A year in review

 

 

So long 2022...here comes 2023

It is always worth reviewing where you have come from, to give you clues where you are going, and I have to say for me in photography terms 2022 has been....

Absolutely awful

I have been thinking long and hard about why and what top do about. In any creative art, slumps are to be expected, but this one feels different. For starters, this has been far longer than normal, but I think also I am in a different place in my life and therefore have fewer avenues to fix it. For the first time in many years, I am seriously wondering whether to give up photography, at least for a while.

So what's wrong, and how do I fix it?

1. Quality

 

 

Quality is always subjective. How you feel about your photos will always depend on your mood at the time, but I cannot point to any image that I am truly happy with. It feels like I have reached a plateau, and I am not sure how to move on. 

The previous years have all been about improvement. Every year I have felt I have made some progress, either in how I take images or expanding into other areas. This year, my images have either felt derivative or I have not produced that memorable photo. I have tried other techniques, but nothing has really stuck.

Now, part of this is the Adam and Eve effect. In the early years I really did not understand what I was doing, so any half decent image seemed good if not miraculous. Now I have suckled on the apple of knowledge and I have a good idea of what is a good and bad image, and mine just do not meet my expectations. In truth, I am my worst critic, but that does not mean I'm wrong.

So my worry is that there is no next level. That my photography is doomed to not improve or, worse, decline as I lose heart. 

2. Opportunity

 

 

One way I found of getting out of a funk is just to go somewhere new. I have been places this year such as Cornwall, Robin Hoods Bay and Snowden, but they were all family holidays or with other people. However, one realization that I have come to accept is that I just don't like taking photographs with other people. I have to be there in my time and my schedule. I just cannot do that with anyone being around me, I always feel the need to moderate my time demands, move with the flow etc. 

 

 

 

As an example, I spent 2 days in Snowden and a day on Dinorwic slate quarry. I have wanted to go back for a number of years, but because I was with my daughter, I felt I could not just abandon her and go off or spend any time more than the minimum taking photos.

So why did I not just go off somewhere? There were a number of reasons why not, but I have just found myself de-motivated to try. This is strange because we felt huge frustrations during the Covid lockdown years, and you would have thought with restrictions dropped we would bound into action, but instead I seem infected with a weird agoraphobia like an animal constrained to a small enclosure who is so institutionalized that they are incapable of leaving their safe space. I am not alone in this, other photographers I have talked to seem to have suffered the same effect

Then there are the frustrations of when I am given an opportunity, I don't use it to it full potential. The big one this year was my nieces wedding. For me, weddings are the pinnacle of a photographer's challenge, and here was someone who had decided not to employ a professional. It felt that my photography journey had been building up to this. I could have stepped in, taken charge and made sure the important shots were taken, but I did not and missed not only an important opportunity but also a great gift for my niece.  Yes, sure I took some nice images, but I could have done so much more and that frustration has really been eating me for the last 6 months.

3. Circumstance

My life has changed a lot over the last couple of years. Firstly, the bit of my life that pays for the hobby has been required to take on new responsibilities. This means that I have less time to devote to my photography. 

 

Secondly, we got a dog. Now don't get me wrong, I love the little furball, but I was not keen to get one since I knew it would disrupt my life. My family assured me that they would be taking responsibility for walks etc, which did not happen, pretty well instantly. So that means that my mornings are often taken up with dog walking. So why is that a problem? Again, I have found I cannot mix photography and dog care. As I said, I am not a social photography and I find I cannot mix them. Worse, my wife feels that the walking should be done together, meaning I cannot sneak off an hour before sunrise, without pained looks from both my dog and my wife

 Solutions

So what to do about this? 

 The first would be to just accept the inevitable and give up. Take up another hobby where at least I have a chance of making progress. Apart from the fact that I would have either a ton of expensive kit lying around, or require extensive eBay visits, I don't feel ready to give up yet. Alternatively, a sabbatical may help me to get my thoughts in order, but I do like photography and I do feel that I need to take images, even just for me. And maybe that's the problem.  Perhaps it is not the taking of images that is the issue, but instead comparing them with my own and others. Maybe I should just start taking images for myself rather than others

Secondly, buy more kit. There is always a part of any photographer that says I could have taken that image if only I had a better camera/lens. While deep down I know it is not true, different kit does open new opportunities that may create a spark. For example, I am painfully aware that my present main camera autofocussing of moving objects is behind the curve. Also, I would like to do more multiple exposures, but its implementation is poor. As for lenses, I would like a better macro, ultra-wide angle and walk around lens. At the same time, I also know I have too much kit. For example, I have a 56 mm lens which I just do not use. However, this way, dragons lie. Spending yourself out of a slump may just result in an expensive slump.

Get out more. I have to break my inertia and go places purely for photography. Basically, I need to commit myself to going, warn my nearest and dearest that no is not an option and put my family on dog sitting duty. Problem is, even as I write this I feel the inertia creeping back in, but it is something I must commit too

Finally, I need a long term project.  One of my failures over the last year is to find a project I can work towards. Projects help you focus on the task, drown out the noise and gives you blinkers to ignore obstacles. I have tried and failed to start projects this year, but I need to find one to carry me into the new year and beyond.

So if anyone has any suggestions on how to learn to love photography again? Answers on a post card

 

 

Nostradamus part deux

 

It is almost 8 years to the day that I made some predictions on the future of cameras and photography. 

When I reviewed them in 2015, I rated my reviews and in truth my scoring was mixed, however 7 years have passed, so I thought it would be worth revisiting those predictions

So was I dead wrong, or was a just ahead of my time? do my predictive powers hold up or am I just another wannabe prophet? 

To find out read on...

2014 Predictions

1. Mirror-less cameras will continue to make in-roads into the professional market, taking market share from DSLR's, even at the top end.

