Light & Shadow

I’m nearly ten years into my ‘serious’ photography journey. I’ve photographed pretty much every style of subject in many different locations. I have taken tens of thousands of photographs, maybe half of one percent, worth keeping or at least ones which I am proud of.

I don’t know if this hit rate is unusual but all the while, I’ve been searching for a distinctive style. I want people to look at my work and instantly recognise it. A distinctive look that my photos take. The one constant quest in my work is to examine the relationship between light and shadow.

I enjoy the work of street photographers such as Sean Tucker, Samuel Lintaro, Roman Fox and Faizal Westcott ; who all maximise the use of shadows, strong patches of sunlight and people moving through these spaces. I went into Manchester last week and made the most of the sunshine by finding spots where it partially lit up the scene. Im still learning the techniques involved with making strong images but I do use the highlight weighted metering mode on my Sony cameras. It’s a fairly common metering mode on most makes but the Sony one helps me to produce a certain look that I’m after.

The light gods do have to bless you in order to achieve this style but when they do, you need to work the scene quickly and with intent. I like people or interesting objects to be in the light or people passing through. I’m not worried if others in the scene just come out as black shapes because it helps the viewer to concentrate on the detail in the lighter spaces. The three pillars of photography to my mind are light, composition and time. I am far from the finished article when it comes to all three but I have learned and improved my understanding of all of them in the last ten years. I now take photos intentionally rather than in hope. I compose a scene and wait for something or someone to walk into it. In the case of the image above, the man eating a snack was stood for a while but I had to wait for him to be isolated rather than behind passers by.

The image above has elements of light and shadow created entirely by the shape of the building. The geometric patterns of the building look fabulous against the blue sky ( if you look carefully, there’s an airliner flying above) and shows you don’t need to be on the street waiting for someone to walk through a patch of light to make a good photo. The legendary British photographer Martin Parr has said that you need to find a subject that interests enough to want to explore more and more. My landscape photography works best for me when I have dramatic skies or strong light on parts of it. I struggle with landscape photography because I think people like landscapes and they are less challenging than street or documentary photography. I’m drawn to the coast because it has texture, light and drama. I just don’t think I’m much of a landscape photographer and I admire those who create beautiful images in nature. It’s just not my main interest and I need to accept that.

I can’t conclusively say my style is distinctive, that is for others to determine. I know I haven’t perfected it by any stretch of imagination but I am getting there. The one thing that those who see my work like is my moody look to my images. I like to create a bit drama, to make the everyday seem a little more interesting.

On another topic, I find myself getting a little frustrated with some photographers on YouTube who tell you that ‘gear doesn't matter’. I am no beginner and have been at this for a while now. I sell my work, have had my work featured in magazines and do studio photo shoots and gear does matter. The fact I’ve been through pretty much every camera brand to end up where I started with Sony. Why did I switch from Nikon Z to Sony? The cameras are as small as full frame cameras get, they have an extensive range of native and third party lenses available and they just work. They aren’t aesthetically the prettiest, they don’t go for retro or sleek. They are purely functional but very good at that. I enjoy shooting with them because they don’t get in the way of my composition or execution.

Often these photographers shoot with the top of the range camera bodies and lenses, get gear sent to them and are sponsored to make their videos.

I don’t begrudge them these factors in any way. They are very experienced professionals who have worked their socks off to get where they are. They provide useful information for those wanting to upgrade or switch gear; and I know it isn’t their intention to make you go out and buy the same in the hope of you being as good as them, because it doesn’t make you a better photographer. I do however reserve the right to have gear that is slightly more than I need for the essentials and allows me to be even more creative. I have traded my way to my present set up and don’t plan on switching because I’ve been there and got several t shirts to prove it.

The Right Tool.

• The search for the ideal camera or system, has been an ongoing challenge for me. I have worked my way through many systems, only to find there’s that almost undefinable part that’s missing in most. About 9 months ago, I switched to Nikon. I used the D810, D750 and D700 for many months. I loved how they rendered colours, the ease of operation and the feel of the cameras in hand. They were heavy, the lenses were bulky but I managed just fine. Then four months ago, I broke my ankle. The road back to mobility has been a slow and arduous one at times but it had its photographic casualties. The kit I used was too heavy to manage with restricted movement. I decided to switch to their mirrorless versions and it has been a revelation. The bodies are light, well built, rugged and comfortable. The z mount lenses are stellar and balance beautifully on the bodies. The menu systems and button layout, virtually identical to the DSLR predecessors.

