I fought the law and...we called it a draw

 

 

Of all the myriad types of photography, the one  I struggle with most is people. 

It does not matter who they are. Friends, family or strangers, the effort of getting them to pose for me just sends my heart palpitating, and I start panicking. This, in turn, means I rush, don't check my settings, etc, and generally get terrible images.

Usually, I get around this by "sniping". Using a long lens so that I don't have to directly deal with the subject. While this has its place, the need to get up close and interact directly with those I am photographing is also an important skill. 

We have had a number of talks this year on people who have done "portrait 100" projects. In this, you go up to a total stranger and ask to take their portrait, and at the same time get a bit of background bio. While the resulting photo may not be up to Annie Leibovitz's standard, anyone doing this should be applauded just for attempting it. 

For me, I cannot think of anything more terrifying. As my wife will tell you, I have a habit of "catastrophising" where I imagine more and more scenarios where things may go horribly wrong. (This is why I insist on arriving at airports 4 hours before departure)My fear with photographing strangers ranges from the simple no from the subject, to naked aggression and physical attack.  

However, many people do it, so as a therapy, I sometimes try and force myself to try it. When I went to Japan, that was my plan. I even had business cards printed out to hand out. I mean, Japanese people are polite, and I had the added advantage of knowing I would never bump into them again. What could go wrong?

In the end, I took one photo like that...and then reverted to type, much to my eternal disgust.

Today I had another opportunity. I have a long-term project on the go that involves recording places and events in my local village. There is one event I really wanted to record that created a challenge. 

Every year, the village hosts a huge rock festival called Download. I wanted to add this, but because I did not have a ticket to go in directly, how was I going to do it? 

In past years, the village would become awash with festival goers, but in recent years, the site has become more self-contained, which means that without a ticket, access would be limited. Therefore, I came up with a cunning plan. I would go to the roads outside and take images of people coming to the festival dressed in their heavy metal get-up. This would kill two birds at once. I would get the images I needed and also practice my portrait techniques.

Initially, this went well. I got a few shots, but I decided to get some shots from the road of the site itself. An important point. I was at no time was I trespassing onto the festival site itself, but I was always on the public roads outside it. (I travelled by bike)

On my travels, I noticed a temporary crossing across the road, which allowed festival goers to cross from the campsite to the festival.  Seeing an opportunity, I parked my bike and started taking some shots. 

This is where it all started going downhill...

 The law of the land

Like all such events, Download employs groups of private marshals and site security. Most of these are zero hour workers, who, whenever I passed them, looked as totally bored and were given the essential jobs of stopping festival goers from parking in private driveways, etc. Maybe this was the issue. Let's face it, festival security is not exactly the chosen career path for high-fliers.  I mean, not many get the chance to mull between brain surgery and event security.

Anyway, I had just parked my bike by the side of the road and had taken a few shots of festival goers passing by, when one of them clocked me. He came over and asked me whether I had permission to take photographs and to stop doing it. What annoyed me was the aggressive attitude and how it was phrased. He came barrelling over and accused me of doing something illegal, and for a while, I thought he was going to manhandle me. 

Generally, I shy away from confrontation, and I really don't want to upset anyone. If anyone came up to me I asked me not to take an image of them, that's fine, but what really pisses me off is someone telling me what I can and cannot do based on their personal belief rather than the law. As photographers, it is an unfortunate necessity to know the law of the land on where you can and where you cannot take photos. Even then, most photographers err on the side of caution and follow both the legal and moral rules. So when some guy comes barrelling up to you and accuses you of doing something illegal, it is very annoying.

The law, when it comes to photography, is clear. On public land, such as a road (apart from some specific restrictions, such as MOD land), there is no restriction on what images you can take. Now there are complications in terms of using such images for commercial purposes, but that's it. So basically, he had no right to tell me what I could and could not take images of.   

This is the 3rd time I've had this issue. The 1st was on the road leading up to Ratcliffe power station, and the second was in Birmingham outside the Rotunda. Apart from the wrongness of it, the rule is applied inconsistently. A full-sized camera is somehow considered some sort of threat, while someone with a mobile is not, even though many mobile phone takes bigger and more detailed images.. If I had stood there with a phone, no one would have batted an eyelid. 

Their 2nd complaint was somehow that I was impinging on the festival goers' personal privacy. Apart from the fact that such a thing did not exist (on a public road), this was a festival. 6 billion images will be taken and shared on social media. My timeline is spammed with millions of images of festival goers. My images are drops in a giant digital ocean. Ironically, if I had a ticket to go in, I assume I would have had carte blanche to take as many images as I liked, so diminishing his argument a fair bit.

