My MFA-thesis brain has been on nyquil and tylenol lately which makes it difficult to remain standing…

I’ll be off for a week. In the meantime, check out the Bert Stern pics of Lindsay Lohan as Marilyn Monroe. Apart from the general ‘wtf’ reaction, it did make me think, we have our “JFK” again, I guess we need our “Marilyn”.

This is the follow up post to the first Sartorialist post. I went thursday to see the prints before the Jurgen Teller opening.

I remember going to see a show many years back of Patrick Demarchelier’s work. It was really awful. Beautiful prints of beautiful people shot beautifully. Stripped of their magazine setting, it was completely coma-inducing. Sometimes that happens, the work is made for a context and and cannot function outside of that. Something similar is happening here, although I feel much more protective of the Sartorialist in this example than Demarchelier. In other words I would rather see the Sartorialist succeed than see PD get his gallery rocks off.

What to say? The things I like; I like that the prints were a nice smallish size, I thought it was a good choice not to try to make these heroic prints you see everywhere. There was another gentleman in the gallery at the time and he was pressed up pretty close to them looking at the details. Small prints can create a kind of intimacy between the work and the viewer. Trouble is there was not much connection to be found. I really got no sense of the people in the photographs, somewhat as I had expected. My impression is that the web is good enough to convey what this work conveys, a sense of style in an instant. And the web is actually better in another way, the fact of the comments and community around the work feels much more interesting than seeing a collection of average prints in a white gallery space.

About the prints, they were fine, suffered a little oversharpening, a little of that digital thing were primary colors were oversaturated relative to everything else. As a group they looked cohesive which tells me a very good printer spent some time getting them all together.

On the way out I overheard a group going in and one said “ok, so the thing is, these are real people..” as an introduction to the show. I think now in photography we have come to expect that what we see is not real on some level, either from retouching or styling or the endless repetition of stars and famous people, the idea of photographing real people is somehow now exotic, and the exotic now commonplace. I did not have the heart to stop and explain that many of those folks were fashion editors and stylists. Certainly real but not “real.”

I wish there was more to say about “the work” but it was not the kind of thing where I come out of the gallery and feel really motivated to go out and take pictures. That is my benchmark when I see a show or a book, how juiced it gets me to want to do my own thing. Certainly others might feel motivated.

I’m going to conclude in a way that perhaps most of you do not expect. I think that overall the Sartorialist, hyperbole aside, is creating a wonderful thing if you just stick to what it is-a fascination with the details of style and dress and manner. Clearly he loves these things, and the people too. I would love to see more of that, more of his affection, more humour perhaps, more attention to the emotional moment. There is always somewhere to go. The invented can become authentic. » Read the rest of this entry «

Here is where we get into some hot water, a comparison of two sacred cows. The both moo, but differently.

So this is not intended to be scientific, but more hands on practical. Two weekends ago I had a 5D on loan so I decided to do a quick side by side, in a typical (for me) situation, alone on a deserted street…:) » Read the rest of this entry «

I think this installment might have to verge towards Lightroom only, since I have not used Aperture in the intervening month as Apple has not updated it’s raw preferences to support the M8…..we are waiting….

In this installment I want to focus on the Library mode since it is the weakest of the four modes. As I said before, in the development of Lightroom it seems there was a mass flowchart for the workflow and certain functions were demarcated to be Library only, when in fact you use them at other times… » Read the rest of this entry «

A while back I chastised Innova for their attempt at a fibre based look-a-like called F-Type gloss. The surface looked mostly like shirt cardboard, the kind you get when you buy a dress shirt. Well they seem to have gone back to the drawing board with FibaPrint Ultrasmooth Gloss. All I can say is WOW-my attempts at showing you the surface texture are not so good, but this looks very very much improved to my eye a near dead ringer for Ilford Multigrade Fibre. » Read the rest of this entry «

theonlinephotographer has posted a pro and con “review” of the Leica M8 and since it is not a review, and since there are so few pro’s I thought I would weigh in since I actually have used the camera… » Read the rest of this entry «

This is going to have to be an abbreviated part two since I am off to Berlin for the rest of the week. Achtung! While I am still enjoying doing most of my work in Lightroom, there are several major annoyances, real limitations that I want to explore. It goes back to Mode Mania, what I described last time as a decision on the part of the engineers to implement features in sets instead of as tools. It is as if there was this big flowchart at Adobe, and on the flowchart was “The Workflow”, and woe be it to the user who wants to use a tool outside of it’s place in the workflow. Here is an example of what I mean. » Read the rest of this entry «

Since Aperture does not at the moment support the Leica M8, except by hacking the raw preferences, I have been “living in Lightroom” for the past month on New York Times assignments and in my personal work. I have some preliminary opinions about the two program’s strengths and weaknesses.

While the comparison is inevitable, I think at the core the two programs are essentially different beasts, designed with very different photographers in mind. The other interesting thing is that Lightroom went through a very public beta process to refine its feature set and functionality, and I believe that has had a tremendous positive benefit for the end product. Aperture is a very Apple-like product, a sort of take-it-or-leave-it approach, although the 1.5 update did address some of the most basic user issues like the library-package concept.

What follows is a very haphazard review:) » Read the rest of this entry «

One week, and a half a dozen jobs later and these are the thoughts that I have had regarding the Leica M8. I really wanted to write a great review complete with lots of pixel-peeping pictures showing the M8 compared to the 5D, MkIIds, maybe throw in a disc camera for fun, but I don’t have time for that. Honestly, most of the difference comes down to different raw converters, you can make it look good or bad, depending. And it depends on what your expectations are. I’d say the comparison to the MkIIds is a little unfair, as there is about a 40% advantage in pure pixels, but you do see the difference in glass, that comes across in every image.  But the 5D is a fair comparison, they are very similar but very different.

