Peter McKinnon’s recent YouTube video entitled The Valley really struck me. It was highly relatable, and not just because it was filmed in Arizona and Utah. There were several interesting takeaways, and a lot that could be discussed. For now, I want to focus on one thing in particular: the wrench.
I think it’s important to feel a little uncomfortable sometimes. “The enemy of art is the absence of limitations,” Orson Welles famously stated. Oftentimes restricting ourselves in some way will propel us forward or allow us to achieve what we otherwise could not, as we have to approach the situation differently than we are comfortable doing. That perspective shift is where growth happens. Wrenches are good.
If you haven’t yet seen the video, go ahead and watch it now.
“I mentioned I’ve been shooting for 20 years,” Peter McKinnon states at about the eight-minute mark. “Digital gets a bit—maybe not even digital, it’s not even the way to say it—just photography itself just gets a bit monotonous after two decades. There’s a formula that you can follow, and it works—you’ve got a style and you’re used to it and you’re used to everything. So it’s nice to throw a wrench into that mix, and that wrench—for me—that’s film. Really needing to understand what feels like an entirely new craft in so many ways with so many facets to it—it really puts you on your toes. It takes you out of the comfort zone and forces you to see the world through a new perspective.”
“There’s something that connects you with nature,” he continues. “There’s something that connects you to the landscapes you’re standing in when you’re out there loading a roll of film that you’re going to shoot [but] that you can’t see after. There’s something that just feels like true photography. And that feeling I plan on chasing for as long as I can.”
Initially, I saw this through the eyes of a long-time film photographer. Yeah, there is something about loading the roll of film and not knowing what you’ve got until much later that connects you with the scene. But then I saw it through my eyes when I neared the 20-year mark (there’s something about that date…), which was a handful of years back. I desperately needed a wrench, as I was feeling burnt out and uninspired. That wrench for me was Film Simulation Recipes. Shooting straight-out-of-camera was the limitation that I needed to be propelled forward. It’s what rejuvenated and inspired me (still does!), and what I plan to chase as long as I can. For Peter it’s film, for me it’s JPEG Recipes—which, incidentally, do have some similarities.
Mitchell Mesa – Monument Valley, AZ – Fujifilm X-T1 – Velvia Recipe
Of course, Peter McKinnon still edits his film photographs. He spot-removed the horse poop, for example. He very obviously used masks to brighten up the subjects. Nothing wrong with that, as it’s his art. For me, though, post-editing just sucks the life out of me. It’s just not my thing anymore, after having done it for so long without any enjoyment. Thankfully, using Film Simulation Recipes allows me to not worry about editing, and focus more on capturing.
I also saw Peter’s video through my current eyes. For several months now I have been feeling that I need some new limitation—a brand new wrench—to force myself to see through a new perspective. And this video was the aha moment. I grabbed my Fujifilm X100V, turned off the EVF so that it was just the optical viewfinder (no image preview), and turned off the rear LCD. Then I determined not to review my pictures until later, sometime after I was done photographing. This would emulate to an extent that film experience Peter talked about, and that I kind of miss (now that I don’t shoot much film anymore). Doing this, I load the Film Simulation Recipe that I want to use into the camera (or, choose one of the seven that I already have saved), capture some photographs, and then I don’t know what I have until sometime later. It’s definitely a different approach than what I’ve been doing, but so far so good. I think I’m going to appreciate this new wrench.
I just started doing this. Below are a few of the first handful of exposures captured using this technique. The Recipe is one that’s not yet been published, but is coming soon, so stay tuned for that. I can only do this on my X100V and X-Pro1, and not my other models, since it requires an optical viewfinder. Maybe this will be a good excuse to buy the X-Pro4 whenever Fujifilm decides to release that someday in the future. In the meantime, this is how I will approach photography whenever I’m out with my X100V. I think it’s the wrench I need right now.
Pink Arm – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X100V
Empty Cage – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X100V
Twin Palms & Concrete – Surprise, AZ – Fujifilm X100V
I have to admit that the announcement of the Nikon Zf has given me G.A.S. (Gear Acquisition Syndrome). The camera looks stunning! And it seems to be nicely equipped, spec-wise.
There are some who will say that the 24mp sensor is unimpressive—and, yes, it’s not—but it’s all that most will ever need. Some cars have a powerful turbocharged V8, but do you really need it? It might be a whole lot of fun on occasion, but not likely a necessity, unless you’re towing something heavy or maybe on a raceway. That fuel-efficient V4 is a lot more practical, and probably plenty for your purposes. Similarly, the 24mp sensor in the Zf is more than enough resolution, unless you plan to crop deeply or print posters. On Fujifilm, I actually prefer the 26mp X-Trans IV sensor to the 40mp high-resolution X-Trans V sensor, just because more resolution is more cumbersome and can create storage issues, and I simply don’t need that much resolution. I think, for most people and purposes, the 20mp to 30mp range is ideal, and 24mp to 26mp seems like a sweet spot. More than that is overkill for the majority of photographers.
The problem, though, with the Zf is fundamental: there’s no aperture ring on Nikkor Z lenses. Because the lenses don’t have an aperture ring, Nikon was forced to include PASM. Just like the Zfc, the Zf has a shooting mode (a.k.a. PASM) switch, which enables and disables the knobs on top of the camera. For example, if the switch is set to A, the shutter knob doesn’t do anything, and is there only for looks. Of course it makes sense that it does this, but if designed correctly, the step of moving the switch to the correct position in order to activate the knob so that the shutter speed can be adjusted is unnecessary. Also, it’s unintuitive. No aperture control on the lens means that it can’t be set when the camera is powered off. Oftentimes, when I am photographing a scene, as soon as I see what it is that I’m going to capture, I have an idea what I want the aperture to be, and I’ll set it even before I power on the camera. Can’t do that on the Zf or Zfc. Just like the Zfc, the Zf makes the most sense when used in Manual mode, and especially when paired with a third-party lens with an aperture ring.
If you want the full Fujifilm experience, you’d better get a Fujifilm, as the Zf won’t deliver that. The Zfc couldn’t match it, and the Zf won’t be able to, either. That doesn’t mean the Zf isn’t an excellent camera, because I’m certain that it is very good, maybe one of Nikon’s best ever (I’m saying this having never used it personally). I would certainly love one myself, just because I’m a sucker for beautifully designed digital cameras that look and handle retro-like. I think the Fujifilm X-T5 and Nikon Zf will be compared very closely by reviewers and YouTubers, and, in my opinion, the X-T5 wins for several reasons, including size, weight, price, JPEG output/Film Simulation Recipes, and user experience (no PASM); however, the Zf will have strengths that beat Fujifilm, so it depends on what’s most important to the user as to which one wins, as I think they’re very comparable. If you’re in the Fujifilm system, you’re not likely to jump ship for the Zf, but if you’re in the Nikon system, the Zf will be quite tempting, and maybe it will convince you to stay with Nikon instead of switching over to Fujifilm, if you were considering that.