I have an old Pentax K70 and a few lenses just to keep my DSLR hand in but my main work is done with the Nikon bodies. They are a great mix of many makes I have tried in the past and afford me the comfort of reliability. They do what I want them to without over complicating things. I have a feeling Nikon was kind of dragged into the world of mirrorless rather like their main competitor, Canon. Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and Fujifilm were years ahead in mirrorless technology but Nikon rather dragged its feet. Now, they stand as equals to the top brands and have produced some awesome products. They allowed the transition of Nikon devotees to be relatively smooth. I have stuck with the 24mp bodies as I prefer to have better low light performance than more megapixels.

I did a blog post previously about megapixels and the upward movement to higher and higher numbers. The more megapixels you cram on a sensor, the less space there is and this can affect the noise levels in shots. I can crop with a 24mp camera and still produce decent sized prints. I have considered switching from the z6 to the 45mp z7 but I’m not sure I need to. The only real reason I would go for a larger number would be if I moved over to medium format and that’s not about to happen anytime soon.

The important thing a professional photographer should realise is that a camera body is a tool. It is designed to enable you to create images whether they be commercial and or artistic. I enjoyed using the DSLR Nikon bodies but unfortunately I can’t carry that weight around with me at present. The only downsides to mirrorless is having electronic viewfinders as I prefer optical ones and the reduced battery life. I tell myself I was used to mirrorless long before I started using DSLR bodies and rarely suffered with flat batteries. Tell yourself that the camera and lens are a means to an end and not what makes you a good photographer. I could shoot with a 100mp Hasselblad and not produce images better than my Nikon or even Pentax cameras. Yes, they would give me lots of scope and incredible detail but they won’t improve my composition or subject choice. If someone gave me a Hasselblad and a couple of lenses, I would be over the moon but I’m not at the stage of camera manufacturers giving me gear.

I am content to work with my full frame Nikon and APSC Pentax cameras. I can do photo shoots, street photography and landscape photography. They allow me to work in inclement weather without worrying about damaging my gear. They are light enough to carry whilst walking and reliable enough to use in all cases. They are the right tools for the job at this moment in my burgeoning career.

The accident and recovery have been a setback and I can’t pretend I have much catching up to do but I’m slowly getting back to normal. I just have to build my rugged side up to match the gear I use. My body is as much of a tool as the equipment I use to work. At least I know I can depend on my cameras to turn up even if I take a while longer to regain full mobility.

Vintage

Panasonic S5II + SMC Pentax M 28mm f2.8

You know you’re old, when the word ‘vintage’ describes items that were made 20 years after you were born. technology moves at a pace these days hitherto not seen in the last 100 years. Camera technology and new models of camera body and lens are being brought out every year and with increasing levels of tweaking what is already there. Sigma for example, have released an update version of their 24-70 f2.8 dg dn art lens in the last couple of weeks. This replaces a lens created only a few years ago which was itself, considered excellent. Every camera manufacturer is forever updating their bodies and lenses to improve on what came before. I have the Panasonic S5II which replaced the S5. There was gap of a few years between models and the camera is a big improvement on what was a great camera.

Panasonic S5II + SMC Pentax M 28mm f2.8

‘Invest in good glass’ is a phrase photographers advise newbies into the world of photography. It is sensible advice and a good lens will make a good composition into potentially, a great one. What if the lens you are using is 50 years old though ? Did the camera companies know a thing or two about producing high end quality lenses back then? I have been user of old manual focus lenses for nearly 10 years now. To be fair, I used some of them when they were new releases back in the late 70’s and 80’s but that’s beside the point. The advent of mirrorless cameras and adapters have enabled photographers to experiment with film era camera lenses. I have tried a few mounts and different manufacturers in recent times. I am a fan of Olympus Zuiko lenses (beautifully made, generally very contrasty and sharp), Canon FD lenses good too but the manufacturer I always return are Asahi Pentax. Their SMC (super multi coated) lenses produced from the mid 1970’s to the late 1980’s are always my go to choice.

