Photographer Justin Mott delivers more "Reality Therapy" about professional photography in the midst of a sea of YouTube influencer (uninformed) fantasies. Good stuff.

 Go here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XihVfuRoIUE  Watch that. Come back and tell me what you think. 

Does subject matter drive lens preference or is it the other way around?

 Throughout my time as a photographer I've had an affinity for short telephoto lenses. I like the idea that a tighter angle of view helps to eliminate clutter and allows me to really zero in on the things about a subject that I want to convey. One of my photographer friends, Will, gravitates to wider angle lenses for his images. His work incorporates much more of the context in which his subjects exist. Neither point of view is the "correct" one but I think the choices we make are part of how we, individually, see the world. 

I notice that when I walk around with a camera in just about any milieu I am always drawn to a single subject which I want to largely separate from the background. If I use too long a focal length the images start to feel unreal, inauthentic. But if I use too short a focal length the images seem to be filled with distractions which, for me, dilute the attention I think should be focused upon the main subject.

I often profess a love for the 50mm focal length on a full frame camera but I know that my real favorite focal length for the way I see things is the 85-90mm focal length. I often choose to use a 50mm because it's easier, a looser framing doesn't require that I control the image to the same extent as I would if I had fewer elements in the frame with which to work.

Rome. On the Spanish Steps.

But if I don't have to work quickly I'll almost always default to a longer focal length because, in most cases, the subject of my photo is far more interesting to me than the relationship of my subject to the background or the environment. Since I find people to be my favorite subjects I have to say that I'm more interested in the mystery each person represents than I am in the greater context of where I've found them. 

B. With her OM-1 film camera. 

There are some who depend on wider angle lenses for their art. Mostly, the images I see made with wide angle lenses are from "street" photographers like Joel Meyerowitz and by the legion of street photographers who display work on YouTube and Instagram. They work with wide angles out of necessity, I think. The photographers aim to capture people and people's expressions and gestures but they do so without the complicity or cooperation of the subjects and so have to work quickly. Since grabbing a shot with a longer lens is complicated by the much more limited depth of field of a longer focal length the shooters gravitate to lenses such as the 35mm and, especially, the 28mm in order to exploit the much greater depth of field. In short, they have a greater chance of getting their subjects in focus but the tradeoff is less control over composition, subject size in the frame, and the ability to control the in or out-of-focus rendering of distracting backgrounds.

In order to effectively shoot on the fly most wide angle street photographers are using 28mm lenses, stopping down to f8.0 or f11, and then zone focusing so that when a subject presents themself to the photographer's attention all that's required is to quickly frame the shot and push the shutter button. And the wider the lens the less rigorous the framing needs to be. But, to my mind, the less impactful each of the images will be. And the more awkward the apparent distortions, caused by close proximity of lens to subject, will be.

Rome. Spanish Steps.

In the two examples of casual street photography I am including just above and just below I did use a 50mm equivalent lens with a medium format Mamiya 6 camera. The lens was a 75mm. I could have used a 50mm MF lens (28mm equivalent) to capture the scene from both angles, on the fly, but in the top image the wide angle's proximity to the row of people on the bottom would have changed the size relationship between their heads and the head size of the young man holding the book. It would have been a "forced" perspective that would have called attention to technique and reduced the reality of the scene. Huge heads in the foreground and small head in the background...

In the scene just below (which is the same group but shot from the opposite angle) a quick "snap" with a wider angle lens would have caused the woman on the right hand side of the frame to look much larger than the people beside her and would have rendered the man on the left side of the frame much smaller. The idea of having an "objective" view of the scene would have been compromised by the obvious signature of a wider lens. Neither of these shots were "set up" or arranged but neither of them were surreptitious either. Working calmly and with no drama makes it possible to take one's time, use the right optic and compose more accurately. Or at least more in line with your own vision. 

Rome. Spanish Steps. Reverse angle.

As I look through decades of photographs the one's that I like best, the ones which describe what I think of as my style are the more considered and less chaotic shots that come from shorter lenses. In the two examples below I've used two different focal length lenses in the same general setting. The image of Lou with the magazine was done with a 50mm lens and includes a certain amount of context. 

