The Light Stuff

Newtown with a toy camera.

2012-01-19T10:13:00.008+02:00

Recently I took a stroll around Newtown, Johannesburg, the site of the city's old market. Built in 1913 to serve the growing population of the expanding mining town, today it is home to Museum Afrika and the Market Theatre.
These pictures were shot with a plastic Holga toy camera that I am growing to like more and more. In fact I like it that muc that I am going to start using it in my wedding and portrait work.
And yes, the opening image in the spread is a DELIBERATE double exposure!

Images of a nation under threat.

2011-12-23T12:51:00.008+02:00

December 16 is considered, by many Afrikaners, their most holy day.
It commemorates the December 16, Battle of Blood River in 1838 when they believe God gave them an unlikely victory against thousands of Zulu warriors.
Each year, thousands of Afrikaners gather at the Voortrekker Monument in Pretoria to celebrate and remember that day and reaffirm their culture values and beliefs.

New Blood River

In many ways they are once again engaged in a 'new battle of Blood River' as whites - and in particular Afrikaners - are increasingly marginalised and denied opportunities in South Africa.
When I shot these pictures a week ago, it was obvious to me that Afrikaners feel they are a nation under threat that needs to stand together to protect their culture.
But somehow this year's event was different to those I have previously witnessed. Gone was the bravado and arrogance that previously characterised such "saamtrekke". They appeared resigned to their future - or maybe they are just battle-weary.

Shaft of Sunlight

The monument is designed in such a way that every year, only on December 16, a shaft of sunlight moves up the steps of the cenotaph and is centered on it at precisely midday.
I sincerely hope I was not photographing a disappearing nation.
The images were shot with a Nikon F3 film camera on Fuji Neopan 400 and developed in a local version of ID-11.

How to choose a wedding photographer.

2011-03-16T11:26:00.006+02:00

The business of wedding photography has changed dramatically over the past few years. The advent of high-quality digital cameras has seen many "Uncle Bobs" and "Aunt Sheilas," with absolutely no photographic experience or expertise, buy a camera, print up a business card and proclaim he or she is now a professional photographer.
And while it is true sticking the camera on idiot "auto" mode can sometimes produce passable images, think carefully about entrusting your precious, once-in-a-lifetime memories to such a person.
When choosing your wedding photographer the most important question to ask is: Will the photographer be able to capture the wedding day the way the bride and groom want? Will he or she create unique and emotional memories that you will cherish the rest of your life?
Once you've decided to get married and have chosen your wedding date, waste no time in searching for your photographer. You'll be blind sided to discover the better ones are booked heavily into the future, often over a year out so time is of the essence.

Film or digital?

Few photographers shoot film nowadays and today's professional digital cameras are capable of producing astoundingly good images and enlargements. But if you want something particularly special, ask the photographer to do some shots on medium format film. I shoot many portraits with some of the world's finest medium format film-cameras and the results more than justify the added effort!

Equipment

There is no doubt, the skills and ability of the person behind the camera are far more important than the equipment itself. That said however, you want to be sure your photographer has high-quality kit as well as back-up equipment should the primary camera, lens or flash fail -- and they sometimes do! Pros will ALWAYS have back-up units. Ask the photographer what sort of lighting equipment he or she will use and if an assistant will be present.

A new trend in wedding photography.

The hottest trend in wedding photography today is the Photojournalistic Wedding. Photojournalism shots are more animated, and might show the bride and her bridesmaids running into the church in the rain, or the groomsmen playing around outside, or guests having a wild time at the reception. Photos are produced in both colour and black and white but b&w is becoming increasingly popular. In a photojournalistic wedding the aim is to tell your story.
If this is how you want your wedding photographed then it is obvious you should hire someone who has experience in photojournalism or press photography. He or she may or may not have photographed weddings before but will understand how to tell a story, capture decisive moments and work under pressure and, in addition, will have taken thousands of pictures with their equipment in all manner of challenging and difficult conditions. That is the sort of person you want to photograph your wedding!

Some questions to ask the photographer:

Have you shot a wedding at my location before?
Do you have an assistant?
Do you have backup equipment and is it the same quality as the primary equipment?
What time will you begin and how long will you stay until?
When will the proofs be ready?
Do we get to keep the proofs?
Do you mark your proofs?
Where and how are your proofs marked?
How much extra for unmarked proofs?
What lighting equipment will you use?
Do you have tele-photo and wide-angle lenses?
Do you work well with the other vendors? i.e.: coordinators, caterers, videographers.
Can you work from a photo checklist that we create?
How will you be dressed?

Final points:

Make sure the photographer you interview will be the photographer who actually photographs your wedding. Read and understand the contract carefully. Spend the most you can afford on your wedding photographs -- the expensive food at the wedding will quickly be forgotten but the photographs will live for generations.

For more information on wedding and portrait photography visit my site: www.bighilt.com

The plastic-fantastic, Holga!

2011-02-15T09:56:00.007+02:00

One of the problems with photography today -- and it's been caused by increasingly sophisticated digital cameras -- is that all images, irrespective of the subject being photographed, somehowlook the same.
The truth is, today's digital cameras are so advanced that most pictures are perfectly focussed, well lit and have accurate colours recorded. They are perfect, in a sterile sort of way.
The situation is even worse when it comes to press photography. The pic-men (or women) are herded together and confined in a specific area. All are armed with similar cameras (the brands don't matter), have similar lenses, similar flash set ups and, as a result, they get similar pictures.
I am more than ever convinced the days of professional photographers are numbered, a fact yet again brought home to me when a friend (ironically at a recent photographic exhibition and in poor light) took a picture with her iPhone. The quality was astounding! Photography is becoming so easy that there are fewer and fewer reasons to hire a pro.
In the light of that I decided to mess around with a Holga, a cheap, Chinese, plastic, toy camera fitted with a plastic lens. With the Holga it's all about compostion and creativity. You never know what you are going to get and no two cameras are the same. The only control, I believe, comes in the darkroom.
I am well-please with my initial efforts!

You can view the full series at www.bighilt.smugmug.com
To purchase images please email me for prices and sizes.

Moment critique!

2011-01-26T12:21:00.005+02:00

I am always amused when new digital photographers and photojournalists talk about the newest, latest, all-singing, all-dancing digital camera able to churn out six to 10 frames per second.
I find it even funnier when they tell me how it's impossible to shoot sport -- or much anything else -- without a camera that can fire off photographs faster than a machine gun.
They seem to forget many of the world's greatest news photographs were shot using thumb-wound cameras with just a standard, manually-focussed, lens. At the same time, many of the great sports photographs were taken with similarly wound-on cameras fitted with a single-focal-length telephoto lens that also had to be focussed by hand.

How did we do it back then?

So how did we do it in the old days before feaures like autofocus, matrix metering and wizz-bang motordrives were even thought of? And how did we do it when we couldn't check the rear LCD screen to be sure we'd got the picture?
It was, and still is really quite simple. We worked like snipers rather than machine gunners. We anticipated the action, prefocussed or zone focussed, understood exposure and only needed to take a single shot at the critical moment.
To illustrate the point, last Saturday, I took a trip to Mandela Square at Sandton City, armed with a simple Minolta X300s and a 50mm and 28mm lens. There is a large statre of Madiba there that naturally attracts the attention of locals and tourists alike.
I took up a position near by, took a meter-reading off the palm of my hand, gave one more stop of exposure, pre-focussed and waited for magical photographic moments to happen.
Over the course of three hours I got a number of really good shots that captured wonderful vignettes of life in the Square and though I was only about 10 feet away from the action, not one of my subjects even realised the were being photographed. At the moment critique I simply brought the camera to my eye, pressed the shutter and lowered it. No shutter-lag, no whirring autofocus, no grinding motordrive to attract attention -- just a single, clean shot and kill.

Look closely at this image!

Some more cyanotypes

2011-01-14T16:06:00.007+02:00

Some more cyanotypes I recently completed in preparation for an upcoming exhibition.
All cyanotypes are available for sale as signed, limited-edition prints and can be shipped anywhere in the world. Each is printed on fine, archival-grade watercolour paper. For prices and details please visit my website www.bighilt.com

My cyanotype exhibition.

2010-11-22T13:16:00.005+02:00

On Thursday 18 November I held an exhibition of 45 cyanotypes in the ballrooom at the Randfontein Country Club. It turned out to be an amazing success with a turnout of around 125 people including members of the media.
Five large, limited-edition, hand-made, cyanotypes were bought by collectors and a couple of black and white prints were also sold. Prices for the cyanotypes ranges from R1500 (approx $220) for matted but unframed examples to R4000 (approximately $650) for framed, tea-toned prints.
And, as a result, I am in currently having discussions with some art dealers and galleries.
Unfortunately I did not scan the cyanotypes before I had them framed -- I do not have a flatbed scanner -- but, at the last moment, I took a few shots of the images. The pictures will give you an idea of the print but do not do it justice and in some instances, my reflection can be seen in the glass. That's just the way it is.
I plan on getting a scanner and rectifying the situation next time.
Visit my website - www.bighilt.com

The Amazing Minolta Autocord

2010-11-09T11:37:00.004+02:00

It's amazing how many blog posts, all over the internet, start with the phrase: "...it's been a long time since I've posted on my blog."
In keeping with that fine tradition, it has been a long time since I have posted on my blog. Life always seems to get in the way and I have had my head firmly down making cyanotypes and prints for a solo exhibition that will take place next week. I have also had a number of commissions that needed to be completed.
But along the way I purchased a 1950s Minolta Autocord, TLR camera for about the price of a 16Gb memory card. I've heard good things about the 'cord which was the Japanese manufacturer's attempt to compete with Rolleiflex and I was not disappointed. The lens is every bit as good as my Rollei.
The two pictures taken here were shot on Ilford HP5 and developed in Rodinal. The (obviously tame) Zebra was photographed on the Seasons Eco golf course near Brits and the other shot is the arch on the Hartbeespoort Dam wall.
I think both illustrate the quality of the camera and the unique characteristics of real black and white film. I am looking forward to shooting some quality B&W portraits with the camera.

Trying to break an emotional bond

2010-08-25T12:41:00.003+02:00

There can be no doubt I love film and film cameras.
The smell when opening a fresh film canister is like perfume and holding a beautiful 1950s rangefinder or a pristine Rollei still sends shivers down my spine.
I like the look of images produced by film -- I think it is magical and I like to look through old negatives and slides. Having a beer while I wait for a roll of film to be developed makes me feel like a kid on Christmas morning -- except for the beer part. I sometimes believe I have Rodinal or D-76 in my veins and digital imagesx and cameras, more often than not, leave me emotionally distant.
But with all that said, I am seriously considering a complete switch to digital. What, you may wonder, has brought on this 180 degree turn-around? In a word, 'cost.'
Last week I took a roll of film to the lab I regularly use and asked them to do the normal 'develop and scan to cd' bit. What I did not know is they had increased their prices, dramatically. When I got handed the bill, I was left reeling. All of my arguments about film not being more expensive than digital suddenly no longer held any water.
As I drove home I can honestly say I felt betrayed, abandoned by an old friend. Since then I have gone through some major, internal, mental-wrestling. Logic tells me it's time to say goodbye to the 20 or so mechanical film cameras I have but the problem is, I have developed strong emotional bonds with them.
I know I can do the same or better with my digital cameras -- in fact I can no longer argue digital is inferior to film. The truth is, it isn't and hasn't been for a long time.
And clients' simply don't care. I've tried to position myself as doing something different by shooting film but no-one cares. Sad but true.
I haven't finally decided my course, though logic tells me I will keep a couple of cameras to shoot the odd roll of film, mostly for fun.
Naturally the Rollei will stay and most likely the Bronica so I can shoot B&W while I have colour in the Rollei. And the Yasica A will probably stay because it has a triplet lens produces nice portraits. I'll keep the Voigtlander Prominent because it's so beautiful, and the two Retinas because they have sentimental value. And, if I'm keeping the rangefinders, I probably should hang on to the Ricoh as it easily fits in my pocket. There's also not much point in getting rid of the Nikons because the lenses can be used on the digital bodies...
Arrrgh!! fuck it! Why is life so complicated?

