OT: Crazy Times at the Pool. What was I thinking???

 I'm happy to be swimming with a competitive team now that I'm 68 years of age. Every workout seems sweeter. Every little victory delicious. Just finishing a hard set seems more fun.  More rewarding. And, interestingly, I'm not slowing down. Much.

Today we were coached by Jenn. She's our toughest coach. 

The warm up was standard fare. 400 yard swim, 400 pull, some kicking sets, A thousand yards with which to loosen up the muscles, find one's rhythm and get the heart rate up. But today's main set was intense.

We did two sets of 20 x 50 yards. That's not so unusual but the intervals were. We were asked to choose a "challenging" interval for the first set of 20 ( times two lengths...) and then choose an interval that was five seconds faster per 50 for the second set. My lane mates chose 45 seconds per 50 for the first set and then 40 seconds per 50 for the second set. Mercifully, there was a break between the two sets. But a "break" at swim practice still means doing yardage. For us it meant a 300 yard dolphin kick. But that was restful compared to the main sets....

Some lanes chose to do their sets on more relaxed intervals but no lane selected faster intervals. We got into a pace we could sustain and which, for the first set, gave us about 5 or 6 seconds rest between 50s. The second set was almost touch and go. A few deep breaths between 50s. A second or two of rest. 

In the end we knocked out about 3300 yards in our hour workout. But man, those were some fast yards with micro amounts of recovery. I'd feel more smug about finishing a set like that except that our lane leader today is just a bit older than I am...  There is a lot to be gained by not succumbing to our culture's perspective on age and performance. We can do a lot more than most people imagine. 

Now, back to the house painting adventures... (going well).

After a weekend of pulling out stacks of paper, moving filing cabinets, rolling up carpets and other prep work for house upgrades there was a lot of pent up desire to be outside with a fun camera.

 

I've been shooting in Jpeg+Raw lately with the M 240, mostly to give myself a choice, when I review files, between black and white and color. The image above looked much better to me in black and white while most of the files below seemed to depend on color to carry the day. 

The Leica M 240 and the 50mm Voigtlander lens seem to be a perfect match. When I use wider lenses on that body, especially the 28mm, you have to move your eye around the finder to really see the frame lines with any degree of accuracy. And that's presuming that the framelines are accurate in the first place. A big assumption given parallax and the changing magnification as the lens focuses toward the minimum focusing distance. The 35mm focal length is the last stop before the inconvenience of wider angle lenses seeps in. I was going to go through the process of finding just the right diopter attachment so I would not have to wear my glasses with the wider angle lenses but I've pretty much decided that in the same way the Q2 is a camera with a fixed 28mm lens and the Fuji X100V is a fixed 35mm lens, the M240 might most comfortably be considered a camera with a fixed 50mm lens. At least the way I use it.

At some point, if I ever warm up to using the 28mm on the rangefinder I'll hunt down a very nice 28mm bright line finder to put into the accessory shoe of the camera. Then I'll focus through the regular finder and then compose with the bright line accessory finder. But for now? I'll keep sticking the 28mm on the front of the SL2 and be happy with it. Or, alternately, I'll stop worrying about where the edges of the frame lines are in the M 240 finder and just merrily shoot without making a big deal out of it. It's not like I'm using this particular lens and camera combination for client work, after all.

I could lie and chalk up the performance here to the fantastic dynamic range of a decade old sensor or I could be honest and admit that I started with a dark file, used an A.I. filter to accentuate the color and contrast of the sky, then made another layer in Lightroom and used the brush tool to select the area under the eaves and on the wall adjacent to the eaves and in shadow. Once selected I color corrected the underlying area (it was too blue), warmed up the white on the sign with the hand, and opened up the exposure on the underlying area as well. I finished it off by adding some clarity slider to the selection but not to the global frame since I wanted the sky to go out of focus. Lightroom makes area by area corrections much easier to do now and I rarely have to go into PhotoShop to get what I want.