I want the Nikon Zf, but $2,000 could fund a nice weekend getaway somewhere. I think experiences matter much more than gear, and oftentimes it’s better to invest in using what you have in an epic way than to buy something new and miss out on the adventure. G.A.S. is an unfortunate problem, especially when combined with F.O.M.O. (fear of missing out); however, the best way to overcome it is to accept that what you have is plenty good enough—simply use it to the best of your ability whenever the opportunities come, and see what happens.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
“I seem to have trouble loading your site and posting comments… Most comments never got through.”
-TheCameraEatsFirst
I’m not a web designer. I’m not an IT expert. I’m not a programmer. Yet, here I am, playing each of those roles.
I’m a photographer. That’s what I want to spend as much of my time as practical doing. I’m also a writer to an extent, which is something else that I enjoy doing. The Fuji X Weekly website is my outlet for both. I like helping other photographers, and am truly honored that my Film Simulation Recipes have had such an impact on so many and even the industry at large—it’s far more than I ever imagined!
Sometimes, though, I have to set my camera down, and be the Fuji X Weekly webmaster. Who came up with that name, anyway? Webmaster sounds so dramatic. Was it on Peter Parker’s shortlist, and after a coinflip he went with Spiderman instead? Surely it was an IT guy—his office was probably in a dark corner of a basement and he felt really under-appreciated for all his hard work maintaining some large company’s website—who coined the term, so that he might get more respect and maybe a pay raise.
When I first enrolled in college many, many years ago, I didn’t really know what I wanted my career to be. A lot of adults advised me to major in a technology field, like coding or engineering. So that’s what I did. In the very first semester I took this class called Computer Basics, which was mostly about how to use Word and PowerPoint and the internet, which was fairly young at that point—DPReview wouldn’t launch for several more months, and Ken Rockwell wasn’t even on the scene yet. The final project for that class was to write a simple DOS program, something like if you prompt it to answer 1+1 it would give you 2. I struggled so much, and passed the introductory-level class with a C. The very next semester I changed my major to photography.
Problems with the Fuji X Weekly website have been ongoing since it first launched on August 21, 2017. I’ve had to learn how to design a website, and to an extent how to code. I was suddenly a webmaster. I didn’t feel much like the master of the web, and I still don’t. I’ve learned so much about it over the years; however, I’m far from an expert. Mostly, I limp along, and hope that Google has the answer to whatever problems I’m trying to solve. YouTube University has been invaluable!
Lately, though, the problems have grown. It started several months back when I needed to upgrade hosting, because I was pushing the upper limits of the plan I was paying for. Unfortunately, what should have been a seamless switch wasn’t, and I was suddenly experiencing both small and big issues. Next, because my expenses expanded—for both the website and apps—I brought back ads, but through a different company that promised a better experience. That’s been a huge headache, and it hasn’t exactly gone well. I’m fighting to get the ads to be minimal, unobtrusive, relevant, and appropriate (yet cover the expenses)—it’s been a battle, and we’re still not there. I’m on the fence on how I’ll move forward with this. I’ve almost pulled the plug several times on the ads—and I still might—but I’m hoping to get it right at some point soon. I appreciate your patience with this.
Some of the website problems are definitely significant. Probably the biggest one is that some people are experiencing an error, and the page won’t load. The message is “too many attempts” or “too many redirects” or something like that. I haven’t found the root of this issue, but clearing the cache and cookies has sometimes resolved it (so try that if you’re experiencing this problem). I don’t know why some people get this error while most don’t, or why clearing the cache is sometimes the fix. If any of you know the answer, please reach out to me, because I’d love to fix it.
Another issue that just recently came to my attention is that a lot of comments aren’t coming through. There are two aspects to this. First, I moderate the comments. Someone who has never commented before, or who has included a link to a website, will often get flagged for moderation. I get a lot of troll and spam comments that I don’t want published because it ruins the experience for everyone, so moderating these are important. This is my website, so I have the authority—and, really, obligation—to do this. Comments held for moderation haven’t changed as far as I can tell. The second aspect is that WordPress will flag obvious spam comments as spam. I get probably 100 of these type of comments each day, sometimes much more than that. Unfortunately, many non-spam comments are getting flagged as spam for some reason. I dug through the spam folder, and found intermixed with all the spam comments a handful of clearly not-spam comments, some by regular readers who have commented many times before. There are so many spam comments that it’s not practical to go very far back looking for the few non-spam that got flagged, but I know that I need to dig through it daily now. I’m really sorry if your comment didn’t come through. I don’t know why this happened or even when, but hopefully I’ll be able to find and approve all of the non-spam and non-troll comments going forward.
Are there other issues that I’m not aware of? I hope not, but I’m certain there are. Whenever I put on my webmaster cap, I do my best to fix them, but I cannot fix what I’m not aware is broken. If you’ve experienced some sort of issue, don’t hesitate to let me know—it’s greatly appreciated whenever someone does. And if you know how to fix the problem, please share with me the answer! I might technically be in the IT field, and I’ve certainly learned a heck-of-a-lot over the last six years, but I’m still in over his head on some of this stuff. Besides, I’d rather be out with my camera, capturing photos for next Film Simulation Recipe—especially during golden hour, when the light can be magical.
I had never heard of Gear Patrol before, so I had to look them up. Even though DPReview’s traffic has been shrinking (well before the announcement from Amazon, but especially after), they still have more visitors—and those visitors view more pages and stay longer—than Gear Patrol. Obviously they hope that this acquisition expands both audiences with crossover between the two websites.
When I was on the Central Coast of California tour two weeks ago, DPReview was brought up several times. There were a few interesting points made and insights that were discussed. I don’t have any inside information into the business dealings of any of these companies, but I do know a little about the industry in general, so I thought it would be worthwhile to talk about it here on Fuji X Weekly. It’s a hot topic, so perhaps you’re interested in my opinions—if not, that’s ok, just ignore this article.
Amazon conducted a financial audit of their company, as they routinely do, and some alarming statistics were discovered. In response, Amazon looked closely at their divisions that were not profitable (or were perhaps trending towards and forecasted to be not profitable), and made determinations on layoffs, selling “assets” that were no longer so, and shuttering departments. DPReview, which was owned by Amazon, was chosen to close.
