I'd Rather be Shooting

I've set up maybe 5-10 blogs over the years---on topics as varied as finance, poker, trading to photography. The interest waned over time till the blogs were neglected and died a natural death.

I'd rather make photographs than blog about some famous photographer, create a list of 10 things why you should shoot film/digital, etc. There's way too much noise out there from blogger photogs---writing an article a day without much content, other than to market their pointless workshops---on how to hold a damn camera when street shooting.

I'll post when I have something to say. You're welcomed not to subscribe, read or look at my pictures. Better to be true and have 1 reader, than come across as a marketeer that makes mediocre photographs and gives useless workshops.

Can't Seem to Work With Ilford HP5+

Called in sick for work today. I've been running a slight fever and inflamed throat since last friday. It's a good chance to catch up on my backlog of undeveloped film.

The price of Kodak films went up by 15-20% in Singapore. I used to pay about S$6 on a roll of 400TX in 120 format. Now, I'd have to shell out something like S$8 once the new stock arrives in the store. No doubt that film is getting more and more expensive. The reason why Ilford HP5+ is looking more and more like a viable option. So, 2 weeks ago, I bought 10 rolls of them film in 120 format.

After developing about 6 rolls of them, making some developing adjustment in timing, I can say that it is nothing like the 400TX that I am used to. I rate both at EI800 most of the time and the negatives come out looking so different that either I learn to like HP5+ or mass import them from freestylephoto.biz(Have to wait about 2-3 weeks for each order though). I am too used to Tri-X. Even after adding 30% to my development time for HP5+, the negatives come out looking thinner than I am used to.

With film getting more and more expensive; I'll have to get rich, switch to a cheaper film or give up totally.

Lens Sharpness

Just last week in the darkroom, I had the chance to look at a 8x10 print made from a Leica 75mm Summicron. The image sharpness cut my eyeballs and left them bleeding. Ever since, I have been looking at my bank account, doing mental calculations and wondering how to tell the wife: I am going to drop some serious money for a Leica M4 and 35mm summicron. The dog will have to go hungry while I go make some art with Leica goodness!

Then the "Minamata" book by W. Eugene Smith and Aileen M. Smith arrived. The images were made by a Minolta. Some fish-eye, wide, normal and telephoto lenses were used. In the book, none of the images had that Leica sharpness that I witness that day. It got me thinking. One of my personal favorite image was made with a $50 Canonet QL17 GIII. Damn image had motion blur and is far from sharp. I dropped the idea of purchasing a Leica reluctantly.

I came to the realisation: I am not better than my gear.

2012, we look at this:

MTF Chart. Like hell I'd know how to read it.

In the mid 20th century, people were more concern with this:

Photo Credit: W. Eugene Smith

Image sharpness and the latest gigamegapixel digital body has over-taken the need to make great images---the original reason why I went back to film for my personal project with 2 humble Minolta XD11, 35mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.7. The entire outfit cost me a cool $300. I spend maybe $60 on film and development every month. The rest of the money, I could use it as personal funding for a project that I really care about.

Then it hits like a 3 ton truck. The image that I saw from the 75mm Summicron wasn't even impressive other than the sharpness and the excellent contrast. It was cropped way too tight, leaving the head floating without a body. Composed far to the right, not even a great portrait.

The elusive search for ultimate sharpness suddenly lost its appeal. The focus should be on telling stories---even if all I can afford is the camera on my phone.

Actual Day Wedding With Film

Bride having a private moment

In the previous post, I mentioned that I shot with a 135 and 120 film camera. The results from scanning on a Canon 8800f isn't great. I don't think it is as sharp as a DSLR. Maybe I am spoilt by the sharpness from a digital camera. I love the simplicity of a film camera though. ISO, Aperture and Shutter speed. That's all anyone needs to start making a photograph.

Bride's father helping the bride wear a necklace he bought for her

Bride and Groom, outdoor portrait

I am however amazed by the dynamic range from the film I was using---Kodak Tri-X. In the last image, I over-exposed by at least 2 stops but was able to recover the sky as you can see. The image was produced using a variety of tools in Photoshop. To do that in a traditional darkroom would have been time consuming.

At the end of it, we have a myriad of tools at our disposal. It is up to the operator to make the best of it.

35mm and Medium Format Wedding Photography

Nikon N80, 35mm, 50mm, Arista Premium 400, Mamiya C330, 80mm, Tri-X

Recently, I shot a wedding using these 2 cameras. I was the second shooter, my colleague covered the event with 2 Nikon DSLR. Choosing to shoot only Black and White film, there were no concerns on white balance issues. However, changing ISO values mid roll was not possible. I had fun, but came to the conclusion that I need the security of:

1. LCD preview
2. 16 Gb giving me 16 megapixels, about 800-900 images
3. Convenience of dropping everything onto Lightroom
4. Ease of post-production

For personal projects, there's nothing else I'd use other than my trusty film boxes loaded with black and white film.