photoblogography - Just some stuff about photography

MMXVIII

focus, dammit, focus

in General Rants , Thursday, January 04, 2018

It’s been quite a while since I last wrote anything here. It’s not for the lack of anything to say, or to write about, but as ever, the lack of time. Or perhaps focus. Or motivation. Or all of them.

Recently I realised that in 2017 I achieved several things: I spent far more time shooting film than digital; I shot fewer photos than in any other year since I have a reliable count (around 2004); I shot less memorable photos than any other year, ever.

I spent a huge amount of time futzing about with film. I tried different film types, different cameras, experimented with film scanners, and got a bit caught up in the whole film revival thing. After a while I realised that the one thing that the #FilmsNotDeadBlaBlaBla movement is NOT about is photography. You only need to sample various social media feeds to quickly realise that it is about shiny toys, generally with knobs on. I am totally unconvinced that shooting with film makes anybody a more interesting photographer, per se. And I see no interest or merit in swapping an obsession for up to the minute digital cameras for an addiction to obsolete film cameras.

Seeing posts where people go on about how many cameras they’ve shot with, and how many identical black & white films they’ve used, all whipped along by cynical vendors hoping for a quick buck, just makes me feel nauseous. The actual photography produced is with very few exceptions extremely dull. I’ve ranted about this previously.

Still, if people enjoy playing with old cameras and film, and coaxing decrepit technology into life, great - there’s nothing wrong with it. But for me it is precisely the opposite of what I should be doing.

What I should be doing is finally finishing the website overhaul I’ve been working on, intermittently, for over 18 months. It’s become a total millstone, and probably I will never do it again. It would make much more sense for me to use an off-the-shelf service like Squarespace, and learn to compromise. Instead I’ve landed myself in a situation where I’ve got to completely rewrite code, redesign the layout and navigation, completely revise content, migrate everything to new versions of the underlying software, and finally ... for what?  I no longer have any professional involvement with web or interface design, so there’s zero synergy. It’s all fuelled by an obstinate and misguided desire for full control over my self-expression (for example, I hate photography hosting sites that crop thumbnails - and they all do it).

But it’s about 90% there. So it’s too late to give up now.

What I think I will give up though is film. I haven’t fully decided yet, but I’m very much leaning towards selling off all my film cameras (I have a ridiculous quantity: Linhof 612, Voigtländer Bessa III, Hasselblad XPan, Olympus OM4Ti, Olympus XA, Minox 35ML and Ricoh GR1s).

It’s hard to come up with a rational reason for persevering with film.  First of all, I’m a slide film photographer, not negative. I don’t much like negative film, really. And slide film really met its nemesis with digital. Negative film still has some advantages over digital, at least from my perspective. The main ones are highlight rolloff and exposure latitude. Colour as well to a certain extent, so long as you don’t care too much about accuracy. Certainly Portra 400, or Cinestill 50, in bright light, can look quite wonderful - but I can get a very similar look from digital. Slide film as well has a wonderful midtone density that is not so easy to achieve with digital, but then again it has serious limitations at both ends of the luminosity scale.

And then you’ve got to buy the film, pay for it to be processed, wait for it to come back from the lab, and then scan it. The novelty wore off for me around 1995.

The basic problem is one of two many choices suffocating creativity. I could of course go 100% film, but, well, I’ve been there before, and it is rather limiting. Even more so these days - ten years ago I could buy a roll of Fuji Provia 1600 slide film and get it developed overnight.  Five years ago I could buy a pack of Provia 400X, or Velvia 100F, or Ektachrome 100G and have it beautifully processed by one of several pro labs. Now I’m limited to Provia 100F and one lab with a turnaround time of at least 1 week. I don’t believe Ferrania will ever deliver their slide film, and I’m not that convinced about “new Ektachrome”. The #FilmsNotDead thing is about black & white and weird stuff like double-layer reverse-rolled stocking-elastic base expired pineapple juice emulsions cross processed in holy water. Not slide film.

The Olympus Micro Four Thirds cameras and lenses I have are fantastic, and are vastly more flexible than any film-based solution. They’re not perfect, but they get out of my way.  My only real justification for retaining film remains the one I’ve been repeating for quite some time: I use film because that’s what the XPan needs. I hoped to add the Linhof 612 to that, but so far I haven’t bonded with it.  On the other hand, the Sigma DP0 is a pretty good digital panoramic camera, with a devastatingly good lens, and it’s quite endearing too.

It’s going to be hard to cut the cord, and I haven’t sharpened the knife just yet, but 2017 could well have been the swansong for film, for me.

xpan_cinestill1_14.jpg


Possibly my favourite photo of 2017 - Hasselblad XPan, 45mm, Cinestill 50

Posted in General Rants on Thursday, January 04, 2018 at 06:49 PM • PermalinkComments ()

3 comments

Aaron De Lazzer January 04, 2018 - 8:26
I feel your pain and echo your sentiment. I too have a bunch of latent film cameras in my possession in want of a shooter. I can't let them go (yet) and am not sure if I'm just in love with the idea of film, the actual results from shooting film or perhaps just the potent cocktail of nostalgia, better photography through suffering and an affectation for the cameras as functional art. They're utterly beautiful. But am I just living in the past to no good end? You have a lovely stable by the way. When I read the cameras you've got, I pretty much said "yup, I'd buy that if I could..." I also enjoy your enthusiasm for the Sigma. I don't know why they don't find more traction. There is something to their output that pushes a similar button as the results I get from film; what with the updated convenience. I'm a massive fan. Good luck with the decisions pending. Perhaps your season is over. Regardless, I hope you'll keep thinking out loud here and stirring the pot with inspirational images and inciteful commentary.

3 comments

David Mantripp January 06, 2018 - 1:00
Very eloquently put, Aaron. For me my fundamental question is "but does this enable me to make better photographs". The problem is, first, how do I define "better", and second, the answer changes from week to week. For example the photo I posted above - which I like, doesn't much matter if nobody else does - was more or less an end-of-roll throwaway from the XPan while I was trying out Cinestill 50 film in my neighbourhood. Without the XPan it would not exist. And without Cinestill 50 it would not have quite the same impact.
But at the same time, the XPan / Cinestill 50 combination is extremely limiting...

3 comments

Project Hyakumeizan January 07, 2018 - 9:45
Yes, the argument for focus and simplicity is always compelling. Nevertheless, I would be sad to see the XPan and the Technorama deep-sixed for ever. I've been very convinced by the results you've been getting from them over the past few years, and somehow I suspect that stitched-together digital panoramas wouldn't be quite the same. Just my film-nostalgic ha'porth, though...

Previous entry: Made in Italy

Next entry: Four books