Two points that I believe are important, but I think were overlooked in the emotion of the closing news, are: 1) DPReview was either not profitable or was trending in that direction and forecasted to be that soon, and 2) Amazon did make some effort to sell it before deciding to close it. I don’t have any personal information on either of those two points, but it only makes sense, and thinking otherwise doesn’t make any sense. No matter how “evil” or “heartless” you think Amazon is, they wouldn’t close a profitable division—they are much more business savvy than you or I, and profits are profits, and an “asset” that’s losing money isn’t one. I doubt Amazon put much effort into selling DPReview, but they probably sent out a handful of inquiries to some companies within their circle to see if any would take the bait, and apparently none bit, so they decided instead to turn out the lights. They must have thought that there wouldn’t be much interest in it.
But then there was a huge outcry from the photo community. I believe that some offers to buy DPReview began to come in, including from Gear Patrol, so Amazon decided to keep it running for a couple months longer as they worked out the details. For Amazon, it makes a lot more sense to sell than to close, so they were quite happy to have a buyer, and probably sold DPReview at a discount.
So why would DPReview, which has a very large and devoted audience, have trouble turning a profit? The answer is simple: cost. The biggest expense for every company is almost always employees. I don’t know how many work for DPReview, but Google says that it’s at least 11 (I have no idea if that’s accurate). Ken Rockwell, for example, only employs himself, so even though he has a significantly smaller audience than DPReview, he’s able to turn a profit. Another big expense for DPReview is data storage and hosting. Now obviously they use Amazon Web Services (AWS) for this, which means they’ve either received this service for free or at a significant discount as a perk of being owned by Amazon. I use AWS for a couple of really small things, and I pay monthly for it. I can only imagine how expensive it would be for something as huge as DPReview! Not to mention that it’s constantly expanding daily (particularly thanks to the forums). Finally, DPReview is headquartered in an high-cost city, which in prosperous times is no big deal, but in lean times might make a significant difference.
I imagine that Gear Patrol negotiated (as a part of the sale) the inclusion of AWS for DPReview, and probably for a specific time. It could be three months, it could be six, but more likely it’s at least 12, if not up to 36. That gives Gear Patrol time to figure out how to run DPReview leaner before having to absorb that big expense.
What’s in it for Amazon? Well, first, there’s however much money Gear Patrol is paying them to buy DPReview. All of those affiliate links are still there, too, bringing customers to Amazon. And if DPReview can stay afloat, there will be the AWS money, too. Even if Amazon practically gave away DPReview (which they might have), it’s still better for them than to just close it down.
What’s in it for Gear Patrol? Suddenly their audience has more than doubled. If they can incorporate some crossover, there’s a real opportunity. However, they have to be careful, and it’s possible they’ve bit off more than they can chew. The challenge will be running DPReview leaner while not degrading the experience, and not making the crossover off-putting to visitors.
What’s in it for DPReview? The people who work there don’t get a pink slip—at least not everyone, and not right away. People who have worked hard for years to build the website and brand will be able to keep doing so. For those at DPReview (and their families), this must feel like a huge relief, although I’m sure there will still be a lot of stress with the transition.
Open Window Reflection – Pawhuska, OK – Fujifilm X-Pro2 & Fujinon 60mm – Kodachrome II
What’s in it for the photography community? DPReview has been around for a really long time, and there are so many resources on their website, which almost completely disappeared. Now—and at least for now—those resources will still be available to the photography community for some time to come.
Unfortunately for DPReview and Gear Patrol, the very best part of DPReview is now at PetaPixel: Chris and Jordan. That’s a huge win for PetaPixel!
So it seems like a win-win-win-win-win situation. Amazon won. Gear Patrol won. DPReview won. PetaPixel won. The photography community won. Amazing!
I doubt that Gear Patrol reads this website, but just in case, the advice that I’d offer them is this: in 2023, people are a little less interested in the fine details of the specs of camera gear than they used to be, and are more interested in how to use their gear to achieve what they want to achieve. We’ve reached a point (really, surpassed it) of diminishing returns, and the small differences between makes and models matter much less than they used to. Nowadays, anyone can achieve what they want to achieve with whatever gear they have, if only they knew how. There are people who either don’t know this, or who ignore it because it’s easier and more convenient to blame their gear than themselves, so they still get worked up over the insignificant differences, but most people are beginning to realize that the gear they own (or are about to own) is actually much more capable than they are. What they want to know is how to use their gear. They want to know how to achieve what they desire either the simplest way or the best way. If you focus more on that, you’ll find tons of success moving forward in this changing environment.
It’s been widely reported that DPReview is closing down on April 10th. This is huge news! Not only is DPReview one of the oldest photography websites—first launched in 1998 when digital photography was a small niche—but it is one of the most popular. Its closure was a shock to me, and it probably was for you, too.
I’m not afraid to admit that I didn’t know DPReview was owned by Amazon. I was still shooting film when that purchased happened (and I think the only thing I had ever ordered from Amazon by that time was used school books), so it’s understandable that I didn’t notice. I suppose it makes sense that Amazon would want to own a camera tech website at the peak of digital camera sales. I’m sure that DPReview drove a lot of sales for them, and helped Amazon become one of the largest—if not the largest—camera seller in the world. Now that Amazon has a clear hold on that market—which has been a shrinking market over the last decade—DPReview has run its course and is no longer worthwhile to its giant parent company. After all, the many websites with affiliate links back to Amazon—which includes Fuji X Weekly—probably drive more sales nowadays than DPReview does.
Going Out of Business – Prescott, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – “1970’s Summer” Recipe
DPReview had its time and place, but I think its demise was inevitable. I suppose that could be said for every website—including mine—but why I say that about DPReview specifically is this: digital camera tech has gotten to a point where it’s all pretty excellent and everything is more than good enough for most people, and forums are outdated. That’s DPReview’s bread-and-butter.
The bread is pointing out the small differences in digital camera tech that at one time actually mattered, but now matters a whole lot less. If you cannot do amazing things with your gear, it’s not the gear’s fault! At one point it might have been, and that’s where DPReview came in handy. Nowadays your gear can do more than you can, so it’s more important to learn how to achieve what you want with it than to spend your energies studying the extraordinarily tiny differences in dynamic range or high-ISO performance or autofocus speed or lens sharpness. In other words, the attention to fine detail that made DPReview relevant is also what made it eventually irrelevant—or at least less relevant—as the fine details themselves mattered a lot less.
This almost decade-old budget camera takes pretty good pictures.
