Flash Or No Flash

Something the paper is bringing out in me is the need for and ability to use flash. Not controlled, interesting and creative flash, just “get it done” flash.

Modern cameras are pretty good at getting by without flash, but flash can never the less often do a better and cleaner job in tough light. The usual order is nothing > a reflector > an LED > a flash > multiple flashes > with mods.

The big issue is often the need to push and pull a file, which is just a lot of pixel binning. Flash eliminates at least one of these.

Warmth, brilliance and 3D “pop”.

In the shot above, a ND filter was employed to help the flash units (2x Good TTL units) cover the space at f1.8. Without the filter I would have been using 1/2000th or higher, really pushing the flash units. High speed flash is a big drain on power, the longer the distance and higher the shutter speed, the greater the drain as the unit has to fire multiple times to cover the shutter movement. Add in TTL pre-fire and it gets tough quick. The ND filter allows you to use a speed under sync (1/250th) with an aperture of f1.8 for shallow depth.

Both units were bare head, set to 35mm (FF) coverage and are just out of frame to the left or behind (not sure that one did anything). Overall exposure was about -1 EV, the flash units at +0.7 EV.

A shot before I remembered to turn silent shutter off (which disables flash). Apart from the shadows over capped faces etc, it lacks the “pop” of the one above. Also though I did shoot the top image a little lower angled and with a wider aperture.

The fact is, flash units in a M43 camera bag have the distinction of often being the heaviest individual items packed, but their utility is hard to argue with. To be honest, judicious use of flash is sometimes the difference between anyone else with a camera and a pro.

Limbo

First world whinge here, so bare with or turn away now.

The last three years, the COVID years, were actually three of my favourite annuals in my working life.

I worked flexibly and happily for the school, was appreciated, felt like part of the family and grew into the space with enthusiasm. Unfortunately, it did not pay much nor consistently, but to be done well (as far as I was concerned), it needed a full committment, curtailing my ability to earn in other ways. I would often get three small jobs a day, sometimes with only a day or two’s notice, so planning ahead was not really an option.

Add to this, the entire burden of expenses, long term security and upkeep fell to me, and financially I was probably better off unemployed.

My bad I guess as I came to the school straight from a camera shop, so had no client base formed. When it was active it was all pervading, when not (3 months a year), it was a void for earnings and even contact, but continued to be a financial drain with software subscriptions, insurance and licensing.

I pushed for a small increase in both security and income, in return promising a disproportionately large increase in content creation and involvement, but to no avail. The school is a not-for-profit and has limited options, so their wheel keeps spinning, spitting out well meaning photographers as it goes. Shame.

I accepted two days a week at the local paper in an attempt to make the whole thing viable.

A respected and ancient institution, it paid at the other end of the scale, including transport, a decent computer and even gear (two of which I do not use). This shared arrangement may have worked to a point, but we never find out, as I was offered, actually pressured to accept full time when another tog left, breaking the connection to the school.

Time to clean house and prepare for the future.

There are good things, such as a heightened awareness of social issues, contacts and decent income for my future, but there is also a massive feeling now of living a single dimensional, lop sided life.

To address this, I have signed up to a couple of charities and social organisation’s as a volunteer photographer, videographer and general helper. Balance feels restored, when it actually happens.

Ther problem is, when I went up to full time, the “machine” gobbled me up in a single day, with, in all fairness, a fair amount of flexibility to accommodate my commitment to the school over their final term (as promised). Working effectively two jobs was not much fun, even worse than doing just one I have mixed feelings about.

In reverse, three months have elapsed since I requested a dispensation and I am fed up. It is odd that if I quit, this would all have been behind me months ago, but partially quitting is taking forever.

Rant over.

Tranquil nature scene showing the cycle of life etc………..

Looking on the bright side.

Working for the school was lovely, a bit too “idilic”, as a private school environment can be sheltered and naive. I had committed fully, much to my own detriment, but really, they are lucky kids, they do not need me.

Being out in the real world has been good for me, opening my eyes and in hindsight, my current dynamic of part time work with the paper and part time self motivated volunteering with the Migrant Resource Centre among others is a better balance.

I did a single job for the MRC the other day, a Bollywood dance afternoon all comers welcome and it was cathartic, life affirming. I have made the right move spiritually and personally, now I just need the paper to sort things.

