Funny Things

I've added a few more shots to the fp sample album. I spent well over three hours out shooting yesterday. I got five keepers, although I only posted three of them. I'm holding a few back so I have something to post in case I don't get anything today. (I always worry about where the next picture is coming from.)

To me, using the fp-M is like walking around with a medium-format camera that shoots 4x5. Here's a funny thing: I've always said I want a camera with IS and my new camera doesn't have IS; I've always said I like small cameras and my new camera (as I'll configure it) isn't small; I've always said I don't care for high resolution and my new camera has high resolution; I always said I don't need full frame and my new camera is full frame; I've always said I didn't mind 3:2 and I've decided to shoot the new camera in 4:3 (for the most part). I guess I'll add that I've never done video and the camera was meant primarily for video.

And, when I first started writing about photography almost 40 years ago, the one brand I knew I didn't like was Sigma, which at the time made very inexpensive commodity lenses for people (and there turned out to be many of them) who couldn't afford better. And now I'm a Sigma shooter.

Goes to show you, you never know what's going to click.

As for the OC/OL/OY idea, here's another funny thing: you don't actually want me out photographing all the time. The more time I spend out photographing, the less time I spend writing about photography, and the latter is what I'm really good for.

The same thing has usually been the case when people make other suggestions to me, like, that I should teach workshops. The problem is the same: the more I do of other things, the less I'd write.

How It Works
By the way, here's how I'd do a portfolio, or a body of work, or a book:

• Start with a defined idea.
• Shoot every day.
• Distill the day's shooting down to that day's keepers. Aiming for between one and five.
• Do provisional post-processing on them so they can stand on their own well enough to be well seen (and so I know the files will work.)
• Do that for a year, or some other defined but extended period of time.
• End up with 400–1,500 keepers.
• Make a quick pass and throw out all the "what was I thinking" or "I don't even remember that one" or "I'm repeating myself" duds.
• Resulting in 100–400 strong pictures.
• Get down to serious editing/sequencing.
• End up with 40–60 pictures that work together in sequence and express my take on my idea.

Only then could I begin to think about the logistics and financing of a show and a book. Which is why I'm so impressed with people who have a show and create a book!

Over the past week or two you've watched me do steps 1–4 with the borrowed Sigma fp Monochrome. The keeper rate would go way down during the long Winter months, but in a year, maybe two, I could be ready for the next eight steps.

Of course, no one really needs me to do that. I think people would rather I write.

Mike

P.S. Oh, I forgot one! This is pretty funny. I used to have to wait till after sunset to do darkroom work, because my various darkrooms were seldom light-tight enough during broad daylight. And now, I have to wait till after sundown to process the day's shooting, because the glare out on the porch where I work makes it too difficult to judge values of gray during the daytime. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Book o' the Week

Fred Lyon, San Francisco Noir. "The version [of San Francisco] that Fred Lyon celebrates in his new book is a classic San Francisco full of smoky jazz clubs, neon lights in the fog and sharply dressed men and women stepping on and off of trolley cars. Made mostly during the 1950s and '60s, Lyon's images are big on atmosphere and style, and hit many parts of the city that visitors love." (PDN)

These book links are your portal to Amazon. Please use these links; they help support the site.

B&H Photo

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Peter, in Boulder: "I don’t know who to put this into words Mike, other than to say this post makes it very clear how much you’ve enjoyed taking pictures this past week. I’m smiling reading it."

robert e: "I've always enjoyed your writing and looked forward to your posts, Mike, but the fp-M saga really has me on the edge of my seat anticipating the next post and uploads. Your excitement is contagious. I'm still flabbergasted by what seems to me extreme depth of field. I'm wondering what the trick is, but maybe it's not a trick at all—maybe it's just been a really long time since anyone on the internet has stopped down. We do want you writing, sure, but I think all of us would prefer you writing about having fun. We just need to figure out how to make that practicable."

Mike replies: In a short while I'll upload to Flickr an example of what the Ancients called "pan-focus" or front-to-back focus...the world of today has forgotten that this was the manifesto of the then-revolutionary Group ƒ/64, to have everything in focus front to back, ƒ/64 being a stopped-down aperture that gave good depth-of-field on an 8x10 view camera. [UPDATE: Here it is.]

Stephen McCullough: "Although you’re making photographs, this is creating material for the writing. And you ‘sound’ happy. I’m enjoying this series."

Mark: "Finally a Speed Graphic replacement…."

Tom Duffy: "I really like this picture. The tones on the shady side of the barn are perfect. I'm not sure I could have resisted making the sky a little more dramatic. Good restraint on your part. I remember when digital started becoming a thing for Leica and people were commenting on the great image resolution. A naysayer commented, 'Since when did the Leica become a view camera?' Since digital, almost every camera has become a view camera. This is why I own two tilt-shift lenses for my Canon."