The butter is the forums. This was a popular digital hangout for photographers for a long time. But, forums just aren’t cool anymore (and haven’t been for awhile). The problem is that trolls and jerks ruin it for everyone else. There’s someone genuinely trying to learn something and gain some insight, and there’s someone with pure gold to offer, but there’s someone else who belittles the person for asking, and another who argues why the pure gold is garbage. While a lot of good happened in those forums, there was also a heck-of-a-lot of toxicity. One bad apple spoils a whole bunch, but unfortunately the forums had a lot of bad apples. I just hope those trolls don’t find their way here, because their behavior is not welcome and will not be tolerated. DPReview shouldn’t have tolerated it, either, but they surely seemed to do so, which made their butter taste bitter for many good-hearted people.
There’s a lesson here that I think might get overlooked but shouldn’t. Technical reviews of camera gear are less important now than they were 25, 20, 15, 10, and even just five years ago. All of the gear is plenty good enough nowadays. What people want to know is how to use what they own. How to get the most out of it. How to achieve what they want to achieve, either the simplest way or the “best” way. That’s what most people are looking for. Fuji X Weekly is successful because I help people achieve the look they want the simplest way (and what I would argue is also the best way, but I understand that’s certainly debatable). DPReview didn’t do enough, in my opinion, to help people in the way that they increasingly needed it. The opportunity was there—they had the audience—they just failed to recognize it and seize it, or perhaps because it wasn’t in the interest of the owner to do so. Now DPReview is dead.
I think it’s easy to say that DPReview’s closure is a result of the economic times—and there’s certainly an aspect of that to the situation; however, I believe that its failure is pointing out an opportunity for whoever will listen. It’s not to fill the void. Certainly some are already eagerly trying to do that—attempting to capitalize on the failure by attracting their audience. No, that’s not where the opportunity truly is. What DPReview’s failure is showing you is that if you can help people in the way that they desire to be helped, there’s an opportunity for success—even in a struggling economy with a shrinking market. Figure out what help people need, and provide them with the easiest and/or best solution. If you do that, you’ll find success. Maybe I should write a book about this?
The best part of DPReview was their YouTube channel. Chris and Jordan will be moving over to PetaPixel’s YouTube channel (which I didn’t know was a thing), and certainly that will quickly become the best part of PetaPixel. I wish them much luck!
I was actually very nervous for several reasons. First, I’m an introvert, and meeting new people always makes me a little apprehensive. Second, Leigh and Raymond are big names in photography. They have been successful YouTubers for many years. They are well connected within the industry. It’s kind of like meeting an actor, musician, or sports star. Third, Raymond does ultramarathons; while I might make a special effort to get to Dairy Queen if Blizzards are half off, I’m definitely not doing normal marathons let alone the David Goggins kind—and we were scheduled for a hike through the desert. I wasn’t sure what it would entail, or how intense this adventure might get.
It turns out that I had nothing to worry about. Raymond was super nice. The hike was easy and relatively short—definitely something someone with my “skills” and “experience” (or lack thereof) could accomplish. We had a great time. It was really good to meet up for some desert photography.
Raymond and I — Captured with RitchieCam on my iPhone
I used my Fujifilm X-T5 and Fujinon 18-55mm f/2.8-4 lens for this outing. I chose and programmed into the camera my Kodachrome 25 Film Simulation Recipe because I thought it would do well in this scenario (which I’ll get to in just a moment) and because I’m converting this Recipe for the X-T5. You see, X-Trans V renders blue more deeply on some film simulations, but the fix is simple: if an X-Trans IV Recipe that uses Classic Chrome, Classic Negative, Eterna, or Eterna Bleach Bypass calls for Color Chrome FX Blue set to Strong, change it to Weak on X-Trans V, and if it calls for Color Chrome FX Blue set to Weak, change it to Off. The Kodachrome 25 Recipe calls for Color Chrome FX Blue set to Strong, so I adjusted it to Weak on my X-T5.
I decided that the Kodachrome 25 Recipe would be good for this scenario because of its characteristics. Kodachrome 25 film had low contrast (for slide film), slightly subdued saturation, and true-to-life (yet Kodak-warm) colors. It was regarded as the sharpest, most fine grained emulsion on the market, and was a popular choice for commercial photography. With an ISO of 25, some found this film to be challenging to use, so the higher-ISO Kodachrome 64, which had a little boost in contrast and saturation, was a more common option. Still, plenty of Kodachrome 25 pictures graced the pages of publications such as National Geographic and Arizona Highways, and I wanted to replicate that classic aesthetic for my desert images. It was forecasted to be overcast with perhaps some peeking sun, and the Kodachrome 25 Recipe does well in that weather—not too warm or cool, and not too much or too little contrast.
If this had been film, I would have shot two rolls of 24-exposure Kodachrome 25 (yes, it was by chance exactly 48 exposures). Of course, Kodachrome has long been discontinued, so shooting with this Film Simulation Recipe on a Fujifilm camera is probably the closest you can get to shooting with the emulsion. The Kodachrome 25 frames in this article are my 12 favorites from that desert outing with Raymond. I hope you enjoy!
Rock Ridge – Goodyear, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodachrome 25 Recipe
Raymond Photographing Flowers – Goodyear, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodachrome 25 Recipe
Flowers in the Dry Desert – Goodyear, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodachrome 25 Recipe
Remnants of a Tree – Goodyear, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5 – Kodachrome 25 Recipe
Captured with the new “Negative Film” Picture Control Effect on my Ricoh GR III.
Fujifilm, pay close attention: Ricoh just did with their GR III and GR IIIx what you won’t do with your X-series cameras.
Fujifilm has stated that they’re moving away from Kaizen and to expect less of it going forward, but some other camera makers—including Ricoh—are embracing it. In fact, Ricoh just added a new Picture Control Effect, which is their Film Simulations equivalent, to their GR III and IIIx cameras. This new Effect is called Negative Film, and it looks pretty good so far to me. It’s not really like anything on Fujifilm exactly—perhaps it could be described as somewhat similar to a cross between Classic Negative and PRO Neg. Std—but it does produce an aesthetic that’s easy to appreciate.
I want to point out that the GR III was released almost at the same exact time as the Fujifilm X-T30. Since the release of the X-T30, Fujifilm has introduced three new Film Simulations—Classic Negative, Eterna Bleach Bypass, and Nostalgic Neg.—plus some other JPEG options like Color Chrome FX Blue, Clarity, and Grain size. None of it has trickled down to the X-T30 (or X-T3). Even the X-Pro3 and X100V—premium models, supposedly—weren’t given the Kaizen love that they (really, Fujifilm’s customers) deserve. Yet little ol’ Ricoh not only created a new Effect for apparently no reason other than the fun of it, and they gave it to the almost four-year-old GR III just because they wanted to make their customers happy.
Captured with the new “Negative Film” Picture Control Effect on my Ricoh GR III.
