POTD: Photography is a team sport…and a commentary on competitions

_PM01783 copy
Canon Photomarathon, Kuala Lumpur. Olympus Pen Mini E-PM1, ZD 45/1.8

This isn’t a recent event, but a group of photographers running around the streets of KL in a pack yesterday reminded me of this shot. The aim of the event is simple: it is a competition with several categories of prize, but everything must be shot on the day, in the same location, and you’ve got to wear the same damn shirt as everybody else. Editing is permitted, but everybody submits prints for judging, made on one of those dye sub printers.

Several thoughts:
1. There’s a HUGE market for photography equipment in Malaysia. This relatively small segment of the population was at least a thousand-strong, with easily $3,000 or more of gear for each person on average. There was more than one person going around with 1-series bodies and 300/2.8s.

2. It’s commendable that somebody bothers to organize something on this scale at all.

3. How on earth the organizers expect to see good results when you restrict the participants is ludicrous – it just makes you look bad because the level of photography is is low.

4. You’re not going to get any good reportage style images or candids when you’re milling around in a pack of hundreds or thousands of very conspicuous people. And more often than not, if you try something that looks out of the ordinary, a whole bunch of people will follow you immediately afterwards and it ceases to be unusual. And in the end the entire event just turns into an equipment masturbation session, with plenty of mine-is-bigger-than-yours. Or maybe that’s what the organizers want, so they can sell more cameras.

5. Postprocessing is as much part of the modern photography process as darkroom work was for film. So treat it as such, not an aberration or ‘cheat’. If you’re going to do something unnatural like HDR, it’ll be obvious to the judges (we hope).

6. Dye sub printers produce horrible color. Perhaps processing doesn’t matter because you won’t be able to appreciate the subtle tones anyway.

7. My final point is a criticism leveled at the organizers of almost all competitions, not just this one: yes, I can understand why you’d need limited rights to republish the image afterwards, but why on earth do all competitions result in the photographer having to surrender any and all rights to all images entered? Don’t the organizers realize that the really good photographers and pros will never agree to do this? I certainly would not enter my best images if I know I’ll have to surrender the rights to them. And if I’m not going to enter my best images, then why bother entering at all? If you’ve got a whole pool of people who think like this – and I know a lot of pros and talented amateurs do – then you’re just lowering the standard in general.

What I’d like to see – or perhaps even organize – is a competition based solely on merit; with no rights transferral or ownership, so we’d see people putting their best foot forward. Anonymous entry, so we don’t bias based on names or fame. Something to think about for the future, perhaps. MT

POTD: Hommage a Hiroshi Sugimoto

_PM08047bw copy
Seascape. Part of a full set coming up later. Olympus E-PM1 Pen Mini, 14-42 kit lens.

The sea is one of those odd subjects – like the sky – that’s seemingly full of infinite variation, but at the same time is instantly identifiable for what it is. I could take a thousand images of the sea, and none of them would be the same – but you’d know instantly that it was the sea. Even if the processing was the same, which I’d never do because it’d be boring.

What you don’t immediately notice here is that to achieve this perspective, the shot was taken at 14mm and just inches above the water, about 30m away from the beach and out to sea. (Interestingly, the EXIF data records the subject as being 4.3 billion meters away – I’d say that’s infinity, and in fact, further away than the moon.) Not exactly the least hazardous environment for photographic equipment! I suppose the only reason I even attempted this series was the relatively low cost of the equipment at risk; no way would I do it with an M9, for instance. I didn’t take anything heavier in the way of photographic equipment because it was meant to be a break. But at the same time, I don’t think I’d be able to truly relax unless I knew I had the ability to make the shot if the opportunity arose.

Sometimes we need time in a different physical location to reset our seeing process, if nothing else. MT

POTD: Reflections and reflections on reflection

_VL31_L1010141 copy
Reflections. Leica V-Lux 3.

I still haven’t found a camera that can quite capture the luminous nature of reflections in glass – they all either seem to make it look too ‘solid’, or too transparent; I suspect it has something to do with the sensor filtration or the transmission properties of the lenses used.