Comments

[Jeff]

Still, this site is named The Online Photographer, not the Online Writer, so it’s comforting to know that there’s an enthusiastic shooter lurking within. And I think it will benefit the writing part.

[Terry Letton]

I take your point that your writing is an important skill for you. But don’t forget that research is an important part of the writing process. If you don’t have something to say writing is pretty pointless. That little Sigma seems to be doing an excellent job at giving you something to write about, so don’t feel guilty about time shooting, just chalk it up as research.

[Moose]

As you say, there are endless ways to render the tones. I want to see more of the boards and ivy:

Click on image for larger version.

[Michael McC]

I love the recent posts. It has been inspiring to see you so enthused taking photos with this camera. I think I'll head out this weekend with a view to taking some B&W photos.

[Colin]

I've been reading your posts for quite a few years now. I've enjoyed following this new camera, but most of all I've really loved see the photographs you've been taking with it. I'd love to see more of them featured on the site. For me it's an important part of the experience of your writing. Your actual photographic work is an important element alongside the gear, the off-topic posts, etc. and there's been too little of it imho over the years. The occasional, all too rare, featuring of other reader's work has also been really welcome.

As to the production of a book, I think you're setting yourself up to fail. Why not make very small books just for yourself, start small and work up to something so ambitious? Having the work in a personally-produced book form has given me a lot of pleasure. And you don't need to shoot daily - surely it depends on the project. I plan to walk from Burnham-on-Crouch along the River Crouch out to the North Sea on 11 December this year, it will be 11 years since the last time I did so and I plan to make my own book from the photos taken from just those two visits. Small-scale can be just as interesting or charming as large-scale works.

[Luke]

Spend more time out shooting.
You have so much more to tell us when you do.

[Nikhil Ramkarran]

As a patron of your photography (I have one of your photos hanging on my wall right over my shoulder as I type this) I take exception to your statement that writing is what you're good for.

I won't demand an apology this time, but I think you're good for writing, and photography (and being a fine parent from what I can tell).

And given the very fine conversation I recall having with you in person, there is much more that you are not admitting to being good for.

[Chris]

Don't worry, Mike, the novelty, honeymoon period will wear off. Then you can go back to wanting the rational things like IS, and away from the weird small sample size group think you seem to be stuck in. Just don't spend too much.

[Dierk]

This shot shure has great possibilities - the thing for me are the clouds. Wondering how a Grayscale RAW would render compared to conventional RGB… Any chance to get the the appropriate file? This could be kind of a virtual TOP Print of the Month Project…

[John Krumm]

Colin may have a point. I was thinking, use the same process, scaled down, to come up with 6 good shots that go together. A personal "seeing in sixes," to borrow Brooks Jensen's term. Combine them with your writing. I've been enjoying your detailed descriptions on Flickr.

[-et-]

Regarding your desire for image stabilization and the lack of it in this camera, I have a question. In the camera description at B&H, it says that the camera has "Electronic stabilization".

Out of a combination of ignorance and curiosity, what does Sigma mean by that?

- Tom -

[Pi Manson]

Like many others among your readership, I’ve been really enjoying seeing your work and hearing your obvious delight at going out and making photographs again. It’s a pleasure to be part of vicariously through your blog. Alongside your reader’s print reviews, this is my favourite element of your wonderful blog. Thanks Mike.

[Bill Tyler]

In response to Tom's question about electronic stabilization, I did a little digging. Here's an excerpt from Sigma's website . "...the electronic image stabilization corrects camera shake by compositing multiple images in a single release,..." So you actually do have IBIS in this camera. It's just that it's not achieved by wiggling the sensor.

[Yes, but it's JPEG only. It doesn't work with DNG raw files selected. And it can't be used for moving subjects. Still might be useful though, in certain situations. --Mike]

[Tim Wilson]

Re the 4:3 thing, there was a point a few years back when, in trying to figure out how best to evolve a certain body of (monochrome) work, that had started via early Micro Four Thirds cameras, into something that benefitted from a larger sensor, I landed on the conclusion that what would work best would be a ‘full-frame’ mirrorless camera that offered a 4:3 aspect ratio mode. At the time, Sony had just been joined by Canon and Nikon in the FF mirrorless club, and Leica was there, too. To my surprise, of the four, only Canon had a 4:3 mode. I rented one, didn’t like it, and ended up waiting months for another option. That option turned out to be the Lumix S1R, and that’s been my go-to high-res camera ever since. More nimble than medium format, with better lens options; a superb EVF, perfect for monochrome composing; really good IBIS; and still 42MP, cropped.