Another cool thing is, they look like they will actually use all the gear and skills the paper won’t, so a perfect balance in that regard also.

Patience is needed.

Wasting Time

I had a late job last night based on a loose appointment, not confirmed, but one that I thought I should go to anyway just in case.

No show, which is fine (coverred the next day and the following weekend). It was my call and the journalist concerned was sick so no way of following up. I had a camera, some nice light and the cities near empty Civic Square to explore.

“Red Tops”.

“Public Garden Harvest”.

“Fire Fingers”

The other bonus was the next morning I still had my camera with me.

An intriguing composition.

Old mate the crane, soon to go with the pending completion of the new build.

Belt And Bracers

Looking for the dual hand grip from the Smallrig shoulder kit, but on its own, it looked like I would be paying something close to the full rigs, so I decided to buy the whole thing. My preferred Smallrig supplier is (ebay seller) smallrig188 who supplies from Australia and is often best or near best price, with impeccable service.

Turns out there was a discount on this rig, so it was the same price as buying the arms alone!

From here I have a lot of options as well as the ability to fully rig out two cameras and with the flick of a lock, switch from one to the other.

My ideal I feel will be the chest brace with side handles, possibly pointing up, but I know from experience, that sometimes the logic does not translate to reality, so having both (or a hybrid) to try will reveal best practice.

It is also handy to have more ways to mount other items. The S5 with it’s small HDMI requires a protective clamp, which replaces the side handle. The above rig allows for both.

The Best Rig Option

I have been looking at maybe adding a follow focus and possibly a shoulder rig or something to the S5.

Being full frame, the stabilising is not as powerful as the M43 cameras and the follow focus thing has been of interest. For the follow focus you need rails, so it makes sense to look at the two in tandem and it is often cheaper.

The problem is, I do not want a shoulder rig. I don’t shoot like that. My comfort zone for hand held low angle video with a right side (camera) handle and left focussing hand in tandem and the option of a left hand handle for movements.

This works well with the G9 and EM1’s, but the S5 is a slightly less reliable platform, a result of a bigger sensor, longer lenses and slightly different ergonomics.

The solution just popped up while I was looking for USB cable guards. The Smallrig 3183 chest pad gives me a third contact point, something that should fix the slight wobbles I have* and the 30cm rails allow for a follow focus option later.

From here, I will also have the option of a top or under handle with a weighted and braced base and even the shoulder rig later for more options, but probably not.

*I have shot 2-4 min hand held interviews with a G9, but there is a slight drift (very Netflix I guess). This should arrest that on two angles, leaving only in-out body movements, which are easier to correct.

The Art Of Overkill.

I have been around a lot of photographers lately and some trends seem to be emerging.

Photography has always been a game of overcoming limitations, but sometimes you need to look at those limitations in context.

Shooting in low light has tended to reduce quality, but had several ways of being mitigated. You could use a larger film stock or sensor (bigger, more expensive cameras with shallower depth of field and lower magnification), a faster lens (also shallower depth of field) or faster film/ISO (lower quality).

So why at a time when we can comfortably say all of these have been addressed, do we feel the need to use all of these fixes at once?

Example 1. I recently shot a job at an airport in the main foyer. The light was ok, interesting with decent levels and the mix of natural and artificial was workable. I used my 40-150 f4 which has proven to take perfectly good files for fine art prints, let alone news grade or internet use. A hired shooter, someone I have encountered before, was switching between three G Master primes on a Sony A7r mk4. These cover the ends of a basic zoom (35/50/85), all at f1.4. In a previous conversation the shooter said he wanted to use two cameras, but could not yet afford another A7r mk4.

My thought, screaming internally, but not voiced, went something like this; “you don’t need edge to edge sharpness wide open nor even wide open for this light, which also brings you super shallow depth of field, which you also don’t need it as some context is appropriate even necessary, nor do you need the massive pixel count the camera offers, so why use any of this instead of a convenient zoom on a 24mp camera?

I know for a fact this presser was only going to go online. None of the gear used was going to be needed for the extreme use it was designed for. A $16,000au + kit to do what a kit lens and base camera could achieve? Even my M43 gear was overkill and I was not using my best stuff. You can buy and use what you want, but what information stream made this shooter feel he needed that kit for that job?