Why am I happy with the frame above? Well, I screwed up the exposure by one stop. I forgot about the 1/4000th of a second limit and, using ISO 500 and f4.0, I overexposed and subsequently got into an argument with my camera. But I was able to pull back the details in the file by reducing the exposure in post. I'd read that the sensor in this camera and earlier M digital cameras had limited dynamic range but I think this is a repudiation of some of that reporting. Sure, if you are off by two stops I'm betting your file is screwed but one half or even one stop? Worth a try every time. Or....you could just take the time to get the exposure correct. (Red-faced with shame....). 

the City of Austin likes murals. They'll commission people to paint them on just about anything. 

Above and below= Two versions of the same frame. Color and "Monochrome" AKA: black and white. 

I went back and forth but after looking at them for a while I decided that I like the black and white version better. Not sure why. Retro charm?

Great idea but I'm pretty sure Willie doesn't want the job and wouldn't like the salary....

On this image and several below I used the Lightroom feature: Lens Blur to selectively blur the background. You'll note that because it analyzes the original frame to determine it's "depth" via a 3D mapping routine the focus falls off in a natural progression the further it "extends" away from the main subject. You can control the amount and intensity of the fall off as well as modifying the range of the effect. I absolutely love it and will probably never have to buy a fast lens ever again (kidding? maybe). 

A bit overdone in these examples but easier to see that way....

Nothing beats an A to B comparison, right?

Top one is with the Lens Blur filter using default settings. 

The bottom image is unfiltered. As it appears right out of camera. 

Not a huge difference but enough. 

One click. that's it. No time having to select the subject, etc. 

This is either machine learning or artificial intelligence but whichever it is

I like it.

I used a "dramatic sky" filter from the LRC presets and toned it down by 50%. 

Is any day really complete without a dose of Mannequin? Especially a mannequin with what appears to be a pyramid in the background. 

Do you like to post comments? Do you like to read comments appended to daily posts? Our default here is to allow automatic posting of comments right after publication of each post. The ability to post a comment without undue moderation is enabled for two days. Older comments have to be moderated so we don't get spammed to death with ads for ED supplements, Bitcoin offers, and miracle offers of discount Russian brides. If something offensive gets posted it usually gets squashed and vacated within hours. We (royal "we") check the blog throughout the day to give you the absolute freshest comments for your reading enjoyment. If you currently have a blog and would like to be quicker on the draw with comments you can take my workshop. It's almost free. 

One Danger in Dealing with Retirement. Or even the Expectation of retirement.

 

I'm a sucker for clouds. Puffy ones stuck in contrasty blue skies, especially. 

After the painters got started B. took over managing our painting project today and I grabbed my camera and headed out the door for breakfast, a morning walk and a respite from over-prepping everything. The easiest destination was my current default, South Congress Ave. Shopping haven for the South side of town...

I was amazed to find convenient, on street parking just a few blocks away from a long time coffee favorite, Jo's Coffee. You've seen many images from Jo's; especially in the last few months. But today I went there for their breakfast tacos and a cup of drip coffee. They used to bring in other people's tacos to sell but they now make their own and they are delicious. Today I went for bacon, egg and cheese on whole wheat tortillas. Jo's seating is all outdoors. If you want to eat at Jo's or meet for coffee at Jo's you'll be doing it along with whatever weather Central Texas wants to provide in the moment. Today it was clear, clean and in the 70's. Yes, that's Fahrenheit. Perfect for coffee outside.

I'm still getting fully checked out on the Leica M 240. My biggest stumble today was forgetting that 1/4,000th of a second is as high as that shutter is going to go. I'm used to cameras that can crest 1/16,000th of a second and I keep wondering why, when I've got the exposure compensation set to minus one stop, my photos are still coming out overexposed. Duh. Maybe I should pay attention to the flashing 1/4000th in the finder and select a smaller aperture. It's a thought at any rate. 

I have a similar weakness for photos of clouds floating in fields of blue done in color. Not as edgy but....blue is universally peoples' favorite color.

When I got back to this week's temporary office (vacant bedroom now filled with much crap from the studio) I checked messages and saw two from friends. One is a fellow photographer who was inviting me over to his place for a late afternoon "happy hour" tomorrow. He's recently had both knees replaced so I'll probably go by my favorite Mexican restaurant and pick up some really good Queso and a bag of freshly made chips. Try to take the work out of entertaining. He's always fun to talk to, has a big, sprawling place with gardens all around and a lovely patio on which to sit and watch the sunset. And generally surrounded by artists and authors; a few of whose names you'd recognize...