Anyway, after a few sharp words, one steward attempted to moderate and defuse it. He asked me why I was taking the images, and I explained I was putting a video together for the village (I might have also suggested this was sanctioned by the parish councils, which is a bit of a white lie), and they backed off, and I moved on. He also suggested that next time, I contact the organisers for permission. It's not the worst idea, but again, it suggests that I needed permission in the 1st place. 

I should have perhaps followed someone else's suggestion that I wear a high-vis jacket and where my Melbourne photography club lanyard around my neck. In hindsight, I should have got a lanyard made up saying official photographer and just announced that I was sent there to take photos for someone official. 

The demon photographer 

 Unfortunately, people who follow the hobby of photography seem to have been demonised in recent years. As I said, most photographers are like me. Keen to follow the law, both written and moral and generally just want to get on practising their hobby. They are a threat to no one. While taking a mobile phone picture is considered acceptable, as soon as a normal camera is brought out, there is almost palpable fear that somehow we are about to steal part of someone's soul. 

I get really irritated when people suggest that, as photographers, we should only take images of landscapes and inanimate objects, so we do not antagonise people. I understand people have rights and concerns, and I, like so many like, spend a lot of time ensuring we respect them.

However, I, as a photographer, also have rights, and such rights cannot be curtailed by someone who feels he has power because he is wearing a lanyard.

All my purpose was, was to record an event for others to enjoy, and I came away angry and demeaned for no fault of my own, and it is certainly not going to help in my quest to take stranger portraits. 

However, unless we stand up to such treatment, people will assume that they have the  right to treat you like that

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 exhibitions and a book

I like to get to as many photographic exhibitions as possible. 

This can be a challenge, since the majority are in London, and of those that are not, they tend to be held at inconvenient times.

Despite all the odds stacked against me, I have actually managed to go to three events this year. 

 

All 3 were very different and each says something different things about photography.

So let's begin the journey:- 

Exhibition 1  - Royal Portraits: A century of photography - Kings Gallery, Edinburgh

The exhibition covered royal portraits from its earliest days to the modern day

This was the only exhibition that had an entrance fee; This was understandable since the image owners are not rich people. :)

Also, they did not allow photos to be taken in the gallery, which was a bit weird. I guess having an image on a commoner's phone would be a dangerous precedent. The upshot was however, I cannot show you any images from the show. 

This is not a big issue, since I am almost certain that whoever you are, you will have seen many of the images already. 

The exhibition showed the progression of royal portraiture from the formal to the latter, more modern, relaxed style.  

At the time, the early images did remind me of something that I could not quite put my finger. Later, I realised it was the communist style leader portraits where every imperfection had been removed, in case the populace got the idea that these were actually just normal humans.

One interesting thing was how the style of image changed as our perceptions of royalty evolved, from the early deferential images, through the 70s punk era, including the famous Sex Pistols' record cover (that at the time was considered almost subversive, but nowadays, post Diana and Harry, seems almost tame). Finally, we have the more relaxed images, where the royal family tries to propagate the idea that they are just like us, as the barriers are broken down through paparazzi intrusion, the internet and the need to generate clickbait, to the point now where it is hard not to see the Royals as a Kardashian spin off.  

 The other takeaway was just how bad some of the images were. With the early images, you could let them off due to limitations of equipment, but considering a Royal gig is much sought after, and the best photographers in the world often vie for it, some of the images were underwhelming.

For example, there were 3 images by Annie Leibovitz. They try to put the queen in a more relaxed setting, but seriously, one of the images had terribly blown highlights. Of course, part of the issue is that access is limited and tightly controlled, so there is very little scope to control the setting. However, the worst one was this one from the coronation of King Charles III

Coronation images by Hugo Burnand. (Copied without permission, and I am now in the tower)

 

 

When I first saw it, my initial reaction was that it was AI-generated. My second was it was a Charles look-alike cosplaying, like on a Game of Thrones set. The background, how Charles is sitting and the way the crown sits on a jaunty angle, just seem both wrong and dull at the same time.  

And this is the problem with Royal photography. Like the Emperor's New Clothes (King surely - Ed). Images are not there to be criticised, but fawned upon. Even in the more modern, relaxed era, images are controlled and censored, so removing any true creativity. 

Exhibition 2 After The End Of History: British Working Class Photography 1989 – 2024 Stills Gallery, Edinburgh

Exhibition 2 could not be more different. 

 It was at the Stills gallery, which is a small photographic gallery just off, ironically, the Royal Mile.

The images were from a number of photographers on the theme working class and it contained the type of photos which would be hated in any camera club setting.

Unlike the royal images, the photos could not be in any way considered beautiful, photogenic or comforting. Instead, they were of mundane scenes from the British heartland of ordinary people doing ordinary things.  