Zeiss Super Inkonta - unacceptable lens flare

2010-08-16T15:32:00.005+02:00

In the shade performance is impressive

I recently acquired a Zeiss Super Ikonta A in beautiful condition. The serial numbers indicate it was made in around 1938 and it is truly a beautiful piece of machinery.
There is plenty of information about the history of these particular camera elsewhere on the web so I won't rehash it other than to say it is a medium-format, folding camera that genuinely can fit into the back pocket of a pair of jeans -- well my jeans anyway. I'm not sure about if that would apply to Heidi Klumm. My particular model is in 645 format with 16 exposures to a roll. The B and C models shoot negatives that are 6cm x 6cm and 6cm x 9cm respectively.
The moment I saw the camera I fell in love with it. What's not to love about a medium format camera that fits in your pocket!
On the day I got the Super Ikonta I took it, loaded with Ilford XP2 Super black and white film to the 1 000 bike show in Germiston. My first outing did not go as smoothly as I hoped.
It's a quirky camera and takes some getting used to. First of all you have to ensure the film is wound to the correct spot inb one of the two red windows on the back of the camera. Then shutter speed and aperture must be set on the 3.5 Tessar lens which is somewhat of a fiddly process. Then you must flip up a front rangefinder focussing lens and, looking through a tiny rangefinder viewfinder you turn an awkward focussing wheel next to the lens. When the two images match the camera is in focus. Once that is done the shutter must be manually cocked and you must move your eye to the external viewfinder to compose and take the shot which in itself is awkward as the shutter-release button in on the left hand side of the camera.
I was prepared to put up with it's quirks as I figured I was unlikely to ever be in any particular hurry when using the camera and the small package would produce a large negative.
But I have been disappointed. The uncoated lens, while undoubtedly very sharp, produces flare that is second to none. If the sun is shining and the sun is not directly behind you there is flare and even after fashioning a lenshood the problem remained.
The fact is I am a camera user, not a collector and if the equipment does not perform then I am not interested in it. Though I like the style, the build quality and the unlikely fact that it is a chick-magnet (I could not believe how many pretty women came and struck up conversation with me when the saw the camera) I probably will not keep it. In all likelihood it will be swapped for a post-war camera with a coated lens or else put up for sale.

2010-08-06T13:02:00.008+02:00

Before going in for repairs

A couple of weeks ago I took a ride to Parys, a small town on the banks of the Vaal River, about an hour's drive south of Johannesburg. (You can read about my discovery of the world's best choc chip cookie and view pics I took there on my travel site.)
Parys has a number of "antique" shops -- many of which sell old junk that they call "antique". I am always on the lookout for old cameras, particularly German examples made in the 1950s, so I was delighted when, in a box in one of the shops, I found a Kodak Retina IIc.
Still in it's leather case, it was caked in dust and some of its chrome sported verdigris. The shutter worked but was slow -- a common ailment with cameras of that era that have often stood unused for years. The lubricant used on the leaf-shutter becomes gooey. The rangefinder mechanism looked okay but needed a good cleaning. But it was obvious there was a problem with the winding mechanism. This is also apparently fairly common with Retinas and the result of a design quirk where the winding mechanism is designed to lock when the last picture on the mechanical counter is reached. It is claimed Kodak did this to stop people squeezing more images from a roll of film so they could boost Kodak film sales. True? I don't know but the design led to many Retinas being wrecked when ham-fisted operators applied force to the winding lever.
This was obviously the cause of the problem with this particular Retina.
The junk shop owner wanted R450 (approx $60) for the camera which I considered outrageous for something that required not only cleaning, lubrication and adjustment but also repairs that might or might not be possible.
I offered him R250 which he accepted, figuring that if it could be repaired it would likely be a line performer that, folded up, could easily fit in my pocket. If not it would be a R250 conversation-piece.
I took my newly-acquired Retina to Roger Vieren in Johannesburg who has been repairing cameras for over 50 years and still has one of the finest private camera collections in the world. (He can be reached on Tel +27-11-782-4574).
Three weeks later I had it back, completely overhauled and serviced and a fully working winding mechanism. He replaced a number of parts with originals and I held in my hand, a pristine example of what many call the Poor Man's Leica. Cost of the job -- R250!
I am absolutely delighted with the little camera and the results speak for themselves, I believe.
I have posted some of the pictures taken with it below.
The details: Fuji 200 ASA colour negative processed and scanned (low res) at a local one-hour lab. Exposure values were set by me using a combination of Sunny 16 and 35 years experience.
The lens is a 50mm f2.8 Schneider Kreuznach Xenon.
Other than cropping on the photograph of the dog (shot with the lens wide open at f2.8) the images are exactly as they came from the negatives.

Art of Milk.

2010-07-30T18:35:00.006+02:00

This week someone emailed me some incredible photographs by Russian (I think) photographer and Photoshop artist, Andrey Razoomovsky.

They are absolutely amazing.

Check out his other amazing work at www.razooma.net

The critical moment

2010-07-26T15:41:00.006+02:00

It was French photojournalist, Henri Cartier Bresson who coined the term "critical moment" in photography.
It's that split second where everything -- composition, action, expression -- comes together to make a unique and memorable image.
HCB took some remarkable photographs where he waited for his subject to be perfectly aligned with an inanimate object so he could make that image come to life.
Recently I received an email containing images where the photographers have shot pictures that would have impressed even Bresson.
I do not know who the photographers are so I cannot give them credit but I am sure you will agree they have done a magnificent job.

Images from the SA 1000 Bike Show

2010-07-05T14:20:00.030+02:00

Every year, over the first weekend of July, the South Africa's Classic Motorcycle Club holds the not-to-be-missed 1000 Bike Show.
It's a chance to get up close and personal with motorcycling history and some of the most beautiful machines ever made.
Each year it get's bigger and bigger and this year was no exception.
I think the pictures tell the story.

Moving to fineart.

2010-06-08T09:58:00.005+02:00

It's been a while since I posted on this blog.
This is mainly for two reasons. Number one is I have been trying to evaluate and figure out what direction I need to follow in photography and the second reason I have been busy writing my other blog, The White Ou. Check it out.
I am not sure if I have completely figured out what and where I want to go in photography. It's an incredibly difficult business to be in right now. The microstock business, where publications, ad agencies, publishers and corporations can purchase images for a couple of dollars, makes it very difficult to get commissions. The fact is, nowadays 'quality' comes a very distant second to 'price'!
And because digital cameras set in "idiot" mode quite often take acceptable pictures -- and if not, you simply shoot and chimp until you get it right -- everybody and his cousin now figures he or she is a professional photographer.
As long as the picture is in focus and groom's head is not cut off then that is okay. And the guy or gal who is prepared to do the shoot at the cheapest rate is the one who gets the work. It is astounding how often the new "pros" will actually work for nothing. The result is the standard of photography, right across the board, is being lowered and this lower standard is acceptable to the client and becomes the norm.
In a previous post I said I believed the days of the professional photographer are numbered. I am more convinced of that than ever.
So where does that leave dinosaurs like me? Guys who believe photography is important and relevant...who still see it as something magical rather than a disposable item.
I'm not sure. But I will be shifting my efforts more towards the production of fine art and decor prints. To survive in this game I sincerely believe a photographer needs to differentiate him or herself from the masses and the rats and mice.
As such, I have just bought a 25 year-old hardcore, dirt bike with the idea of using it as a means to get to places other photographers can't easily reach.
My aim is to produce and sell limited edition, fineart photographic prints. I'll keep you posted.
In the meantime check out some examples here and place an order if there is anything that takes your fancy.

Mother's Day photographs

2010-05-11T18:04:00.001+02:00

Sunday was Mother's Day and I got to take some formal, set up, portraits at the local Baptist Church.
I brought in lights and a backdrop and shot the pics with a Nikon D70, as people wanted instant feedback. I prefer to shoot portraits in black and white with a medium format camera, using real film but, as the images will only be enlarged to 8" x 12", digital was just fine.
I think the pics work well in colour.

Portraits at Ceilidh's birthday celebrations

2010-04-14T11:37:00.004+02:00

On Saturday 10 April I got hired to photograph Ceilidh Vigoriti's 30th birthday. The celebrations took place at Pomodoro Ristorante in Morningside, Johannesburg.
We set up a "photo booth" with studio lights where guests were photographed when they arrived, many choosing to ham it up with supplied props. Throughout the rest of the evening I shot digital pics of the proceedings which were printed out on the spot and given to the guests. It was a great idea and worked wonderfully.
In addition I shot a few pictures of Ceilidh and her mates with the Bronica on black and white film that was processed in Rodinal. The others can be seen here.

Rain and this Johannesburg wedding photographer

2010-04-01T16:24:00.004+02:00

I am beginning to think I have super-powers and should be called "the Rain-maker" -- but don't tell prospective brides who want to hire me!
The last couple of weddings I've done have all had one thing in common -- rain and rapidly-changing, poor light.
Danielle and Wimpie's wedding was not different. When we arrived at the venue, the Thatchery in Muldersdrift, it was overcast and threatening to rain but every few minutes a gap in the clouds would appear and bright sunlight streamed through.
Then moments later that gap would close again and the light would again quickly become gloomy and dull. The result was constant checking of exposures -- that is one disadvantage of shooting film, on digital you have instant feedback. But then, on the other hand, film can handle the changing light and extreme contrast far better. Swings and roundabouts!
To cap it all, in the midde of the ceremony, the heavens opened forcing everyone to scurry for cover. Did I mention it was an outdoor wedding? This meant some photos had to shot with the couple standing under a large umbrella held by someone hiding behind the groom. In truth, he did a pretty good job keeping out of view.
In some cultures it is supposed to be a good omen if it rains on your wedding day. If that is the case, Danielle and Wimpie can look forward to a long and happy life.
But all in all it worked out well. The photos look good and tell the couple's story.
They can be viewed here.

Perfection can be over rated.

2010-03-09T12:53:00.002+02:00

A little while ago I was asked to photograph the golden wedding anniversary celebrations of the parents of two of my best friends.
Werner and Klara Hollenstein (the couple) are Swiss/German and I wanted to use a camera that would be appropriate for the occasion. Something German and around 50 years old.
I had a couple of options -- a Zeiss Contaflex, a Voigtlander Prominent, a Rolleiflex -- but I opted for a 50 year-old Kodak Retina Reflex. The Retinas were made by Nagel & Co in Germany and are sometimes referred to as the "Stuttgart Leica." My particular example sports a 50mm f2 Schneider Kreuznach lens that is an absolute belter.
My idea was to capture the spontaneity and joy of the occasion rather than shoot posed pictures. I also wanted to include black and white images to give it an "aged" feeling.
There is no doubt, using a single camera with a standard lens is limiting. It would definitely have been easier to use a zoom and motordrive-equipped, autofocus camera but I think having to "zoom with my feet" to get the right framing produces a unique look. Sometimes perfection is over-rated and in truth the two images I like best from the shoot are not blindingly sharp yet beautifully capture the moment and the joy of the occasion.
The rest of the images can be seen here.

Kitchen table film developer

2010-02-08T12:28:00.004+02:00

I've been scouring the Internet in search of easy-to-make "kitchen-table" developers. Why, when there are good commercial developers available?
Firstly because it is fun and secondly because I am committed to film and do not want to have to rely on the whims of companies whose only consideration is whether a product makes a profit or not.
In previous postings I wrote about Caffenol and Caffenol C but, with current the price of pure coffee, I wanted something cheaper. My search led me to a recipe published over 20 years ago in Shutterbug magazine. The beauty is it requires only two easily available components, in addition to water and the results were remarkably good. I adjusted the Shutterbug-published amounts slightly, to take into account the size of the tank I was using. The recipe is as follows: 300ml tap water (my water is pumped from a borehole so I am not sure if that makes a difference or not), 5 1/2 teaspoons of vitamin C powder and 7 teaspons of sodium carbonate, which can be purchased in a supermarket as washing soda.
Mix in that order until the powders are dissolved. The vitamin C powder I had on hand was coloured and flavoured orange and made the solution look a bit strange but appeared to have no effect on it's functioning.
Once the brew was concocted I scratched around for a roll of exposed film to develop and could only find a forgotten 35mm roll of Konica Chromogenic film. This is a film that gets processed in chemistry designed for colour negatives. I think it expired about 15 years ago.
I processed the film at 70F agitating for the first 30 seconds then two inversions every 30 seconds for 30 minutes. It was tedious and time-consuming but the results blew me away. The negs came out a dark, chocolatey colour but with lots of definition, sharpness and surprisingly fine grain.
I have published a few unaltered -- other than cropping and adjusting levels -- examples below.

Why photography is important

2010-02-01T09:16:00.006+02:00

This is an image that I believe sums up my mother's life at present and documents her current history. It was shot recently using an almost 50 year-old Rolleiflex, on the occasion of my Dad's 84th birthday.
Over the past few years my father has increasingly suffered spinal degeneration that has necessitated he walk with the aid of a "walker" and even that is a slow and difficult process. Thankfully his mind remains as sharp as a tack.
But his physical condition has dramatically increased the burden on my mother and means she pretty well must take care of my Dad constantly as he has, on occasion, fallen and injured himself.
She is reluctant to leave the house and leave him on his own even to go shopping or to church for a short while. Yet she remains cheerful.

A photo that tells a story

I wanted to take a picture that tells that story so future generations will know something about her and what sort of person she was.
In this image, the walker looms large and is overpowering, to show the influence it has on her life. The blinds on the widow look like prison bars yet she continues to smile.
It's not a "pretty" picture but to me it's important.
Over the years I have became acutely aware of how rapidly the world has changed and how personal and family history is simply fading into dim memories or disappearing competely.
But it is the images and stories of the ordinary man and woman that are most interesting. They are your vital legacy that must be kept for future generations because that is all that will tell your story in years to come.
Your lifestyle, environment, milestones, relationships, family and friends are patches in the quilt of who you are. It is your history and life and it is important.
This realisation has caused me to shift change focus and concentrate on documenting family histories, working with couples and families throughout South Africa.

My Dad

You snooze you lose!

2010-01-27T16:41:00.001+02:00

You snooze you lose!

