You may profess to "hate" YouTube, and videos in general, but I think there's a ton of great stuff there for photographers. You just have to get picky.

 Bitch about videos all you want but you're missing some good stuff about photography when you turn your nose up to specific YouTube channels. I thought today I'd talk about one photographer whose content always interests me both as a hobbyist photographer (I am) but also as someone who has earned the vast majority of my income for the last 38 years as a full time, working photographer (also me). He's not a "walkie-talkie" video maker and he talks pretty fast but I find him to be one of the more interesting working photographers on the web. With credentials!

I'm talking about a guy named Justin Mott who lives and works in Hanoi, Vietnam. He works for lots of major companies, international in scope, and he also does a fair amount of work, editorially, for prestigious outlets like The New York Times. (Don't like the New York Times? Go read something else).

Here is a link to a video he posted on his channel today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=248KwNdCRoc

His video walks the audience through the nuts and bolts of his recent assignment for the New York Times. It's about old and new coffee culture in Vietnam (coffee, a subject close to my heart) and Justin walks you through every step of the two day project with loads of really good images coupled with great observations about how to work with complete strangers, new locations and the pressures of hitting deadlines while still delivering exactly what the client wants. 

There's none of the pompous, "I am the world's greatest expert in..... blah, blah photography." There's no oppressive hubris. Just really interesting nuts and bolts. He starts by explaining how he was contacted, how he discussed the project with a photo editor at the Times. How he bid the job. How he selected his gear for the assignment (don't whine too much, he's a Leica shooter --- both M and SL). How he works. Why he does these kinds of assignments with no lighting gear. And even a step-by-step explanation of the post-shooting logistics for editing, labeling and delivering the work. 

The thing that caught my interest in watching the video and listening to his work strategies is just how quickly he works, from shot to shot, how largely invisible he is even though he is a larger caucasian man in a sea of Vietnamese natives. And how he can make himself fit in to this different environment without drawing much attention, and how his professional attitude provides a template for him to get work done. I think it boils down to a mindset, and experience. 

There is no swarm of assistants endlessly circling around him. No stylists, no art directors, etc. In this particular editorial/visual description he's very much a one man band. While many bloggers and YouTubers pontificate about what they think photography is all about Justin is actually hands-on with the reality of commercial work. And editorial work. Where the YouTube people who make thinly disguised advertorials for camera makers as their only job constantly suggest the need for the fastest AF cameras, the largest resolution sensors, the need for for long fast zooms and short, even faster zooms Justin shows a more realistic approach. Using single focal length M lenses adapted to an SL (mirrorless) camera and working with a much smaller selection of focal lengths than any of the wannabe "influencers" would have you believe is possible. It's a reality versus fantasy antidote. 

Justin is scruffy and talks pretty fast but his work is good and what he's saying about "how he works" is equally good. Valuable. Even to someone with decades of experience. He's also working in a different culture and on the other side of the world but still is able to attract the clients he needs in order to be successful. Both aesthetically and financially.

Some of his videos are more gear oriented and he is an unapologetic Leica user. But the video I've linked to shows a job that could have been done with any good camera system. In the hands of a real pro. His reasons for using the Leica stuff aren't dealbreakers to enjoying the heart of the video. 

I'm going to share a few more of my favorite channels so my video- reticent readers are exposed to the stuff I look at. And, just to let you know, I am not a big fan of "My name is Bob and I have a video camera strapped to my chest and I'm going to film myself walking through some urban streets annoying all the people around me and then bragging about how great my mostly mediocre images are because I shoot with: Sony, Fuji, Leica, Nikon or any other "fill in the blank" camera system."

My favorite videos are about working artists (Paul Reid), working commercial photographers (Justin Mott) and people who are making a living selling their prints and talking about HOW they shoot instead of WHAT KIND OF GEAR THEY SHOOT WITH (Mostly James Popsys). 

I know, I know, you love to read print and you hate video. If that's the case just read this twice and ignore the link. No one will know....

typing fast is a blessing. written on the flat keyboard that came packaged with my iMacPro computer. 