Example 2. Another newspaper shooter sitting next to me at an indoor AFL training camp, was sporting a single camera and lens combination worth more than my entire working day kit, but still complaining her lens was not long enough. The light was poor and I was lamenting leaving my 75 f1.8 at home, but got by with my f2.8 zoom. The other togs’ R3 and 85 f1.2L combination was too short, too good at low light handling for news paper work, but still with a DOF cost if used to purpose, but still did not offer a pixel benefit for cropping.

It was unbalanced for the job, but still cost 4x the actual kit needed and the massive lens was a pretty big deal to lug around “just in case”. My 45mm f1.8, the lens I would use for the same reason weighs as much as my car key. If I had that Canon kit, the 85 f1.8 would have been more than adequate and allow me to carry other options.

Low light be damned.

Sensor Size

The industry it seems, has done a real job on us and younger shooters in particular are right in the cross hairs. The relentless push toward full frame, something that was diluted when early DSLR’s ruled has become really cemented in mirrorless, right when it does not need to be. The industry is offerring both increased quality and more quantity at the same time.

Fuji and Olympus have taken another path, but Panasonic has caved and Fuji does medium format. Again, “crop frame” sensors, the name alone dooming them, have been pushed aside for the fallacy that is “full frame” or nothing.

Here is a better look at the real difference;

Lenses

The push for full frame brings with it a need to improve lenses for better edge to edge sharpness, otherwise why use the sensor size (and contrary 3:2 shape) or the pixel count? Some of this glass is getting massive, expensive and impractical and often in the face of the one actual benefit of full frame, lower noise and naturally shallower depth. The Nikon Z series even robs you of another stop of depth of field thanks to their super wide lens mount.

Shallow dept of field, often called Bokeh, but which actually refers to all depth of field transitions not just the super shallow ones, has its creative limits. Full frame f1.2 looks nice occasionally, but wears thin and is not overly practical in the commercial world. If you really need it, the average modile phone can fake it.

Super fast apertures are also not needed for low light with modern cameras and software, all factors considered.

F1.8 on a full frame 50mm. The same can be achieved with a 45mm on M43, or even shallower with a 56mm f1.4.

Most modern f1.8 prime lenses are near perfection and much easier to make, so you have to ask yourself, what are you actually getting that big, expensive lens for? Is it the rarely used performance parameters, the added prestige, a way of spending your obvious over abundance of funds or a need to have something that makes you feel like you stand out? A whole clutch of them? Overkill. Personally, I did not see a need even in M43 for their f1.2 lenses, let alone a full frame equivalent.

Pixels

More pixels have also been pushed for better quality like bigger film stock used to be, which was never a good measure. Not only is it very hard to prove the benefits of more pixels to the uneducated (i.e. the vast majority of people who will look at your images), but more pixels alone do not guarantee better colour, sharpness or more character, just bigger files. The potential actually has few relevant pathways of realisation. Ironically, when we needed more quality for massive prints, it was so very hard to achieve, but now that we have it easily, nobody needs it.

A decent crop off a low grade lens and older M43 20mp sensor.

ISO

There seems to be zero tolerance for high ISO performance issues these days. The fact is, most modern cameras get you most of the way, then software gets you the rest. Perfectly clean any-ISO performance is the ideal, but until that day, we can get the job done with what we have. What are we actually after? Absolute technical perfection, and if so, to what end?

A huge crop (about 10% of the original) from a middle-high ISO image off a medium pixel count, smaller sensor camera. The sensor, from an EM1 mk2 is a generation or two older than is state of the art, but C1 and ON1 No Noise combined for decent results.

The ends then, nullifies the means.

Internet posts and prints have limits, limits we have been exceeding in real terms for a long time. Very big prints can be made from very big files, but rarely need to be. The only time you can genuinely see the difference is when you get too close. The only real measure of massive pixel counts would be a huge, very hig resolution screen.

Viewing at 400% on a screen, standing feet away from a bill board etc will show some differences (and sometimes they will not, more often showing the limits of the medium), but only the obsessed do that and only when a direct comparison can be made as an exercise is for it’s own sake.

A 50% crop from a 20mp EM1 mk2 file, poorly processed in C1 (my first month), then shot on a cheap phone at dusk!

More, more, more, but with little accounting for real needs.

A Cameras Best Feature And It's Close Friend

I have a different shooting style to the other photographers. Part of that is from a different learning process, part of it is technical.

The single best feature my cameras offer me is silence.