I found that out the hard way today when I went to buy a Mamiya RB67 outfit I'd been eyeing for a while and discovered it was sold yesterday. I will no doubt be kicking myself for the next few months as this really was "one that got away".
I saw the kit at a Johannesburg dealer last week, consisting of body, back, magnifying view-finder, 50mm, 90mm and 120mm lens and could have had it for around R4 000 (about US$530).
For those who don't know, the Mamiya RB67 produces a negative that is 60mm x 70mm and for years has been the workhorse of pros. I thought about it, ummed and ah'd and hesitated, while I tried to reach a decision. Did I really need it?
I am very happy with my Bronica SQA and my Rollei but Bronica lenses seem to be quite difficult to find and, when you do, tend to be pricey. The Rollei has a fixed lens.
When I finally convinced myself the wisest course would be to build a system around the more readily available Mamiya and to sell the Bronica, it was too late. I am gutted.

Blown away by a cheap rangefinder

2010-01-25T09:22:00.006+02:00

It's been months since I last wrote anything on my blog, mainly because the financial crunch has forced me into survival mode. I've had to hustle and do all sorts of strange photographic jobs, ranging from golf days to end-of-year company functions.
Let's be honest, this is a tough business to be in right now.
But enough of that.
I recently shot some pictures of the little son of one of my best friends. Little Grant Cachia is one cute little tyke who never stops moving.

I wanted to do the shoot with something different, so I fished out an old Ricoh 35RF rangefinder camera that I've dabbled with on a few occasions.
The same, basic, Ricoh was produced in a number of guises and sold as a Ricoh 35G (I think) as well as under the Sears name. They can still be found regularly at bargain prices and are capable of phenomenal results.
I loaded up with Ilford's excellent XP2 Super black and white film. It's a very convenient film option as it produces incredibly fine-grained images and can be processed at any one-hour lab. I find it is best if under-exposed slightly and normally set my exposure meter at ISO 320.

The prints blew me away. Because the little guy moves so fast, and it was a dark and gloomy day (sounds like the start of a novel!) I was generally shooting wide open, at f2.8 and sometimes as slow as 1/15th of a second.
This resulted in some of the images not being blindingly sharp but I think they better captured the energy of the little guy. Sometimes sharp focus can be boring.
I have posted a couple of the shots below but you can also check them out at www.bighilt.smugmug.com
Also take a look at my new website www.bighilt.yolasite.com
Quite by chance I came across the work of Cheryl Jacobs. I think she is one of the finest portrait photographers you'll ever encounter. She is also one very good looking lady.
Do yourself a favour and look at her work at www.cheryljacobsportraits.com

It's nice to be home!

2009-08-20T11:57:00.001+02:00

It's been a while since I've written anything -- work has a habit of getting in the way of fun.
I've been giving a lot thought to the direction -- especially in terms of equipment -- that I want to follow photographically.
In future, the bulk of my work will once again be shot on good old film. A few factors have influenced my decision.
Chief amongst these is the fact that Nikon has become like Nokia with a propensity to seemingly launch five new models per month! The camera you buy this week could well be outdated next week!
I know the camera will still do the job perfectly but it becomes uncomfortable when you arrive at a job and see the bridegroom has a "later and greater" digital camera than you. The fact he knows only how to put it in "program" mode and uses it as nothing more than a fancy point-and-shoot, matters not. You still have to field questions about why you're not using the new D-whatever.

Limitation

I recently had canvas prints A2-size made from images I shot with the 6 mega-pixel D40. They are magnificent and the size was limited only because of the processing power of my computer. On a more powerful machine I could easily produce extreme-quality A0s. Yet, I still get told: "my cellphone has an 8Mp camera and, as such, I should consider using something more up-to-date than my ancient, 15 month-old camera.
It's a treadmill to nowhere. The fact is you'll always be chasing new technology with useless, unwanted features, that have have only one purpose -- to fleece you financially. Face-recognition and built-in video capability are two cases in point. How did we ever manage without that before?!
In future I will be using the digital camera primarily as a sort of Polaroid. Kinda like in the old days where we used Polaroid backs to check exposures, lighting, shadows etc and then switched to a film back.
Using film gives me an element of uniqueness in a clutter of digital sameness. It also keeps me at the cutting-edge of scanning technology. When my lab scans my film today, it is with the latest, state-of-the-art scanning equipment. In ten years-time their current scanning equipment will not doubt have been replaced by what will then be the state-of-the-art technology and my present negatives will be able to be scanned at that level.

Nikon F3

The digital image files I now have are as good as they're going to get and, if recent history is anything to go by, I probably won't be able to open those files.
With this in mind, yesterday, I took a trip to Johan at Kameraz and, after a bit of horse-trading, walked out with a Nikon F3 fitted with an MD4 motordrive.
The F3 was (is) the greatest pro 35 mm camera ever produced and I am by no means alone in that belief -- do a Google search and you'll see why so many feel that way.
It is built like a tank and, that is no idle statement. In the mid 80s a friend and colleague, well-known in press circles but who shall remain nameless here, killed a car thief when he buried his F3 and lens into the top of the criminal's head. The blood and other goo was simply washed off and the camera continued to function perfectly.
When I picked up the F3 yesterday, it was like coming home to an old friend. It has everything you need and absolutely nothing more. It's the ultimate photo-making machine where, you, rather than the camera, are in charge. There is nothing to get in the way of the process -- no decision to make about which of the 11 focus-points the camera wants to use, no poncing about trying to figure what program mode is best, or if the matrix-metering requires compensation to balance with the i-TTL flash.
Then there is no processing in RAW or NEF or whatever before you can start working on the image and no need to shoot multiple images so you can produce an HDR image because your digital camera lacks the dynamic range of flm.
You want automatic functions on the F3? Simply turn the dial on the top to "A". Choose the aperture that best suits the depth-of-field you want, rotate the ring on the lens to that aperture setting (no thumb-wheels here!), focus, compose and shoot.
No computer algorithms to take into account. No custom settings buried in the depths of a menu. Just pure, unadulterated photographic purity and joy.
It's nice to be home!

Abandoned Canons and processing film in coffee.

2009-06-19T17:00:00.006+02:00

Rolleiflex - developed in Rodinal

Contaflex - developed in Rodinal

Contaflex -- developed in Caffenol

Contaflex -- developed in Rodinal

Contaflex -- developed in Caffenol

The Canon is gone! I ran a roll of film through it and was really disappointed with the results.
Even at apertures of around f11 the pictures are soft. They have no bite.
So that was it, it had to go back. I traded it in on a Nikon F80 that has given much better results.
I also put a roll of film through the Zeiss Contaflex and am happy with the images produced. They have that kind of old Tessar look about them that is reminiscent of those produced by cameras of its era. It's definitely a keeper and when I get 'round to it I will do a head-to-head test, putting it up against the Kodak Retina. It'll be interesting to see how the Zeiss lens shapes up against the Schneider - Kreuznach on the Kodak.
I developed two rolls of Ilford FP4+ shot with the Contaflex, the same subject was shot in pretty much the same light. The difference was, one roll was developed in Rodinal (about 20 years old but still perfect) and the other in a mixture of coffee and washing soda generally called Caffenol.
(If anyone wants specific mixtures, times, methods, etc that I used, drop me a line and I'll let you have them.)
I have only ever read about Caffenol so this was a first for me. I don't think I'll be dumping my regular developer but I really do like the effects created by the Caffenol and certainly can see some application for it.
Finally, the lead picture in this post was shot with a Rolleiflex. It's of an old, abandoned mine not too far from where I live. There's no doubt, there's no substitute for negative size!

It was Christmas and my birthday this week!

2009-06-04T15:47:00.002+02:00

A few years ago, I figured I'd learn to play the guitar and my wife bought me one for my birthday.
I quickly established that, when it comes to music, I have absolutely no talent or aptitude. About the only instrument I have any hope of playing successfully, is a portable radio!
It was with this in mind that I was delighted when, last week someone offered to buy the guitar from me at the price originally paid for it. I jumped at the offer and, with R1000 (about US$120) in my pocket, immediately set out to purchase something more useful -- a classic camera or two.
What a week it turned out to be -- like Christmas and two birthdays all rolled into one.

Spoiled for choice

At a Johannesburg camera store I was spoiled for choice. I fondled a Pentax SP SLR with a clip-on light meter, drooled over a couple of beautiful Minolta SRTs and considered another, high-quality Nikkormat.
But then I saw it, and it was love at first sight. An absolutely, like-new, seemingly never-used, Canon FTb QL with a 55mm f1.2 lens. At R350, including the original owner's manual, there was no way I was leaving without it. Heck, I would have paid three times that and still believed it a bargain!
But it didn't end there. I added a 28mm f2.8 Hervic Zivnon lens, still in its leather case and with a lens hood, for R50, a beautiful Kodalux, all metal light meter that slides into a camera hot-shoe and that can take both reflected and incident light readings for R35 and a Gossen Sixon light meter, complete with leather case for R40. Both light meters are as accurate as my digital meter and accordingly, I am delighted.
I also bought what looked like a perfectly-working Gossen Pilot (what can I say, I like light meters) but wasn't. I don't know if I'll bother to get it repaired and will probably just use it as a teaching aid.
I don't know anything about the Hervic Zivnon lens and can't find much about the brand on the Internet. It's made in Japan, appears to be all-metal and seems to be well-made. I have no idea of the quality of the images it will produce, as I have not yet used it but will post results and impressions in due course.

Contaflex

Two days later Johan from Kameraz -- who knows my fondness for classic German cameras -- called to tell me he had a pristine Zeiss Ikon Contaflex Super that was mine if I was prepared to part with R250 -- more or less what I had left over from the proceeds of the guitar sale.
I quickly high-tailed it over to his Rosebank shop and, after a couple of cups of coffee, departed with another, rescued, classic, film, camera.
It is in beautiful condition, apart from a few flecks on the mirror -- as is the case with my Kodak Retina SLR -- that have absolutely no effect on the final image.
The Contaflex is like handling a piece of jewelry and I am looking forward to running a roll of film through it. Once I get 'round to doing so I will post the results and a "review" of the camera but first want to put the Canon through its paces.
Which explains why there are no pictures accompanying this post. Right now, I am having so much fun shooting the 39 year-old Canon that I don't feel like firing up the digital Nikon to shoot pics of the new additions. Maybe on the weekend.

What a difference a lab makes!

2009-05-28T16:20:00.003+02:00

Earlier this week I had a roll of Fuji Superia 400 ASA film developed. It was shot with my 53 year-old Kodak Retina SLR. You can read the background story behind the camera here.
To put it mildly, I was absolutely blown away. The f2 Schneider-Kreuznach lens did a phenomenal job of extracting detail in the images. In my initial article I said I was somewhat disappointed and that the lens could not hold a candle to my Nikon glass. It seemed a bit soft.
I have now completely changed my opinion. What has changed? Why the sudden improvement? I believe the reason for my initial view was largely the result of the output of the lab I used to process and scan the film.
This week's roll of film was processed by a different lab and the improved quality is astounding. The two images displayed here are a fair representation of the other pictures on the roll. Exposure for all images was set manually, using the camera's built-in selenium exposure meter, with the white incident disk clipped in place.

This allowed me to measure the light falling onto the subject, rather than the light being reflected by it. It is, without doubt, the most accurate way of determining exposure. Click here to read about taking incident meter readings.
I am loving this old camera. I would imagine I'd get the same feeling driving a '54 Gull Wing Mercedes!

About to dump M$ WindoZe once and for all!

2009-05-21T16:15:00.001+02:00

A few years ago I dumped Windows and loaded Linux on my PC. I was sick of the hassles that accompany a Micro$oft WindoZe system -- the blue screen of death, pouring money into an endless pit called anti-virus software and its updates and the once a year (in a good year that is) obligatory computer crash, hard disk reformat and complete reinstall.
I loved Linux. It just worked. Plain and simple. I used it and spent my time accomplishing what I wanted rather than fart-arsing with crappy software. There were some programmes I missed, primarily Photoshop, but I managed with the earlier versions with Gimp and, in any case, only needed to do a bit of tweaking of my images.
Then I replaced my PC with a laptop and signed up for a data package with a mobile phone provider. The laptop came loaded with Windows XP and my new provider emphatically told me I would not be able to use Linux to connect to the internet on their network.
I sighed, shrugged my shoulders and accepted I'd once again have to make do with an inferior system.
Two years later, after much frustration, the removal of countless viruses -- despite having two, up-to-date anti-virus packages installed -- I'd had enough. In spades.
I wanted the freedom of Linux again but at the same time was afaraid, if I dumped Windows, I would not be able to access the Internet and may have problems getting my computer recognise my camera, printers and other peripherals.