One of the abiding mysteries is how these photographers make a living, since these are not images to hang on a wall or adorn a chocolate box. These images will not appear in international Salons, nor would they win club competitions, but they are all the more honest just for that reason.

What they are is life in realistic detail, and do not represent some fairy tale. I was drawn to a set of images by Kavi Pujara

 

 

Chris Shaw

Kavi took a set of images from their native Leicester. Leicester is a city I know well, and I have always enjoyed the vibrancy of the city due to its vibrant mix of cultures. 

Kavi captured the dichotomy of 1st and 2nd generation immigrants, caught between seeing themselves as British, but at the same time having deep roots back to India. It is a useful reminder, with the hysteria about immigration, of how quickly immigrants become part of a society, and even if some parts of it will never accept them as truly British, they consider themselves as British as your average Anglo-Saxon.

I always found it interesting how some right-wing politicians, such as Pritti Patel and Kemi Badenoch come from 1st generation immigrants families. It's almost as if they feel let down by the reality of the UK compared to the myth they had been sold, and make it their life work to take Britain back to an ideal that never existed

Kavi Pujara

Exhibition 3  Mao Ishikawa, Meads Gallery Warwick

The 3rd exhibition I did on a whim, since I realised it was only 20 minutes from work in lovely Warwick (well, actually Coventry, but Warwick sounds better)

The gallery is on the grounds of Warwick University and helpfully stays open till 10 pm so I had plenty of time to get there and fight the hordes getting in (me and 2 bored museum attendents)

Mao Ishikawa is an Okinawan native, and since I have a fascination with all things Japanese, I thought it would be a great opportunity to see some Japanese photography

 Her photography was very much tied to the Okinawans' experience.  While Okinawa is part of Japan, it also has a subculture and language of its own. Also, after World War 2, for 30 years, the US occupied Okinawa, which created a huge conflict between natives and the large number of US servicemen on the island.

Mao's photos are not easy viewing, and cover the underbelly of life on the island, such as violence, prostitution and drinking. As a woman and native, she was well-placed to observe and photograph them. She also did the same on a trip to the US to stay with a black ex-boyfriend in a poor part of the US.  

Again, none of these images are ones you would hang on the wall, and they were often brutally honest and graphic. However, many of these people would have no voice or evidence about their existence on earth, and as such, such works are more valuable than any pretty landscape shots 

It shows a part of Japanese society that never gets mentioned. However, the work that resonated most was a gentler piece documenting the actors in an Okinawa acting troop, as the performers got older and were not replaced, so they slowly died out. Again, it showed part of life, which, if not recorded, would disappear without a ripple and therefore is invaluable.

 

So, 3 very different exhibitions, and the question is what I took from each of them. I have to say, the Royal Portrait left me cold. While the other two made me question why I take photographs.  

I have felt for some time that as photographers, we have a duty to record what is around us, warts and all. These images will not win awards, competitions, or Instagram likes, but they may be the only record of your area, and as photographers, we must record and share the events in an honest way.

Dialogue With Photography by Paul Hill , Thomas Cooper 

Finally, I have also been reading

This is a recently re-published book, originally published in 1979 of interviews with a whole set of photography greats from Man Ray, Cecil Beaton, Henri Cartier-Bresson and Ansel Adams, among others.

When done originally, photography was still struggling to be accepted as a legitimate art form, and many of the photographers had worked through the glory days of published photography, but were hardly household names. 

Nowadays, I can review their work with a click of a button, but then access was far harder. As such, it is a great time capsule of the pioneers of photography.

While you won't get many insights on how to become a better photographer (Most struggled to explain why they did the things they did ), you get a better understanding of how photography came to be where we are now, and it is greatly recommended

 

 

Welcome to the new boss

 I am not one for gear acquisition syndrome. My mantra is usually, get the best you can afford, learn to get the best of its capabilities, until a) it breaks or b) reaches a point where technology provides some advantage that I cannot do without

My 1st Fuji Camera was a XT-2, bought in 2018. It was a worthy workhorse, but I felt that the autofocus was lagging, so in 2022 I updated it to a Fuji XT-4.

Today I got a XT-5. 

To be honest, I should have got a XT-5 in the 1st place. I pretty well bought the last XT-4. My thought process was a) I would save £200 and b) I did not need the extra Mega pixels that came with the XT-5.

This was a mistake.

While the XT-4 has been fine, in terms of technology there really wasn't enough for an upgrade. I don't feel I did anything with the XT-4 that I could not have done with the XT-2. The main reason was to improve the auto focus, which is definitely not class leading, and I could never really trust it with fast moving objects. 