Here’s a second interesting thought: why don’t camera makers match the spectral response of the sensor to that of the human eye, rather than limit it to an arbitrary range of wavelengths? Our eyes don’t work that way, and that’s probably why it’s so darned difficult to capture exactly what we see. MT

POTD: One more from the window seat

_1000922b copy.jpg
Not just good for landscapes! Ricoh GR-Digital (original flavor), 2006. What you’re looking at is the shadow of the airplane projected onto a cloud; the white dot with the color halo around it is the sun. The color halo itself is caused by the same process that creates rainbows – prismatic spectral dispersion of the white light from the sun by the water droplets in the cloud. MT

POTD: The crinkled building

IMG_1769b copy
The crinkled building. Or maybe it should be called architectural origami. Starhill Gallery, Kuala Lumpur. And in keeping with yesterday’s article, it was shot with an Apple iPhone 4. MT

POTD: Vacation time

_7004158bw copy
Tanjung Jara beach, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia. Nikon D700 and 85/1.4 D

I’m off to the beach for a few days for a short vacation (the same beach in the image, coincidentally) and to practice my hommages a Daido Moriyama Hiroshi Sugimoto (I have no idea how I got that one mixed up). I’ll still have internet access though, so please keep commenting. There’s also a couple of very interesting posts completed and scheduled, including an On Assignment covering shooting watches with the Leica M9-P system – I wouldn’t leave you guys without something to read, would I? 🙂 MT

POTD: Step on it

_7019573bw copy
Speeding is illegal. Acceleration isn’t. Nikon D700, 28-300VR. BMW 135i M sport.

POTD and Off Topic: Test drive notes of a different sort

_8001318 copy
Eyes, part one. New F30 BMW 328i Sport. Nikon D800, 28-300VR.

_7025483 copy
Eyes, part two. Outgoing E90 LCI BMW 320d M. Nikon D700, 28-300VR.

Perhaps I should have called this post ‘a parable in headlights’. I am a BMW fan, which isn’t to say I don’t like other makes; the lower vehicle is my daily car, and serves me well in a versatile manner for everything from grocery shopping to ferrying the wife around to the occasional spot of sideways driving along my favorite piece of road on Sunday morning. It also has a remarkable engine that puts out somewhere in the region of 210bhp and 450Nm after a little ECU tweaking – oh, whilst managing a consistent 35mpg in our abysmal traffic. (I’ve seen it go as high as 58mpg for long distance cruising, and it’ll do 0-62mph in about seven seconds). I’d say this is much like the car equivalent of the D700: you can do pretty much anything with it, and it does a very competent job and doesn’t get in your way. Even the standard non-M sport base 320i petrol version is a nice drive, and the only difference between the two is body roll, power and suspension stiffness. Otherwise, they handle much the same – think of one as moving along at five-tenths, and the other as eight-tenths.

The new model – codename F30 for BMW geeks – is a bit of a different beast. I test drove two versions – the normal, base, bog-standard 320d with no frills or options; and the ‘sport’ package 328i with (optional) adaptive suspension, active steering and BMW’s new masterpiece turbocharged 2-litre petrol that puts out about 250bhp and 350Nm. The 328i was one of the most nimble, responsive cars I’ve ever driven. It was just so easy to drive; I felt confident straight away and able to push the car to perhaps 90% of its limits (or at least the limits to which I feel comfortable driving on public roads). Even the new electric power steering system, whilst oddly and irregularly weighted at low speeds – the sensation of the rack ratio changing while maneuvering at 5mph feels like the front wheels are losing traction, but you’re most certainly not – becomes perfectly weighted and direct (if a little less communicative than I’m used to) at speed. The paddle shifters, combined with the new 8-speed ZF gearbox, make firing off a gear change fast and easy. And that engine…oh boy. It’s got power and torque everywhere in the rev range, and just feels more eager to rev than the 2 litre turbo diesel I’m driving now, even though the car I drove only had 40km on the odometer. The only thing I didn’t like about the car (apart from the increased price tag, nearly 10%!) was the odd-feeling steering at low speeds. Would I buy this? Hell yes, if I could find some spare organs I didn’t need, or perhaps a hidden hoard of diamonds under my floorboards.

The base 320d (F30) on the other hand, was utterly horrid. I hated it. I didn’t feel confident in the car at all; the suspension wallowed and rolled; the steering was equally odd at low speeds, but strangely disconnected and uncommunicative at high speeds; even the interior materials felt a step down from the other car – even though they were supposedly built at the same plant. Even though the engine was a supposedly updated version of the one in my car, it felt tight and underpowered, lacking the midrange punch between 1800 and 2800rpm that I’m used to. Would I buy this one? No.

I felt that this odd duality gave the new 3 series a similar personality to the D800: a specific tool, which if configured (optioned?) correctly, would do a peerless job; but was also capable of being entirely inappropriate in some situations compared to the old model.