The next message was from a long time friend and the former CFO of our advertising agency from back in the 1980s. She was calling to see if we could schedule a "happy hour" for Wednesday afternoon to celebrate both of our recent birthdays and to catch up. She's always been a financial mentor for me and is probably one of the real reasons I live in a nice house and can afford to hire painters instead of sitting alone in a tiny apartment covering cracks in a dirty wall with old, free posters from bad concerts. Her persistent mantra, early in my career, to save, save, save was delivered into much resistance. So I am in awe that her persistence is what carried the day.

We'll meet at a favorite neighborhood restaurant to share a bottle of wine and a plate of cheeses and charcuterie. And to talk about kids, retirement, writing and what to expect from this crazy economy.

The danger of having a bunch of friends who are slightly older than me and who have plunged into the adventure of retirement before me seems to be that the happy hour is gaining, week by week, in popularity. I tease a bit. We're all pretty mellow at this stuff. Two glasses of wine and we're usually happy enough and ready to head home. Still, it's habit forming and not the best thing if you are planning to swim hard the next day. A balance between social engagement and possible excess...

Hmmm. A photo project about America's fascination with happy hours. That might be fun. 

It's mid-afternoon and the painting is coming along well. We're about to see a second coat of white paint on the ceiling. Amazing how white a white ceiling can look when it's revisited and re-coated after two and a half decades. 

So, what's after all this painting? you may ask. Ah, well, then it will be time to replace the hardwood floor in the living room. And start on Winter landscaping. And re-visit the interior touches in my office. It just never stops....

Buying cameras is a lot more fun but it actually is nice to see fresh paint and it makes everything seem clean and new. And, I think for B. it is a lot more fun than buying cameras. Good to compromise from time to time. 

A reminder that everything here at the blog might slow down from now until Wednesday. The painters are here. The computers are moved. Everything is chaos. Pretty much normal...

 

It's been 26 years since anyone painted the walls and ceiling in our living room. It's a big room with high ceilings a row of six French doors to one side. We raised a kid, along with his rambunctious friends,in this house and the paint is beginning to show its age. Some peeling paint, many picture hook holes and little gaps running along the ceiling beams between the beams and the ceiling sheet rock.... and other tattered spots. 

Two workers on tall ladders are prepping the ceiling and walls with caulk and mud. The floors are all covered with plastic. Most of the furniture has been moved out. B. takes all of this in stride. I am rattled by change and having people in my space; and the prospect of three full days. B. reminds me that I spent a long career doing as little organizational stuff, detail stuff and actual work stuff, as I possibly could. I protest that I worked hard. She counters that my hard work was more focused on shaking hands with executives and instructing assistants and other crew members about how to do the physical labor. I protest that I've carried my share of gear. She reminds me that, at least for the last five or ten years, that's been a voluntary undertaking and not exactly required. I give up and decide to take a Leica for a walk.

I'm saddling up with an "ancient" M 240 and a VM 50mm APO. I have no destination in mind. I have no project bubbling up. Just a walk. And now that I write this I'm beginning to plan a trip to Torchy's Tacos for a fun lunch. I am not good at management of anyone besides myself. And maybe the oversight of project management. 

Being a photographer has been like being on an extended vacation with little spurts of actual work. Enjoyable. Especially when one considers all the more stressful jobs out there. Like painting my ceiling. 

Hire pros. Do more walks. Today's strategy.

Today the living room. Tomorrow the back porch ceiling and a bathroom. Wednesday my office; the cleaning of which, in anticipation, has been like an archeological dig. Depressing...

I have been checking in on the availability of the Fuji X100V for a year now. It is still unobtainable. Does it still exist as a viable product choice?

The Fuji X100V is a very nice camera. Well worth its retail price of $1399. Its fixed 35mm equivalent lens is a very good performer. It's lightweight and easy to carry around. The battery life is acceptable. But there is one major, overriding problem with this particular camera. It has been unavailable for over a year now. 