Time elapsed: 45 minutes; including proof-reading. Advice to other bloggers: drink more coffee so you can think and type faster...

The future of photography blogs. What's next?

It's almost like the joy of discussing new gear and new techniques has been wholly replaced on most of our photo blogs by personal observations about day-to-day routines, life's struggles, diets, and photo walks. When blogs first appeared we were still, to some degree, transitioning from film to digital. From known processes to new realms of imaging that demanded a different processes and, to a certain degree, new skill sets. Darkroom work was quickly giving way to working with Photoshop and outputting images to paper via inkjet printers. And inkjet printers were hardly foolproof and there was much we could learn from photographers who ventured into the inkjet realm before the rest of us. They'd already bled out tons of money on ink and papers and calibration and we could learn and profit from their honest accounting of their triumphs and failures. And they mostly conveyed this knowledge on blogs. 

By my read digital became mature, both for inkjet printers and cameras by around 2010 but the demand for good blogs about the hyper-quickly changing introduction of new cameras models was still going full blast. A blog was also a great place to market things like books, workshops and, eventually, presets for post processing images. Hobbyists and working photographers without access to bricks and mortar camera stores, locally, depended on blog writers to supplement the cheery "no bad cameras" crews at the major, for profit sites with a bit of honest critiquing. 

Still, even as late as 2013 photographers saw value in the writing on blogs about our industry space, about new trends in photography; especially as it became a hybrid practice that started incorporating more and more video. We writers who were also photographers tried to deliver information as well as proof of concept. We bloggers, at least some of us, actually bought the cameras and used them for more than a couple of weeks and then reported what we'd found out. Sometimes posting about a single camera serially, squeezing as much experience as we could from the gear. And then sharing it. Some of us without considering any financial reward.

From 2015 onward the introduction of new cameras started to decline or decelerate. The decline was slow at first but constantly tumbling. And, after years and years of writing about processes, lens evaluations and value propositions of various camera types we capitulated to the onslaught of "camera reviews as entertainment" delivered by YouTube. A completely different, much stickier medium than the static blogs. 

And with YouTube in daily ascendancy blogs began a steady decline in readership, audience interest and, for those who depended on them for financial reward, also income. Blog writers and blog readers aged together until we hit a point where the writers and the readers were equally well informed, from multiple sources,  when it came to tech fluff and other stuff. You could read long reviews of cameras on the review sites which were dedicated to providing that kind of content. The one thing blogs by professional photographers like myself could still deliver was descriptions of how we used various lights and cameras in actual, paying, commercial jobs. We helped deflate the expectation that the latest gear was required by clients for everything. We helped readers understand the value of good practice over the latest acquisitions. We still delivered some value related to the process of photography. And we helped support the mythology that photography was an important and unchanging part of our culture. 

But then the pandemic blew everything up. And the last two years of supply side disruptions along with the realization that nothing much has changed, qualitatively, in the previous three or four years at the core of digital cameras so we ended up with fewer and less interesting work projects to discuss and fewer and less interesting cameras to review or discuss. 

And photo bloggers have been running out of things to sell. There are no real workshops to tout anymore. They still exist but the workshop owners don't need to pay third party bloggers anymore to generate interest and participants. No one needs to buy presets for post processing now that hundreds of presets come for free in Adobe Lightroom. Good luck with making money from affiliate links in a market situation where no one can get their hands on new products because of backorders and limited production runs. And the worst part of it all for bloggers is that the information comes fast and furious and in a very much more entertaining fashion via well produced videos on YouTube. And YouTube, like it or not, is where the makers of cameras are now sending the bulk of their "review" cameras first. The video influencers always have a head start.