Photography started with silence and after a long, long time of clacks, whizzes and burrs, it is returning to silence.

Animation like this, which was very representative of the person, would have been hard to replicate artificially.

The general process, especially with TV present, is that the interview is conducted with the photographer waiting till the end, then a shot or two is taken. It is a process, tried and true, but limited in options and to be honest, a little dated.

With a silent camera, it is possible to get that natural, empathic and genuine shot while the interview is in progress, even with sensitive TV mics near by. It is even possible to get an image that the subject will like.

Occassionally, I have noticed more clued in subjects, such as performers, politicians etc, can also play in this space, bringing their best to the process, which is good for all.

The second most useful feature, directly tied to the application of this is the responsive back screen that allows that silence to be used at angles previously not exploited.

The subject here was in casual conversation with our journalist, which allowed me to shoot low without being obvious.

Other benefit of no give away sounds, is no startled children, no wary or skittish animals and no breaking of the existing flow.

There are however some down sides that must be taken into account.

Depending on the camera, no flash will fire, sometimes banding is introduced under artificial lighting, especially at high ISO settings and sometimes, a lack of sound can be seen as sneaky.

Fill flash was employed here, the only image that made some gentle noise and of course the flash. I took plenty of silent ones first, then chanced this one, which was admittedly the best, but it broke the spell.

The flash thing is rarely a problem, the banding issue is getting better and there are sometimes ways around it and the sneakiness is fixed by simply being up front and pleasant (unless sneaky is called for).

The Mixology Of A Micro 4/3 Kit

Running two brands on the same format has its advantages and disadvantages. I tend to obsess about the down sides, but then I forgot about the good.

The bad;

Some lens features do not cross over.

This is sometimes a good thing. For example, the super touchy aperture ring on the 15mm Leica, something you cannot disengage on a Panasonic, is dead, i.e. not a major pain the ass on an Olympus, but also some switches and in lens I.S. are also not transferrable.

Some Flash features do not transfer.

Like the lens thing, but less of an issue off-brand units.

Things turn the wrong way (depending on how you look at it). On the Oly cameras, you can change the lens focus direction, but only in focus by wire and you are stuck with zoom rotation. My fix for this is (now) to only use Oly cameras at the paper in AF, Panasonics for my video/commercial kit and always give myself a reasonable adjustment period between the two. I also tend to use these cameras differently*, so that helps.

Panasonic AF sucks with non Panasonic lenses.

It is not unusable and for short lenses I rarely notice any issues, but for long lens sports, it is twitchy, jumpy and generally not happy. Results can be had, often more than you would assume, but without a dedicated Panasonic lens, you are in for a ride. The newest Olympus 40-150 f4 seems the best followed by the 75mm, the older 75-300 kit is by far the worst.

Using my shorter Panasonic lenses on Olympus cameras is rarely an issue. This also goes for my Sigma prime, which works seamlessly on an Olympus, but are noticeably less comfortably on a Pana.

The good.

Some of my favourite results come from mixing lenses and cameras. Generally the Panasonic cameras have lighter and brighter images, lime greens, warmer skin tones, but the Olympus cameras also vary a little, so I effectively have three looks.

This also goes for the lenses, some Olympus being warmer than others, the Panasonic range seemingly is more consistent.

Favourite combinations;

G9 and 75mm. Used for many studio portraits since I gambled on the combo for the Telstra shoot, even using the G9 for the first time for stills. I believe this combination is in my top tier for quality overall.

G9 and 45mm. The little version of above. The 45mm Olympus is optically a less delicate and lush looking lens than the 75mm, but the G9 adds that in.

OM10 or G9 and Sigma 30mm. Just very nice. I do not like the files as much from the EM1’s or the Pen F with this lens, which seems to need a little warming up, but the delicateness of the lens and G9 mesh very well.

This job in particular highlighted the benefits of cross-pollination. The file above, taken in the notoriously bad light of the school gym needed almost no processing. The OM10’s often produce overly yellow files in this situation. The OM10 mk2 and Sigma 30mm was faultless and equally the 45mm on a G9 gave nicely balanced files (although the OM10 files were better).

EM10 and Leica 15. This combo just seems to rock. I used it a few times for school shoots as the third camera and regularly found the images spectacular. The EM10’s are quite warm, the lens cooler hued and the two seem to balance out, especially in mixed lighting and the AF with screen touch focus is snappy and sure footed.