Sure, you can go to EBay or Amazon and find a vendor who will sell you an "open box" or lightly used one for anywhere from $2,200 to $3,000. For those prices you can do better. In fact, it puts you closer to the prices on used Leica Q2s, which are substantially better picture taking devices. 

I have no idea why there is so much demand and so little inventory for the X100V. It would seem that Fuji could sell every single camera they could churn out for its list price and, if the past is any guide, Fuji is capable of mass producing cameras. So what's the deal? Did they just get tired of having a wildly successful product or are they hellbent on driving medium format sales to the exclusion of everything else?

If I think the camera is a good value then why did I sell two of them? Easy. They are not built to the same standards as more expensive fixed lens compact cameras from Leica. The finders are not as good. The overall feel is plastic-y. The menus are not as well thought out. The optical finder combined with the digital finder is gimmicky and not instinctive in use. But for the vast majority of people, especially those who have never tried out a better finished product, it's a wonderful choice. 

But it's not the "end all" and "be all" of compact cameras. Not by a long shot. 

So, I wonder if Fuji is in the process of retooling and getting ready to launch an upgraded product that is a bit more expensive but also feels more substantial and incorporates features such as image stabilization. 

Your guess is as good as mine. 

As far as I'm concerned, if budget isn't an impediment, a good, used Leica Q2 is a lot more fun to shoot with. But you may have other metrics for cameras than I do.  

If you ever see one offered with a true warranty, new, and at the retail price of $1399, you might consider snagging it. On the other hand that could be a speculative investment bundled with all the risk of every other bet. 

Just thinking about that today as so many commenters rushed to laud the X100V as a substitute for a Leica. Maybe it is. But only if you can get your hands on one.... And you are willing to accept some compromises...

Resurging interest in Leica rangefinder cameras? Fad or Trend? All aboard or waiting for the next big thing?

 

It may just be the way the algorithms present stuff to me personally but I've been noticing more and more "influencers" on YouTube, and even a few well known and long-tenured photographic blog writers, (myself included) are creating and presenting more content about Leica Q and Leica M series cameras than ever before. Some of it can be tied to Leica's recent product announcements of the Q3 and the M11 and M11-P cameras but those are hardly mainstream, mostly unaffordable by vast swaths of photo enthusiasts, and made in such limited quantities that taking possession of one is as hard as being able to afford one.

Last year's announcement of the re-introduction of the M6 film camera has had the effect of increasing the prices and decreasing the availability of most previous film, "M" cameras and has also led to an increase in new lens models from inexpensive Chinese makers as well as established Japanese companies such as Voigtlander. The overall affect being a steady rise in the price of good, used Leica M cameras and lenses and a tightening of availability for new product. Unlike many companies that sell hundreds of thousands of a single model product Leica seems to be in no particular hurry to ramp up production. Of the nearly eight billion people in the world in 2023 only about 10,000 of them will be able to acquire a current, new Leica M11. That's all Leica will make this year. A fraction of a fraction of an audience. And given the hand work and expertise required to make some of these cameras there is even reasonable doubt about their ability to scale up.

There were always two reasons voiced for buying an M camera in the past. One is that some people, after experiencing the process of shooting with an optical finder and a rangefinder, come to understand the subtle advantages and want to shoot with that kind of product. Lucky for Leica that they are currently the only company currently making a full frame digital or 35mm film rangefinder camera with interchangeable lenses and an optical viewfinder. And a real, optical rangefinder.

The second reason many people give for using or wanting a Leica M has to do with the idea that Leica's lenses are better than lenses produced by other camera makers. With a few exceptions; perhaps a lens like the 50mm f2.0 APO lens for the M, lenses from other makers are catching up or have caught up with those from Leica in 2023.

So why the renewed excitement for the Leica M? Speaking for myself I have to be honest and say that it's all about sentimentality and nostalgia, coupled with an uptick in spending power which sometimes comes with age. After all, most of the expenses of raising a family end at a certain point --- college is paid for, mortgages are over, compound interest has been kind, etc. --- There is a window between the expunging of many of life's routine expenses and the drop of income in retirement that's a sweet spot for finally acquiring a few of the luxury items you always wanted but were averse to spending needed cash on.