Burning bridges

I wanted to dip my toes in the Linux waters again, without completely burning my bridges.
The solution was remarkably simple. I bought a Linux magazine that came with a free DVD containing a new version of Mint Linux. I believe it is based on Ubuntu which in turn is built on Debian. The beauty was, I could run it off the DVD without having to install it on my computer. That way I could test it completely before making any drastic changes.
To cut a long story short, running off the DVD, Mint Linux recognised all my hardware and seamlessly connected to my service provider's mobile network. I could even read files created in WindoZe!
There was no doubt. It was going to be installed but I still wanted a safety net, (is that not an oxymoron when talking about Windows?) so I decided to set up a dual-boot system where I could choose to run either Linux or Windows.
My new Linux distribution was up and running in about 20 minutes and was a completely automatic, painless and simple procedure that anyone can do.
For those who are not familiar with Linux, the beauty of it is it's not just an operating system but comes with thousands of absolutely free software packages. If you want an office suite, for example, there are three or four different suites to choose from and, because they are all free and available at the click of a mouse, you can try them all and see which you prefer.
Along with all the other bundled software, my Linux distro, included GIMP 2.6, Linux's equivalent of Photoshop. It's a wonderful programme that, as far as I am concerned, is the equal of Adobe's product -- with one major exception, the price! (Search my blog for a GIMP photographic tutorial.)
It's now been almost a month since I installed Mint Linux. I have since not booted Windows once, nor have I missed it. I also have not had a single crash, frozen screen or forced reboot. And, in addition, I have used 50% less data, by not having to download Windows updates, security patches or anti-virus updates.
I think the time has come to dump Microsoft once and for all!

What an amazing weekend it was!

2009-05-06T12:51:00.021+02:00

The Delegates and our hostess, Rina (front row,3rd from the left)

Pic by Dani

It's been a while since my last blog entry mainly because I've been busy with work that pays (some of!) the bills and also because Joy and I were feverishly getting the first photographic breakaway weekend organised.
And what a rousing success it turned out to be!
Delegates arrived at Fountain Villa in Klerksdorp at around 17h00 on Friday evening.

Pic by Freek

After settling in and enjoying a gin and tonic, we commenced proceedings in the Gallery where we sat on genuine oriental hand-knotted rugs and antique Balinese furniture. It was a time to get acquainted and I gave the delegates a lesson on the "Golden Pyramid of Exposure". (Search this blog for a post about that.) It was new to all of them. These were all "auto" shooters who'd never heard of "aperture", "shutter speed" or "ISO".
Dinner was in the restaurant, the oldest building in what was once the old Transvaal and one of the original 12 Voortrekker houses built in 1837. Our hostess, Rina, prepared a meal few will soon forget -- four legs of lamb roasted at a low heat for 24 hours.
Much wine was consumed and it turned out to be a late night. Fortunately no one
wanted to get up to photograph the rising sun so, after breakfast and a lecture on composition and other photographic tricks of the trade, I issued each person with an assignment-sheet containing ten subjects, of which five had to be chosen and interpreted in whatever way the delegate chose. Topics included, portraiture, photo-journalism, lines, textures, nostalgia, natural beauty and self-portraits.

Pic by Douw

Differently

Then we set off for the old Boer War and concentration camp cemetery.
The place is run down and the graves vandalised but it makes for creating haunting and disturbing images.
It was interesting to see how people saw and photographed things differently, despite all being in the same environment. We spent a fair bit of time there then returned to Fountain Villa where delegates were free to wander around and photograph both inside and outside the 104 year-old house.
It was incredible to see how many were now manually setting their cameras and by doing so able to achieve the results they visualised. They were "making" rather than "taking" pictures!

Pic by Maggie

Judging and prize-giving took place in the gallery before dinner and proved to be more difficult than I'd anticipated. Each photographer had to choose and submit their five best images which were loaded onto a laptop for general display.
The standard of images was truly amazing and it was hard to get my head around the fact that, just 24 hours ago, all many of the delegates knew, was how to turn the camera on.
Photographs were judged and scored by other members of the group.
Over a chicken curry dinner that had some returning for three helpings -- you know who you are!-- prizes were handed out and another late, wine-filled evening ensued.
It was a blast and we're already busy planning the next photographic breakaway. Interest has been shown in a trip to Namibia and that is something definitely being considered.
I've posted examples of some of the images made during the breakaway and will load the rest on my website just as soon as I get the chance. Once done I will add a link here.

THE OTHER IMAGES HAVE NOW BEEN UPLOADED AND CAN BE VIEWED HERE.

Pic by Marcelle

If you are interested in joining a photographic breakaway please click the link on the side panel.

Pic by Marieta

Pic by Nicolette

Pic by Ria

Flowers don't carry batons!

2009-04-08T12:41:00.007+02:00

I guess it’s a world-wide phenomenon, as I read many similar complaints on photographic websites and bulletin boards.
As a result of paranoia, imagined terrorist threats and a just plain and simple, hard-assed attitude, practising street photography is becoming increasingly difficult and in many cases, impossible.
In most South African cities there is effectively no street life -- it has all moved inside privately-owned shopping malls and that is where the problem arises.
Last week while wandering around the Sandton City shopping mall, I stopped to take a shot of lunchtime office workers sitting in the food plaza watching a soccer match on a giant screen.
It was a simple picture showing a slice of South African life that may be interesting to look back on in a couple of years.

Within moments of raising the camera and firing off the shot two security guards descended upon me.
“Where’s your permission?” they demanded. “You can’t take pictures here. It’s private property.”
They huffed and puffed, threatened to call the manager and generally displayed the attitude exhibited by lower-end life forms when they have some authority.
Naturally I ignored them and left.
A few days later I went to the Rosebank Mall, not too far from Sandton City. I had with me my Kodak Retina and stopped to photograph a mime in an open square through which dozens of people were passing.
You guessed it! Within a minute I was accosted by a security guard who called the manager, who arrived so quickly I am sure he was convinced he’d caught an international mime-spy!
Same story, same demands while, at the same time, two other passersby continued to snap away with their cellphone cameras.

I fail to see the logic of the policies of the centre-owners. The fact is, I was not trying to sneak in and photograph something hidden away, beyond the eyes of the public. All was in full view, openly displayed and intended to be seen.
The manager muttered something about “combating industrial espionage” before I left.
I shot the images on film and I have not yet had them developed. I doubt they will be anything more than a mildly interesting record of a moment in time. But the incidents got me thinking, is it worth the hassles?
Probably not. For me, photography is not a contact sport and, as a former press photographer, I paid my dues as, on many occasions, I was harassed by jack-booted authorities.
I’m too old to put up with that kind of crap now.
So it was with that in mind that I decided, for the time being, to follow a different route in photography. My plan now is to find and photograph beauty surrounding us that we do not always see.

Searching for beauty

I am fortunate to live on a small farm and at this time of year some very attractive wild-flowers bloom in the veld. They are not something I have ever photographed before, in truth, I have always walked past and hardly glanced at them.

But, for the past few evenings, about an hour before sunset, I have spent some very pleasant times searching for splashes of colour in otherwise dreary surroundings.
Some of the images I captured were shot on Fuji 400 colour negative film, the others were taken with a Nikon D40 but in all cases, either a prime 50mm f2 or a 105mm f2.5 Nikkor lens was used. This allowed me to shoot wide open (in some cases I used a 2x neutral density filter) and end up with wonderful, creamy bokeh.
In truth, I prefer the shots taken on film. Though more grainy, I think they have a painterly quality about them that is absent in the digital images.
(Image 1: digital, Image 2 & 3: film, Image 4: digital, Image 5: film, Image 6: digital)
For once, it was nice not to look over my shoulder for a baton-carrying goon!

10 steps to winning camera club competitions.

2009-03-26T14:35:00.003+02:00

1. Throw originality out of the window. Judges love pictures of wild animals. Birds are also particularly popular, especially masked weavers. Photograph them hanging upside down at a nest. Look at what other people are doing and DO EXACTLY THE SAME!
2. Go on club shoots, take a big lens, set your camera on “auto” and shoot the same animal from the same position as everyone else. As long as your camera’s software algorithms correctly expose the image, the camera’s auto focus function is working properly and the subject is located on diagonals or thirds in the frame, you will win a gold.
3. The guy with the most Photoshop filters wins. Add motion blur, wind-shear, neon edges or any other combination of filters and effects to crappy pictures. Judges love that. They think its creative.
4. Shoot pictures of lonely trees on top of hills against over-saturated skies. Better yet, replace the sky with a painted-in unnatural blue.
5. Desert scenes are also a favourite. Study the picture submitted by a thousand other photographers and DO EXACTLY THE SAME.
6. Always paint highlights into subjects’ eyes, even if the light-source is located in such a way that the highlight defies the laws of physics. Remember, judges don’t care about such things, they want highlights!
7. Bugs are big. Insects may be uninteresting but they’re big with judges.
8. Saturate, saturate, saturate. Judges are fascinated by bright things...saturate.
9. Never use a fish-eye lens. Judges don’t know what it is and are frightened by anything unusual.
10. Stay away from the “photo journalism” categories. Photo journalism shows backgrounds in order to establish context. Judges don’t understand that. They will tell you they are marking the image down because it has a “busy” background. Rather stick to safe categories like birds and animals.

Remember:

Judges look for what is wrong, rather than what is right.
They don’t look at the actual image, preferring rather to focus on accepted “rules”. Therefore, follow the rules, dammit!
Always use fill-flash so that your pictures look like everyone else’s.

Read this hilarious brilliant satire on how famous photographers would be judged on the internet.

Expensive disposable cameras.

2009-03-18T12:06:00.001+02:00

Ken Rockwell has a way of riling people.
I first started reading his writings about three years ago when his site, www.kenrockwell.com turned up in an internet search.
The Californian is opinionated, shamelessly self-promoting and has a tendency to present himself as a scientist, “real photographer” and latter-day sage and philosopher.
He likes to pepper his articles with scientific terms and jargon.
But for all of that, I like him. Rockwell calls a spade a shovel -- even when it’s sometimes a rake.
Over the years that I’ve visited his site I have seen his tone and almost blind worship of the merits of, particularly Nikon, digital cameras change and watched his enthusiasm wane.
It was therefore not all that surprising when Rockwell called Nikon’s latest flagship camera, the D3X “disposable.”
This 24.5 megapixel machine boasts more options, buttons and software than was used to put Apollo 11 on the moon. It also comes -- without a lens -- with an approximate R100 000 (US$10 000 approximately) price tag. There is a comprehensive article about it here.

Disposable

The fact is, Rockwell has got it right this time. All digital cameras are in effect disposable, much like computers. The 10 year-old, top-of-the-line digital SLR that cost a similar price back then, is today, pretty well worthless.
Every time a new generation of DSLRs arrives it invariably has a different version of RAW that is not backwardly compatible with the previous firmware version. And, while it is true, software vendors like Adobe quickly introduce new editions of Photoshop that are able to handle the format, it is yet another expense.
It is a fallacy that digital is cheaper than analogue. Right now, a roll of Fuji colour film costs me about R13 when I buy it in a pack of three. Developing costs around R25 and a 16-base scan of a roll of 36 exposures comes in at around R25. That is a total of R63 or R1.75 per image.
“Ah,” I hear you say, “But you still have to buy Photoshop.”
No you don’t. There are plenty of free alternatives that do the job of photo-manipulation and re-touching just as well and I could just as easily do the necessary adjustments on the lab’s computer.
The truth is, I hate sitting behind a monitor sorting through hundreds of digital images. When I shoot film stock, I shoot fewer images and the computer work is so negligible it takes only a few seconds per image.
But what about quality?
Nikon’s new wonder camera is the first DSLR to have a sensor that is...wait for it...exactly the same size as a frame of 35mm film.
There are differing opinions on what resolution 35mm film is capable of capturing, ranging from 15 to 25 megapixels. I don’t know, I just know it’s enough. I also know film has a higher dynamic range and can capture more detail, particularly in the highlights.
Let me lay my cards on the table and say right here: I am not anti-digital in any way. I recognise, the convenience, the superb image quality and all the other advantages.
I guess, like Rockwell, I am trying to say the prices charged for an item likely to become obsolete in just a few years, are ludicrous.

Screwing us

The camera manufacturers are screwing us. There is no way on earth the Nikon D3X -- and the equivalents from the other manufacturers -- is worth R100 000, or even R30 000 for that matter!
Consider this. A new analogue, Leica system will probably come in at about R50 000 (still way over-priced) but it will still happily be taking quality pictures 50 years from now, long after the current crop of digital cameras is just a footnote in history.
And, if history is anything to go by, the Leica will sell secondhand for the price it was bought new, effectively making it free.
Digital camera makers have done a wonderful job convincing us that, after the initial investment in equipment, our picture-taking is free.
The world is littered with similar marketing examples: “free” cellphones, a free holiday when we sign a contract etc.
As they say, there is no free lunch. The first hit is free - then you’re locked in and have no option but to purchase over-priced manufacturer-only, non-standard rechargeable batteries, flash-guns that only work with that particular model, new wireless remote triggers, “upgraded” software...the list of never-ending expenses is endless.
And all to produce and image that is the same practical quality as that produced by my 25 year-old Nikkormat bought for R200. Let’s not even talk about the quality a used medium format camera system I saw advertised for R5000 will dish up!
I for one will not be dumping my film cameras.

Take an incident reading.