EM1’s and the 9, 12-60 and 8-18 Leica’s. Delicate looking Pana lenses with extra body from the Oly sensor.

All the other compositions from this set were with Oly cameras and lenses and the blues were deeper, the greens cooler and heavier. The 9mm Leica allows me to open up an image seemingly more naturally with a slightly “fill flash” look.

G9 and 40-150 f2.8. Not for focus tracking, which is quite frightening, but image quality.

Bag Merry-Go-Round

I have been using the F2 Ballistic Domke happily for a few months and apart from weight (my Godox 860 flash is the main culprit), it has done nothing wrong.

I decided none the less to give the F804 another go, just to see if one bag could do all and to accommodate a larger hand held reflector.

The bag is just too big. It holds a ton of gear, big things especially, but gets uncomfortable to carry and poorly laid out for smaller gear. I will hold on to it for hauling lighting gear or similar.

Then I tried to get by with the Photocross 10, but after a job with only one camera, no spare bits (my bad, not the bags), I did learn to make sure “experiments” are carried out with real needs in mind.

The fact is, the F2 is the perfect bag for me. The shape, size and layout fit the ideal M43 day kit. The Ballistic version adds weather proofing confidence, slightly updated extras and the classic style and design has come back into vogue.

A little like this, only the left hand camera is now gripped, the OSMO has been dropped and the lenses have white circles on their back caps.

Main compartment;

This sits lens down in one section of the four part lens insert with the camera sitting on top. EM1.2 with grip and strap (worn when out) and usually the 40-150 f4. If I know I am going into a low light situation, I will swap this lens out for the 75mm.

In the open inside section. EM1.2 no grip with 12-40.

In one of the lens compartments*. Olympus 45mm for Bokeh and when the 40-150 gets too slow at f4.

In one of the lens compartments*. Olympus 17mm for Bokeh and low light standard work.

In one of the lens compartments*. Panasonic Leica 9mm as wide/macro. This has become one of my most useful lenses. Wide enough to do most of my wide work, stable enough for normal use. I call it the politician lens, for when the “crush” only allows one arm shooting, often high or low.

In one end pocket. Godox 860, off camera controller, small LED. I wish a decent flash was lighter, because the flash is the heaviest single thing in my bag.

In the other end pocket. The Sennheiser mic and phones have been dropped, even though it weighs nothing as video has been scarce, but the LED panel has been kept and the room reserved. That lack of video has allowed me to switch a G9 for a lighter EM1 as my second body.

Back pocket. A small 60cm 5-in-1 reflector and note pad (I like the bigger ones),

Front pockets. Phone, cleaning cloth, batteries, small spare note pad and multiple pens. The 1970’s era pockets are perfect for modern accessories like iphones etc, ironic considering I never found a proper use for them before.

Inside lid. Small change, spare cards, face mask and other bits.

Still reasonably heavy, but nothing compared to the other guys kits.

*One of the best things I did this year was put padded white furnitutre foot protectors on the lens rear caps to help identify and protect them. No more dropping one on top of another or grabbing two before I get the right one.

Dual Duel.

Dual ISO comparison, quick and dirty (or not as it goes).

This image was shot at ISO 2000, the upper end of the lower ISO range.

On closer inspection, sharpness and noise are very good, certainly better than M43, but there are other considerations.

Now one taken at ISO 12.800.

The image looks harder, but that could be the light. Still sharp and clean, but their is a little grain pattern in the background.

The dual ISO thing is still a bit of a mystery to me. I get it, but I don’t “get” it in useable terms. The application of it with video makes plenty of sense, but for stills, my instincts still fall back on what feels right.

A World Turned Upside Down?

Some very high ISO tetst with the S5. I have found that even with the 50mm lesn, the camera sseems to need more light. I have checked and checked, but nothing seems out of place. The good news of course is that ISO 12,800 on the S5 is very clean, although colour can drop away a bit.

ISO 12,800 wide open.

ISO 12,800 wide open.

ISO 12,800 wide open. A little added saturation sent the file a little off the rails.

ISO 2000, f1.8.

A sneaky G9 image (Sigma 30mm at f1.4 ISO 800). So why did the G9 only need ISO 800 when the S5 went straight to 2000 and a slower shutter speed?

Realistic Needs.