When I made this prediction in 2014, the first high-end full frame mirrorless cameras, such as the Sony A7R II, were just coming on the market,

Reading the comments on forums like dpreview, there were many who doubted that such cameras could make in-roads into the established DSLR manufacturers. It was said that focusing was not good enough, battery life was poor and there was a lack of lens choice. Also, electronic viewfinders were criticized when compared to optical viewfinders on SLR's that they had poor resolution and had lags when tracking and when the camera fired, the EVF would black out.

8 years on, and it is clear that mirrorless has now taken over from DSLRs. Autofocus, for a long time the Achilles heel of mirrorless cameras, has matched or even surpassed DSLR models, and have added features such as eye and animal detect maening even in areas like sport and wildlife where DSLR's reinged supreme, mirrorless cameras are now common.

The EVF's have increased resolution to the point that they are the equal optical viewfinders, with a high refresh rate meaning black out and lag are virtually eliminated They also have the benefit of the extra viewfinder information that they contain and the ability for you to see what the actual photo will look like before you take the image

Even lenses are not a problem. Sony filled out their range with a combination of in-house manufacture and encouraging third party support, while Canon and Nikon provided adapters to allow mirrorless cameras to use legacy glass,

In 2015, I gave myself 8/10, but today it is not hard to argue that I deserve

10/10

 
2. Nikon and Canon will produce their 1st full frame mirror-less cameras. Nikon's especially will not gain much market share due to commercially driven design compromises.

 In 2015, it was felt that Nikon and Canon were still very much betting their future on DSLR's. This in turn gave Sony a free run to compete with big 2 cameras manufactures by developing their range of full frame mirrorless cameras. 

 For a long time Nikon and Canon were in denial, however the writing was on the wall, and Nikon eventually produced its first full frame mirrorless body in 2018, and Canon following soon after. 

Since then, it is clear both manufacturers see the future as mirrorless, and the future of any more DSLR development severely in doubt.

To credit Nikon, its 1st foray into mirrorless was very good and managed to stem the market share loss to Sony. However, unlike Sony and Canon, Nikon relies heavily on camera sales, and it does not have deep pockets. Developing and maintaining both the mirrorless and DSLR lines must have been expensive for Nikon. Also, due to the delay to entering the market means that Sony are now equal in terms of market share in the high-end areas, and Sony continues to be aggressive in its development strategy

Nikon on the other hand has history and intense customer loyalty to fall back on, but it remains to be seen whether Nikon can survive in this new world where it cannot share out the market equally with Canon

In 2015, I gave myself a dismal 0/10, but now...

9/10

3. There will not be much increase in maximum pixel counts in cameras. Instead, efforts will be made to increase the sensitivity of existing sensors by going full frame with fewer pixels on mid-range cameras

One of the certainties of the 2015 was that the camera megapixel war would continue unabated. At the time, 20MP was common, but cameras with 40MPwere coming onto the market.

Today, high MP is not seen as important. The sweet spot of APC is still around 20MP, but Sony full frame have gone as high as 60 Mpixels on its latest and greatest, which is not that much more than the Sony A7R 45 Mpixels of 2018. If you want 100 MPixel you will need to invest in high end, medium format cameras, which at best are niche products

This slowing of megapixel growth has been driven by 3 factors.

Firstly, is the law of diminishing return. The increased in resolution between 45 Mpixel camera and a 60 Mpixel camera is actually quite small, and at the same time it increases costs, the dependency on lens design, and camera stabilization etc. You will not see much benefit in this sort of increases of sensor pixel count while at the same time it increases the demand on storage and post-processing effort

Secondly, is the rise in computational photography. This has negated some of the resolution benefits of higher resolution sensors. Many cameras offer some manner of pixel shift capability, where the camera takes 4 images and combines them to quadruple the resolution. While the implementation in many cases is less than optimal, it is often an easier and cheaper way to get the increased resolution in those rare occasions when it is actually needed. Computation photography will no doubt improve removing, much of the need for higher resolution sensors

Finally, is the rise in video. Almost all cameras now promote their video capabilities as much as their photographic ones. It used to be 4K photography was the norm, but now high-end cameras are pushing 8K recording. However, video performance is dependent on how fast you can read from the sensor. Recording 120 frames at 8K means you need to shift the data out very fast. Even more important, the faster you read the sensor, the fewer effects like rolling shutter you get. However, the more pixels you have, the slower the read-out gets, meaning cameras have to resort to cropping the sensor.

Instead of increased pixels, we have seen improvements in both the readout speed and sensitivity of the sensor by changes in the sensor architecture, such as back side illumination chips that allow more light to be captured and read more quickly. These in turn have produced cameras which are almost ISO invariant in that even at high sensitivity they are creating little or no noise in the images.

In 2015, I gave myself 1/10, today....

Score 8/10

4. Sony will continue to indicate their continued support of the Alpha series  DSLR's, while doing bugger all to actually back up the claim by filling out the product range with a model between the A57 and A77II. In the meantime, they will produce 2 new mirrorless cameras, the A7S II and the A7R II.

To be honest, this was a no-brainer. The A-Series DSLR was based on technology bought when Sony took over Minolta which introduced a split screen that part of the light went to the sensor and part to the EVF. It allowed Sony to create a camera with some of the capabilities of a mirrorless DSLR, but with the cost of reduced light to the sensor. It was clear however that it was a stop gap solution and the future was pure mirrorless as long as the technology challenges could be worked out.

The complication was that although the writing was on the wall, for a long time Sony denied that the line was dead. Clearly now it was a commercial decision to ensure return of investment from the lens. The last camera, the Sony A99 II being brought out on Sept 2016, even then Sony refused to confirm the death of the line leaving many Sony DSLT users to hoping for an upgrade and production continued until 2020 when Sony was finally admitted it would be killing off the line and concentrating on their pure mirrorless cameras. 

You would have thought that the cameras would now be junk, but a Sony A99 II will still set you back £2500 on fleabay, so obviously there is still some love out there, and of course a lot of legacy glass.