Panasonic S5II + SMC Pentax A 50mm f1.7

There is something about the process of taking a photo that is enhanced by using a manual focus lens. They make you feel more at one with your camera and the advent of focusing tools such as focus peaking, make capturing photos relatively easy. They can be quicker than autofocusing lenses as they don’t hunt for focus. You set the focal distance and everything will be in focus. Pentax made some lovely prime lenses back in the day. To be fair, they still make lovely lenses now but their film era glass have a certain quality about them. The colours are punchy but not lurid. They are slightly cooler than say Olympus Zuiko but attractive. The out of focus areas are very well controlled and you can get some beautiful bokeh with them. The biggest plus for a photographer however is the price of these lenses. The three focal lengths I use are 28mm, 50mm and 135mm. You can get a really good Pentax M lens in all these focal ranges for well under £40.

Panasonic S5II + SMC Pentax M 135mm f3.5

If you were to only use manual vintage lenses, you could have a complete lens kit (including maybe a 70-210) for under £150. That is half the price of a modern secondhand standard Panasonic kit lens. What you get for that money are high quality metal lenses with beautiful glass. Yes, in tests they don’t perform to modern standards but you learn to work around that. The double advantage for someone who also happens to own a modern Pentax DSLR is that these 50 year old lenses will fit your modern camera without the need for an adapter, That is a huge plus and I continue to take my hat off to Ricoh Pentax for that.

I still use my modern autofocus lenses on both my S5II and Pentax K70. Sometimes, I need their autofocus, their sharpness, their weather sealing. I love the modern lenses but I have more fun with my older ones. They can be unpredictable but that can also be a bonus. You get effects that you would otherwise not with a modern one. If you have never used vintage lenses, I urge you to do so. They are an affordable way of creating interesting photographs. Many filmmakers are now using vintage lenses to get a different, more creative look. I would recommend Pentax or Olympus Zuiko but classics like the Helios 44m. It is an amazing focal length lens, that produces wild swirly bokeh and pretty sharp detail. Get yourself an adapter to fit your camera body and choose according to what lens mount your vintage lens has. Remember to make sure your camera is switched on to shooting without lens. This allows you take a photo. You won’t get exif data but you’ll just have to remember that! Go and have fun and you might get hooked like me!

Capturing Clouds

If you ask most people what their idea of a perfect day is, they would invariably cite the fact that there ‘wasn’t a cloud in the sky’. Clear blue skies tend to cheer folks up, well apart from most photographers I know. A cloudless sky is one stripped of an important element, drama. That drama is often supplied by clouds. Whether they are the soft fluffy type, the dark moody type or the mackerel skies. Cloud inversions are even more sought after. That feeling you are floating above the clouds and distant landscapes peek through the clouds or are enveloped by them. Calderdale is a particularly good spot for cloud inversions as the valleys are very steep sided and cloud has a tendency to get trapped in them.

My photography tends to lean on the dark and moody side. I love dramatic atmospheres - mist, cloud, storm, the more oppressive or cloudy, the better. Maybe it's because I haven’t come to grips with shooting in very sunny conditions, or I just don’t use ND filters enough/properly. Maybe it is because it is a reflection of my general mood. I have a dark brooding personality that is best expressed through my photography. From the moment I started to take photography more seriously, I favoured dark, de-saturated images. I thought and indeed still do think, a light blue/grey tone to my photography works better for me. Clouds and cloud inversions really lend themselves to this colour palette.

We do good skies in Yorkshire. We have big landscapes with height and valleys. This can be a problem to capture the grandeur of the landscape but I still try. There sometimes isn’t a foreground, just plenty of middle and background. It is how you present this type of view. I have used 2:1 or 16:9 crops lately to express a sense of scale to my photos. I find it a good way of showing off just how open and uninterrupted the scenery is.