I have a ton of advice that I’d give to Fujifilm if they were ever interested in hearing my opinions. I mean, I have a pretty good pulse on a big chunk of their customer base, and I’ve done more than most to bring them new customers, whether directly or indirectly, so you’d think they would be interested in hearing what I have to say. The very first suggestion that I would have for them is to do more Kaizen and not less. I get that it costs time and money, but fostering a happy long-term repeat customer base is priceless, and well worth whatever it takes to do that. A lot of photographers go from brand-to-brand-to-brand, or they begrudgingly put up with a brand for a long time because they don’t want to endure the cost and headache of switching, and there is a surprisingly large amount of disloyalty among customers. Yes, there are the outspoken fanboys—I am one for Fujifilm—but while their voices are loud, their numbers are surprisingly small. So if a brand can actually make more of their customers loyal, which they do by showing them that they matter and are appreciated, it can have a significant long-term impact. Of course, if your customers don’t think you care about them, they’ll be more quick to leave when another brand offers something new and exciting, or if they think that another brand cares more about their customers than the one they’re currently using.
Ricoh just made sure that their customers know that they care. Fujifilm, make sure that your customers know you care!
Below are some examples of photos captured using the new Negative Film Picture Control Effect on my Ricoh GR III.
Wow! It’s been crazy the last several days. Fujifilm released the X-T5 on the 17th. Not everyone got their orders.
Let’s back this up. Amazon apparently listed the X-T5 too early on announcement day. By contract, everyone is supposed to go live no earlier than a certain time, but Amazon jumped the gun. I preordered an X-T5 on Amazon because I had reward points that I wanted to use. When the 17th came around, some people received their preorders that day. For others it shipped that day, and arrived in the next day or two. For me? Nothing. Those who ordered on Amazon were left in the dark. What I didn’t know is that Fujifilm decided to punish Amazon for their sins and not give them any cameras to sell; sadly, only Fujifilm photographers who ordered through Amazon were actually punished. Is it Amazon’s fault? Yes. Is it Fujifilm’s fault? Sure—they could have done something else to teach Amazon a lesson, while still allowing people to receive the cameras they ordered. Is it my fault? No. Is it your fault? No. But you and I didn’t get our gear when others did. I know this is a first-world problem, and in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter, but it is something that many people have experienced.
Amazon is a huge company, and Fujifilm sales are a tiny drop in a massive bucket. If Fujifilm stopped selling to Amazon altogether, it wouldn’t hurt Amazon in any way, shape, or form. I get that Fujifilm has to hold them accountable. I get that it wasn’t fair to their other retail customers. But let’s be real: crap rolls down hill. Who ended up with the crap? Me. You, if you, too, ordered through Amazon. Fujifilm’s customers are who got punished, not Amazon. I’m sure Amazon gave two seconds to this situation, and hasn’t cared one iota since. When they get their cameras, they’ll sell every single copy, and it will have such a small impact on the bottom line that you need a powerful magnifying glass just to see it. Those trying to be patient with their Amazon preorders might have to be extremely patient—I’ve heard that it might be sometime in January before orders are shipped. I don’t know that for a fact, but it’s what I have heard, and it may or may not be true—I hope it isn’t true.
So how did I get my X-T5? I called around to local camera stores, and I found one in stock. Luckily, Foto Forum in Phoenix had a body-only copy, plus one bundled with the 18-55mm f/2.8-f/4 kit zoom. I purchased the one with the lens. If you are still waiting for yours to ship, maybe call around to local camera stores to see if they still have an X-T5 in stock, and if so purchase from them instead.
That’s my story. What about you? Did you buy a Fujifilm X-T5? Did it arrive or are you still waiting?
People have already begun asking me for my impressions on this camera. I think a number of you are waiting to learn a little more about it before spending so much money. It’s way too soon to provide you with anything valuable. I’ll tell you my way-too-soon initial impressions, but please take them with a large grain of salt. I’ve only barely begun to use the camera and really haven’t had a chance to properly test it. I’ll give a full review later.
First, let’s talk about megapixels. Do you need 40? If you crop deeply, print posters, or just love to pixel-peep, then maybe. But if you don’t crop deeply, don’t print posters, or don’t pixel-peep, then you definitely don’t need 40mp—it’s way overkill. Fortunately, it doesn’t seem to negatively affect the speed of the camera or even the file transfer speed when using the Fujifilm Cam Remote app. Unfortunately, it does take up more space on the SD Card, phone/computer, and storage, and uploads to my cloud storage are noticeably slower. There’s pluses and minuses to 40mp; I don’t anticipate the pluses coming in handy for me very often. For some of you, though, it is an important upgrade.
I haven’t put the autofocus improvements to the test whatsoever, but through three days of shooting, I haven’t noticed it being any more snappy than my X-E4. The only thing I noticed is that face detection locked onto a face that was far away, which I wouldn’t expect to happen on my X-E4. Since I wasn’t trying to photograph the person, it actually wasn’t a positive thing, but I can see this being an improvement. I haven’t even attempted continuous tracking or anything like that yet, so I can’t speak of it.
I was really excited for HEIF, but discovered that it disables Clarity. That’s disappointing. No HEIF for me, since I use Clarity a lot. Speaking of Clarity, I was also very disappointed that it isn’t any faster on the X-T5, and the Storing pause is identical to X-Trans IV. Fujifilm should have spent some time speeding this up, in my opinion. Oh, and somehow I keep bumping the drive switch, and accidentally switching to CL or HDR, both of which disable Clarity—I’ll have to figure out how to not bump that switch.
While the X-T5 is smaller than the X-T4, and just a little bigger than the X-T1 and X-T30, it is definitely heavy. Seems like a similar weight to the X-T4—not sure if it is or isn’t, but it’s hefty. I personally prefer the weight of the X-T1 or X-T30, but if you use large lenses a lot, you might appreciate the solid base of the X-T5.
The reason that I purchased the Fujifilm X-T5 is because this camera has the new Nostalgic Neg. film simulation. What do I think of it so far? If Eterna and Classic Chrome had a baby, it would be Nostalgic Negative. It has some similarities to both of those film simulations, with soft gradations in the shadows similar to Eterna and with some Eterna-like colors (particularly the warm colors), and with contrast, saturation, and an overall palette more similar to Classic Chrome. I’m not a huge fan of default straight-out-of-the-box Nostalgic Neg.—I was actually initially disappointed—but with some adjustments it can become magical. I love it! Nostalgic Neg. is another analog-esque film sim from Fujifilm that’s sure to become a classic. Expect some recipes soon!