Contax RTSiii camera. Tri-X. 50mm lens

Little City Coffee Shop.

The image below was taken in the same location but from a different angle and it was done with an 85mm lens which allowed me to make a close up portrait which, while you can tell it is not a studio portrait, very much eliminates intrusive and unnecessary details. Less of a story, perhaps. More of a "study." More interesting to me, in some regard. Mostly because I was more interested revealing the subject than in showing a scene. 

Contax RTSiii camera. Tri-X. 85mm lens

When it comes to focal lengths longer than 50mm my current favorites are 85 and 90mm. In the film days and in the time when digital cameras had far lower resolutions I would try to match lenses to what I considered would be the final crops. The final presentation. The idea being to maximize quality by using all the available pixels or film detail required longer lenses; like the 135mm. Now that sensors have advanced so far I'm less likely to use longer lenses such as 135mms and default to cropping in post production instead. 

Now I am most likely to work with one of the following lenses for photographing a single subject. Depending on my final use and the prevailing conditions these are: The Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art lens, the Voigtlander 90mm APO lens and the Sigma 90mm f2.8 Contemporary lens. When photographing with the M rangefinder cameras I find I am more drawn to the 75mm focal length and I am more confident now in my ability to crop since all the cameras have at least 24 megapixels of rich detail. 

There is a time and place (and subject matter) for all sorts of lenses but if you want to move from "generalist" to "artist with a style" you will, over time, find your comfort zone in the jungle of available focal lengths through trial and error. Which means you'll need to try various focal lengths to see what resonates with you. The focal length lens you are most comfortable with will usually do the best job elevating your work. And making your eyes happy.

I'd love to say that for me it's the 50mm focal length on a full frame camera but time and self-curation shows me that it's really somewhere "north" of 80mms. And I'm okay with that. 

85mm. 

 Close enough to be able to interact with one's subject.

Long enough to give them a comforting distance.

It's so much fun when Leica introduces a new product. It always makes me think about buying a Panasonic camera...

At a factory in Mexico. Self portrait.

 

I own a SL2 and I like it. It's very nice. Now Leica has introduced their replacement for the camera and it's called the SL3. Changes include the option to use three different resolution settings for raw files (a useful feature I had back on a 2003 Kodak SLR/n digital camera...), a new 60 megapixel sensor, phase detect AF (which might come in handy for event work with flash), a new battery which, surprisingly, the camera desperately needs as it's battery life is worse than previous models, two different type card slots (which for some is great but for me is a pain in the ass), an added, second control dial on the top plate that can provide ISO control but is also programmable, and, finally, a tilting rear screen. They would like for people like me to upgrade to the new camera and have priced it to move quickly...$7,000.  (sarcasm alert).

Of all the new stuff on the camera the only thing that really moves the needle for me is the ability to have 60 megapixel raw files as well as 36 and 18 megapixel raw files. When shooting events, portraits and tons of other web targeted content the ability to shoot full frame at 18 megapixels in raw is great. But really, I've got cameras that shoot 24 megapixel raw files natively, and that's close enough. 

Since there's no obligation to actually consummate the transaction of a "no deposit" pre-order with most stores I immediately pre-ordered an SL3 from my favorite Leica dealer. Why? Because I think it will be at least a month or two before they get product in the door and I may want one by then. Someone has already called me today to see if I want to sell them one of my more "minty" SL camera bodies. A few sell offs here and there and I'd be ready to accept the latest and greatest from Wetzlar. 

But when I really thought hard about it I came up with two scenarios that seem like a better use of my money. And a third scenario where I just keep the money in my investment account and take a chance on some new "hot stock." The first two scenarios for better spending the $7K required for the SL3 are based on the kind of work that requires certain differing performance/use parameters. 