I had one of those jobs the other day that pushed my gear to the limit. In hindsight, after the mild depression lifted, I realised that I had broken my own rule.

I had taken the wrong lenses for M43 to work at it’s best.

The reality envelope of this level of photography, is pretty much understood.

I can push my M43 gear to a well exposed ISO 6400 file, which can still be cropped, pushed and prodded a decent amount. From these files I have managed to read name badges from a group of over a dozen people, bring out shadowed faces cleanly and use as little as 20% of the file without anyone seeing the crop.

The job I did unfortunately, had all the elements that stretched that and I only have myself to blame. Anticipating a quiet week with no sport (a weekend off), I took my sports gear bag home, but luckily left my f2.8 40-150 in my locker by mistake.

The lens I really needed was the 75 f1.8. In this environment, I would have managed ISO 3200, 1/1000th wide open. Wide open of course is f1.8, acting like an f2.8 lens in this format.

This is plenty and well within my happy zone.

To add to my dramas, the outer ring lights used for bikes were the on, but not the stronger main overhead lights, so basically most faces were in shadow.

Instead I needed ISO 6400 at 1/500th f2.8, which was on the edge. ON1 bought the files back, but I did the big no-no, I underexposed several files. They only just made news print quality, not fine art by any means.

All systems have a limit and most need some type of awareness to get the most out of them. My systemic advantage is extra reach for the speed, but I have to bring that. If I am in the same situation as everyone else, the full frame shooters have an edge. If I play all my tricks, balance returns.

Another photog there had a Canon R3 with a monster 85L ($13,000au). Her issue was reach, made up for partially by cropping a few more pixels and cleaner ISO performance, balanced against sometimes shallower depth of field, so same-same. The reality for her was a little more reach at the expense of a bit of speed would have been better (135 f2?) as she sometimes needed to be a little too close.

The huge difference to me is my EM1x and 75mm come in under the price of the lens alone and most importantly, it is more than enough. I just did not bring it, so my bad.

Taker Or Maker Redux

I did a post a while back called “Taker or Maker?” asking whether you, the reader fall into one or the other camp, but the context was confined to street photography. This time I am going to apply it to more general photography or more specifically, general journalistic photography.

I am a photo taker. I see something and if appropriate and I am able, I grab the shot. Simple as that. How I get the shot is an ever evolving process, but still it’s that simple.

That has always been me and always will be. Thirty plus years of photography has allowed a style to emerge naturally and that style is to watch, see and capture. I see no value in manufactured reality. It does nothing for me and it never occurred to me to evolve any differently.

For a long time I thought this was a matter of practice. The skill set that was not developed, but could be. Over the years though I have noticed a strong resistance in me to reverse the process from the natural see > capture to a very forced and uncomfortable make > capture.

This may be normal of course. Most people have a fear of public speaking or performance and to some extent manufacturing an image smacks of that, but in my case I have developed several comfortable skills when communicating with others, from sales to training to running field trips. I seem to have no fear when it comes to communicating to control peoples actions, but I still feel uncomfortable posing people.

Why?

I guess creatively, I respond to genuine actions with purpose, to the subject unaware candid and the beauty of life’s authenticity. The early images that inspired were National Geographic or Outdoor Photographer covers, books of travels and candid portraits of people in exotic places (i.e. Street photography before it was called that). During that period of my life and the history of photography, still life, weddings, newspaper and commercial work all had formulas that served their needs, but none appealed to me.

I am attuned to natural observance and feel very self conscious when breaking that reality.

This was grabbed, then I went to get names. better to ask for forgiveness than permission, because asking for permission kills the moment.

While there, this happened. Nothing set up, just reacted to. Prior to these I got a set of the usual sit-and-pose images and they were fine. Workman like. Interestingly, the editor chose these two as hero images, along with one of the artist (performing, not posing), then used the other shots as small fillers, so there is clearly something in this for everyone.

The watcher or taker is only after a natural moment. Nothing can be forced, made up or faked. If I have to set up a shot, I will take the role of choreographer and let the characters play out their roles, hopefully allowing me to work my way.

Good makers, like wedding or commercial shooters are a different breed and in some limited circumstances I can do what they do, especially in a studio, but generally, meaning 99% of the time, I work best watching and taking.

I have been trying to grow another foot at the paper, become a good photo maker, one who sets up polished formulaic shots, but it is just not me. This is part of the reason I have asked to go back to part time with an emphasis on weekend work. Weekends are where the sport is. I need some space to practice what I am good at, to do some work I actually enjoy and more than just occassionally.