But I tend to be (somewhat) frugal. I felt the desire to get a digital M camera because I had used M film cameras extensively in the analog days. I've used M3s, M2s, an M5, an M4 and three different models of the M6. I used mostly lenses ranging from 28mm to 90mm and have (and still have) fond memories about shooting with the system. So, I wanted a return to the experience of using an M but without the added fussiness and daily expenses of a film camera, or the outrageous cost of a new M11 digital camera, so I bought a very well cared for M 240 camera, used, for around $2800. It serves its purpose. It's fun to shoot with and fun to have sitting in front of me on my desk. A reminder of some of the most fun days of my career. But I would hardly recommend a Leica M camera to anyone who just needs a full frame camera with good lenses, in order to pursue a photographic project in modern times. 

Digital cameras with EVFs are much easier to learn. Much more precise to use. And much, much less expensive than getting tangled up with Leica digital rangefinders. Knowing this won't stop us sentimental types from wanting one but after I re-acquired an M I have had to deal with the disconnection between an optimistic and happy memory and the reality of both my aging capabilities ( mostly a need for either diopters or a need to wear glasses. And while wearing eyeglasses dealing with an attendant inability to see the full frame of a 28mm lens bright line, etc.) and also the heady progress other camera makers have made; at least in catching up or exceeding the M series for sheer image quality. Said quicker = the M is a quixotic and fashionable camera but in no conceivable way is one the magic bullet for photos, the absence of which is hampering your ability to perform. It's just not. You might "like" the process of using one but you won't be held back if you don't have one in your bag. 

I like working with manual focus lenses but I can do that equally well with any number of cameras. I routinely use M rangefinder lenses on Leica SL camera, the Panasonic S5 and also the Sigma fp. All with good results. When I use, say, a 50mm f2.0 Voigtlander APO lens with an M to L adapter on an SL2 body I suddenly remember how nice it is to compose and focus through a nearly six million dot EVF. And how much easier it is to focus at slower shutter speeds because of the steadying power of in body image stabilization. And how much I appreciate the very high shutter speeds that allow me to use old, manual glass (and the new stuff) in full sun, at wide apertures, and without the need to carry around ND filters. 

After using the frame cropping feature in the Q2 I've become a convert to the idea that a single focal length lens can become a multi-focal length lens when used on the right camera. Basically, any camera that supports high resolution and the ability to set a crop mode. And to see the results of that crop mode in your finder.

Lately I've been using the 47 megapixel SL2 with a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 lens. It's the same lens I used last  year on a shooting trip to Vancouver, Canada. Only now instead of carrying two lenses (a mild wide and a mild tele) I've started putting the 40mm on the SL2 with a Leica M to L converter and switching back and forth between  using the 40mm focal length in the full, 35mm mode and then, when I want tighter crops, switching the camera's mode to APS-C and making use of the VM lens as a 60mm. Two focal lengths in one and quite a small package. I do the same with the 50mm. Using the APS-C mode to convert the 50mm to a FOV of 75mm. For one recent project I used the 90mm Sigma f2.8 lens with the crop to give me a wonderfully compact 135mm lens. I can't do this with a digital Leica M. If I want two focal lengths I have to carry two lenses. 

Or I have to remember how I wanted something cropped and wait to do it in post. Which is very unsatisfying for me. You, of course, are perfect and will remember your intention of exactly where to crop --- right down into the micron level. 

As far as a nostalgia for a film M camera goes it's really an area in which I no longer have any interest whatsoever. The whole idea of buying, shooting and processing film leaves me cold. My shooting style has changed a lot. I love being able to work a situation from lots of different angles and with lots of different moments. Lots of potential images vs 36.... I hate the idea of having to send out film and wait for it. And there's no way I'd even consider having to put in a home darkroom and deal with that mess again. It's a time and a way of doing things that have long passed into the mists of time for me. 