The XT-5 on the other hand, the reviews seem to indicate, is better. Like I said, I don't really want the extra MPixels littering my hard drive (40Mp vs 26 Mp), but I guess I will just have to be tougher in what images I keep

The other thing I did not like about the XT-4 was the flippy screen. No photo centric camera should ever come with one. Not only are they difficult to use in photo situations, but it makes fitting an L-Mount virtually impossible for tripod work. The XT-5 I am happy to announce has reverted a more traditional tilted arrangement.

Apart from that the XT-5 is much the same as the XT-2/3 etc. Both good and bad.

Anyway I went out for the 1st time today to see whether how it felt.

1st Impressions

The XT-5 is actually a bit smaller than the XT-4. However the grip feels shallower and i felt I needed to grip more to keep it stable.

The controls are much the same We still don't have a locking button for exposure compensation and the pointless ADV option on the control dial is still there. Apart from that the AF button is more prominent which is good, but the two custom buttons (on top and front) are still too recessed. The Q button is also a bit hidden.

The menus are still standard Fuji ordering i.e you have to guess which category each function is in, and sometimes naming is bizarre (photometry anyone)

However, the big thing is does the AF work any better?. Well a good thing is that now it has subject detect, which is a welcome addition, however irritatingly, you can have eye detect or subject detect, but not both. The only way you discover this is by setting way then seeing the other one disable. It is this sort of Fuji menu peculiarities that makes being a Fuji owner such fun 

My test subject was my dog. This is a tough ask. Not only is she fast, but in low light it can be difficult to track. 

The 1st signs are hopefully, but I still was not really getting enough keepers. Hopefully it is just a case of settings and experience

Anyway, some more images from today

Before original sin

 Do you remember when you first got your first real digital camera?

Mine was a Sony a37, with a kit lens. In terms of technology, it would feel primitive today, but at the time it felt like entering another world.  I had vacillated for a long time about buying one, putting up with a plethora of smaller cameras, until I persuaded myself (and my wife) that I deserved it. So I went to Jessop's in Rugby high-street, presented my credit card and bought it (how things have changed).

I remember being outside the shop, slipping in the SD card and taking pictures of the local church. Later I got them back and marvelling of the quality (!) and the ability to process them. 

For the next few years, the camera went everywhere with me. My family had to put up with me disappearing to take photos. After a while I felt I could see an image in everything and took photos of all sorts of subjects, but I had no way to judge whether the images were any good.

Later my wife persuaded me to join a photography club, and through internal competition and just seeing other images, I started to form ideas about what I wanted to see in my images and strived to achieve them. In turn (in my mind anyway), my images improved, and in turn, I became more critical of what images I kept.

As I did so, my output dropped. I no longer took images anywhere. Instead, I would make special trips. I would still take holiday photos, but they were for family Facebook pages, not for general consumption. Although I did not take as many images, my success rate improved and they started winning competitions.

However, last year something happened. It is at this point in the year when I review my years work and I look at what to enter in club competitions. To be honest, I struggled to find anything I liked. 

There are a number of reasons for this.

Firstly was opportunity. Basically, I have less time to get out. I did one pure photographic trip last year, and even then I had to postpone once. That is not to say I did not go to some great places. I spent 10 days in Japan, which is a wonderful place for photography, but it was a family trip, and I struggle to combine my photography needs in such times. Coming back, and reviewing the images, I felt I had not taken the opportunities offered.

Even when I take photos, they often lie on my PC for weeks and months, before I got around to processing them. Now, this is not always a bad thing. I sometimes find a gap provides a different view of your images, and you see something else. However, too often I fear looking at my images in case mediocrity stares back.

Photography, for me, is always about improving. Up to now, I had felt that every year my images had improved. Last year, for the 1st time I felt my photos were either no better than the year before, or were just, worse, plain derivative. I am not a photographer who is happy to repeat or copy others, but to often I was chasing past glories, taking the same image in the hope something would click.  My goal is to highlight my own style and niche, and it just felt that everything I did had been done before by me, often better.

This made me think about the excitement of owning a camera for the 1st time. That moment of innocence where you don't know any better. The period before the original sin. How great it would be to recapture it.

Obviously, I cannot forget what I learned. One mistake many make, including me, is to go back to your place of greatest success and try to recreate that moment. You fall in the trap of trying too hard, and end up with an image, no better than the one before, but also cursed with the knowledge of faults in the original image.

Instead, I decided to just take my camera and take photos. Don't worry about competitions, prizes or public affirmation. Take images because it is a fun thing to do, with no expectation of success. Just like I did all those years ago.  

So these images below were just me, my dog, walking down a river and taking images. I am not putting them here to be judged, by me or anyone else, just to show the joy of taking.