I'm shooting an event in April. It seems like I'm always shooting some sort of corporate event where I need to make flash photos on the fly. Leicas are famous for having a very, very thin selection of (just) decent flashes. And the usability, based on reviews and real life stories, tells me that they are far from optimal for quick flash use in dark spaces. Rather than spend $675 in addition to the cost the SL3 ($7000) for a so-so shoe mount flash, if my reasons for acquiring the new camera are for event work, my logical brain tells me (emphatically!!!) that a slightly used Panasonic S5ii for $1500 is a much better choice. It has the image stabilization that makes focusing through longer lenses better. It has phase detect AF. But just as important, I already have several dedicated Olympus/Panasonic flashes (Like the Godox V1) that work great with the S5. No more money out of pocket to outfit the used S5ii --- and a track record of moderate (proven) success from the existing flash systems. In this scenario about $6,000 stays in my pocket. 

The second spend/spend/spend scenario is based around the idea that the higher resolution of the new SL3 would be helpful for shoots like the ones I did for Abbott last year and the year before which are model intensive, require high quality files for big print targets, and can benefit from higher end Leica lenses. 

And I might have gone down that path a couple of years ago but last year Paul dropped a Fuji GFX50Sii on me and it quickly became obvious that there is a quality difference provided by more square sensor surface. If I get invited to do more jobs like the previous ones mentioned, or the job which required highest quality files for a 30 foot truck wrap for the Capitol Area Food Bank, I'll much more likely reach for a medium format camera body over even a 60 megapixel FF body. And I'll buy or rent the lens, or lenses I need for particular projects; all at a big, big cost savings over the purchase of a new camera from Leica, the major advantage of which is slightly more pixel density. The map has changed a bit for me. 

We're almost back where we were in the 1990s when we mostly used two camera systems for two different types of work. Leicas for event work, public relations, public relations portraits and the like. Medium format cameras for big advertising work. Work that required the highest quality available; especially in the eyes of clients. 

Or, I could just ignore the new product announcements, ditch the work that doesn't conform to my favorite current cameras and move on. It's interesting to have options. This morning I'm leaning toward ignoring everything new. 

Maybe I'll start researching really high end swim goggles instead. It looks like a pair of the best goggles caps out at under $100. That's reasonable purchase. And no firmware updates to consider...

My role in getting our tax numbers together is complete. I'm off the hook now. I'm so happy just to get back to photographing and swimming. Who here is photographing with medium format digital cameras? What do you use?

 

a few years back I was doing an ad campaign for a natural gas company 

based in Oklahoma. One small part of the assignment was to photograph

a particular restaurant kitchen that, of course, used natural gas for cooking.

I did the "straight up" corporate shots of the cook and his kitchen but I also noticed

 the words tattoo'ed on the cook's hands and wanted a shot of that for myself. The original is in 

color. I've shown it here before. I made a conversion to black and white because...

well...because I wanted to. I don't remember which full frame 

camera system I was using at the time but it worked out fine.

Taxes: Most of my current participation in the family's tax preparation is concerned with the Schedule C, profit and loss statement for my business. Mercifully, B. handles pretty much everything else. I bitch and whine (how did "whinge" become whine? Pronounced like: "wine.") about the time it takes but in all honesty it only takes me two days to access all the numbers from two checking accounts as well as the numbers from two credit card accounts and then to filter out all the charges that are not relevant to taxation from the ones that are. For example: Lunch with Ben (not deductible). Leica M240 M-E (nicely deductible). There's not a lot of "gray space" but since every cent I spend in a year is via a credit card there are a lot of lines to look through. Okay. That's not true. I did write 23 checks last year. So retro. 

Yesterday, around two thirty in the afternoon, I put everything into the template that our CPA likes and sent it, along with some brokerage statements, to B. She'll incorporate the rest of the needed information and pass it along. Sadly, I can't just depend on the standard deduction. I have to itemize. Otherwise my CPA will give me a stern lecture. But yesterday, at around 2:45 pm, I tasted freedom. I immediately went out for celebratory coffee. How rich would I be if I could deduct the cost of all my coffee episodes??? More about coffee in the swim section...