Score at the time was 6/10, but now

Score 10/10


5. High-end cameras to use more smartphone technology in their OS. Not only the ability to upload photos via mobile networks, but also download apps to add new functionality to the camera. Also, it would be great if cameras opened up their SDK, so it allowed programming of new functionality. Why limit yourself to 5 stop HDR where you could expand your camera to do 10 stops and focus stacking at the same time. Preferably using some sort of graphical programming environment. (This was not mine originally but borrowed from Mark Abeln, but was too good not to include)

Today, the majority of photography is taken on mobile phones. Mobile phone cameras have grown from a toy to a serious photographic tool that has killed the small digital camera market. 

To overcome the inherent disadvantages of lens and sensor of mobile phone cameras, phone designers have added computational photography techniques such as combining multiple images to reduce noise and increase dynamic range. 

Not only that, but on a mobile you can add apps to customize the phones, process your images on the device, update your images to social media together with location info. They even allow you to make phone calls :)

It seemed obvious at the time that camera manufacturers would have to embrace some of these new technologies and build them into the cameras. However, that has singularly failed to happen, with camera OS showing little change to the one in 2015

I recently reviewed a Samsung Galaxy Camera I was given. Despite being almost 10 years old, I was blown away of how modern it felt, with a huge rear screen, mobile connectivity and apps. This should of been the future of all cameras, but for some reason design and innovation has stalled in camera design. I always think that it is a sign that designers have run out of ides where they start going down the retro route like the Nikon fc.

Sony did try having a app store for a while, but basically blew it by making it a closed shop. However the argument to have the ability to extend your camera or customise its functionality is a powerful one, and it seems only the conservative elements in camera design are stalling it happening. 

For example on my camera I can set ISO limits, but they are crude. What I want is the ability to set a ISO limit, a speed limit and a aperture limit. I want them to cut in at certain light levels, so I can say ISO 100, speed 1/100 Aperture F8 is the limit, but when it gets darker it can go to ISO 400 etc. 

The other big area of mobile technology is connectivity. For example not many cameras provide a headphone jack, because the are large ane unweildy. Why then do cameras not provide bluetooth audio? It seems a no brainer, but no camera on the market offers it

While some connectivity to the cloud is offered, cameras are still a closed area with limited outside access and connectivity. They also provide little customisation both in the camear operation and adding extra functionality via a app store

Any way my score the was 1 out of 10, today dissappointingly it is still

1 out of 10

Conclusion

So 7 years on, it seems the majority of my predictions have been borne out. So waht will happen in the next 7 years?

Thsi will be the subjectb of another blog when I have looked in my crystal balls and consulted my tarot cards..

coming soon.

Forty Farms - A review

 

I first became aware of Amy Bateman through twitter photographic competitions such as Wexmondays. I had had a few small successes and feeling pretty smug, but some person with a handle @Croftfoot kept consistently kept getting in the top 3. I sort of assumed initially that she was a professional photographer, but as I learned more about her, we found out she was someone just starting in the world of photography with no formal training who just happened to have a natural flair for the subject.

Over the years I have crossed paths with Amy a number of times at things like the photo show, and we also got her to do an online talk to my camera club, and in the process learned a little of her backstory. 

She started out as a physio therapist, married a lake district farmer, and gave up her chosen career to have children, then started in photography as a hobby to do something to fill the hours between school runs. 

It is clear that she is one of those people who seem to do well in anything they set her mind too. Normally that would them incredibly irritating, however this is mitigated somewhat by the fact that in person she turns out to be actually a very nice person.

Spotting her talent early meant that I have followed her career trajectory with great interest. So when she announced she had a book coming out, I of course ordered a copy. 

This is the review of that book

Forty Farms

When I put my order in, I had sort of assumed that it would be just your standard photo book of the sort that I have many of. 

The first hint that this book was different was when it dropped through the letter box. Normally, photo books hit the ground with a soft "thwap". This one arrived with a loud crack and the complaint from the nearby British Geological survey that there had been a minor earthquake in the area.

After unboxing and opening the book, I realized this was not only a book containing photos, but also a documentary, analysis and treatise of Lake District farming.

The book covers 40 farms in and around Cumbria, from Barrow-in-Furness to Carlisle, from one family small holdings to giant conglomerates. In it, Amy has interviewed the farm residents in length and laid out a description covering pretty well all the aspects of farming in Cumbria. 

It is clear from reading the interviews that Amy's used her position as someone inset with the Cumbria farming community to gain the trust of the farmers and gain privileged access to the subjects. As a result, the book covers a vast array of subjects, from the farm dwellers themselves to the actual business of farming. 

In many ways, the timing of this book is providential. Through a combination of climate change, Brexit and generally people's relationship with the countryside, farming is going through a tsunami of changes, but one thing you get from the book is that many of the farmers are here not out to get rich but are motivated by a sense of connection with the land and a belief in themselves and their own destiny. You also find that most farming is hard, unyielding work, only partly compensated by the sense of achievement. That is not to say there is any sense of self-pity, just an acceptance of the reality. 

One of the impressions of people who are not in farming is that all farmers and farming are the same, and farmers speak with one voice. Something that stood out from the book is how far from the truth this is, with farmers expressing a wide range of attitudes from things as critical as breeding strategies to the effect of Brexit on farming.  It is clear that farming is like any community, highly stratified and diverse, and the book lays out the differences well, and shows the tensions within the farming community on things like land access.

The attitude of farmers to hikers and walkers accessing their land is an interesting subject, and as someone who often hikes is both a concern and interest. In places like the Lake District there will always likely to be tension since it is an area of both entrenched farming and increased leisure commercialization. These two uses are not always happy partners, and the attitude from farmers ranges from frustration to those who feel that tourism brings in benefits that can be used to boost farm income. Of course the other issue is the that farmers are cash rich, but money poor and there is always pressure to sell off land for development in such a sought after location. Again the book sets out both the issues and the attitudes of the farmers

Interestingly, the author decided to include her own farm in the book. This gives a personal insight into her and her husbands' life, and perhaps a motivation in writing the book itself. One of the interesting point is that although the farm has been in the family for over a hundred years, Colin, Amy's husband, comes from an academic background and is not your traditional farmer. Again, this highlights that few of the farmers are actually dyed in the wool (sic) farmers, with many having careers outside the industry before deciding to give it a go, so going against the idea that farmers are all traditionalists against any change. For example, on the author's farm there is very much the idea that nature must be worked with and not against.

