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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

OT: Healthy Photographer, Happy Photographer.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks, Kirk

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

I just wanted to take a moment to thank my readers who sent me advice earlier in the week, re: banking without checks.

 Many have written to brag to me that they have not dealt with checks (or cheques) in years, or even decades. They don't write them at all. Pretty amazing to me. But each have admitted that sometimes they do receive checks (or cheques) and that they have a super-technically, ultra-efficient way of handling the disposition of checks (or cheques). Apparently they are able to point their smart phone cameras at the check in question, make a photo of the check and somehow send this information to their banks which are somehow able to intuit what to do with the photographs. 

I suspect that this method might require one to place onto their phone something that's called an "app." Which is short form for application. Being able transfer or deposit checks this way on devices that are among the world's most secure devices, on networks known for their high security and unhack-ability is mind-boggling to we few banking muggles. I'd like to try this new method but I have a question or two. 

My biggest question might paint me in a somewhat sinister light but I really want to know if it's possible just to use PhotoShop to add a few digits to a check's total in order to boost my income by a bit? Secondly, will I need to print out the check I've photographed, on paper, and then send it via physical mail to the bank?

If I do need to print out the check will I need a special kind of printer or a special kind of paper? Are checks more authentic when printed with, say, a Canon printer versus an Epson printer? And does paper type matter? Is a check better handled on glossy or matte. And, I hope you'll forgive my ignorance on this but if I have to send the photograph of the check via USPS (United States Postal System) why could I not just send the original check along instead?

But here's where the mental gymnastics get a bit trickier. One commenter suggested that after sending the phone-enabled check to the bank via whatever radio waves the phone uses I could then elect to spend the money via some type of card or another. But that brings up the whole question that started this particular thread: What if I would like to receive cash, folding, paper money to put in my pocket as a result of this check deposit? Not ephemeral money in some cloudy online account but legal tender printed by the government? Spendable just about anywhere. At least in the USA.

When I use the "phone app" does the cash/paper money get sent to me by mail, or Federal Express? How long would that take? What if someone steals it from my mailbox? How do I get my hands on the cash?

I guess I could make a photograph of the check with my phone, then print it, then send it to my bank and then get in my car and drive somewhere in town where there might be an ATM (automatic teller machine) that works with my bank, surveil the surroundings to ensure a lack of obvious muggers, enter a plastic card into a slot on the ATM, enter a PIN (personal identification number), navigate to "withdrawals" and then hope the cash money squirts from the machine, rush back to my car, jump in, lock the doors and take off. 

Seems like a hell of a lot of work to me for something that should be... convenient. 

And if I use an ATM and it has a skimmer on it and my information gets stolen and my account gets "hacked" how much time and energy will I spend trying to get my money restored? Which I guess is preferable to getting robbed at knifepoint gunpoint (thanks John) while standing in front of an ATM. Right?

So, if a big insurance company sends me a paper check and I can put it in my wallet thinking that my bank is downtown at the intersection of most of my almost daily walks, and on my route could I not, instead, just deviate 25 feet from the path, walk into the bank lobby, hand the check to a warm, happy, conscientious bank teller and have them hand me the folding, paper cash money into my waiting hand with no delay and no risk? Wouldn't that sound pretty good? 

I mean, it's not like I need the money to pay bills or anything like that. Goodness no! I do that at home through a service called, "online banking." No, I just thought it would be nice to have some real cash to do things like: tip Skycaps at the airport, drop a few bills into the near empty tip jar next to the surprisingly good street musician, donate some lunch money for an aging homeless fellow on Congress Ave., pay for an inexpensive cup of coffee. Or maybe just for the nostalgia of having some cash in my pockets. 

Sadly, the bank where I do most of my larger transactions is in a different state and I generally have to do my transactions with that banking resource via that secret thing I mentioned just above: online banking. 

But I've never done a transaction bigger than $200,000 at any one time. And that was to pay off a mortgage. Kind of scary to do that as a "bank transfer" or "wire transfer"; especially something that big but it seemed to work out just fine. Probably easier now since that was about ten years ago. 

Now, is there anyone who could step up and help me with my darn VCR (video cassette recorder)? It's very frustrating but after one of the maids accidentally unplugged its electrical connection from the alternating current wall socket it's been acting squirrelly. Now that I have plugged the unit back in it just keeps blinking "12:00" over and over again. I've tried turning it off and on again but it insists on blinking those mysterious numerals. I have heard that there are things called "DVDs" but my son, who works for an A.I. (artificial intelligence) tech start-up tells me that a thing called "streaming" is all the rage now. You can "download" or "stream" movies!!! On demand!!!! But he does tell me that I'll need to progress beyond our dial-up connection in order to take advantage of this new technology.... I wonder if they can just fax the movies to me?

I would mention the reality that I can still, in 2023, get in the car and go to a theater to see a projected movie but I'm sure the same crew of commenters might pooh-pooh that idea as well. After all, Isn't watching a feature film so much better on the screen of an Android phone? I ought to try that sometime. I'm sure it's just as compelling an experience....

But...wait for it......I have just been informed that all not cameras now need to take films. But that's a subject for another post. Or "blog".