2009-03-16T15:52:00.006+02:00

The quickest way to take your photography to a new level is to invest in a hand-held light meter.
No doubt many will disagree and point out that, with the arrival of matrix metering -- I believe first seen in Nikon’s FA in 1984 -- and now digital cameras complete with built-in histograms, separate light meters are completely obsolete.
Today’s camera metering systems, with intricate algorithms and databases containing thousands of lighting permutations are incredible, no arguing that.
Most of the time, stick your camera on “program” or “auto” modes you’ll end up with a well-exposed picture.
If you used negative film and the camera’s meter, it was a rare case that exposure wasn’t acceptable. But that is not so with digital cameras and their tendency to blow out highlights. In far too many instances do-it-all matrix metering does not cope with intense highlights.

Reflected light

The problem with built-in camera meters is they measure REFLECTED light. Brighter objects reflect more light and, unless you take that into account and adjust accordingly by using your camera’s exposure lock facility, you could end up with an image not as you saw it.
Reflective meters see everything as being 18% grey and adjust exposure accordingly. Photograph a pure white object using a reflective light meter and it will reproduce as grey. Do the same to a pitch black subject and it too will reproduce as grey.

The fact is, if you want you whites to be white (sounds like a washing powder advert!) you need to give MORE exposure than indicated by your meter. The opposite applies if you want your blacks to be black.
So what’s the solution? Learn to use your camera on its “manual” setting and adjust accordingly or, keep you camera on “manual” and get yourself a good hand-held incident light meter.
An incident meter has a white dome or disc that covers the light-receiving cell. Often it looks like a cut-in-half ping-pong ball.
The main advantage of an incident meter is it measures the light that is falling ON the subject and that reflected by it. It does not matter whether the subject is black, white or anything in between.
It is the most accurate way to measure light and set exposure. Period! End of story. If you doubt that statement ask why it’s the method used by Hollywood when shooting million dollar movies.

Simple steps

How do you use an incident meter?
Follow these simple steps and you’ll be amazed at how dramatically your images improve.
1. Remember you need to measure the light falling ONTO the subject.
2. Set the ISO speed your camera is set at on your meter.
3. Position yourself in such a way that the light-gathering dome FACES THE CAMERA IN THE SAME LIGHT STRIKING THE SUBJECT.
4. Read off the aperture/shutter speed setting that is appropriate to the effect you wish to achieve.
5. Set your camera to “manual” and transfer the light-meter reading to your camera.
6. Take the picture.
Why not simply “chimp” until you get it right or just try to fix it in Photoshop? You can do that but I personally hate sitting behind a computer and fiddling with images -- much better to get it right in-camera first time, with a minimum of fuss.
A separate light-meter also allows you to use the wonderful old cameras manufactured without built-in exposure meters or whose meters have died or for which batteries are no longer available.
In my case it also allows me to use the phenomenal old prime lenses I’ve gathered over the years that work perfectly except for the fact they will not meter on my digital camera.
Each image posted here was shot in difficult lighting circumstances, with a manual prime lens and metered with my hand-held Polaris digital light-meter.
No Photoshopping other than slight sharpening and re sizing was done.

Using an incident meter meant the detail in the bright concrete trough was still maintained. The bright reflectance would have fooled the camera's built-in meter.

Shooting a "new" old classic

2009-03-06T17:48:00.006+02:00

A couple of weeks ago I was asked to shoot some portraits of an uncle and aunt on the occasion of their 50th wedding anniversary. Somehow, the talk got around to my fondness for old film cameras and my uncle mentioned that he had a camera he bought when they were first married.
It had not been used for years and, if I wanted it, it was mine.
Did I want it? Is the Pope Catholic? Do big dogs pass gas?
A few days later I collected a beautiful Kodak Retina Reflex, the first SLR Kodak made.
Made by Kodak AG in Stuttgart, Germany it is an SLR camera with interchangeable lens components. It is unusual in that the rear of the leaf-shuttered lens is fixed while the three front elements are contained in a capsule that bayonet-fits into the front. The 50mm standard front lens-cell can be replaced with one of three Schneider components - an 80mm, and two different 35mm components.
Sometimes called the "Stuttgart Leica" or the "Poor Man's Leica", the Kodak Retina was introduced as a rangefinder in 1934.
The camera is also unusual in that the winding mechanism is situated on the base-plate and it has a few other quirks you can read about if you do an internet search.
The Retina is a phenomenal example of German engineering -- some would say OVER-engineering. It is all metal except for the film winding-spools and is like handling a piece of jewelry.
The leather, ever-ready case is a work of art.
I received the camera in perfect working order except for stuck-open shutter leaves, a common problem with lenses of this type that have been left unused for lengthy periods.
It was an easy fix. I simply removed the front lens capsule and doused the shutter in lighter fuel which dissolved the gummed-up lubricants.
Naturally I couldn't wait to run a roll of film through the camera that, according to Kodak records, was manufactured in 1957.
The Retina SLR comes equipped with a built-in selenium light meter that in this case, still works perfectly and does not need a battery. Also supplied is a white disk that can be clipped over the light-gathering cell to convert it into an incident light meter. The readings from the Retina's meter exactly match those of my hand-held digital light meter.

How well does the camera work?

Within it's limits pretty well but it is certainly no Leica. With the lens wide open images are very soft. In my opinion, unacceptably so. Sharpness increases from about f5.6 and is not bad from f11 but the truth is, it cannot hold a candle to my Nikon lenses.
Without a lens-hood, the 50mm lens -- the only lens I have - is particularly prone to flare. Fitting a lens-hood helps a lot, but does not entirely eliminate the problem.
The truth is, beautiful as the Retina is, there are other cameras of that era (Voigtlander and Leica in particular) that are considerably better. It is also easy to see why Japanese SLRs that were beginning to make an appearance at around the same time, quickly captured the market.
But with all of that said, it does not mean this is not a fun camera. It's a precision instrument, kind of like driving a beautiful old vintage car -- you know, in terms of features and performance it comes a very distant second to a modern vehicle -- but there's still something wonderful about it.
There is no doubt, I will continue to lovingly and often use the Kodak Retina. It produces a look that, in some ways is unique.
I have posted a few pictures -- nothing special or particularly artistic -- that I shot in an effort to see what the camera can produce. A few have had their levels tweaked in Photoshop but no sharpening was done.
Also posted is a picture shot with the Retina and then "hand coloured" in Photoshop.

Ignore the old farts!

2009-02-26T15:45:00.002+02:00

On Sunday I attended a photographic exhibition titled “Then & Now”.
It was a display of the works of eight of South Africa’s most significant documentary photographers organised by Johan at Kameraz.
Over the years David Goldblatt, George Hallett, Eric Miller, Cedric Nunn, Guy Tillim, Paul Weinberg, Graeme Williams and Gisele Wulfsohn captured significant moments in this country’s tumultuous history and still continue to do so.
Their images, the majority shot in black and white, tell the story of a county in transition...a transition that was often bloody and brutal. Today they continue to reflect our society and although the occasions photographed are less dramatic, their images are no less moving.
But I could not help but think had those pictures been entered in camera club competitions few, if any, would have been praised by the judges or awarded gold certificates.
While camera clubs undoubtedly help amateur photographers raise technical standards, they do little else. Impact, particularly in the photo-journalism category, appears completely ignored. Creating an image that is moving, tells a story, causes the viewer to mentally ask questions about the story behind the picture or awakes some sort of emotion, counts for little.

Check list

In the minds of the judges there is a checklist to tick off:
* Is the image well focussed?
* Does it follow the “rule of thirds”?
* Are there diagonals or curves that lead the eye to the focal point?
* Does the focal point present a contrast to the rest of the image?
* Is the sky a deep blue with fluffy clouds?
* Is there a highlight to be criticized somewhere in the background?
* Is the background busy? (Yes it is, it was part of a riot and I didn’t have time or opportunity to arrange the people involved!!)
* Is there a fancy border that separates the image from the screen?
Meet all of the above and success is guaranteed.
I am sure there are other “rules” but one is certainly not: “Is this picture not just another rule-meeting, boring image of a lion/impala/bird/flower/bug the likes of which we’ve all seen hundreds of times before?
The pictures taken by the photographers listed above do not follow the “rules”. They don’t have to. They capture decisive moments, tell stories, evoke emotions and document history. Maybe that’s why such photographers get to have exhibitions, sell prints and publish books while the windbag camera judges, most of whom have never worked as photo journalists, pontificate and spew crap.
Almost 30 years ago I entered an image at a local camera club. It was shot at an Eastern Cape political funeral where activists shot by police were being buried. The image is of a group of ANC cadres running through a huge crowd of township mourners, carrying the coffin of one of their slain comrades on their shoulders.

Not pin-sharp

The judges, three old farts with inflated ideas of their own significance, tore into the photograph. The criticized it for not being absolutely pin-sharp, for not having the coffin located on a diagonal bisecting an image third, they said some of the people in the picture were looking back and not at the camera.
And they were right! Those rules were all broken but some background is in order.
At the time, all political funerals and gatherings were banned and breaking the law brought swift ploice retribution.
It was winter, late in the afternoon and the light was as murky as pea-soup. This meant shooting wide open, at a shutter speed of something like 1/15th of a second. It was also in the days before auto focus and meant constantly back-pedalling while manually trying to pull the focus.
At the time picture was taken the police had just begun to fire teargas and rubber bullets so the fact the picture was not sharp, the background busy and the main subjects not neatly arranged on diagonals was hardly surprising.
But it added to the drama. It captured the feelings of panic and disorder.
As I listened to the criticism I became increasingly angry but then consoled myself with the fact, that particular image was published in around 65 countries -- I shot it while on temporary assignment for one of the world’s largest news agencies.

Do what pleases you

So what does this all mean? In essence shoot pictures that please you and that tell the story of your life and those around you.
Most of the time the so-called experts are trapped in their own, limited, narrow thinking. Go ahead and break the “rules” if by doing so you achieve the emotion and impact you desire. The only rule you should uphold is never shoot boring images, no matter how technically good they are.
The fact is, the images of many of the great photographers would not impress the puffed-up judges at camera clubs, but they’ll be around long after that bloody shot of masked weavers building a nest is forgotten!

The Photo Breakaway is organised

2009-02-17T09:38:00.007+02:00

The first of the photographic breakaway venues has been a few weeks in coming but now all is done and it's only a two-hour drive from Johannesburg!
I have negotiated great rates in the historic Voortrekker town of Klerksdorp that was started in the mid 1830s. In fact, the oldest building in the old Transvaal, a Voortrekker "huisie" (little house) erected in 1837 still stands on the grounds of the guesthouse where we will stay.
Fountainvilla, our accommodation, was built in 1905 by a local liquor baron and is itself a national monument.
Heavy fighting occurred in the area during the Anglo-Boer War. There is a Military and Concentration Camp cemetery on the outskirts of the town that is now overgrown and vandalised. A few years ago I photographed many of the soldiers' graves, including, what is probably, the only spot in the world where two Boers and two Britons are buried together, in the same grave.

This photograph is very possibly the last photographic record of the site before thieves sawed off the metal crosses and sold them to some shit-bag scrap metal dealer! It is a blight on the town's authorities but makes for moody and evocative photography.

The main objective of the weekend breakaways will be to have fun, while learning to use a camera. Just a small bunch of people with a common interest and a desire to have fun.
There are countless photographic opportunities right on the premises and nearby are many historic sites.
It's going to be a blast. Click here for more details and pictures.

The link below will present you with some of the history of the area.

http://aatravel.co.za/staticnew/towns/klerksdorp.html

Not photographing the Chinese New Year celebrations

2009-02-10T16:59:00.004+02:00

Last Saturday Johannesburg’s Chinese community held its New Year celebrations at a local shopping centre and the camera club to which I belong suggested there may be a number of good photographic opportunities.
Everyone and his brother was there, all armed with top-of-the-line digital cameras and everyone scrambled to get a position near the stage, so they could photograph the kung fu demonstrations or stick a camera in the face of the lion dancers.
I felt as though I had stepped back in time to the bun-fights I had years ago with hordes of other press photographers as we all jostled and shoved to get the same picture.
And that’s exactly what was happening - everyone was shooting basically the same image. It is an aspect of camera clubs I dislike. Camera club judges place emphasis on technical excellence but largely ignore creativity and uniqueness. I have no doubt, at the next club meeting, ten different people will present exactly the same shot and, so long as it is properly exposed, in focus and the main subject is located on one of the intersecting thirds in the image, it will score gold.
I wanted to do something different and the Chinese celebrations, colourful as they were, just did not do it for me. The light was harsh, contrasty and unattractive. So, after I’d had my fill of kids kicking and punching pre-broken wooden planks, I wandered off to see what else I could find.
I ended up with three images I liked. For me, they capture critical moments and tell a story.
Let me know if you agree.

Buy me! Buy me!

See no evil.

Pleeeeease, Mom!

Are pro photographers doomed?

2009-02-06T12:57:00.003+02:00

One of my favourite blogs is the Strobist. Published by David Hobby, a veteran newspaper photographer, it is a most comprehensive and definitive source of information about lighting techniques and how to use off-camera flashes. David is undeniably one of the most knowlegeable guys around and I have learned much from his blog. Check it out, it is listed in the blogroll in the right-hand column.