If you "need" to slow down --- often listed as an advantage of shooting film --- buy some tiny capacity memory cards and shoot enormous, uncompressed raw files. That ought to slow you down enough. But if you are pining for the thrill of getting to the end of a roll of film and having to rewind and reload as you are watching aliens land their spaceships in your front yard I would say that you are misguided. The idea of wanting to go back to film strikes me as being as logical as pining for a return to cooking with Margarine. Or heading out for a night on the town with a bottle of Boone's Farm Apple Flavored Wine. Or going out in the morning to adjust your carburetor. Or getting a hair weave. Or breaking out those Dingo Boots. 

When I am asked by anyone who is getting interested in photography "what camera should I buy?" I never suggest a rangefinder or a pricey Leica. My go to recommendation is nearly always first to master a recent model iPhone and only then, if you still need "better" to consider something like a Panasonic S5ii and a really nice, standard zoom lens. Maybe a Sigma 28-70mm f2.8, or something similar. 

Why? Because in competent hands few if any people will see a difference between that and an $8,000+ Leica and it will mostly be easier to learn and easier to use. 

The people who gravitate to Leicas should understand what they are getting into. And, like a good spy, they should have an exit strategy for every (buying) situation as they enter a new space. Just ask Henry White, a long time Leica M user. He'd tell you the same thing. ...when he's not busy stuffing plastic explosives into his M4 body..... (excerpt from the novel, The Lisbon Portfolio). 

I love my M 240 but probably not for the same reasons you might. And certainly not of the same reasons a collector might. It's all about time travel back to the 80s and 90s for me. So, of course your mileage ---and your position on your "timeline" will vary. 

The wiser entry point for a Leica experience? The Leica Q, Q2 (sweet spot) or the Q3. Master one of those and learn why you like it and then you'll be better able to decide about joining up with the M Leica cult. Funny that most who write about them don't own them. Journalistic disconnection....

this is not the first time I've written about M series cameras and likely not the last. I love em. But not for any logical, economically wise reason. Caveat Emptor.

Shaking up the geography of personal existence. Thinking about the sweet spot of cameras. Belaboring the obvious. Planning the next trip.

 

I posted this image two days ago. For some reason readers could see the image "inline" in the post but couldn't see it in the windowed gallery. I dug down to see why. Because of the detailed grain the actual size of the Jpeg file was 25 megabytes. That's a lot for a 4000 x 6000 pixel file! But the devil is in the details. 

Have you ever noticed that very grainy files can be much more detailed  (in appearance) than smoother files? The requirement to resolve and represent accurately a very fine grain structure allows for much less Jpeg compression. Smooth files are a breeze. Noisy files require machines to exercise a higher level of finesse. I dropped the resolution of this file down to about 12 megapixels and, when I look at the files at 100% I can see an obvious difference in how convincing the larger files is, as a "real" photograph, than the smaller version. Something to think about as you consider the level of compression at which you save Jpeg files. No wonder some raw files can look so much better...

Painters are coming on Monday. I need to denude the studio of delicate and breakable things and also remove heavy stuff that impedes moving filing cabinets and six foot high shelving around. The painters need access to all four walls and while they will move heavy furniture they are allergic to handling things like computers, cameras, lighting gear, rare books, etc. 

I started my part of the prep process by shutting down my main computer, disconnecting all the hard drives I had connected to it. Disconnecting the big, wide carriage, Canon inkjet printer and clearing out all of the power strips that had been multiplying under the desk I've been using for the past 24 years, without a break. It was an oddly emotional process since I've been sitting in that corner writing and doing image post processing for more than two decades. I got acclimated to the certainty of that spot and never expected to have an emotional response to the physical disruption. 

When I woke up this morning I felt unmoored. Adrift. A bit lost. I now have my computer (with no drives attached) sitting on a mid-century desk in an unused bedroom in the house. It feels weird. There is a window in front of me and that's weird. The desk is smaller, and that's weird. I can hear B. typing away in a room down the long hall from me, paying bills online and answering email. I miss the sense of absolute privacy of action. After all, my studio/office is mine alone and I can go out at anytime and feel nicely isolated from....everything else. Working in the house I suddenly feel guilt for going to the Boston Leica Store website to take another look at a very nice condition, chrome M 240... That's a new feeling.