In a couple of years it will probably all change but we've been doing accounting stuff this way, more or less for nearly 40 years. Most of them profitable. A few.... not so much. But at least my part in this year's math adventure is done. 

When I hit the point of completion I usually make some bold statement to myself that I'll get much more organized in the current year. I'll become a master of Quickbooks Pro, or some other dorky accounting program. I'll parse out the categories as I go along. Right. But, at 68, I know I'm lying to myself and, in fact, I'll probably just go in the other direction, put all the printouts and stuff in a cardboard box and delivery it (without notations!) to Barry; my accountant. He'll  complain and charge me a lot more but I probably won't care. 

Work: It's been a slow but happy year so far. Most of the work has been portraits. Either in the studio or on location. I'm happy working either way. We've booked a four day event in San Antonio in April and I've got a sprinkling of portrait work until then. But it's interesting. All the panic about money from my early years is gone. If fun and challenging work comes in I'm more than happy to rise to the challenge. If we hit a dry spell (or year) I'm happy taking time off for more swimming, walking and goofy camera fun. 

Most of the portraits I've been doing this year are kind of a throwback to my earlier work. I'm using huge modifiers like 7 foot diameter, soft white umbrellas and going a step further by adding a layer of diffusion to the front for an even softer effect. I'm getting a lot of use out of the medium format GFX camera. Funny (to me, at least) that I have so much fun buying Leicas but I use them less and less in the business side and use the GFX for just about anything where I have a modicum of control with the subject. Not sure this would be true with fast moving event stuff. But, I bought the GFX 50Sii and a few lenses in the middle of 2023 and haven't felt the urge to "flesh out" the system any further. 

The GFX is a good, solid working tool, it's just not as much fun as the smaller, sleeker cameras. 

My kid was telling me that he bought a new computer last week. It's a MacBook Pro, 14 inch with an M3 processor, 16GB of RAM and a 2 Terabyte hard drive. He used to edit video for me and he was telling me that I wouldn't believe how fast the new machine eats through video footage. Multiple streams of 4K edits in real time. He also mentioned that he was surprised by how good the display on the newest machine is.

Ben's first computer. A Blueberry iBook. He had a desk in my office...

It got me thinking that it's probably time to upgrade my system. My 2018 vintage iMacPro has been rock solid and it does have 64 GB of fast DDR4 RAM and a fast Xeon processor but from what I've read on the various computer test sites my kid's machine is faster than mine by a factor of 10X-14X.  I'll justify buying one as it will be a replacement for my 2018 MacBook Pro 13" which is probably one software (OS) upgrade away from being obsolete. And then I'll try sneaking it into the studio mix....

I do need to take a laptop with me for the April event job. The client wants a quick turnaround on some shots from day to day.  Yeah! That's a supporting rationale... 

I'm finding that the idea of retiring is more or less miserable. I'm diving back in with a handful of clients. I like the challenge of photography. I hate volunteering for stuff. I know first hand that most non-profits would rather have cash donations than more hands to manage. Your mileage may vary. And I think mentoring someone would be cruel. For them. I'm too scattered.

Swimming. I was plainly being immature at swim practice today. We had a new coach for today. I approached her at the poolside and told her that this was my first time ever to try a masters swim and I hoped I'd be able to get through it. She was very kind. Until my usual lane mate corrected my story. Drat. I really had the coach going for a few minutes. 

It was 60° when we hit the water at 8:00 am. The sun was shining, the birds were chirping, the coach was coaching and the water was so clean you could have read fine point type at the other end of the 25 yard pool. If you had your goggles on. We had a challenging workout with lots of 100s on short intervals. In between sets of 100s we had a pyramid of 75s kicking. On the same intervals as the swimming 100s. That'll get your pulse up!  

I'm trying a new swimming experiment. I've had the habit of drinking a cup of coffee upon rising each morning. That means I'm ingesting "healthy" dose of caffeine before practice. But in truth I have always been an anxious person and the caffeine sometimes exacerbates my performance anxiety in the pool. Get anxious in workout and your muscles get tighter and your brain makes breathing feel harder. Genius that I profess to be (sarcasm alert) I finally figured out after 63 years of competitive swimming, and 40+ years of caffeine-drenched morning swims, that I might be better served by skipping the coffee until AFTER workout and seeing if that affects my overall results. 