Recently David wrote about the need for photographers to sometimes do work for free. The article evoked a great deal of discussion. While many agreed with his point of view, some took a completely different position, particularly John Harrington. Those who had opposing views felt that doing work for free adversely affects the way a professional photographer's value is perceived. You can read the debate on the Strobist site, so I won't rehash the arguments here.
But it got me to thinking that much, as I hate to say it, I believe the days of the professional photographer are largely numbered. I say this for a couple of reasons. Technology has brought convenience and simplicity making it easy for camera-owners to shoot properly-focussed, well-exposed, pictures -- the fact that little thought or creativity is involved, means nothing. Consumers of images have, since the advent of web publishing, been dumbed down and most wouldn't know quality if it walked up and slapped them in the face.

Anyone with a camera

Nowadays, anyone with a digital camera, figures he or she is, or can be, a professional photographer. By way of example, I live in a small town in South Africa that has fallen on hard times as a result of local gold mines shutting down. There are 57 "wedding photographers" here, pretty well all of whom are equipped with a digital camera, painfully slow kit zoom lens (most don't know what that means) and built-in, pop up flash. Their standard operating procedure is to speculatively shoot around 1400 images, download them, burn a CD and present it to the client at the end of the wedding. They justify this mediocrity as "photojournalistic wedding photography," although the nearest any of these "photographers" has ever come to photojournalism is buying a newspaper from a street-corner vendor.
They are happy to work at a rate that, in many cases, just covers traveling expenses. But the client is happy because he's never seen better or "just good enough" is indeed good enough.
Recently, a young-buck newspaper sports photographer asked how I could shoot a motorcycle race with a manual Nikkormat that doesn't autofocus, has no motor-drive and does not allow me to immediately see the shot taken. He spoke from behind some or other 10 frames per second DSLR. As soon as I started to explain zone focussing and the decisive moment, his eyes glazed over. He had no clue what I was talking about an mumbled that those things didn't bother him, he simply put the camera on "auto" and of the hundreds of images he shot he was sure some would be good enough for publication.
I do not think it is the guy shooting for free that is going to put the pro out of business. I think the wave of technology - in much the same way easily-used office software signalled the doom of typists - and the general acceptance of mediocrity, where purchasers of photography can't recognise the quality offered by the true professional, will do that.
It's sad but I think we are a bunch of dinosaurs in a rapidly-developing ice-age.

A story of unthinkable love and courage!

2009-02-03T10:39:00.005+02:00

When I worked for newspapers, magazines and news agencies I was always on the lookout for the big story. The story that would move people, get them talking, be remembered for years to come. Although I did some substantial articles none comes anywhere close to the story that follows.
Today I came across a tale of unimaginable courage and love. It's by no means my "scoop", in fact almost 10 million people have already downloaded the video but I do not remember ever being moved as much by any other story.
This is the background information I received:
A son asked his father, "Dad, will you take part in a marathon with me?"
The father who, despite having a heart condition, said "Yes".
They went on to complete the marathon together.
Father and son went on to do other marathons. The father always said, "Yes" when his son asked them to race together.
One day, the son said, "Dad, can we do the Iron Man together?" to which his father replied: "Yes".
The Hawaiian Iron Man is considered the toughest triathlon in the world. Competitors must complete three endurance events in the race: a 2.4 mile (3.86 km) ocean swim, followed by a 112 mile (180.2 kilometer) bike ride, then end with a 26.2 mile (42.195 kilometer) marathon run along the coast of the Big Island, Hawaii.
The father and son went on to complete the race together.

Do yourself a favour and take the time to view this 4 minute 36 second video. It will uplift your spirits!

Everything you ever wanted to know about the credit crunch but were too afraid to ask.

2009-02-02T11:40:00.007+02:00

Although this blog is mainly about photography I got sent this and thought it was simply too funny not to share.
Here follows everything you wanted to know about the credit crunch but were always too afraid to ask.

Q: With the current market turmoil, what's the easiest way to make a small fortune?
A: Start off with a large one.

Q: What's the difference between an investment banker and a large pizza?
A: A large pizza can feed a family of four.

I went to the ATM this morning and it said "insufficient funds".
I'm wondering is it them or me.

Q: What's the difference between Investment Bankers and London Pigeons?
A: The Pigeons are still capable of making deposits on new BMW's.

Q: What have Icelandic banks and an Icelandic streaker got in common?
A: They both have frozen assets.

You know it's a credit crunch when…

1. The cash point asks if you can spare any change.
2. There's a 'buy one, get one free' offer - on banks.
3. The IRS is offering a 25 per cent discount for cash-payers.
4. UK Prime minister Gordon Brown has stopped chewing his nails and started sucking his thumb.
5. Your builder asks to be paid in Zimbabwean dollars rather than US dollars.

Q: What's the capital of Iceland?
A: About $3.50.

Uncertainty has now hit Japan. In the last seven days, Origami bank has folded, Sumo Bank has gone belly up and Bonsai Bank has announced plans to cut some of its branches. Yesterday, it was also announced that Karaoke Bank will go up for sale and will likely go for a song, while shares in Kamikaze Bank were suspended today after they nose-dived. While Samurai Bank is soldiering on after sharp cutbacks, 500 staff at Karate Bank got the chop and analysts report that there is something fishy going on at Sushi Bank, where it is feared that staff may get a raw deal.

Q: What's the difference between an American and a Zimbabwean?
A: In a few weeks, nothing.

Q: George Bush was asked today "what did he think of the Credit Crunch?"
A: He replied: "It was his favourite Candy Bar."

How long will film still be available?

2009-01-28T14:47:00.006+02:00

How long will film be around?
It’s a question that often pops up on photographic forums and in chat rooms. The answers range from “a year” to more than “100 years”.
As a dyed-in-the-wool film guy, with a love for old film cameras -- my favourite is a beautiful 1957 Voigtlander Prominent -- it’s a question that does concern me, as it no doubt does hundreds of thousands (more like millions) of other film-camera users.
It will be a sad day when I can no longer lovingly fondle and use my Nikkormats or my Rollei because film is no longer available. But I do not think that scenario is likely to happen, either in my life nor more sons’ and I think my future grandchildren will also enjoy the wonderful experience of opening a fresh canister of film.
For many that will be a wild, optimistic statement they’ll vigorously dispute.
“Film is already dead,” they’ll say, “it just doesn’t know it.”
There is no doubt digital photography has made major inroads into the market for film. The biggest blow has come, not from dedicated digital cameras, but rather from camera-equipped cellphones. No arguments there.

Where the argument falls down.

Where the contention falls is it is most often made by people living in rich western countries and, the truth is, there is a big world beyond that.
I recently stopped in at a few one-hour mini-labs in Johannesburg and nearby towns. I asked the owners what their experiences were and the answers surprised me. All reported that around 50% of their “film” business still comes from developing, scanning and printing 35mm film.
In more affluent areas digital photography occupies a larger proportion when compared with poorer areas. In a busy mini-lab in Randfontein -- a less affluent area -- I was told film make up two thirds of their business.
I would guess the situation in South Africa is reflected in Asia, China and South America. There are a lot of people in those parts of the world who already own film cameras, who cannot afford, nor want or need to supposedly “upgrade” to digital cameras. For them, using film requires no computer equipment, no power, no expensive batteries, no CD burners, no external hard-drives...well you get the picture.
And as long as that remains the case, someone will make and supply film. It may not be the traditional, large, film manufacturers, although Kodak, Fuji and Ilford have all, in the recent past, said they are committed to continuing to make film although, in fairness, it must be pointed out, some non-profitable lines have been dropped from their ranges.
But even if those companies decide to withdraw from the film market, someone else will step in. I am surprised that, with the flood of Chinese goods into South Africa, I have not yet seen anyone importing Chinese film which, by all accounts, is very good.
Film will never occupy the position it once did but it will be around for a long time. We may not be able to buy it in every corner shop and garage kiosk, as we can now.

Medium format difficulties

Unlike the situation in Europe and the US, where reports say medium format and large format film sales are seeing something of a resurgence, the opposite seems true in South Africa.
Many professional labs that used to process such film have shut down and, even if you develop it yourself, getting it scanned and printed is a problem and setting up a wet darkroom is something I do not want to do again!
But, if push comes to shove, the world is a small place nowadays, so I’ll either buy a medium format scanner or mail the negs to a lab overseas.
I love film and I love the fact that so many phenomenally good cameras are now within my reach because people are dumping them for crappy digital point-and-shoots.
Dust off those old cameras and get out there and have fun, then when, you’re too old, give ‘em to your grand-children so they can give those old gems another lifetime of use.
Film is dead! Long live film!

Photo-compositing IS manly!

2009-01-26T12:54:00.004+02:00

I continue with my foray into digital scrapbooking -- to make it sound more manly I have decided that in future, I'll use the more high-falutin' term, "Photo-compositing."
In my defence, it was done while waiting for my eldest son to arrive so we could head into the mountains for a bit of dirt bike riding -- a very manly pursuit! While awaiting his arrival I figured I'd fiddle around with some images of my other son, Kevin, and see what I could come up with, using Gimp and "layers".
I could just as easily have used Photoshop but, as I run post-processing photo courses in which students receive a free copy of and learn to use Gimp, I thought I should use that program to illustrate what is possible.
In total, eleven layers were used to build up the image, which is a little more complicated than it appears at face value.
I am pleased with the result and, in truth, found the process thoroughly enjoyable. Photo-compositing is definitely manly!

Digital Scapbooking and Photography

2009-01-20T11:57:00.003+02:00

Recently I was asked by someone if I could teach him digital scrapbooking. It is not a craft with which I am particularly familiar. In fact, I had to do some internet searching to see exactly what it entailed.
Scrapbooking is something that I figured only bored housewives got together to do, so they could complain about their husbands. But a friend, who runs a scrapbooking studio, showed me examples of her work and I was blown away by her creativity.
I can't say I am likely to be joining a morning housewives' scrapbooking session any time soon but I learned once again that I should keep an open mind before judging things about which I know nothing.
I reasoned the principles of digital scrapbooking must, in many ways, be the same as those applied to photographic manipulation and post-processing.
So I sat down behind my computer, fired up Gimp and had a bash. To be honest, I am quite pleased with my first effort - though I am sure experienced scrapbookers could pick many holes in it. That's fine. I saw how a number of scrapbooking techniques can be applied to conventional, art photography and will be experimenting in the future.
In truth, I rather enjoyed the process. I just hope none of the guys I knew when I wrote for Soldier of Fortune magazine read this blog!

Your tripod is your sharpest lens

2009-01-13T10:13:00.004+02:00

Over the years I have been fortunate to work with some great photographers, all of whom taught me something.
None more so than the late, great, Jimmy Soullier, for many years Chief Photographer at the Sunday Times in Johannesburg.
Jimmy was a small, unassuming Australian, always ready to help neophyte like me. He always seemed to just get on with his job, never seeking the limelight but he was brilliant at what he did. I stand under correction but I believe he won the World Press Photography Competition twice.
Like Henri Cartier-Bresson, Jimmy started and ended his adult life as a painter, with photography filling the gap in between.
I only ever knew him to use Leica rangefinder cameras -- M3s if I remember correctly.
On the occasions we worked together -- I did the words, he did the pictures -- he never once used a flash, no matter how dark the scene was. When I asked him why, he replied like a painter: “Why mess with the natural light? Isn’t press photography about capturing the scene the way it is and not altering it?”
The most I ever saw Jimmy do was use a reflector -- often just a sheet of newspaper -- to bounce a bit of light, if contrast was excessive.

Set apart

It was that outlook that set James Soullier’s pictures apart from the rest. They always had atmosphere, were dramatic and told a story, a far cry from today’s press images that tend to be blitzed and over-lit with high-powered speedlights.
It was this in mind that I recently shot the image of a vet taking a tea-break in between operations.
The light in the picture is completely natural and exactly as it was.
I don’t remember the exact camera settings as I was using the Rolleiflex which naturally does not record EXIF data. But it was slow enough to have to use a tripod, somewhere around one second at about f8. The exposure reading was taken with a hand-held light meter.

Tripod

The old pros always said: “Your sharpest lens is your tripod”. They were right.
On photographic courses I run, I always urge students to invest in a quality tripod and to use it along with the natural light to illuminate their images.
Try it, it’ll take your pics to new levels.

Five simple steps in GIMP to improve your pictures

2009-01-09T09:27:00.000+02:00

Many people own digital cameras, either sophisticated DSLRs or simpler point-and-shoot versions.
It is my guess, based on questions I am asked on the courses I run, that the majority of people do not end up with particularly good images. Most digital camera-owners simply hand their camera’s memory card to the guy or gal behind the counter at the one hour lab and pretty well accept the results dished up to them.
This entry is a quick, down-and-dirty lesson that I hope will help you improve your images during the post-processing phase and show you how to get them the way you want them to look. This page can be downloaded as a PDF here.
To do this you need an image manipulation programme. The market-leader is undoubtedly Photoshop and Photoshop Elements followed by an up-and-coming Paintshop Pro.
These are brilliant pieces of software but for many, are simply too expensive.