The painting in the office, and the rest of the house, will be completed by Wednesday evening but that seems like such a long time away. I guess I'm just remembering the cadence of work life in years past when the idea of shutting down business resources for any length of time seemed perilous. 

I worry about "workspace creep." The idea that it might be nice, after restoring my "work" computer to its rightful place back in the office, if I might be tempted to enjoy still having computer in the far off bedroom for all those days when it's too cold or hot to venture into the studio. Or I become too lazy to walk the twelve extra steps from the house to the office. Maybe a nice, 16 inch MacBook Pro for the smaller desk. A complement to the 13 inch laptop I already keep on the kitchen table to catch up on stocks and news over breakfast and coffee. But I remind myself that the studio shelves already look like a laptop graveyard with older, now obsolete units stacked chronologically from Powerbook to Blueberry iBook (which was Ben's first computer ---- nostalgia alert!!!) to more recent models in a tower of eclipsed tech, a few feet high. 

Interesting how, at the beginning of the career there were no computers, no cellphones, and no internet and we spent our time optimizing the dark room and the studio lighting instead. When the phone rang it rang on the office desk and if I was in the darkroom and slow to repond an answering machine recorded incoming messages for me on magnetic tape.

I'm sure I'll get everything back into order but I'm noticing, as a I clean up the studio space that it's almost like an archeological dig; layers upon layers of stuff once deemed absolutely necessary now gathering dust under newer stuff now considered...obsolete. I haven't hit "hoarder" status just yet and B. doesn't tolerate the clutter of redundant stuff in the house but still....it's a visual indicator of the waste one can generate with a changing industry.

Camera Sweet Spots. There are any number of experts on the web who can make decent arguments leading one to believe that every advancement in camera technology is a welcome, vital and necessary one. I suspected all was not temporally linear when, after having much imaging joy with "old" used Leica SL cameras (24 megapixels, non-BSI, non-stacked sensors and 2015 tech all the way) I picked up a much newer SL2 complete with, at the time, a state of the art 47+ megapixel sensor and, ostensibly,  a more advanced imaging pipeline. Why then, over time and with quantities of experience, have I always liked the images I get out of the older models better? The simple answer is: The Sweet Spot. Which is also "the Ultimate Compromise Theory." 

The bigger geometry of the individual pixel wells on the older camera was a sweet spot for making a certain kind of file which just happens to align with my taste in how photographic images should look. Crispy and detailed as opposed to endless resolution and a certain, cloying smoothness. I felt the same when I compared the older Nikon D700 (12 megapixels with enormous pixel wells) versus the Nikon D800 with its much higher resolution. Sure, each of the files from the more modern and higher resolution cameras could be enlarged to a much greater extent without visible stair stepping and disintegration but did they look better when viewed in normal circumstances? Sadly, no. 

I recently had the same experience when I compared my recently purchased, decade old, 24 megapixel Leica M 240 with a much more recent Leica M10R camera that has 40 megapixels. The difference is not as obvious as the SL versus SL2 comparison or the Nikon comparison but it still holds true. The less pixel engorged sensor of the M 240 makes files I like the look of better than the M10R's 40 megapixels. Both are very good. And I'm sure the M10R has more dynamic range and --- maybe --- less noise but it lacks a certain crispy detail look that I can get easily from the older camera. Which pushes me to look for at least one more clean iteration of the older technology before it disappears altogether from the marketplace. 

What am I talking about? Think of this example when thinking about super high resolution. You know how good an iPhone photo can look when you see it on an iPhone screen? How the electronics multisample and interpolate and "enhance" the look of the photographic images? Now, take that phone image and blow it up big. Or take an image in low light and then look at that on a big monitor. The images start to fall apart, the colors look thin. And using a shadow slider not only generates noise but almost instantly generates banding. The size of the pixel wells still matters. It's physics even if software provides at convincing image when viewed in undemanding media. Or in less rigorous sizing. 