As someone who struggles to even grow sunflowers, it provides a deep dive into the world of farming. I must admit I am still struggling to tell a Hogg from a Gimmer, but that just a sign on how much information has been packed in. It is definitely not a book that you can flick though, but you will need to return to many times.

For a first book, the level of journalism is impressive as is the attitude of the author to let the interviews tell the story and let the reader make up their own mind, rather than use it as a pulpit to try and impose some world view. 

May contain photos

I should also perhaps mention the photos, since this is a photographic blog. 

It is clear that since Amy started picking up a camera, she has expanded her repertoire from landscape, to take in animal, people, documentary and drone photography. In fact, it is hard to think of a photographic genre which this book does not cover (although there is a lack of ICM :) ), and it is clear that Amy has expanded her skill set to become an excellent generalist. 

Most of the photos are of course there to tell the story, but even then some images are slipped in that would stand out on their own, and of course we have some of her best known work, such as the sheep being driven down from the hills. 

Forty Farms Later

In the last page, Amy highlights some of the issues facing farming today, such as the uncertainty of government policy on farming, the changing of government subsidies post-Brexit and the reduction in emphasis from an encouraging bio diversity. Of course, farmers are not immune to the effects of outside events, such as gas prices effects on fertilizer prices. 

As she notes, farmers are not strangers to crisis and change (If you want a low stress life, farming is definitely not your profession) and it is a profession that weeds out quickly the weak, leaving people who are tough, self-reliant and determined. However, everything has a breaking point, and it is easy to forget how critical farming is in Britain; Not only in feeding the nation, but also con how we manage the countryside and strive to create a balance with nature. 

Often, farmers and the public are cast as two sides, in conflict with each other. However, this book shows that farmers and the wider general public have much in common and should work together to meet our common goals.  

This was not the book I was expecting, but it was definitely one I am pleased I purchased. I have come away with a different appreciation of farmers, farming, beautifully wrapped in gorgeous photos of the Cumbrian landscape and farming community. 

The one thing I hope is that there is a follow-up one day, continuing the story of the families involved. Did they succeed? Were their hopes and fears realized?  It calls for a follow-up called 40 Farms Later, 10 years down the line.

What this book highlights is the need for a narrative and outreach to fight the myths and misinformation on both sides. Maybe this is a role someone should pay Amy to do. It is maybe not something she has ever considered doing, but with her track record, I'm pretty sure she would become very good at it.

Forty Farms can be ordered from Amy Bateman's website

Street View

Last week we had a great photography club talk from Brian Lloyd Duckett. Brian, apart from providing a superb photography club talk, is a wonderful and talented street photographer and gave great advice for anyone wanting to have a go with this genre. 

One of the things he suggested was that we should watch the documentary "Finding Vivian Maier". After finding it on Amazon Prime, I heartily echo that recommendation. It was one of the most engaging, thought-provoking, and emotional roller coaster documentaries I have ever watched on photography and made me think really hard about my relationship with photography.

Just to add to small world theory, at the same time this article appeared on a popular blog page. 

This was a timely reminder that of all the photographic genres, street photography is one thats divides photographers. One of the street photographers (although I am not sure that he would use that term) I greatly admire, Marc Davenant, chimed in on Twitter (For those reading in 2023. Twitter was a popular platform for expressing opinions :) )that

"This is a terrible take on the ethics of photographing people who are experiencing homelessness. It isn’t rocket science. There are virtually no circumstances where non-consensual photography of homeless people on the street is acceptable or ethical."

While I hate to argue against people I admire and who probably had more time to form a reasoned opinion, I do also have a low tolerance for definitive black/white opinions on subjects that has a lot of greys. It is something I have thought about a bit, so I felt it was time to tie my colours to the mast (too many colours metaphors- Ed)

256 Shades of Grey

As I said, opinions on street photography, even among photographers, are very polarizing (see what I did there :) ). Any article on somewhere like a site such as dpreview on street photography, will result in a fair proportion of comments saying things like street photography should not be allowed in any circumstances. Even of those that concur that street photography as some value as a genre, will put some caveats that some should be prohibited. These are not the kind of discussions you generally get on say landscape photography.

The dividing line seems to fall on one's perception or feeling about on how much an individual's should expect on a right to privacy.

There are also various cultural barriers to be considered. In live in the UK and the law is clear that in public there is no automatic right to privacy, while in other places it can be a legal minefield, going from general acceptance to chemical castration (looking at you South Korea). These in many ways echo the societies view of privacy. Even in the UK, there are some who feel that street photography should be banned altogether, or at least require an element of consent (ignoring the legal complexity of such a law, enforcement, and logistical impossibilities of consent of everyone taking an image). There is also the consideration that people seem to make a distinction between mobile and camera photography.

One of the other problems with street photography is the tendency for it to be conflated with other less salubrious photographic endeavours. In the public eye there seems a short step from genuine social photography, to paparazzi, tabloid journalism, and even worse, things like up-skirting. That is even before we consider the ethical issues of taking pictures of minors. In many ways, taking pictures of homeless people and children are lumped together and while in the UK, it is not that it is illegal to take pictures of either without consent, whether it is ethical to do it is left to the photographer's own conscience and moral map to provide an answer.

However, there is a counter-argument.It can be argued that a well taken, considered street photograph is in itself a far more important and valuable document than one taken in any other genre. 

A street photograph can capture the changing face of society, and the eyes looking back at us ask us questions about are own mortality and our place in the world. 

When I think about the images with the most impact, it is not Ansel Adams, etc that I consider, but the Diane Arbus's, Dorothea Lange's etc. These individuals captured images that more than any defined a point in time in society, in a way that no other medium could possibly hope to capture. For example, You would have to be a Conservative MP or a Fox newscaster not to feel strong empathetic emotion to images such as Migrant Mother.  