GIMP

But there is an extremely powerful, albeit quirky, absolutely free alternative. GIMP has been around for years and, in my opinion, is in many ways better than Photoshop, though others will feel differently. More power to them. This entry is not about the merits of the software. Use which ever you prefer, the principles are the same.
GIMP can be downloaded at www.gimp.org and the latest stable release now is version 2.6.4. I’ll assume you have it loaded on your computer.

Note: Images are not displayed at full size on these blog pages and are not easy to see. Simply click on the image and a full-sized version will be loaded!

Step 1:

Launch GIMP. The toolbox and the working area will open in separate windows.

Step 2:

Click “File” then “Open” and select the image on which you want to work. Click the “Image” drop-down menu and make a duplicate so you always have the original if you mess up. Name the duplicate and close the original.

Figure 1. Open an image

The image I selected for this example was shot with a Kodak digital point-and-shoot and, as you can clearly see, is washed-out and lacks “oomph”. The highlights in the sky on the right-hand side are blown out and cannot be recovered but let’s see what else we can do.

Step 3:

Select “Colours” from the list of drop-down menus at the top of the working window then select “Levels”. (In Photoshop the sequence is “Image” then “Adjustments” then “Levels”.)
A window like that in Fig 2 will open displaying a histogram. Notice how the graph stacks up against the right-hand edge of this picture’s histogram -- that clearly shows some of the highlights have been blown out.
Directly under the graph are three “arrowheads” that indicate the image’s black point, mid-tone and white point.

Figure 2. Adjusting Levels

In this example I dragged the black point as well as the mid point to the right in order to darken those areas. There is no purpose in attempting to adjust the white point as dragging it to the left will only make it lighter.
Adjust the arrowheads until you are happy then click “OK”.
The picture already looks better but there is still more we can do.
I think the colours should be more punchy.

Step 4.

Figure 3. Adjusting Hue and Saturation

Select “Colours” then “Hue/Saturation”.
Dragging the “Saturation” slider to the right makes the colours pop. Play around with the sliders until you have the result you want. When you’re happy click “OK”. Remember you can undo any step by opening the “Edit” menu and selecting “Undo”.
Now it’s time to add a little contrast.

Step 5:

Figure 4. Adjusting Contrast

Go to “Colours and select “Brightness-Contrast”. Move the sliders until you are happy then click “OK”.

Step 6:

Figure 5. Unsharpening

The final requirement is to sharpen the picture. Select “Filters”, “Enhance”, “Unsharp Mask”. Yep, that’s correct it’s UNSHARP MASK for reasons I won’t discuss now.
I believe sharpening must be done in small steps or else it is easy to over-sharpen and end up with an unnatural and unattractive image. These are the settings I use, but experiment and see what you like.
Click “OK”, you’re done. All that remains is to save your picture, write it onto CD and get it printed.

The finished product. Not great art but a definite improvement!

Before I get flames from the experts I know there are a lot more ways to improve images by using layers, masks, dodging and burning HDR techniques etc. I teach some of these in a course I run.
The intention of this article was to present a quick, easy way to improve images.

Shooting the old warriors

2009-01-02T15:53:00.000+02:00

I hate the Christmas holidays! It’s a time when there is usually no work and expenses seem to rocket.
It’s also a time of immense boredom, so when my son suggested we visit the military museum next to the Johannesburg Zoo, I eagerly agreed.

Over the years South Africa’s military museum has grown and expanded and is well worth a visit. Unlike other South African museums, it has thankfully not become politicized and has on display the full gamut of the military conflicts in which ALL South Africans were involved -- including that by the participants of the freedom struggles. It offers an unbiased, honest look at South Africa’s history.
On display are many exceptionally rare pieces of military equipment, the most notable of which is the World War II ME262 jet night-fighter, the only example of its kind in the world!
But museum exhibits can be difficult to photograph and make look interesting. The lighting is often poor, other people somehow always seem to find their way into your shot and backgrounds are usually cluttered and intrusive.

Isolate

To overcome these obstacles I decided I would isolate pieces of the equipment in a way that would hopefully evoke some sort of emotions. You’ll have to be the judge of whether or not I succeeded. All images were taken with a Nikon D40 and either an 18 - 55 mm zoom lens or and old 50mm/1.8 prime.
The first two images I got to take were of an old ambulance and 5,5 field gun, both quietly rusting away in the car park.
Both are familiar objects to me as they are to hundreds of thousands of other South African Defence Force veterans.
In a way they are symbols of a generation of men and women that gave much but is now forgotten.

It's hard not to like the D40!

2008-12-29T11:28:00.000+02:00

I must admit, ever since I got my first DSLR, a Nikon D40, earlier in the year, I have looked for ways not to like it.
That is becoming increasingly difficult.
As a dyed-in-the-wool film guy, digital somehow did not seem real but the more I use the little D40 the more I like it and the harder it is to cling to my belief that my film cameras are better than my new digital toy.
Over the dreary holiday period I had the time to play with the D40 and to get to know it better. I am now absolutely convinced this is a little gem!

Let me say right up front, I only use the camera on its “manual” setting so, apart from the ergonomics, the picture-taking process is not all that different from that followed when using my analogue cameras. At least half of the time I set the exposure using a hand-held meter to take incident light readings.
But what is truly amazing about this camera is the amount of control tucked away in the menu system.

Flash-triggering is now easy

By setting the on-camera pop-up flash to “manual” -- as opposed to “TTL” I was able to turn off the horrible pre-flash sequence and so have the flash fire only once, when I pressed the shutter release button.
I also discovered I could turn the flash power right down. This opens enormous creative opportunities, as it is now a simple operation to use the on-camera flash as a trigger for off-camera flashes fitted with cheap “peanut” optical triggers.
It is easy to purposely over-power the on-camera flash with the stand-alone units or to tailor it to pop just right amount of flash onto subject in order to soften shadows.
It’s a facility that effectivley allows me to carry a full studio in my camera bag.
But another benefit is I can now safely use my old hammer-head flashes, because, when used as slave units, their high trigger-voltage obviously has no effect on my camera.
Modern digital cameras’ circuitry can easily be fried if the trigger-voltage of a hot-shoe-attached flash exceeds that specified by the manufacturer.
I believe Canons should not exceed 6v while Nikons can handle anything less than 250v. I am not sure what the numbers are for other brands but some older flash units pump out as much as 500 volts.
Naturally, if the flash is not attached to your camera -- ie it is a slave unit -- it cannot damage your DSLR.

Cheap manual flash units

There are heaps of excellent, old, manual, flash units to be found at give-away prices. I have a Sunpak 5000 hammer-head that is unbelievably powerful that I bought at camera flea-market sale for R10 (about $1.00). It will now be reporting back for duty.
Yesterday afternoon I saw storm clouds gathering so I grabbed my Rolleiflex and the D40 and headed for Breedtsnek, one of the highest points in the Magaliesberg.
From the top of the pass I watched rain storms moving across the valley. I quickly set up the Rollei on a tripod and fired off a few frames of black and white then grabbed the D40 and shot about 20 frames -- just because I figured I should.
I haven’t had the chance to process the shots taken with the Rollei but have posted a few shot with the Nikon.
More than ever, I am beginning to feel my firm positions are increasingly on shaky ground!

Some pictures from the Rollei

2008-12-12T14:55:00.000+02:00

Please note that all images and text on this site is copyrighted material and may not be used with my written permission.

I ran a roll of Ilford FP4+ through the Rolleiflex I swapped for a Nikon SB600 Speedlight and now, more than ever, I am convinced I got the better deal in the trade.
The film was rated ISO64 and developed in D76 for nine minutes.
I am absolutely delighted with the results. In my opinion the quality of the large neg pretty well blows away any image created on a DSLR.

Exposure is just like filling a bucket

2008-12-10T16:05:00.000+02:00

How do you get the right exposure and take control of your camera?
I decided to write this after I met a few, new camera-owners who complained that they completed a photography course through an online photography "college" but still did not know how exposure relates to aperture and shutter speed settings.
First off it is important to understand there is no single "right" exposure. For any given picture-taking situation there are a number of different exposure combinations, each of which is "right" but only one that will achieve exactly the effect the photographer wants.
If you truly want to master the craft of photography you must go back to the basics, understand the fundamentals and take control of your camera.
A good analogy is flying an aircraft. A modern, commercial jet has so much sophisticated electronic wizardry it can almost fly itself. The pilot may use the technology available to make flying easier and more convenient but he or she still needs to know how to override the systems and take control. Ultimately the pilot must be in command of the aircraft -- not the other way around!
The same principle applies to you and your camera and, if you can grasp the principles that follow, you will be able to cope with almost any photographic situation.
The foundation of all photographic technique is the triangle or pyramid of exposure.
On a blank sheet of paper draw a triangle. Above the top point write "ISO," then, beside the bottom left-hand corner write "shutter speed" and next to the right-hand point write "Aperture (hole size)".
You have just drawn the Pyramid of Exposure, but what does it mean and how is it applied?
We must step back to the days of film and film cameras. When you bought a box of film it was (and still is) marked with an ISO number, for example, ISO100, ISO400, ISO1600 etc (sometimes the label read ASA100 etc but ISO or ASA ratings are the same thing.

ISO400 film

From a completely simplistic point of view, film is made up of light-sensitive chemical crystals laid down of a strip of celluloid (don't write and tell me about about dyes and other components, the purpose of this article is to present an easily-understandable point of reference.)
These crystals are laid down in different grain sizes to allow the film to react to light in a certain way. Larger grain sizes let the film accept and react to light and fast film has many advantages. So why do not simply always use a "fast" film such as ISO800 and be done with it?
Because the down-side of a larger-grained film is when the image is enlarged, grain becomes more visible and sometimes unattractive.
Slow film on the other hand has smaller crystals that, when enlarged, do not show up to the same extent.
The obvious question then is why not always use slow film? Because slow film requires light be allowed to fall on it for longer period. That sometimes makes it difficult for the photographer to hold the camera steady while taking the picture.
There are ways to work around the problem that I'll discuss later.
What does all this have to do with digital photography? Scroll through your camera's menu you will see an option to set the ISO speed rating. Your camera's sensor -- in practical terms -- works much the same way as film in as much as the lower you set your ISO rating, the finer the "grain" will be. Higher ISO settings bring more "noise", the digital equivalent of film grain. I have no idea what the process is behind the sensor. Don't worry about it. All you need to do is remember the principle outlined above.

Shutter speed

The next point on the triangle you drew you marked "shutter speed". Earlier I talked about the amount of time the film crystal need light from the image to shine upon them and that time is called "shutter speed."
When you press the shutter button on your camera it causes a little "door" -- the shutter -- to open to allow light to fall upon the film or the sensor. One of the ways you (or your camera if is automatic mode) contol the quantity of light allowed in is by deciding how long the door will be left open before it is shut again. That is shutter speed. Typically your camera can open the door for a period as little as 1/8000th of a second to as long as a few minutes or even hours.
It is important that I point out that all the corners of the triangle of exposure are linked and changing any one, will affect the other two.

Aperture

Inside the barrel of an old Sun lens showing different aperture settings and a reflection of the photographer.

The final corner of the pyramid, "aperture" is often the most difficult for students to understand.
Inside a camera lens is a series of "blades" arranged to form an adjustable hole through which light passes on its way to the film or sensor. The blades can be set to form a smaller or a bigger hole (aperture). This hole is called the "f-stop". On some cameras -- many digital camera lenses won't let you do this -- you can see what I am talking about by removing the lens from your camera, setting it to its manual setting and then moving the ring on the lens with markings that read 22, 16, 11, 8, 5.6, 4 etc. Your lens may have more or fewer graduations. As you twist the aperture ring look into the lens and you should clearly see the aperture size change.
What you will also notice is, the bigger the number on the aperture dial, the smaller is the hole (aperture) size. The hole visible when (f)16 is selected is much smaller then the hole that appears when (f)4 is selected. In fact, each aperture size is either double or half the size of the setting on either side of it.
Let me explain: the hole when f11 is selected is twice as large as the hole when f16 is chosen but only half the size of the aperture at f8.
Do not worry now about why or when you choose a particular aperture -- that will be covered in another post. Now it is enough to simply grasp the idea of what goes on inside your camera's lens. On a digital camera you set the lens aperture with a thumb-wheel on the camera's body while apertures on mechanical cameras are set manually on the lens.
To properly understand how the three points of the exposure pyramid how they relate to each other we must once again step back to film and the ISO rating.