I don’t have any other observations yet. I hope to do some more serious experimentations soon, and when I do I’ll share those impressions with you. In the meantime, here are some straight-out-of-camera Nostalgic Neg. pictures that I captured with my Fujifilm X-T5:
Two Ducks – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
311 – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Caution: Nature – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Believer – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Cat Clock – Prescott, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Dusk Blazer – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Spiderweb Rocks – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Don’t Shoot – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Warning – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Golden Light Chair – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Red & Gold – Prescott, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Going Out of Business – Prescott, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Hyundai – Prescott, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Short Train – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Around the Bend – Arlington, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Lakeview – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Log on the Lake – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Private Dock – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Can’t See the Forest – Lynx Lake, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
Irrigation Mist – Buckeye, AZ – Fujifilm X-T5
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
I had big plans for this project for these days, but life had other plans. Specifically, Covid. I know what you’re thinking: didn’t you just have the flu a few weeks ago? Yes, I did. Now I have Covid. Well, I’m almost recovered now, but I was very sick during the days that I captured these pictures, and I was limited to what I could capture in and around the house. Most of these photographs were taken in the backyard.
If you’re not sure what this short-term project is, the concept is simple: I’m photographing only with my Fujifilm X-T1 from the announcement day of the Fujifilm X-T5 (November 2) until the release date (November 17). Why? First, even though the Fujifilm X-T1 is eight-years-old (and approaching nine), it is still such a great little camera. It took three years for Fujifilm to bring this model to the market because they wanted to get it right, and it was one of their most important cameras ever released. The Fujifilm X-T1 was one of the first, if not the first, Fujifilm cameras that widely appealed to professional photographers. It was Fujifilm’s most successful model at the time—outselling all the previous cameras—and launched the extremely successful X-T line. The X-T5 is the latest iteration. This project will give me a better understanding of how the X-T5 has evolved from the original model. It also allows me to demonstrate that previous models, including the original X-T1, are still really good.
Hopefully, now that I’m not nearly so sick and my quarantine period has ended, I can do some of the photography that I was intending to do. I want to really see what the X-T1 is capable of, and with some luck I’ll be able to do that before this project comes to a close in the coming days. Once my X-T5 arrives in the mail, the X-T1 will be going back on the shelf, at least for a little while. I don’t expect the new camera to be wildly better than the first iteration, but soon enough I’ll know for sure just how much improved it is. And, of course, I’ll write all about it, so stay tuned!
I get asked all of the time when to use which Film Simulation Recipe. With over 250 on the Fuji X Weekly App to choose from, it can be difficult to know when each recipe should be chosen. Besides, you only have C1-C7 Custom Presets on your Fujifilm camera (most of you, anyway). Which seven recipes should you have programed? When should you select them?
The problem with trying to answer this question is that it’s a highly subjective endeavor. While I might like a certain recipe for a particular situation, you might not. There’s not a right or wrong answer, just what works for you and what doesn’t—and I cannot say whether any particular recipe will work for you or not. Only you can answer that for yourself, and you have to try a recipe to know. With that said, I attempt to give good advice. In each SOOC broadcast I recommend a few recipes for various situations. Still, I’ve really struggled with how to be helpful to those asking for direction—that is until I watched a video by Grainydays, a YouTube channel about film photography, in which photographer Jason Kummerfeldt tries to give advice on when to use which film stocks. You can view it below:
Jason has a similar dilemma. Since film choice is such a personal thing, how do you say when to use which? It’s the same thing for Film Simulation Recipes. His solution is simply to demonstrate what he uses and state what he likes, and maybe you’ll like it too; I’m going to do the same thing for recipes. I’ll tell you what my preferences are, and invite you to try them too if you want. If you don’t want, that’s cool. There’s not any one way—and especially no right or wrong way—to do this. Instead, figure out what works for you, and do that. If you’re not sure, perhaps this article will be helpful to you.
I’m going to suggest seven recipes for you to program into your Fujifilm camera, and state when to use each. Since recipes are (for the most part) generationally specific, I’m going to make this a series of articles to cover most Fujifilm models. In this first one we’ll cover “newer” X-Trans IV cameras: X-Pro3, X100V, X-T4, X-S10, X-E4, and X-T30 II. This should also apply to X-Trans V cameras (from the reports I’ve received, X-Trans IV recipes are fully compatible with X-Trans V, although I have not tested this myself to know for certain) and newer GFX models (although the rendering will be slightly different).
Kodak Portra 400 v2 is a recipe that does well at anytime during daylight hours, and as the name suggests it is a good option for portrait photography, but I’m going to recommend it specifically for “golden hour” near sunrise and sunset. This really could be your primary use-all-of-the-time recipe, and that’s why I suggest placing it in C1, but when the sun is low to the horizon, make sure that this is the one you’re shooting with. I personally use this recipe frequently.
Denny’s Days – Beaver, UT – Fujifilm X-E4 – “Kodachrome 64”
Kodachrome 64 is another one that could be your go-to everyday-use recipe, but specifically I want to suggest it for daytime (non-“golden hour”) photography. Obviously it can also be used for when the sun is low to the horizon, too, but I think it is one of the best options for when the sun is not low—from mid-morning to mid-afternoon. This is one of the few recipes that you’ll almost always find programmed into my camera.
Evening Clouds Over Wasatch Mountains – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-E4 – “Kodak High Definition Plus 200”
If it’s thick overcast and rainy, the Kodak High Definition Plus 200 recipe is an excellent option. Yes, it’s pretty good in daylight, too (even “golden hour”), but give it a try on drab overcast days—I think you’ll really appreciate just how well it does in that situation.
For natural light indoor photography, my top choice is the Kodak Ultramax 400 recipe. This is another great all-rounder that could be used in pretty much any daytime situation and produce excellent results, but specifically I’m recommending it for natural light indoor pictures. For artificial-light indoor images, use the recipes for nighttime photography below.
11th Street – Astoria, OR – Fujifilm X100V – “Serr’s 500T”
If it’s after dark, my top choice for nighttime or artificial light photography is Serr’s 500T. This is a very blue recipe, so it isn’t a good option for many daytime situations, but from just past sunset to just prior to sunrise, this is the one that I would most recommend, especially if there are warm artificial lights.
For an alternative process recipe—a fun option for unusual results—my top recommendation is Xpro ’62. Use it anytime of the day or night, as it is surprisingly versatile. The results will be different, and perhaps unexpected, yet the experience will be a lot of fun, so give it a try!
Alternatives for “alternative process” photography:
Round Window – Pismo Beach, CA – Fujifilm X100V – “Kodak Tri-X 400”
My all-time favorite recipe is Kodak Tri-X 400, so it should come as no surprise that it is my top recommendation for monochrome photography. It’s not the most popular recipe on Fuji X Weekly, but it is the most popular B&W recipe. Definitely give this one a try if you’ve never done so before.