This is the made photo, predictable, forced and practiced (but by shooting the process over the person it was effectively “taken” by me). I also noticed the maddening habit all the drivers got into of holding up the one finger, something even the host web page used sparingly. Making images can be a two way thing, which only adds to their fake nature. If the interaction is necessary, then the process ia at least smooth, but if it replaces a lack of imagination…………. .

This is the taken image, with adding context, action, interaction, authenticity and story elements. It required preparedness and speed, but this just adds to the fun and feeling of achievement.

As stated in a recent post, if forced to shoot naturally, I need to put people in a comfortable place, then take their image naturally, organically even if a little fake.

A bit like late night and morning people, I don’t think you can force one to be the other. Although the two other photographers at work are well practiced at making photos, one of them I feel is not any more comfortable than me, just well practiced and resigned to it. His great love is the landscape (found not made).

I can do the set shot thing and have to, but I will never be good at it*, nor will I like it and I will always push back with what I feel is a better representation of the world.

Protesting With Impact

My first job today was a protest.

The group in question protest a lot, usually with high commitment and most often climate based. This time, they were protesting our lazy preparedness against flooding on the eve of the aniversary of Lismore’s floods last year (which are still being cleaned up).

One of the things I find tough about my job is the general cynicism that most causes are greeted with, but I am impressed by the protesters courage and in this case creativity.

The numbers on the walls are significant floods in Launceston’s past (although one a few years ago is not on there and let’s not talk about floods to many others in the country).

A little Alice in Wonderland, a little Pink Floyd and some Stalinist monument.

One Job

Could I do one photographic job as a career now?

One sport, one genre, one style or one operational process?

I had not tried panning in a while, but gave it a go at the Penny Farthing bikes. It worked ok, so it seemed logical to do it with the cars.

To be honest, once you have a few basic styles knocked, a sport like this just becomes a matter of planning, patience and a little luck, because you can’t be everywhere at once. I only spent a few hours at the track this weekend, unlike the pro racing shooters who spent three full days behind the lens. In that time I got the required pan, corner and pit lane shots of every car and had to ask myself “what else is there?” apart from catching an accident or other drama.

We worked out that to guarantee at least a chance of catching all the action at even our small Symmons Plains race track, you would need a minimum of four shooters working together.

I got really lucky with this one, ironically a product of a working photographer who had several other jobs to do that day. It was taken during an early practice lap, so the driver was only warming up and I was the only one at this corner. During racing I stuck with this corner, because I did not have time to go too far and the pits were close, but then I had lots of company.

I cannot honestly think of a single sport I would like to cover at the exclusion of all others, let alone a career shooting just sports only. I simply do not have a great enough passion for any one sport and enjoy too many other types of photography.

At a paper at least we get daily variety and plenty of opportunities within that, even if they are often limited. My plan to drop off a couple of editorial days in favour of weekends will hopefully balance my load better.

The truth is, after the first few encounters with a new sport or photographic style, I tend to either get obsessed (which leads to over working it), or bored. I love shooting some sports, but can still get too much very easily. Some sports, often ones I actually like to watch or play can be bland to shoot and all come with compromises*.

The paper and school have reinforced my preference for candid, take as you see shooting with plenty of scope for variety.

My ideal. A person comfortable in their space, respectfully captured without intrusion allowing us an insight into their world.

Maybe, if I had the means to achieve it, a working portraitists career could work, but with lots of other forms of photography as hobbies. I am aware that over time, even that would start to become tedious.

Travel and street, similar and mutually supporting interests I had before I found employment, seem to be the ones I will go back to easily. It does not hurt that Japan is the lure for both.

In a nutshell, I guess my “one job” needs to be the “all job” that free lancing, hobbyist or news photography provides, I just need to find a balance within that spread.

*Motor sport, red ball Cricket etc, where the action happens fleetingly and sometimes rarely.

The Constructed Candid

I hate set-up shots. To clarify that a little, I hate obviously set-up shots. Sometimes I feel like a day at the paper is nothing but these and it is driving me away.

There is a way though, to escape this oh so obvious provincial newpaper looking image*.

My C.I.A mantra is a start only, but looking closer, I realised you can interpret that a lot of ways, so here is a more flexible version.

