poses will eventually be dropped into an urban background and finished as a black and white image. I used the Fuji GFX 50Sii along with the 35-70mm lens for those shots. Then, when we knew we had the required images in the "can", I asked if she had time to do some "just for fun" portraits. I pulled out that 90mm TT Artisan lens I've written about before and put it on the camera in order to both comp a little tighter but also to play a bit more with shallow depth of field. 

In all we spent about 50 minutes photographing, chatting, laughing and then photographing some more. It was a very relaxed set. I'm happy with the early images; the ones we'll use for the website and other corporate collateral, but I'm especially happy with the closer photos. The 90mm lens has its shortcomings but if you take your time with it and nail the focus it can deliver very beautiful images. 

The camera was set for ISO 640, the shutter speed was 1/640 and the aperture was f2.5. Dicey to shoot that wide open when you are operating close in because the depth of field is so shallow that slight movements of the subject can put the eyes out of focus. You have to be prepared to shoot a lot in order to throw away the misses and still have something fun to show.

I used three Nanlite FS-300 LED lights. Two on the white background and one in the aforementioned, giant umbrella. The umbrella main light was about four feet from Sam's face. I also used a white reflector panel to the opposite side to put some needed fill into the shadow side of her face. 

The studio door was wide open to let in warm air. The weather here is pretty much perfect. Sunny and warm with a soft breeze. Everything was so laid back today. A nice way to work. Just thought I'd share a contemporaneous photo. I don't always have the chance. 

variation: 

Sam. ©2024 Kirk Tuck

 

Almost every photo walk has a purpose or an agenda. Sometimes highly defined. Usually quite vague. Now...Saturday....

We've been talking about testing gear lately. At least I have. One of the lenses I recently purchased has been languishing in the equipment cabinet mostly because it's not a 50mm lens (my favorite) and  I've been more focused on getting all three of my rangefinder cameras perfectly calibrated before using this one because it's a 90mm and they require more rangefinder accuracy because they provide less depth of field. You can really tell if a camera and lens are front or rear focusing when a longer focal length is involved. By the time I grabbed for a camera on Saturday afternoon I felt confident that everything was just as it should be; camera-wise. 

The lens I'm writing about is the Voigtlander APO-Skopar 90mm f2.8 for the M mount. The lens is deceptively tiny and light. I bought the chrome version just for something different and I think the lighter finish also makes the lens seem less dense. I wanted to see how useful the 90mm focal length would be on a rangefinder camera and I thought it would be fun to take the lens out on a sunny, late afternoon and put it through its paces. 

I used the lens on a black M240 body and shot everything in Jpeg. I know that some reviewers have decided that they don't like the SOOC Jpegs from Leica rangefinder cameras but I've always found them to be really nice. Especially if you tweak the camera settings a bit. More contrast seems to be what they want to work really well. At least for me. If you measure stuff using test targets in your basement studio you may have completely different point of view as regards Leica Jpeg response. I'm interested in a "pleasing" look and not necessarily a completely accurate rendering. The urge for perfection seems to go hand in hand with unhappiness.... Even where cameras are concerned. Especially where cameras and lenses are concerned.

I think the images here (below) tell the tale. I've played around with post processing a bit but not so much as to obscure the basic look and feel of the files. I think most stuff looks better with a bit of contrast enhancement. It's just the way I see the world.

The 90mm VM APO is a very sweet lens. I already own the Sigma 90mm f2.8 for the L mount but the Voigtlander is more useful for me as it can be easily used, with an adapter, on the M, L and GFX mount cameras (and many other mirrorless models) whereas the Sigma i lens is limited by its lens mount to only the L cameras. That makes the VM very useful for me. I'll keep the Sigma for those times when I want the luxurious laziness of autofocus with eye detection. It's great for that. 