You have plenty to choose from, because I just suggested to you 42 different Film Simulation Recipes! Of course, there are so many other recipes that I could have listed—just because one didn’t make this list doesn’t mean that it’s not good; however, I do feel that this is a good set—not only the seven suggestions, which I believe are a winning C1-C7 combination, but the alternative options, too. With that said, don’t let an exclusion from this list discourage you from trying a particular recipe, because you never know when one just “clicks” for you, and you find a new favorite. The top picture in this article was captured with a recipe that I didn’t recommend, yet I do really like that recipe and do recommend it, and I even use it myself sometimes, including recently. It’s a good reminder that this is all subjective, and you might not prefer any of my recommendations, but instead have seven that I didn’t mention as your C1-C7 custom presets. So, I guess, the conclusion is to try every recipe until you find the ones you love and fulfill your photographic needs—but, if you’re not sure, maybe start with these 42.
Next up will be recipes for “older” X-Trans IV cameras—the X-T3 and X-T30.
Well, because I’ve been under the weather, I’ve had the opportunity to read several books that have been sitting on my shelf for awhile. Some of these I’ve read before. Some I had previously only skimmed through. Some I hadn’t even cracked open yet. Now, with extra time on my hands, I have been able to read through a number of photography books. Below are the ones that I’ve been reading. If you are looking for some photographic resources and/or inspiration, I recommend adding these to your library—I’ve included a link to Amazon if you’re interested in purchasing any.
The Art of Photography by Bruce Barnbaum — A great practical guide to improving your photography — Amazon
Authentic Portraits by Chris Orwig — Solid advice for improving your portrait photography — Amazon
Ansel Adams’ Yosemite by Ansel Adams — Inspirational pictures of one of my absolute favorite locations — Amazon
Lost America by Troy Paiva — A fun book of abandoned places light-painted at night — Amazon
The Way Home by June Van Cleef — A book by the person who taught me photography — Amazon
Curious Cameras by Todd Gustavson — If you like learning about unusual gear, this is the book — Amazon
Steam, Steel & Stars by O. Winston Link — Amazing B&W photography of steam trains at night — Amazon
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Rob Morgan is an internationally touring bass guitar player. He’s a super talented musician that’s often in-demand. He’s a creative director for live shows and world tours. Maybe you’ve even seen him play before in an arena, dive bar, or coffee shop—he’s even performed on The Today Show. Rob’s out on tour right now, so maybe you can catch him live if he’s coming to a city near you.
Aside from the music and podcast, Rob is also a photographer. It started out as a hobby—simply another creative outlet—but has turned into something much more. His photographs have been printed in media globally and he’s regularly commissioned to photograph musicians. He often uses a Fujifilm camera loaded with a Film Simulation Recipe.
Curious yet? I hope so! Keep reading to learn much more about Rob and his photography.
Grand Tetons from Snake River overlook – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: Hi, Rob! You play bass guitar—how did you get started with that? Why the bass?
Rob Morgan: There’s a common trope in music: a band needs a bassist, so they convince a guitar player to pick it up. Me, I’ve always been in love with the electric bass. The moment I got one for Christmas when I was 14, it was game over. I knew that was it for me, and there’s never been a Plan B.
Pre-Show drinks in the Greenroom with Joel Bowers – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: What are the biggest music projects that you’ve been involved with? What are your most memorable musical moments? And what are you currently doing?
Rob Morgan: I mean, if we’re talking about memorable musical moments… it’s always the weird ones that stick out, no? A drummer (mistakingly) trusting a fart fifteen seconds before going on stage and playing in front of thousands in Beijing, China—our guitar player and I laughed during the entire set, knowing he was going to need a new drum seat after this show.
But opening for Foo Fighters at Fuji Rock Music Festival in Japan a few years back while playing bass with the band Owl City was definitely up there. Getting to have a private moment with Dave Grohl and telling him how his band’s documentary Back and Forth was one of the reasons I didn’t quit music years before while in a dry spell… that felt like a full circle moment.
As for right now, I’m currently sitting on a bus as we drive through Washington on tour with Caitlyn Smith.
Backstage with Caitlyn Smith – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: Let’s switch gears. How did you get started in photography?
Rob Morgan: Growing up, there were these photography kits for kids—it came with a film camera and instructional book—that my mom got me back in the day, but I didn’t really start diving in deep until a few years ago. I was halfway through an Asia tour when I found myself wandering around Tokyo with my friend, guitar tech and stage manager Alex Perkins, who always had a Fuji X camera on him. On a tour that big, you don’t have access to your instruments outside of shows, and through him I realized one of the things I love most about photography: at any given moment, you can enter into the creative process.
Michael Shynes on stage – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: Tell me about your cameras. Why Fujifilm? What do you shoot with now?
Rob Morgan: You can absolutely get a killer synth sound on a laptop, but there’s something about the tactile feeling of twisting a knob to change a sound on an analog synth that I love. While on that tour, I picked up a Fujifilm X100 for the same reasons. The fact that you changed the aperture and shutter speed via actual knobs (instead of touching a screen) reminded me of the cameras I grew up with, and the X100 series is still the closest digital version of a film camera I’ve found—its small size and vintage profile also play a large part in my love for it.
Artists and musicians (uncomfortably) can sense a large DSLR being pulled out instantly. This thing feels far less invasive and my propensity for zone-focusing and manually dialing in the exposure in advance means I can be extremely fast.
Through the years, I kept advancing through the line, moving to an X100S, X100T, X100F, X100V, and back again to my current camera, an X100F. The reason for going backwards is a pretty unpopular opinion: although the technical specs of the X100V are “better” it lost the mojo of the earlier models. The feel of the metal, the tilting screen, and even the shape all seem clunky to me, and I found myself reaching for my camera less often.
I love the X100F’s 35mm equivalent prime lens, but I also travel with the TCL and WCL adapters. I feel like I see the world in 35mm, but If I’m taking portraits of an artist, I throw on the 50mm TCL. If I’m bringing my camera in close quarters, on stage, or in the tour bus, I like the 28mm focal length (that the WCL allows me to capture) while in the middle of it all.
Pre-show shots with Caitlyn Smith – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: What Film Simulation Recipes do you use and why?
Rob Morgan: Whether it’s Daniel Kramer’s photographs of Bob Dylan, the authentic moments backstage captured by Danny Clinch or the iconic photographs of Anton Corbijn… as I started paying attention to the images that moved me, I realized the majority of them were shot on Kodak Tri-X 400 film (often pushed to 3200). As I said, I treat my X100F like one of my film cameras, and, thanks to your “Pushed Tri-X” recipe, I’m able to take it a step further and make it feel like I’ve loaded the camera with a roll of that film. It’s seriously been a game-changer for me! Shooting JPEG+RAW also allows me to not question it and focus on light and composition knowing that if it calls for something else later, I have the option in my back pocket. Sometimes, I’ll switch over to your HP5 recipe to change it up, but 99% of the time I stick with Tri-X.