There is a local campaign to stop a proposed windfarm of 65, 200m high wind turbines on the moors between upper Calderdale and the moors above Top Withens near Haworth. This would have a devastating effect on the upland moorland ecosystem as well as drastically affecting the landscape of this area. To say it is overkill is an understatement! We are used to wind turbines in Calderdale but on a smaller scale. Clumps of up to ten moderately sized turbines, can just about sit comfortably with the surroundings but this proposal is huge both in the size of the turbines and the number they wish to put in place. The big skies would be peppered with massive structures, looming like giants over the peat bogs and rocky outcrops. It would be dramatic but rather more in the way Tolkien painted nightmarish visions of the landscape once Isengard fell to Saruman.

I didn't intend this to be a campaigning blog post about the wind farm proposal, it is about why I love clouds.Maybe it is their ethereal qualities, their mystical properties, of how they change the landscape for the better. I am writing this on damp grey Sunday morning. It doesn’t feel very inspirational weather today. The sky is light grey with little or no cloud definition at all. I do try in every light or weather to get photos. I do work for my craft but I just don’t crave clear blue skies any more. Good luck to you if you do and I hope they lift your spirits. Mine aren’t deflated by blue skies but just throw in a few clouds to make them more interesting.

Feeding The Beast

Why do you/we/I take photographs ? Is it a hobby, an opportunity to capture special family or personal moments? It could be any of those and they are valid reasons. You could be a photographer that is either a professional, semi professional or someone getting into professional photography. Your goal is to make your passion a career. Also, valid reasons. I have been most of these things in my time. I always found that taking photos of family and friends wasn’t enough to interest me. I liked taking images of urban scenes, of landscapes and seascapes even from an early age.

For the first 45 years of my life, I took photos, got the film processed and then kept the prints and negatives, only to show to those who had an interest in seeing them. I never shared them publicly because I didn’t think anyone would want to look at them. The digital age came along and social media was born and things began to change. We had phones that could capture, process and share images to a wider circle of people. Apps such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter grew in importance. Suddenly, people were sharing not only their thoughts but images. Photographers of all levels began to see the opportunity to create an audience for their work.

I joined these social networks about 15 years ago (well at lest the ones that existed then) and shared the odd image. At this time, I wasn’t serious about photography but was a keen amateur. I gained followers and connections. They allowed me to show some of my photos and I got likes and positive comments. This confirmed that I must be doing something right so I shared more. I’m not entirely sure at what point did I begin to care about how many people liked my photos but trust me, it happened. I tailored my output according to how others responded to it. I gave the pubic what they wanted. Except, the public or more accurately, the social networks can be greedy. They require more regular content of a certain type to cater for your audience. I entered a vortex of connection/disconnection. I posted photos that I thought a larger number of people would like rather than ones I liked.

I got more serious about photography about 8 years ago. I decided to try to work harder at producing more professional images that would wow the followers/friends/likers. I bought kit that I thought would enable this transformation into a bigger hit on social media. Needless to say, it didn’t happen. In fact, it wasn’t until about three years ago, my social presence began to grow, thanks to the help of a dearly departed friend promoting my work. I was still feeding the beast though, looking at trends, colour palettes that were popular, compositions that got the most likes. I did stop to ask myself why I was doing this but not seriously enough for me to take a step back and reflect upon it. I certainly didn’t think to stop or start again. I post regularly on instagram and Threads. I share images I think others would like but nowadays, I also share them because I like them. I think I have a style and take photos that say as much about me as they do of the subject or composition. I’m not the greatest photographer and only passably half decent but I am working on it.