Great street photography allows you to look into the eyes of another soul, and makes you ask questions about yourself. A long time ago I did a video called Ghosts of Castle Donington, after finding a book of old photos of the village I lived in. While it was fun lining up the old images with the modern village, what really spoke to me was the people in them, all long gone, whose steps I was following. It was a way of making sure of their spirit lived on.

It also often the only evidence that an individual ever existed. Some of the power of Vivian Maeir's photos was not that they were taken of the rich and famous, but they were often of those who formed the underclass of society, unseen and unwanted, but each individual a vessel containing their own love, hates, desires and wants. Street photography is at its best a leveller because it elevates the common masses. (It should also be said that the curse of street photography is that it's value is often only really measurable long after the image was taken)

Also, at its very best, street photography can be a powerful tool for social change. If you are lucky (lucky??- Ed) enough to go to North Korea, you are restricted about where you can take photo's, because the authorities want to control the narrative and it will ruin the curated image of a socialist paradise.  Photographers such as Dorothy Lange work also showed the world the devastation of the depression on working people, and highlighted that the people affected were real, not just faces in a crowd. Such images have become a powerful totem in the battle against ideologies which belittle or downplay individuality.

For these reasons, street, social or whatever we may want to call it is invaluable and so are the rights to express it.

However, we still have the question, as to how far you should be allowed to go. Should there be limits, either legal or through forced social pressure, about which images you should be allowed to take?

Let's start with the statement that there are virtually no circumstances where non-consensual photography of homeless people. Whenever I hear such statements, my brain cannot start with thinking of counterarguments.

 For example, what if someone took images of all the homeless people in London, and played them on a continuous loop outside the House of Commons in an effort to improve social conditions. Would the greater good outweigh the loss of privacy of the individual? I think most of us would agree that it would

Therefore, my biggest issue with such arguments about whether homeless people should not be photographed is that in doing so, it creates a form of censorship. Do we want future generations to see the world around us as it truly is, or in a watered down North Korea way, only what we find morally acceptable?

Going back to the original article, the author made it clear that the purpose was not to take images of homeless people, but to put them in the context of the disparate society they lived in, and in some way to highlight the issues in a society that seems to abandoned them. I really cannot see the problem with this, and I struggle to understand the anger with such images. I have less of a problem of people taking photos of the homeless than I do of the fact there are homeless people around to take photos of. In short, why shoot the messenger.

However, I agree that there has to be boundaries. My red line is when images of homeless people are taken to primarily profit the taker.  If you are going around taking images of homeless people purely to fill your portfolio or to sell books, then your moral compass needs re-setting. When we take images of anyone, we must first treat them as human beings and not objects.

In the end, these moral questions are messy, and it is up to each individual to work their way through the maze. Personally, in these situations, I fall back to the  good book. 

But not the religious type. (Omnipotent deities seem to have remarkable little useful to say on the moral dilemma's of modern artistic mediums.)

Instead, I refer you to late great Terry Pratchett

There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment on the nature of sin.

"And what do they think? Against it, are they?"

 

"It's not as simple as that. It's not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray."

 

"Nope."

 

"Pardon?"

 

"There's no grays, only white that's got grubby. I'm surprised you don't know that. 

 

And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."

Back to basics (Fuji Instax Mini Evo Review)

 

 

Taken with a Fuji XT-2

(All images were taken with the Fuji Instax Mini Evo, unless otherwise stated) 

(For a more complete review see the following video)

 

Film photographers are a bit like steam train enthusiasts. They preach how great the technology is, but gloss over the reason we don't use them any more was because they were difficult to use, expensive  and to be honest a pain in the butt.

Being old enough to span both film and digital cameras, I have boxes of photos, all taken and printed at great cost, and with a few exceptions, all pretty awful.  It was only when I went to digital, that I started really getting to grips with photography and ability to learn from my mistakes were an important part of that (sure about that? - Ed). Film I found unforgiving, and it is so hard to correct your deficiencies when you can only take 36 photos, the results of which you only saw a week later.

Saying all that, however, there is still something about a physical image which will always trump a digital one. Posting an image on Facebook will never have the cachet of handing someone a real object. It is just a pity that film does not have the immediacy of digital. Actually, that is not quite true. Since the late 40's, when Edwin Land brought out Polaroids, there has been a subset of photography that is both analog and immediate. 

 

 

This year I went to the wedding of the century (no, nothing to do with the Beckhams's), when my niece gets married. Of course outside the immediate family, this is a non-event, and my niece having her own way of doing things, and did not want presents, but still I thought I should do something. Obviously taking photos is one thing, but it felt out of kilter with the wedding, so I thought why not get one of those Instax cameras, take a picture of the guests,  stick it in a book  and present it at the end...job done.

One issue however was that my success rate with Instax cameras are hit and miss. I wanteda way of getting good photo prints without wasting film. One way would be to use my phone and get a Bluetooth printer, but that required carring two devices and I was looking for the analog look. 

Then Fuji announced the Instax Mini Evo. This combined a digital camera with a Fuji film printer, meaning I could review the photos before printing them out. 

This is the review of that camera

The review

 

 

The camera comes in a small box, together with a camera strap, an instruction manual and just in case you don't alreday have 1000's of the things already, a micro USB charging cable.

Things that the camera does not come with is Micro SD card, and film. The former is excusable, since most of us have loads lying around, and also there is a 40 image in-built memory in the camera. However, the lack of film is a strange omission. The whole point of the camera is to get you to print images, so you would expect they would put at least a 10 shot pack in for the price. This is a bit of a bummer if you receive one on Christmas day, then you have to wait until the shops open to get your physical film. 

Also in the box a user manual, consisting of the usual text in 30 languages, with only 4 pages on any use. I do wonder why they bother, really. Stick the manuals online, add more content and save a tree!