Goodness gracious! So that's what it's like swimming relaxed!!!! I've been doing this experiment (no pre-workout coffee) for about three weeks now and the difference in workout is revelatory. No anxiety. Faster repeats. Less tired at the end of each set. Why didn't I do this say.....forty years ago? I guess I'm just a slow learner. 

Now I'm wondering just how much that glass of wine with dinner affects my swim performance the following morning. Dropping another habit might just be a second interesting experiment. Guess I'll find out.

SXSW photo thoughts. It all starts on Friday. A great day NOT to be at the Austin airport. It's the start of SXSW. I love photographing there but I'm always trying to decide, right up until I walk out the front door, which cameras and lenses I should take to document the event over the eight days. This year I've had the recurring and strange idea of going really light. Now planning on taking two Leica CL cameras, the Sigma Contemporary 18-50mm f2.8 zoom and the ultra-fabulous Sigma 58mm f1.4. Two cameras with the weight of one. Small and light lenses with lots of good performance. Those are today's front-runners but you know that, with me, it's always subject to change. 

Is it wrong to still be having so much fun taking photographs? I'm guessing not. 

See you out there? 

the chef in color.

The Quiet Before the Storm. Or, how SXSW impacts Austin.

this is Sixth St. today. On March 4th. 

On March 8th the same street will be closed off

and filled from side to side with tens of thousands of

music fans, movie fans, performers and more. 

Should be fun.

 I'm pretty sure that a lot of cities, big and small, all around the USA would love to have a couple hundred thousand spend-happy tourists flock into their cities for an eight day, hotel filling, bar busting, tax receipt engorging convention of tech forward young adults who also love the latest technologies, movies and music. Well, I hate to disappoint many other city councils and chambers of commerce but.... I think Austin has a lock on SXSW for the near future. See their website for a taste of the eight days between the 8th of March and the 16th. https://www.sxsw.com/

I look at the festival from a photographer's point of view. The image above is Sixth St., smack in the middle of our downtown. By the end of the week it will be festooned with multiple live music stages, each complete with a state of the art video crew filming the performances with multiple 8K cameras and streaming them....somewhere. The entire street, from the main highway to Congress Ave. will be closed off to vehicle traffic and filled with wannabe musicians, super fans, gawkers and vendors (some legal and some...impromtu). It will be loud, messy and filled with energy. People go there to be seen. To share their music. To hawk their CDs. To pitch their movies. And the some of us go there to document the event. It's a magnet for cameras and their photographers. 

Most of the serious action takes place inside the Austin Convention Center. Pay $1,920 for a wrist band and you can get in to just about any and all seminars, performances, showcases, tapings or other sponsored events. 

I spent one year at SXSW inside the "velvet rope" photographing famous bands on stages in the convention center during their performances, for Sony Music. I spent one year at a corporate sideshow photographing speakers over at a venue on Rainey Street (just across from the Convention Center) and watching the wristband elite drop by to eat up all of the catering and lay waste to the open bar. All on my client's dime. Over the years I've seen the event from every angle. I was at the event there for the rollout of the world famous "Cronut." In fact, I was the official photographer for that late night event, working for the P.R. firm out of NYC. Documenting 400+ people who waited till midnight to get a free donut/croissant combination that was shaped like a small drinking glass and filled with milk. Sorry, no seconds!

I've largely given up hitting the official venues and aim instead, as a photographer, for Sixth St. and all the surrounding areas because nearly every bar, restaurant, coffee shop and alternate space is rented out to corporations that want to introduce their latest and greatest stuff. Let's not forget that SXSW is where Twitter got its first traction --- along with a lot of other start-ups. The swag can be overwhelming.

The number of people out in the streets during all hours of the day and night is amazing. Most are young and excited to be in, what is for two weeks, the center of their universe. This is where bands get discovered. Some get contracts. The film festival rivals Sundance for cinematic interest. And the participants come from, literally, all over the world. Each hoping to land funding for their big break through.