I think it is important to learn photography as both a skill and an art form. You need to learn how to use your gear, understand light, composition, and form. You need to work on creating your own style, first by studying others and secondly by adapting this knowledge to your own work. You may be a fan of Henri Cartier Bresson, Ansel Adams, Martin Parr or Joel Meyorwitz but use them merely as inspiration. Look at what makes their photos so captivating and try to see if you can put little bits of that inspiration into your work. Social media is a very fickle thing. You can be easily forgotten, overlooked. You can care too much about your social media presence. You can take a stand and only share work very occasionally and feel morally superior about it. You aren’t a slave to voracious appetite of the beast, demanding you post daily/twice daily hourly?! Instagram and Threads will pass you by and forget about you if you don’t post. Hopefully, one day, people will know my work not just through Instagram. This website showcases some of my work and some is available to be purchased as prints. I do intend to have a YouTube channel at some point this year and hope it will get a few views. I now take photos because I want to and because I love doing so. I feel my work is good and I have a professional presence. I post daily on Instagram but it is the photos I am proud of and want to share. I don’t care as much about trends because I am teaching myself to care more about the photos I take. I still feed the beast but I don’t care as much if it isn’t what people want to see. It is what I want them to see, to let them see the world through my eyes. After all, isn’t that what all photography is about ?

One Camera - Maybe More Than One Lens?

New Year, new challenges. If I’m honest, I feel as if my photography has been a bit stuck of late. It’s not that I’m unhappy with the results but just that it isn’t progressing as upwardly as I would like. You often imagine that progress is gradual but consistent state. I realise from the benefit or misfortune of being nearly 60, that life very rarely goes in an upwardly straight projection. My kit is absolutely perfect for my photography. I have a small collection of stellar lenses and two brilliant hybrid camera bodies so I do not excuse myself on account of not being ably equipped. I had my first exhibition last September which went very well. I launched my website around the same time and am fairly pleased with the look and function of it. I have asked others who are in both photography and the creative arts as to how I could structure my website to increase traffic and sales of prints. I now have an idea as to how I can do this.

I’m also pleased with how my photographs are turning out. I see a shift in style and mood with my recent work and like how this shows some progression. The title of the post is however related to the challenge that is popular with many photographers ; namely the ‘One Camera, One Lens’. The principle behind this is to focus the photographer on improving their composition skills by requiring them work the scene more. Having a fixed focal length can be seen as a hindrance by some. Conversely, having a single focal length makes the photographer look at the scene more critically and maybe focus aspects of it rather than trying include everything in it. One of my favourite You Tube channels is that of James Popsys. He talks in one of his videos about the best advice he was given when starting out in Photography. He was told by a very experienced landscape photographer, to think of a scene as a jigsaw. To not look at the entirety of the scene as a completed one but to decide whether the component parts of that scene work sufficiently well to produce a coherent image. Having a single focal length can enable the photographer to concentrate on maybe one or two elements by virtue of the self imposed restrictions placed upon them. I do sometimes think my images can be too busy, too many elements. The skill of an artist can often be what you leave out rather than include.

I do however have a problem with using just one lens. I see why it is a good exercise but I also see the merits of having two ways of approaching a scene by using two focal lengths. I have sufficient experience to know that using one lens in certain circumstances, can be a bit like cutting your nose off to spite your face. I have two excellent Leica/Panasonic collaboration prime lenses - a 25mm f1.4 and 15mm f1.7. These give you the full frame equivalent focal lengths of 50 and 30mm respectively. The wider lens allows more of the scene to be included whereas the longer focal length is a standard length. The wider lens enables the photographer to give more context to the subject even if the shot includes maybe too many elements. The skill in this case is to manage how you contain the number of elements while increasing the context. The longer focal length reduces the extent of the scene but enables the focus to be specific. 50mm is not an uncommon focal length for portrait work which does allow a little scene to appear. In truth, I like both focal lengths. I may only take out one of those lenses as part of a two or three lens kit. This doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy using the other but I make a determination as to what the particular assignment requires.

In short, I do think it a worthwhile challenge but I am not a sufficiently experienced professional photographer, to artificially restrict my workflow by choosing only one focal length. For instance, yesterday, every shot I took on my Panasonic GH5ii was with the 35-100mm f2.8 lens. They were either at 35 or 100. I chose that lens because the images I wanted required that flexibility. I was very happy with the results and enjoyed working the compositions using that one lens. If I had used just 25mm lens, I would not have been able to get the images I specifically wanted. One day when i’m rich and famous, I will spend a year shooting exclusively with my Leica rangefinder and the best 50mm Leica lens I can afford. I will justify it as a need to return to improving compositions skills. Until that day, I still need the options my excellent kit allow me!