A few of my friends have purchased Leica M11 cameras and those cameras are interesting. I'd conjecture that about 30-40% of the final image quality is mostly dependent on in-camera software manipulation. Don't get me wrong. I think everyone else's high res cameras are largely beholden to software for their final appearance as well. Not just Leica. But it's a crapshoot to be too dependent on software engineering for ultimate quality. At this point anyway. And just think, the real power in software enhancement is doing it at speed. If you are doing any file processing in camera you are always weighing the quality of results against the speed of the process. Otherwise you lose the P.R. wars around operational responsiveness and frame rate. The bigger the file the faster processing you need in order to get good results. In order to just match the quality of smaller files.

Imagine instead if we took the same ultra fast processors and, instead of applying their power and speed to enormous 61+ megapixel files we applied those resources to a 12, 18 or 24 megapixel file instead. If we kept the frame rates the same we could apply four to eight times as much processing to overall image quality instead of compromising between high frame rates AND large files. How much better the images from the less crowded sensors would be done that way. Which inevitably reminds one of the engineering matrix Sony landed on when they came out with the A7S camera line, downshifting from a "standard" 24 megapixel sensor to a 12 megapixel sensor, and delivering a low noise champion in the process. But it's not just noise that can be affected; you could make different compromises that might entail things pickier traditional photographers value such as color discrimination and high bit depths. 

So ----- hey Leica! Give me a 24 megapixel, new M camera with all the cool stuff like USB charging and .....USB charging. And use all that hard won software expertise not to make the sensors more densely populated but capable of delivering discernibly higher image quality for real world use. 

Belaboring the obvious. I've been taking advantage of the new A.I. stuff in Lightroom and PhotoShop. I'm not using it to create wholly new photographs but rather I use it in the fine tuning of my usual photographs that I deliver to clients, or to the blog. Things like "depth blur" filters which create a 3D map of an image and can selectively blur the images from back to front. It's much more realistic for projects on which you have a separate background image (like an architectural interior) and you need to realistically composite an image (portrait of a CEO?) on top of it. Another wonderful filter which is mostly non-intrusive is the use of A.I. in noise reduction via the DeNoise filter in Lightroom. The tools are here and now and if you use them to create something you were able to visualize before but didn't have the tools to perfect then these features are more of a step forward that a complete re-imagining of photography. 

The same cohort of "you kids get off my lawn" photographers who thought digital imaging would never displace analog/film photography are now grousing and posturing their discontent for anything A.I. But they are missing the distinction between "generative" A.I. and more basic enhancement A.I. which, in many forms, can be nothing more than convenience calculations aimed at allowing one to do something they already do in their workflow but with more speed and better overall results. Not a "deal-killer" by any stretch of the imagination. 

So, put down your Speed Graphic cameras, change out of your Lands End shearling slippers and into some walking shoes, fire up that Buick sedan, put down your paper copy of USA Today, and takes some time to make some test new and improved test photographs, and then use them to try out some of the new tools. Life in the photography world is not completely about printing long scale landscapes on double weight printing paper in your chemical darkroom. Broadening one's horizons is a good thing. At least that's what I'm trying to convince myself in my new, temporary office. 

Planning the next trip. I like to travel. The weeklong adventure a month ago in Montreal whetted my appetite for it. So now I'm trying to balance the weather, the season, the flight availabilities and whatever obligations I have locally in order to plan the next one. My friend, Andy, just got back from a couple weeks in Japan. He wrote about it and it sounded wonderful. Ben is currently hopscotching across Japan for two weeks and I can hardly wait to hear his stories and recommendations. But a silly part of my brain is bent on seeing Montreal again but this time in the dead of Winter. I'm thinking of a quick re-trip in January to see what a "brutal and savage" Winter really looks like. And how the city operates when everyone heads indoors; into the subterranean city. 

And why not give it a try? The off season rates for hotels and even flights are so low for that time frame that it seems like they are paying you to come up for a chilly visit. 

It's not like I need to choose only one place to go. But it's so rare I've been north in the Winter months that it's almost like science fiction to me.... Well, except for that blizzard in Toronto in 2017....

I guess I should wrap this up and head back out to the studio to keep the pre-paint process rolling. Monday morning will be here before I know it.... Oh, and there is a nice, noon swim practice available today. Might be good to store up some extra, natural vitamin D.