My plan this year is to head down for as many days and evenings as I can (after swim practice, of course.). I'll take two cameras. Both will be black Leica M240s. One will sport a 50mm lens and the other will sport a 90mm or 75mm lens. With those particular cameras I doubt I even need to weigh myself down with extra batteries. With just these two cameras and a small bag I can travel light and nimble. 

The priority is to work the crowds and photograph the endless parade of people; most of whom are looking to become somehow famous. Dressed and made up to attract maximum eyeballs. A wonderful opportunity for photographers to practice their favorite street shooting craft. I'm sure my friend Andy will be there and I might even coax my friend Paul to give architectural photography a little rest and troop down for a day. 

I learned a long time ago that parking downtown is next to impossible. If you do find parking in one of the many private garages you'll end up paying mercenary rates to the owners. One year in the recent past a day's worth of parking was averaging over $80. 

If you try taking an Uber you'll likely get into a traffic jam that'll take forever that's not going to make anyone happy. My ploy is to take public transportation. Austin has the worst. But there is a bus that goes from maybe a half mile from my house all the way into the belly of the beast. It's the #30 bus. It costs $1.25 each way. I think I can swing that. The ride takes about 30 minutes and drops me off in front of the W Hotel. It's a five minute walk to Sixth St. Easy enough to catch it back home as well. Look at me breaking the American and Texas traditions of each person traveling separately to events in their own private car and demanding endless close-in parking....

I've always had a blast photographing during the weeks of SXSW. The crowds are mostly younger. 20s, 30s and a shrinking number of 40 year olds. Maybe some leftover 50+ hippies as well. Usually so much good energy. 

The only glitch in my scheduling this year is that the show will exactly correspond with our new living room floor renovation. Exactly the same two weeks. I'll have to be extra nice to B so she can take the lion's share of supervision duties. Now gearing up for this Friday and the official start of the insanity. If you're in Austin you owe it to yourself to check out the turbo-charged street scene. It's a fun photographic project.  You get to participate as much as you want. Bring your own violin or harmonica as well and get discovered....

reports to follow.

Tax Time. A process that feels worse than dropping your favorite camera on the sidewalk.

 Yes. I know. Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society. But as a detail averse small business owner I hate the process of getting all of the numbers together so the CPA can do his magic.. or voodoo. I buy too much stuff. I usually use a credit card. Doesn't everyone? At the start of tax prep I have to go through hundreds of lines commemorating the indulgent, sometimes impulsive spending and pick out the wheat from the chaff. The deductibles and depreciable expenses from the day-to-day normal guy spending. Leica cameras versus things like coffee, lunch, cool shoes, new swim goggles (which I'm discovering are NOT deductible...). 

It was beautiful outside today but I wouldn't know it first hand because I've been tracking down last year's invoices and trying to make them match up with those pesky credit card numbers. Hours and hours of filtering. Yuck.

There's an old joke that's been floating around as long as there have been commercial photographers. It goes like this: How to you make a small fortune in photography?  ..... Easy, you just start with a large fortune.

If you do happen to drop your favorite camera onto unrelenting concrete and you are in the biz you can take comfort in knowing that the repair or replacement costs will be deductible. And, if you are a smart photographer you probably have been paying for insurance for your entire career and you'll finally be able to use it. Once. Because I'm sure the insurance company will not renew your policy after they've paid to replace your Hasselblad X2D and your favorite lens...

Perilous times, for sure. 

Yes. We should all have powerful accounting or bookkeeping software in our offices. But in the end it's the data entry that crushes your soul. And who knew that Crocs were NOT deductible??? 

Anyway. That's today's trauma. Should be done in a day or two and my mood will lighten considerably. Until I see the final numbers. And write the frightening check.

After looking at the numbers for 2023 I know one thing. I'm currently working at not working. 

Yes. I do photograph after sunset. Here is a blog post with plenty of samples....

 https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2024/02/last-week-it-was-freezing-and-today.html