Control the elements, by putting into place (Composing) what you want and excluding what you do not.

Once placed, this couple, a pair of safe crackers by trade were quite relaxed when I simply said “talk amongst yourselves”.

The Interest value should evolve from the Interactions that come naturally from that space.

No posing, I just asked them to hold their place and look to the camera.

Action or Angle is the bit where you capture those interactions, quickly, quietly and intuitively (preferably invisibly), adding a level of enjoyment and accomplishment in the process.

The shot before the one above. No posing, just recognition and take.

This is looser than the original mantra probably sounds, but is the key to breaking that painfully ordinary look. There are ways to make bad look good, but to me the best is to simply avoid the bad.

*There are actually two, but the other requires lighting and more time than you usually have.

More Noise

Days two and three of the racing and I have it sorted in my head.

Taken with the 75-300 the day before, this lens is impressive regardless of price.

The 40-150 f2.8, got a run today, because all I needed were podium and the odd action shot, so I went one weather sealed lens with plenty of cropping and light gathering power with the 1.4 tc as an option, just in case promised late afternoon storms happened. The 40-150 f4 would have done, but the f2.8 does not get much use.

Gee that lens is nice. The Bokeh can occasionally get a little busy, but equally, when it plays nice it is sublimely sharp, then “smokey” soft.

The kit zoom again in dull light.

Lots of big weather around, but it came to nothing.

Lots of time to practice my panning. At about 1/180th to 1/250th, I got pretty good, but slower was an issue. The main consideration was a bit of track long enough to get a good slow pan. Where I was was a sequence of corners with a dip.

Like most things, fun in small quantities.

Big Noise

Motor sport this weekend.

Open wheelers, Masters Touring cars, “Tin Tops” and more.

A rare mistake.

Limited time and opportunity still allowed me to get a couple of decent “hero” shots each day, but importantly, I got all the cars once or twice.

Pit lane was of more interest, faces and action aplenty.

That budget friendly 40-150 f4 constantly impresses.

Lenses used were the 40-150 f4 and 300 f4 on practice day, but I swapped to the 40-150 and 75-300 kit lens on the following day because it was enough, it allowed me to set one camera to panning mode (1/180th) and the other to action freezing and the nose of the kit lens poked through a safety fence on the most likely bend to have some action, something the big nosed lenses did not allow.

A decently tight crop from a kit zoom shot.

Tomorrow is a full race day, so plenty of action to be had.

Surprised Them All

I did some golf today.

Last time the big 300 and my 40-150 f4 went, but I felt after running around a hot golf course, that the 75-300 “sneaky little cheat lens” would have done. A no tracking, good light environment is it’s happy place.

So, I took a punt (and a literal load off my back), going with one camera and one kit lens.

Quality?

From this,

to this.

and again,

to this.

Plenty to print, more than needed for web use. I could shoot wide for banner and cropping options, still providing enough quality to get in close. Effectively three or four different imge options per shot.

My favourite of the day (shame I only got half the ball). Capture 1 managed to salvage this from slight softness, when the focus hit the foreground bush and only depth of field saved it.

Really need to get my volunteer stuff sorted. Horse racing fashions, golf and politics are not doing it (and this morning I had a combination of two, yesterday the other).

Got The Key

The Portkeys PT5 II came today. I missed out a few weeks ago when the fire was burning, put in a notification request and forgot about it. When notified I ignored the email for a day or two, then decided to go for it.

It is gorgeous!

Shorter than my iPhone, but about twice as deep without a battery. The sun screen brackets can be removed, making it look even more like a phone.

The advantage it has over my 7” Feelworld is a clear jump in contrast and touch screen with a much smaller footprint.

Compared to the camera screen (G9 or S5), it is about the same quality, but twice the size and more conveniently located with a sun screen option.

The rig above is perfectly balanced. This stays true for the S5 with either Lumix lens and the G9 with most lenses.

I have no intention of relying on auto focus for video, especially now I have focus ring control on the Pana lenses, so the big things to fix are viewing screen and manual focus.

Focus I am happy with, with every lens I run bar one (the old Olympus F series) focussing the same way with consistent throw (120 degrees seems ideal), so a follow focus is not on the horizon.

Viewing was improved by the 7”, but it is big. This will be kept for the static camera rig. The 5” is for the moving camera and also better for outside use.

Cool stuff.