The manual uses a small part of the contents to sell the virtues of the product. Apparently it has the highest image quality of and Instax camera (4.9 MP!!!!!). You can use over a 100 effects!! (more on that later). It also has a Luxury classic design!!!

It was the last one that got me. I am not sure what goes for luxury classic design where the manual writer lives, but be assured, this camera is not a Leica. Actually, the feel is more plastic toy than quality camera. This is not helped by trying to do the two things most essential to the camera. 

Firstly charging. The camera has a fixed battery, and has to be charged via USB. The port to get to it, is behind a flimsy panel, which will almost certainly break off at some point. Why they could not just stick it on the outside is beyond me. To make it worse, the camera will not operate while charging, so no plugging it in to print off. To me, this is a big mistake. If you are at a party and the battery starts running down, the ability to run it from an external battery pack seems to me essential.

Secondly, is inserting the film. Fuji have gone to great lengths to make the camera look like a analog camera. You would have thought therefore the film mechanism would be like film cameras of yore with the film winder pulling out. No, it is a tiny lever on the back, which is virtually impossible to operate. It takes about 2 minutes to get in. Again, since printing is the primary function of the device, you would have thought they would have come up with a mechanism a bit more slick.   

Then we come to the design of the camera itself, Fuji camera designers are the Jacob Rees-Mogg of the camera world. For them, camera design reached its nadir in 1970 and nothing will change their minds. So the camera has the look and feel of a Kodak Instamatic. Emphasizing this is the lens which is 28mm f2.0, fixed aperture, fixed focus affair.  The camera comes with no lens cap to speak of, so obviously the designers are not greatly concerned about damage or knocks. Let's face it, this camera will be used almost exclusively for selfies and party pictures, so the lens optics are not going to be stretched too much.

The front of the camera has a large on-off switch, a small flash unit, a selfie mirror(!!!) and two shutter buttons that it can be used in landscape and portrait mode, which is a nice touch. The buttons fall into hands nicely. Less pleasant is the slab face of the camera, meaning there is danger of fingers obscuring either the flash or the lens. Some sort of finger rest would have been useful.

Rounding off the front controls is the dial around the  lens. This you would have thought could have been an aperture dial, but actually lets you choose the photo effects.

On the top of the camera is a large rotary dial. This allows you to choose colour effects that can be applied to your image. Also on top is a lever, like a film advance lever of old, which initiates the printing. This is nicely implemented, but you do feel that the majority of the design budget was spent on this, not leaving much for the rest of the camera design.

Completing the top is a fake flash shoe. Why this is here, other than to assuage the Fuji design teams love of Nikon F3's, I have no idea. To be honest, I am surprised they did not add some of those flashcubes to complete the Kodak 126 Instamatic homage

On the back is a reasonable LCD and menu buttons. There is no EVF of course, however a simple glass viewfinder would have been useful and would have added to the whole retro vibe. 

The controls at the back provide access to the stored images and a menu button to access things like date/time, print settings etc. Some surprises include face detection, and firmware upgrade functions suggesting that some form of autofocus takes place and that Fuji at some point expect to upgrade the software (Maybe to add video capability :) - Ed ) 

The back includes a d-pad that allows access to the camera settings, such as self-timer, flash settings (off, on, auto, high speed sync :) ), a macro option  and white balance. Probably the most useful is the EVF button, since with a fixed aperture it is pretty well the only way to control over exposure (Strangely +ve EVF is on the left, while -ve is on the right, which seems wrong). It also allows access to a digital zoom, which is as about as useful as any digital zoom. None of these buttons are customizable,  which is a pity because it would have been nice to control the exposure compensation directly via the D-Pad or the front dial

Finally, on the right-hand side of the camera is a plastic tripod mount. Strangely there is not one on the bottom, so if you want  to take self timed landscape images you will need to find a table or cushion to rest the camera on.

And that is pretty well it. The photos can be stored on a both micro-SD and internal memory can take up to 40 photos. It is not clear what the point of the internal memory is, since the SD card would of been perfectly usable on its own. To get the images of the camera  you either have to extract the SD card (not easy accessible ) or Bluetooth since there is no USB download method (The USB is to charge the camera only)

The camera itself has an ISO range of 100 to 1600 and a shutter speed range of 1/4s to 1/8000s, although these are automatically selected. It would have been nice to have control over the speed.

Remote Access

 

 

Fuji have taken a lot of grief, quite rightly, on their apps. However, the phone app actually works quite well, allowing the transfer of images and using the camera as a printer. Unfortunately this tends to highlight the camera quality with camera photos looking superior to the native ones.

Camera Effects

 

 

The manual states that there are 100 effects. While that is strictly true, they get to that figure by combining both the image effects and the colour effects, both of which are independently settable. However, it is unlikely you will use some of the effects with certain colour modes such as Sepia or Monochrome, so the actual usable combinations are far less.

The image effects are probable the less usable and include such classics as 

• Vignette - create a darkened border
  
• Soft Focus - Nylons effect
  
• Blur - Blur the edges
  
• Fisheye - create a false fisheye effect
  
• Colour Shift - purple fringing
  
• Light Leak - poor lens effect
  
• Mirror - Create a mirror effect down the middle
  
• Double Exposure - self-explanatory
  
• Half Frame - two images, one in each half of the frame
  

 To be honest apart from the last two I cannot see any good reason to use any of these.

The colour effects change the colour profile of the camera. Again, apart from Vivid and monochrome, the rest seem rather superfluous and is the kind of things that happen when software developers have too much time on their hands.

The effect dials beig so prominent are easy to knock. There is a quick reset button, but it does raise the argument whether these controls should be so prominent compared to the standard exposure camera controls. 

In truth while fun to play around with and giving some creative opportunities, pretty well all thse effects could be applied in post, and I think people will get pretty bored of them fast.

Usage

 

 

The camera itself is pretty well point and shoot. The LED screen provides a reasonable view, but I would of liked a simple optical one as well for when the light was bright. 