Conclusion: newer isn’t always better, often the refinements mean that what you’re going to use it with (i.e. the engine and options, in this case) is almost equally as important as how you’re going to use it. As a consumer, don’t always get fooled into thinking that you need to change something. Just because a new model is out doesn’t in any way reduce the capability of the existing model you own: yes, it might be better for some things, but if those things aren’t important to you, then why spend more money? You’d be surprised at the number of emails I’ve been getting in the last few days asking ‘D800 or D700?’ when clearly the person using the camera has no need for large file sizes, but every need for speed or higher ISO. Know what you need your tools to do first before you buy them. MT

POTD x3: Food photography with the Nikon D800

_8005414 copy

Goldeneye steamed in miso and ginger

_8005366 copy

Seared tai (seabream) with momeji oroshii chili.

_8005295 copy
Iso-bagai snail, I believe poached in mirin and soy.

This series shot with a Nikon D800, PC-E 85/2.8 D Micro, and two LED light panels. Chef – Kenny Yew at Hanare

Two of the toughest things to get right color-wise (in my experience, at any rate) are people and food. There’s something about the way organic materials reflect light – probably due to the fact that they are both reflective, transmissive, and have odd properties in the infrared and ultraviolet regions (think: flowers, or cat’s eyes) which is just a huge challenge for most cameras.

Up to this point, I was fairly convinced that the Olympus Pen Mini plus Zeiss lenses (usually ZF.2 2/28 via adaptor) delivered hands down the best color; perhaps not the most accurate, but certainly the most pleasing. The Olympus sensor’s color bias would take care of global saturation and hue, and the Zeiss glass would ensure great micro contrast and accurate color transmission. Similarly, for landscapes – anything with skies, especially – the Leica M8/M9s excelled; I still can’t match the blue with any other camera. To my eyes, the Leicas (with Leica lenses) deliver the best sky blue bar none; and a decent skin tone (with Zeiss lenses – yes, there is a difference in color transmission; it’s subtle but I’ve always felt the Zeisses are slightly warmer.) The Nikons…well, I learned to correct them, but frankly, they weren’t that accurate (thought the D700/D3/D3s was the best of the bunch to date). I think it has something to do with the way Nikon designs lenses for global contrast rather than micro contrast, which affects the transmission of subtle tonal variations. Color improves markedly with Zeiss glass, which is designed to optimize micro contrast.

After this shoot, however, I think I’ve stumbled upon the best of both worlds. The D800’s sensor delivers the best color I’ve ever seen – accurate and highly pleasing, which is an achievement (and I believe DXOMark found the same thing). Paired with the Zeiss 2/28 Distagon, it’s pretty incredible. But what if it could get better? What if you could have accuracy, saturation, micro contrast, macro contrast and everything in between? Apparently, you can. The PC-E Micro-Nikkors now take the cake for me as the best lenses to use with the D800; resolving power is there even wide open; color transmission and micro contrast are on par with the Zeisses; edge performance isn’t an issue because they were designed with enormous image circles to support the tilt shift movements; and finally, you solve the DOF vs diffraction issue through tilts or swings.

My only complaint is that focusing ring feel is rather inconsistent, for some inexplicable reason. The 24 PCE is silky smooth; the 85 PCE is so stiff and dry that it’s very difficult to move in small increments. And sadly, Nikon has changed some components internally so that moving the tilt and shift axes to be parallel now requires new internal PCBs and about $400, instead of just removing some screws. This begs the obvious question: why the hell didn’t they design it that way in the first place, since a) clearly, enough people want the lens that way that they designed a separate PCB for such cases; b) almost all of the lenses I’ve seen on ebay have been modified and c) it doesn’t make any sense photographically unless you want to do a horizontal pano! For architectural work, macro work, and everything else, you need to have tilt and rise/ fall, not tilt and shift or swing and rise/ fall. Makes you wonder if anybody is actually a photographer on the lens design team.

All of that aside, being able to shoot at wide open or nearly wide open and still have sufficient DoF is a joy. It makes small LED light panels useable as your primary light source at ISO 100, handheld even. This is great, because studio strobes and speedlights will make the food wilt in double time, and anything raw will start to look slightly parboiled under the heat if you don’t work fast. On that note, enjoy the sushi. MT

POTD: Retail party

_PM03166 copy
Retail party. Olympus E-PM1 Pen Mini, Panasonic 20/1.7

On assignment again this weekend – shooting watches for my upcoming exhibition at Starhill, Kuala Lumpur (from May 2nd, more details to come in a future post) with Jaeger Le-Coultre and Leica. This one’ll be an interesting challenge because the entire set will have to be shot with a Leica M… and I don’t scrimp when it comes to magnification. MT