The 90mm VM results from the day convinced me that I'd gotten my RF calibrations done well. The lens focuses quickly and has a relatively short focus throw and that takes some getting used to. The lenses I collected to use on video projects were selected, in part, because they feature long throws which allow for really accurate fine focus and better results when doing manual follow focus moves in video. For example, the Carl Zeiss 50mm Milvus lens has a very long focus throw. Maybe 270 degrees; much of it in the close up area. But careful focus marking on the barrel for stop and start targets pays off with smoother throws and more accurate stops and starts. It just does. Conversely, it takes a long time to go from something that requires close focusing to a subject situated near infinity. Practice, practice, practice. The 90mm VM is quick to focus; snappy. But that also means you have to be quite careful to hit exact focus when you need to. With a rangefinder it's actually a bit quicker for me because the coincident rangefinder has a more binary display. It's easier for me to see where coincident images come together than to explore exact focus on a focusing screen. Focusing on a screen requires, for me, more iterative ins and outs for me to be finally sure of the exact spot. I'm betting the focus throw of the 90 VM to be something around 90°.

The M240 camera I used was easier to focus and compose with than I thought it would be. At one point, back in the film days, Leica made three different versions of the M6. The different magnifications worked to make the cameras match up better with various focal length categories. There was an M6 with a .58 magnification finder that was optimized for using wider angle lenses. It was perfect with the 28mm lenses and also quite good with the 35mms as well but as you got into standard and tele lenses the frame lines became progressively smaller and that always makes composition and focusing a bit tougher. 

The standard camera in the M6TTL line up was the one with the .72 magnification finder. It was a decent balance for use with all manner of rangefinder lenses but it was a bit too tight to accurately and easily show all of a 28mm frame. One really needed an external/shoe mounted bright line finder for use with the 28mm. (Now the standard M camera magnification is .68 but Leica have made the viewfinder bigger and that helps with the wide angles. 

The camera I loved back in the film days was the Leica M6TTL with the .85 magnification finder. It was perfect for use with the 50mm lenses and very good for the 75s and the 90s. But 35mm was as wide as you could go and the finder still felt very cramped at that focal length. I would love to have a new digital M camera with the choice of a .85 viewfinder. It would be wonderful with this 90mm lens but even more delightful with the 50mm lenses. That would be rangefinder heaven. 

But it all is what it is. What we give up in finder magnification flexibility (and the cost of owning three different bodies in order to optimize the use of different focal lengths) we gain in having live view which can effortlessly show us exact framing of any lens on the camera and also offer punch-in magnification for precision focusing. 

On Saturday I chose to use the rangefinder to focus the 90mm and not live view. I'm okay with the degree of accuracy I was able to get. 

*****

Yesterday was someone's birthday. We all went out for Korean food at Oseyo on East Caesar Chavez St. The food and company were wonderful. Then we all celebrated the birthday with big slices of chocolate cake and ice cold glasses of milk. I'm sitting here today writing this right now because I'm still full from yesterday's fun excess... and writing the blog gives me an excuse to sit, motionless, like a snake who devoured a whole herd of something or other and must now deal with digesting it.

I read a blog post this morning about the agonies, and the trials and tribulations, of selecting products one wants or needs to buy. The tortured description of the process was almost disturbing. I have an opposite methodology for buying photo gear. It goes like this: Realize that a 90mm for your rangefinder might be fun. Go to B&H's website (or your favorite website) and see what's available for your camera in the price range you can afford, select between black and chrome finish all the while understanding that there is no "right" choice and that either option would be fine with you. Put in shopping cart. Check out. Wait for arrival. Use in a state of general, uncomplicated happiness. Done. Time elapsed with the purchase of the 90mm? About two minutes. Presto: more life left over for living well. Happiness ensues.  More photography gets done.

Research is deadly. Can be boring. And indecision is a clear path to anxiety and depression. Pull off the bandage. Get what you want. Go with your gut reactions. Stop worrying about getting everything just right and you'll actually have time to go out and make photographs. Even silly test photos like the ones below....  (this does not apply to expensive hats....).

Last shot of the evening at twilight. ISO 3200. 

only one mannequin shot and only added because I loved the texture on the hat...

this frame originated in color. The one below was taken a few minutes before and 

was shot with the camera's black and white setting. With contrast boosted in camera.