Generally I found the images slightly over exposed requiring  the exposure comp to be turned down a notch, however with no histogram features it si hard to work out whe the image is over or under exposed. It would of been great however if that could of been controlled from the top function. 

 

Of course you have little or no control over the image exposure time, ISO or aperture

The printing function is very slick. You select your image from the back, press the film lever and 5 seconds later it prints. To get a developed image takes about 2 minutes. Of course the big benefit of this camera is that you can choose which image to print and therefore not waste film.

The camera has a film indicator on the LED in the form of 10 dots. A number or dedicated LCD counter would of been better

Picture Quality

 

 

The 1st thing to mention here is that this camera is designed primarily to take prints. Therefore any image issues are slightly hidden by the fact the output is supposed to be a small 1,8 x 2.4 inch print.

However since on of the benefits of this camera is that it is also a digital one, that also needs to be taken into account.

In good light, the images are quite pleasing with good colours. However there is limited dynamic range meaning highlights quickly get blown out. As the light gets worse, however it is a different story, with photos quickly falling apart in only average light. Since this is a camera which will get used primarily at indoor parties, that is unfortunate.

 

Of course you have a flash to compensate for this, but this will further use your battery life up. It would also have been better to have a dedicated Flash button on the side of the camera.

As the evening went on, image noise became unacceptable

Conclusion 

 

 One thing that surprised me about this camera is how pleased people were to have the images and it is easy to forget that the Gen-Z  have virtually never dealt or held film. To them images are on their phone, snapchat etc. Having a physical representation is a great novelty. 

In that way the camera  fulfiulled its brief, and was a great success at the wedding. 

However there are caveats....

The 1st one is the price. This camera has a £100 price premium over the other Instax cameras. For that you get a slighter higher resolution camera, the ability to store your images and a LED screen.  In truth, it is hard to justify the price premium for those features alone and therefore the camera feels overpriced.

Secondly the question is whether there are better ways  of doing the same thing. Pretty well everyone has a mobile phone camera which is far better than the Instax one. Not only that you can store, edit, transfer via the phone. Therefore apart from having it all in one unit, it is hard to see the advantage of just buying a Instax printer and using your phone rather than using this camera and basically saving £100

Finally, the effects are gimmicks which could of been ditched and instead Fuji could of provided better controls such as a exposure compensation dial and a flash control button. However it did make me think perhaps  that Fuji missed a trick.

One thing Fuji cameras are famed for is there film simulations. Rather than niche effects it would be better to be able to print out a image as Kodak Gold, or Ilford B&W.

In truth I enjoyed this camera more than I thought I would. However Fuji just could not seem to decide whether this is a fun camera or something more serious so priced it at the serious end, but did not back it up with the controls required for you to take control of the image. I think there is something there, but not at this price and design.

For a more complete review see the following video

 

 

Streets of London

 

I blame Harry Styles.

In 1 B.C (Before Covid), my teenage daughter came to me telling me that the Mr Styles was the best singer ever, as well as the best looking and her life would not be complete unless she could go and see him live, and by the way he was playing the NEC Birmingham, would I get tickets to go see him.

I'm a bit of a pushover when either of my daughters request something, so reluctantly I agreed, so spent time fighting with the female teenage population of Europe in a website death-match to gain 2 tickets (one for her and a friend). 

Then the inevitable happened and Covid hit, meaning the concert was postponed for first 3 months, then 6, and then indefinitely. Secretly, I was relieved. Not that I have any issue with Mr Styles music, it's perfectly pleasant, it was more the realisation that somehow I would have had to get my daughter to the NEC, and then pick her up at about 11 O'clock. Now the NEC is about an hour drive which is fine, it's what I would have done  in the intervening 5 hours stuck in the cultural desert of NEC car park that concerned me (slogan - Nothing to do, but at extortionate prices). Still, now with that bullet dodged, I could deal with the other issues such as a global pandemic.

Of course, it would not be that easy. This year, my daughter, now 2 years older, announced that the dates had been rearranged and could she go?

Two problems. Firstly, the NEC date had been nixed, leaving just London or Manchester. Secondly, the new dates were smack in the middle of her A-level dates. This latter issue made it clearly undoable, so we explained how her future came first, how there would be other opportunities, etc, which she all accepted stoicly, accepting the wisdom her parents. 

Like bugger, she did....   

After many tears, we compromised. Manchester was out because she had an exam the next day, but  Wembley was possible because the next exam was not for 4 days. So again I sat in mortal combat to re-arrange the tickets. 

This left the small problem of getting her too and more importantly safely back from the big smoke. 

Train was the obvious answer, since the entire UK rail network concentrated in London. However, while getting there was not an issue, the problem was that the last train North departed at about 10:45. It became abundantly clear that with the concert finishing about 10:30 and a 20-min tube journey, there was no way she was going to get back in time. Missing the train would mean spending 8 hours until the trains started again. There was nothing for it, I would have to drive them down and back on the day; a round trip of 5 hours at stupid O'Clock.

Sometime ago I had vowed never to drive into London, but with no choice, I had to decide a) how to do it and b) what I was going to do for the 5 hours wait as my daughter and friend disappeared off into Wembley. 

Realizing that driving, anywhere near Wembley, would be a big mistake, I came up with a cunning plan of parking at one of the outlying tube stations and let them make their own way there. This I realized gave me an opportunity. I could take my camera and head off into big town and take some cityscape shots. Win-win...

Of course my cunning plan was not as cunning as I thought, finding the car park full, it seemed pretty well everyone North of Watford had the same idea, so I had to drop them off and find some other place to park up. In doing so, it brought back to me why I moved away  from London so many years ago (apart from the insane house prices, which are even more insane now). The living constantly on top of each other means either you have to be very chilled, or constantly on the verge of territorial violence. 

Nothing says this more than car parking. Every space and road is guarded by impossible to decipher parking restrictions saying basically the if you don't live here, bugger off. Still I managed to locate a spot 15-minute walk away, but I spent the day constantly worried that I had missed a sign, or would get back to find my car set on fire by irate residents. 