The Good

If Canon could make a dslr with a simple shutter dial, an aperture wheel, an iso button and and real focusing groundglass they would make a mint. Oh, wait, they are already making a mint. I feel sad that I pushed my new F1 across the table at adorama three years ago for the 10D, which, while it is a great camera of it’s day, holds little romance compared to the F1. It seems like Canon has forgotten so many things while on their way to discovering new things. Like face recognition technology, who needs that-well, if you can’t focus the camera accurately, I guess you do. I don’t understand how we can have 150 years of photo history where cameras were manually focused and have it entirely thrown out in 5 years in favour of autofocus with no recourse. And before you say it, my eyesight is good enough.

So what does the Leica do so well? The viewfinder the viewfinder the viewfinder. Repeat after me, if you can’t see it you can’t shoot it. Or actually you can because the 5D is designed not to be looked through, I swear. It does a fine job, in fact a better job if you just leave it alone to its own calculations. I rented the 85 1.2L and used it wide open, and it is impossible to manually focus accurately, unless you are right on top of that something.

There is a trend here where it seems like the technologists have looked at all the pictures already made, all the “good” ones if you will, and decided, that is what we should do, make “good” pictures, like the ones we have already seen. So if in fact, you might want to deviate from that, say, use the 85mm for something other than a headshot in natural light, give it a try, you won’t come close. Not unless you fire up the strobe and turn the autofocus on and let the camera make all the decisions. So you are back to making “good” pictures.

Oh I have not spoken about the Leica yet. You camera manufacturers should know, it was a hit with the twenty-somethings at a recent job/party I photographed for the NY times. Everyone knew about it, there was lots of geek lust in air. Could it be a certain romance lacking from other more commoditized camera offerings? I think that is part of it. I think another part is like the resurgence in Vinyl recordings. I know, I am late to the party here. But said twenty-somethings all knew the mantra-vinyl is “warmer”. Analog is alive a well it seems.

Sure, you can cram more “features” into a camera, and here I will allow, image stabilization, while it makes me sea-sick looking through the viewfinder (silly me, I should not be looking right? what is the point?) it really does work. So this is the new paradigm. Canon will show at PMA a camera with enough pixels, say 15mp, that goes to ELEVEN, er, I mean shoots at an effective ISO of 12,800, or in other words, six stops over tri-X, and at that point, who cares what the lens is, you can have a lens that only goes to 5.6 and with image stabilization and 12,800 ISO, you can basically shoot under half a candle light. So go find me a half candle. And everything else we fix in software. This is where we are headed.

Oh I still have not spoken about the Leica yet. That is because it represents something that is rapidly being lost-hell it was lost even before it began. Most photographers abandoned rangefinders in the late 60′s, except a few artists and journalists. But the bulk went over to SLR’s, and Medium Format long ago. Just a few crazies left working with Leica, some Magnum types, and of course, Doctors and Dentists.

The concept is so patently simple it is a shock to those who are not familiar with it. It goes like this: What you see is all a lie, it just depends on which lie you like to operate under. In a SLR, everything you see with shallow focus, but probably outside, everything you shoot is in focus. In a rangefinder, everything you see is in focus, but really only part of it is, the rest is out of focus, depending. So either way, you are left imagining, what will the picture look like? I find it easier to anticipate the elimination of things mentally, rather than anticipate the inclusion of things mentally, get it? But it is the same either way. Think of the rangefinder as driving a car, you see everything, left and right, and you steer it. Think of the SLR as a dream state, inside a tunnel, with everything hazy and indistinct.

Am I supposed to talk about image quality? Yes it is good enough. I bet even a good quality 10mp point and shoot can do as well on a sunny day. Everything over 6mp is good enough at average sizes. But with the M8 you can do what you could not with a film based Leica, and that is print much bigger without it falling apart. 20×24 is about the limit for 35mm film, even then, it is falling apart, becoming air so to speak. But it is nice air, no doubt. Digital is another thing entirely, and I can see 30×40 and maybe, perhaps, 40×60, obviously not that tight, but very good depending on ISO. So you essentially get two cameras, a 35mm available light machine, and a medium format on-the tripod machine, in one.

I will honestly try to post a review, I do promise. Also, an appreciation of Aperture vs. Lightroom, since I am forced to use Lightroom because Aperture does not yet (exactly ) support the M8, except via a hack. And also Raw Developer, which is very very good, and makes gorgeous black and white. Don’t get me started on Capture One…

Hahmemüle on the left and Agfa on the right. You can see the cotton rag underpinnings of the Hanny on the left, the slight weave pattern, the texture. I guess this is “pearl” after all. And on the right, ah, the liquid smoothness that is an air-dried glossy gelatin paper. Certainly better than that Innova crap, but still lacking. Hundred bucks a box for 50 letter sheets-sheesh guys, Portriga was never that expensive!
At least they included a fine profile for my R1800 on their website-something that Innova has not got round to do. I have to say, “its not bad” overall, I guess it depends on what you like, it’s still “granular” to me, still too regular, too “manufactured.”
Maybe it never will be the same, the problems are different. Pigments need a microporous surface to accept the ink. In theory, a gelatin paper could be made for dye inks, but there is a drying issue, they take a long time to dry, in fact, they may never dry totally. So they are very unstable. HP and Canon seem to be sticking to the dye bandwagon, maybe it is time to jump ship?

Here is another take on that:
Reflections on Recent Digital Paper Offerings.webloc