Now the few readers who have hung on can read about my swimming practices, the weather in Austin, or how I used a camera on my walk that yielded results that are not demonstrably different from any other camera I've taken along for a walk in the past. Or, they can read about medical issues and keyboard products at Mike's site, with a sprinkling of articles about how things used to work in the "good old days." And then you can bounce back over here to read more about the weather and which lens purchase of the day was motivated by boredom, and mostly intellectual lethargy.  In a year or so all the web/print based blogs will largely vanish. People will tire of reading about which brand of preserves I like with my toast. And which kind of toast I like with my jam. And about coffee. And Mike will be busy reviewing a half dozen electric toasters to see which one is head and shoulders above the rest --- without being Veblen. And he'll probably hold an audience longer... 

Actors like to talk about going out "on top." Meaning at the very top of their game. At the Zenith of their popularity. But I guess I missed the boat on that. 

I still love to take photographs. I like to talk about life but I'm reticent to make any waves so I don't get to rail and rant about money, religion, politics or anything else that's frictional but fun. I love using new cameras but the cameras that are new to me lately are 12+ years old and have been reviewed to death. 

I could write about jobs but we're not doing anything new and different as far as techniques go, so what's the point? No one needs to read about an event job I'm doing for bankers in April. The curious can go back into the VSL archives and find basically the same article from years past. Maybe just substitute different camera brands to make it contemporary. 

I think my first 2500 blog posts were pretty good but boy-oh-boy has the second 2500 been repetitious and boring. "I selected a camera and lens. I walked around. I shot this skyline, this mannequin, this building....I came home and looked at the files. They were good." 

A sad thing about my readers getting older (as am I) is that they/you all remember when houses cost $80,000 and you could get a nice car for $6,000. A hamburger cost less than a dollar. A lot less. Cameras were something you had to save up for and sweat about before you handed over what was, in the earlier days, a big handful of cash. And we carry these memories with us and they pollute our understanding of current values and current finances re: cameras, and everything else, which makes us sound miserly and out of touch. Every new product announcement is met with a certain amount of hand-wringing about the costs. Now people will gladly spend forty, fifty or sixty thousand dollars on a shitty SUV but whine when camera prices go up a couple hundred dollars due to inflation. 

We've collectively turned into a group that wants everything to stay the same, and we want everything at a bargain price, and this stunts our appreciation for completely new and different gear. And the pleasure of experimenting. I know, I know, you love your Speed Graphic and your Minolta SRT201. You never feel the need to upgrade from your first digital camera purchase. You think gear is overrated. Which begs the question: why are you here?

And, the constant reference to price, and critique of prices, is as tiresome as watching a group of self proclaimed "old people" haggling at a restaurant about how to split the check four ways, and "who had the extra diet Coke?" Stuff cost more now. And surprise, you are pulling in more money, statistically, than you probably ever had before. And your kids are through college and your houses are paid for..... but you grimace over the price of a Q3 or a top line Sony. It takes a lot of joy out of the transaction of me writing and you reading and commenting. But at least when you are complaining you are commenting.

The blog can be fun to write. And if you want to pretend that it builds a community you can tell yourself that. Although I've only met and corresponded with a tiny % of you. The 1%? 

I'm going to keep blogging for a while more. But they'll be short on writing and accompanied by an embarrassingly large number of images. That's what everyone tells me really counts. The images. I guess I've basically run out of interesting things to say about cameras and lenses and processes. Just an honest assessment of where everything is right now. Photography has changed from a valid, freestanding art form to something more akin to quick but impermanent performance art hits.

I thought it might just be me but I checked in with my favorite twenty-eight year old data scientist and he concurred that blogs are a dying "art form." I'd hate to be the last one out. The guy tasked to turn out the lights...

 

It's February 25th. We're in the northern hemisphere. It was almost 90° today in Austin. Better start getting acclimated to the heat....

First warm weather walk. Took the heavy rig. The Leica SL2 and the Carl Zeiss Milvus 50mm f1.4 ZF.2. Warm and near 90° but not overwhelming for a three or four mile walk. My left arm will be sore tomorrow after carrying that rig around this afternoon. Shot as close to "wide open" as I thought advisable. Just some random samples. 

 

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