London Calling

The Shard in all its glory...

Still, I was here, and I had up to 5 hours to myself to take photos. The question is what of? In most cities that is not a great issue, but London is such a treasure trove of sites that days not hours are required to cover it. 

Some time aback I received  Photographing London Vol 1 by George Johnson as a gift, but never had the opportunity to try it out (Note the entire of Scotland is covered in 1 volume of the series, but London requires more...). There was no way I could take the book with me, it was just too heavy, but it gave me the idea of walking the Thames, starting somewhere downstream and ending up at parliament. I would have preferred to go to Canary Wharf, but it felt too far out, so I decided to start at Tower Bridge. So carrying far too many camera lenses I set off on the tube to London Bridge station

Shard loads

Trying a bit of ICM

The Shard captures converging verticles fantastically

The multiverse of madness

Reflections

I always think that Londoner's take their tube system for granted. No other UK city has such a complete transport system, which teleports around the city. It is a modern marvel. Saying that as we got closer to the centre I could not help thinking that after 2 years of lockdown, going back to travelling this way each day must have been a nightmare and no wonder so many wanted to stay working from home. 

I also must admit here I made a mistake.  It has been so long since I have regularly worn a mask, that I did not carry one. But then again, nor did virtually anyone on the tube. It has if the last 2 years sacrifices has been erased from our collective memory. Whether we will come to regret this is to be seen. 

Not many mask wearers

On Arrival, the weather was not the best. Despite being in the middle of a drought and heat wave, that day was cold, slightly damp and the sky was just bland grey. It was clear that this would be a day for B&W photography

Arriving at London Bridge, the 1st challenge was finding the river. You would have thought that this would have been easy, but London hides one of its major landmarks quite effectively. 

One thing that was easy to find was the Shard. It was the closest I had been to it, and it was impressive and a great photographic target. I spent a good 20 minutes playing with some shots and I got a few interesting things out of it. In hindsight I should of concentrated on it, but that was notv the plan

London rising

Framed

Wedding Party

The ever expanding skyline

There are a lot of these bronzes explaining about Chimps.

The old and new Southwark Cathedrals

 

Finally finding the river, I headed off to Tower Bridge. In London, unlike Paris or Berlin, access to the Thames betrays its working roots, meaning access is often interrupted by old wharves and buildings, (now pubs and wine bars), which means that following its course is harder than it should be. 

Maybe it was the long journey, worries about collecting my daughter or just the weather, but I was just not feeling very creative. In hindsight, I perhaps should have just concentrated on one small area (bit like trying everything in a Chinese all-you-can-eat buffet, rather than sticking to the stick chicken). It was 6 O'clock, so I stopped in 5 guys to get a meal in the hope to get me going (slogan - like McDonalds, just slower, more expensive and less tasty), but it only made me feel more sluggish.

I should really just of sat down and took pictures of tourists enjoying London, however I just still feel very self-conscious of being out in a street with my camera. I find there are two types of people in London. Tourists, who are just there to have a good time, and therefore are quite happy to be snapped and locals who see any supposed intrusion on their privacy as something to be defended verbally, or expect something from it. 

 

I met the latter in an underpass by the national theatre. A skate park had been set up and I started taking images of various youths doing tricks. Then one of them told me I should not take pictures without permission. I considered briefly calling him over to educate him on the law on street privacy, and ask him anyway how would I get the permission of 40 strangers, and it was not that sort of photography anyway, but then I realised I would be arguing with a 20+ adult who still spent his life playing on a kid's toy, so I decided to move on. However, that is London. It's Disney World overlayiong Mordor.

My plan was to go into the Tate modern, but it was closed. Of course, no sign actually said that, I was only told when I tried to enter, by a security guard with poor English. A reminder that London is built on cheap immigration and would fall to a quivering heap without fresh blood. Instead, I tried taking some shots on the eponymous Millennium bridge. Problem is, that location has been done to death, so rather than re-create, I moved on (passing a photographer trying to capture the parliament under Westminster bridge shot. I felt like calling out to them "I know what you're doing!")  

 

The eye has it

The covid memorial...

 

I ended up opposite Parliament and I thought after dragging my tripod 5 miles, I should perhaps use it, so I tried some long exposure shots, but it was neither dark enough or enough cloud. 

It was 9 by then, and I had had enough, so I stacked up with the other drones and head back to the car, which fortunately was still there and had not been identified as some foreign particle in the body London. 

All that was left was to pick up my daughter and friend. This did not happen until 12, so I had a fine 2 hours of reading, snoozing and generally worrying about where the hell they were. 

As I waited on Stanmore tube station, the vast herd of tired Harry Styles fans disgorged from the tube and headed up the platform. Of course, my camera was in the car, but it would have made a great shot....

All that was left was a hour journey up the M1 at one in the morning. The good news however was apparently Harry Styles was great... 

And say for you that the sun don't shine?

She's no time for talking
She just keeps right on walking
Carrying her home
In two carrier bags

-- Ralph McTell

Maybe it was 2 years of lockdown, but I feel I am now more anti-social photographer than I was. This is difficult in a city because you will need to deal with people. A whole lot of them. I feel very naked in places like this, and I think a city is one place where I would feel more comfortable in a group.

 Probably the big mistake in London is attempt too much. London is unique in Europe in that it is really about 10 towns put together, each with their own character. If I did it again, I would stake out a small section, and concentrate on that. 

Although I lived just North of London for 3 years, it has always felt alien to me. I have friends who would not live anywhere else, but the whole compression of personnel space, the undercurrent of dog-eat-dog aggression feels just wrong. We are a species evolved to walk the savannah, not all live in the same tree

I don't think I will ever truly be comfortable taking pictures in a city. You either need great self-confidence or little empathy, but it would be nice to try again, although I think not involving a 4-hour drive. 

However I learned again what sort of photography interests me (Spoiler - not the common type), so we never know, if my daughter wants to see Harry Styles 2 tour, I may just volunteer my services again.