Sunny 16

When you buy a roll of film that, for example, is marked as being ISO100 that number has a specific value and is not simply arbitrarily-chosen. ISO ratings tell the photographer how to set the camera in order to produce a properly-exposed picture. ISO speeds are linked to a rule known as the "Sunny 16" rule that holds, on a bright, sunny day set your aperture at f16 and your shutter speed at the speed closest to the ISO rating of the film (or sensor) for correct exposure.
An example will better explain. Let's pretend you have bought a roll of ISO400 film -- or set your digital camera to ISO400 -- the sun is bright and clear so, using the "Sunny 16" rule, you can set your shutter speed at the nearest speed to 400 (a digital camera will most likely allow you to set your shutter speed at exactly 1/400th of a second but on a manual camera you will need to set it at 1/500th of a second), set the aperture at f16 and go out and take pictures. Do this and you pictures, in those specific lighting conditions, will all be properly exposed.
But what happens in this example if you want to set your shutter speed at 1/1000th of a second? What must your aperture setting be?
It's really quite simple. When you use a shutter speed that is twice as fast (1/1000th is twice as fast as 1/500th of a second) it stands to reason you will only be allowing half the light to fall onto the film or sensor -- remember the principle of how fast you open and shut the door. In this case then, if the door is going to held open for only half the period, you need to use a bigger door (aperture) to let in the same amount of light.
Remember, aperture settings are double or half of those adjacent to them. Therefore, if I half the time the shutter stays open and still want to allow in the same quantity of light I must then double the size of the hole in the lens. F11 is twice the hole-size of f16. So, in this particular example, to keep the amount of light that strikes the film or the sensor constant, if I want my shutter speed to be 1/1000th rather than 1/500th of a second, I must open the lens aperture up to f11.

Filling a bucket

An easy way to grasp this concept is to liken the photograph you plan to take to an empty bucket you intend to fill from a tap that has an attached hose.
If you increase the diameter of the hose (the aperture) to allow more water to flow, you will have to turn the tap off sooner.
Conversely, if you make the hose diameter smaller you are going to need to let the tap run for longer.
On your camera, full aperture stops are f22, f16, f11, f8, f5.6, f4, f2.8. Digital cameras show an intermediate value that is one half or third stop between the two nearest full stop values. So between f16 and f11 you will be presented with an intermediate value of f13. Do not be concerned about intermediate values. At this point, all you need to remember is full f-stops allow in half or double the amount the light let in by adjacent full f-stops values.

Amaze yourself with a field outing

To see this process in action a field outing is in order.
Choose a sunny day and follow these steps and it will all become clear:

1. Set your camera to "manual".
2. Choose and set an ISO rating.
3. Set your shutter speed to the speed nearest to that of the ISO setting.
4. Set your aperture to f16.
5. Take some pictures and, if you are using a digital camera, check the histogram and the image on the screen.
6. Be amazed at how good the exposure is.
7. Now go into some shade. It is darker than in the open sunlight so obviously you need more light. Allow more light in by opening up your aperture to f8 or alternatively by slowing the shutter speed down by two stops (eg from 1/500th to 1/125th).
8. Take the picture and check the histogram and viewing screen again. If you feel the image is too dark open up another stop or slow down the shutter speed further. Tweak the aperture and/or shutter speed settings picture the exposure is exactly the way YOU want it.
9. Pat yourself on the back -- you have just taken back control of your camera.
In the next post we will explore the reasons why we choose particular apertures and shutter speeds.
Let me know how you do.

P.S. I have no idea why these postings do not insert spaces at the beginning of the first sentence of a new paragraph. I put 'em there but this thing seems to have a mind of its own!

SB600 speedlight for a Rolleiflex

2008-12-02T13:53:00.000+02:00

Yesterday I traded my new Nikon SB600 flash for a mint 1962 Rolleiflex T medium-format camera, a few rolls of film and some black and white chemicals.
I think I got the better deal.
The Nikon SB600 flash is a dog! Stay away from it and all its ilk!
The problem is, the flash forms part of Nikon’s fancy 3D matrix lighting system and, in order to set the exposure, it fires two flashes of light in rapid succession. The first is used by the camera system to provide the information needed for the second flash.
The system works...no doubt about that. Exposures are perfect. So what’s the problem? Nikon claims the intense flashes of light are fired so rapidly the subject will not notice. That is simply not the case.

Closed eyes

In more than half of all people I photographed while using the SB600, the subject blinked after the first flash and was captured by the second with eyes half or altogether closed. Imagine presenting a set of wedding pictures where in most images the bride is dopey-eyed!
Of course the SB600 can be used as a manual strobe and, with a simple homemade, “flash meter” that costs a few cents to make (I’ll post instructions in the future) it performs perfectly.
But being forced to use a strobe that costs in the region of R3000 (approx US$300) to do the same job as a unit you can pick up for less than a third of that price, somehow doesn’t seem right.
The simple fact is, with a digtal camera and its instant feedback, you don’t need a strobe with all the bells and whistles, unless you intend to use it as a remote unit fired by a “commander”.
A digital camera allows you to take the shot, examine it in the viewfinder and then chimp the image until it is exactly the way you want it.
The fact is, many photographic products are like fishing lures -- designed to catch fishermen rather than fish!
Save your money, learn the underlying foundations of photography so you can MAKE the images you want.
In the meantime I can’t wait to get out with one of the greatest cameras ever made and to view the silky, rich tones of a 6cm x 6cm negative that allows me to make poster-sized prints.

My impressions of the Nikon D40

2008-11-27T12:27:00.000+02:00

I have been using a Nikon D40 for about eight months now. These are my impressions.
This is not intended be a technical review -- there are many better qualified to do that than me.
Rather, these are my impressions and experiences, other users may have different opinions.
For over 30 years I have steadfastly used mechanical film cameras, both 35mm and medium format. A few years ago I bought a Minolta Dimage, mainly for the immediacy that digital photography offers. I liked the idea of being able to see the image and being sure I had it correctly exposed and composed.
I also liked the fact that the work-flow would be streamlined (no taking the exposed film to a lab) and that I would not have to scan the negs with a film scanner. Why didn’t I just get the lab to do the scanning for me? Where I live, in the armpit of the world, the quality of labs and lab technicians leaves much to be desired. I spent more time trying to clean up dust and scratches from their scans than I spent doing the scans myself and that didn’t make the task any less monotonous and soul-destroying.
Thankfully, a new lab has opened and their work-quality is outstanding -- they even do 120 film!

Disappointing

But my experience with the Minolta Dimage was, to put it plainly, disappointing.
I hated the camera’s ergonomics and any ISO setting above 200 produced terrible, clumpy, noise and fringing. In my opinion, the Minolta Dimage is not good for anything other than posting pictures on the web and even that is questionable.
Why did I not just buy a top-of-the-line digital slr and be done with it? Ever heard the stories told about starving writers?
In any case, the top of the line dslrs of that time are now superseded by the specifications -- if not image quality -- of some cellphones!
I figured that even if I could afford such a camera, I would not recover the cash plonked down before it became obsolete.
Since then prices of digital cameras have fallen so that argument may no longer be entirely justified, however, I still remain, largely, a starving writer.
After the Dimage experience I quickly went back to my old, manual, film cameras, and probably would not have given digital photography another thought...except I started losing jobs because clients increasingly wanted a CD with images at the end of a shoot.

Lenses

I chose the Nikon D40 because I could afford it and because it accepts the Nikon lenses I already owned.
Because Nikon decided to fit the focusing “motor” into the lens body rather than the camera body, all of my lenses, except the kit lens that came with the camera, will not auto focus and the camera will not meter with the older primes.
I do not consider that a problem because they can all be focused manually and there is a focus-confirmation light in the viewfinder that lights up when the image is sharp.
Metering when using my older lenses is done with a hand-held incident meter or applying the “sunny 16” rule.
If I had to do it again I would probably buy a Nikon with the focusing motor in the camera body, as it would be more convenient and quicker to focus in some circumstances.
The D40 is a six mega pixel camera (the D40X has 10 mp) and despite the fact that six mega pixels is now considered to be towards the bottom end of the scale, I figured the camera would serve all my purposes. After all, only a few years ago, the top-of-the-line pro dslrs came with three mega pixels and pros happily used them.

A3-sized prints

I have not yet felt I needed more mega pixels. With careful interpolation using either GIMP or Photoshop 7 I have successfully made A3-sized prints that are effectively grainless. On the basis of those enlargements I think going up to A0 is certainly feasible.
Since buying the camera I have probably taken around 1500 shots and the operation remains flawless. Battery-life from the included, rechargeable battery is just fine for a day of my type of shooting but it is very unlikely I will ever come back with more than 100 shots -- I still tend to shoot as though I am using film.
The D40 came with an 18 to 55 zoom lens that looks and feels cheap but produces surprisingly crisp, sharp images. It’s a case of handsome is as handsome does.
Controls are straight forward although some settings are buried deep within the menus but I guess that is normal for most digital cameras.
Some people have complained that the camera is small and awkward and in some modes, changing the aperture setting is fiddly as a small button needs to be held down at the same time the control wheel is turned. It’s just not as quick and convenient as an old manual camera but I am no doubt flogging a dead horse.

Metering

The D40 comes with matrix metering, (the camera analyses a number of points in the frame and then, using a sophisticated algorithm, calculates what it deems the correct exposure), traditional centre-weighted metering and spot metering, although some would argue it is not true spot metering.
Metering is excellent and in most circumstances is not fooled. When not using a hand-held, incident meter, I use the spot meter and expose for the brightest highlight in which I want detail to be visible.
However, I still believe, in most cases, the best exposures result when the camera is set to “manual” mode and the photographer sets the exposure to achieve what he or she wants.
Am I happy I purchased the Nikon D40? Yes I am. The issues I have, tend to be about digital photography as opposed to capturing images on film and really have nothing to do with the camera and its functions.
The D40 does what it is meant to do and it does it very well.

Document your history

2008-11-27T10:10:00.000+02:00

In a previous post I talked about how history is being lost. In South Africa, this is particularly true.
It is said that one of the spoils of war is the victor gets to rewrite history and that certainly is the case in this country.
There are many examples where our current government has removed statues and icons dating from a previous era and the history text books are all being rewritten but I came across an example in my own little town.
A few years ago I was commissioned to write a book detailing the history of this town and, in doing so, I took photographs at the local war-memorial park.
Recently I revisited the park and was horrified to see the that plaques containing the names of boys killed in South Africa’s border war have all been removed. The wall stands empty, those soldiers’ existence expunged.
No matter what anyone’s particular beliefs or political leanings may be, history and it’s symbols should be left intact.
If we adjust or modify the past to suit ourselves there can never be truth.
But the fact is, like it or not, it is going to happen. Today’s government will massage history and perceptions to suit itself and the government that follows will set about wiping out what this government has done.
In the end, it is going to be up to ordinary citizens to document -- and the best way is by taking photographs -- the life and times in which we now live. Get out there and photograph those monuments, statues, paintings and buildings -- the things that are important to you -- because, if history continues to repeat itself, in all likelihood, the things you record today will soon no longer exist.

Film for important pictures?

2008-11-25T12:59:00.000+02:00

I waited a long time before dipping my toes into the digital photographic waters. In the end it was only because clients wanted a speedier turn-around.
I have not worked for newspapers for years and of late my editorial work was for magazines where turn-around time is not an issue.
My first digital camera was a Minolta Dimage that, in truth I hated. Noise levels at any setting above ISO200 were horrible! Image quality was nothing to write home about and peering into a screen to take the picture was just too foreign.
I quickly went back to shooting on colour negative and having the negatives scanned.
Using a bunch of Nikkormats, an F2 and an old, but much-loved, Voigtlander Prominent, got me labeled a dinosaur but the images those old gems produced were better than anything I saw shot with a digital camera.
However, this year I had no option but to buy a digital SLR.
I chose a Nikon D40, a decision determined by my limited budget and because accepted even my oldest Nikon prime lenses. The fact that I cannot meter or auto focus with them is of no concern. I have always preferred to take incident readings with a hand-held light meter any way.
I will review the D40 at some other time.

Some impressions

Now, after almost a year’s use, a few impressions:
A digital slr is a wonderful and convenient tool. It is fantastic to be able to shoot and know you have the image. There is no need to clean dust spots off the scans and it is convenient to be able to present a client with a finished image in only a minutes.
In my opinion, quality is equal to, or better than, that of 35mm film.
But despite all of that, I still prefer shooting film. To me digital images appear sterile and lifeless -- perfectly exposed for sure, but nonetheless sterile. They’re a bit like comparing real leather with leatherette or a Timex with a Rolex -- the former do the job and in many cases better than the latter but they’re still not the real thing. Nostalgia? A Luddite? Maybe. Probably.
But there is a more practical reason for my preference. I believe the move to digital communications is resulting in the loss of much history and, in the future, the only history left properly recorded will be the “official” history.
As the author of a couple of historical books -- the best know of which is Days of the Generals, the story of South Africa’s Apartheid-era military generals -- I know how much information is gleaned from personal documents, letters, photographs etc. My mother, for example, has letters I wrote from the operational area while serving with the South African Defence Force in Angola in 1975. The letter Billy the Kid wrote to the governor so long ago is still accessible.
In 20 years time will we be able to say that about the emails and digital pictures servicemen and women are sending from Iraq and Afghanistan? I doubt it.

Disappear

Those invaluable, personal accounts will disappear.
Even news agencies acknowledge this fact. In the past, negs and transparencies -- even those not published -- were filed and stored. Now, because of the volume of digital pictures shot, those not used, are deleted and gone forever.
Of course images can be stored on CDs, DVDs and hard drives but right now, I sit in my office with a draw of stored documents saved on floppy disks. Maybe I should have kept the computer I used to write those disks!
I wonder about the thousands of weddings and special occasions that were shot on Betamax video tapes and can only imagine how difficult it must be to relive those moments.
I think there is a strong case to be made to shoot important events and occasions on film.

What do you think?