Danny Burke photoshoot for Klergy – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: How does being color blind affect your photography?
Rob Morgan: It’s tough to say. I’ve always had a propensity for the timelessness of black & white photography despite being red-green color blind. Ted Grant said, “When you photograph people in color, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in black and white, you photograph their souls!” I love that, and I think I’d still be shooting the way I do even if I wasn’t color blind, but it’s definitely cemented my style. Now that I shoot portraits of artists, record labels will often ask for color options, too, so I’ll shoot RAW and use a wallet-sized grey card to adjust the white balance in Lightroom. But normally, they’re bringing me in to shoot because they want my gritty B&W style.
Andrew McMahon and daughter – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: Tell me about your behind-the-scenes photography. What do you try and convey through these pictures?
Rob Morgan: I’m fully aware of how incredibly fortunate I am to get to travel the world playing music. But, once you do anything on a regular basis, it’s easy to start taking the small moments for granted: whiskey cheers in the greenroom before walking on stage, a candid moment on the tour bus, the band goofing off during soundcheck…. Like anyone else diving into photography, I started taking photos of the world around me. As I started sharing them online, and people connected with them, I realized how rare of a vantage point I have. I’m no Linda McCartney, and I’m not married to one of The Beatles, but the candidness and behind-the-scenes trust seen in her photography have always been something that inspires my work. I’m glad artists and fans connect with the photos I’ve taken, but at the end of the day, it’s purely selfish—I want to remember all the tiny details of this wild ride.
Waiting pre-show– Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: Tell me more about your interest in street & documentary photography.
Rob Morgan: I adore the documentary photography of Dorothea Lange, and she’s often quoted as saying, “The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.” That’s everything to me. Whether I’m on tour with an artist or traveling Europe with my wife, Sarah—as long as I stick to my rule of NO ‘CHIMPING’ (looking at a photo you just took), photography helps me to see the moment and my surroundings more clearly. The street photography approach of “F/8 and be there” (setting your aperture to f/8 and hyper-focal zone-focusing) has been massively impactful to my approach, whether backstage or wandering a new city. It’s taught me to anticipate a moment and has given me the speed to capture it, especially if I have a bass in my left hand. See a moment, grab the camera, snap the shutter, put it down, and get back to rocking out.
Frankfurt, Germany – Photo by Rob Morgan with Fujifilm X100F
FXW: Thank you so much, Rob, for carving out some time while on tour to do this interview!
Ocean Kayaks – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
You should always have a camera with you.
The Fujifilm X70 is so small that it fits into my pants pocket, making it convenient for carrying literally everywhere. When I head out the door, no matter where I’m going, I shove the X70 into my pocket, along with my wallet, keys, and phone. I don’t always use it, but sometimes the opportunity presents itself, and I’m grateful to have a camera with me.
I was recently out running some errands with my wife, Amanda, and the kids. After we finished our tasks, Amanda asked, “Want to go to Lake Pleasant, just to check it out?” I’m always up for an adventure; besides, over 20 years ago, Amanda and I used to go to this lake, and we hadn’t been back since. So I eagerly answered, “Let’s go!”
Old Dock, New Dock – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
I hadn’t been to Lake Pleasant in a long, long time. The drive out there was vaguely familiar yet a whole lot different. Much had changed. While the body of water is still outside the city—way out in the lonely desert—the city sprawl is inching closer and closer, and the lake has seen quite a bit of development. I’m sure it happened slowly, but, because I hadn’t seen it in so long, it was a bit shocking to me. There weren’t many people there, but I’m sure on a holiday weekend or during the summer heat the place is probably extremely crowded. We didn’t stay long, but because I had a camera with me I was able to capture these 15 pictures.
You never know when photographic opportunities will present themselves, so it’s best to always be prepared. I would have been disappointed that I didn’t have a camera if I hadn’t had the X70 in my pocket. Instead, because I did have it, this impromptu trip to the lake yielded some interesting pictures, which will serve as reminders to this quick adventure for years to come.
Kayaker – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Short Rope off a Long Pier – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Water Wench – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Water Watching – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Paqua – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Wench & Docked Boats – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Repair Kit – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Dolly – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Slip Away – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Barrel Cactus Blue – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Pleasant Lake – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Desert Water – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
Saguaro Hill – Lake Pleasant, AZ – Fujifilm X70 – “Kodak Portra 160”
I mentioned at the beginning of this article that I had also put my phone into my pocket, which is an iPhone 11 with the RitchieCam camera app on it. For those who don’t know, I have my very own iPhone camera App, available in the Apple App Store. Even if I had failed to bring a Fujifilm camera, I would still have had my phone. Or, in the case of this particular trip, in addition to the X70, I also had RitchieCam on my iPhone (selecting the Sunny Day filter), and I used both to capture pictures.
Deserted Boats – Lake Pleasant, AZ – iPhone 11 + RitchieCam – “Sunny Day”
Hole View – Lake Pleasant, AZ – iPhone 11 + RitchieCam – “Sunny Day”
Lake Vista – Lake Pleasant, AZ – iPhone 11 + RitchieCam – “Sunny Day”
Scorpion Bay Kayaks – Lake Pleasant, AZ – iPhone 11 + RitchieCam – “Sunny Day”
Orange Dolly – Lake Pleasant, AZ – iPhone 11 + RitchieCam – “Sunny Day”
Note: I wrote this article, which I stumbled across today, over two years ago, but for some reason never published it. I replaced many of the original pictures and corrected some words and grammar, but otherwise I kept it the same.
I love film photography, but digital is so much more convenient. The cost of digital photography is paid upfront, while with film there’s a per-frame cost with each exposure, which is just getting more and more expensive. I rarely shoot film anymore, but I like the look of film. The best of both worlds is when I can get a film aesthetic straight out of a digital camera. That might sound pie-in-the-sky or even pretentious; if I like the look of film, why not just shoot film? If I shoot digital, why not just edit like everyone else?
Fujifilm cameras can create something film-like while delivering digital advantages, and that’s incredible! With digital you don’t have to send off your exposures to a lab or have your own lab set up somewhere in your home. You can know immediately if your frame is any good or not—no need to wait hours or days or sometimes longer. And you are not limited to 12, 24, or 36 exposures. There’s a reason why most photographers shoot digital, yet there’s a reason why some still go through the hassle of shooting film. I think Fujifilm is kind of a bridge between the two.
Rainbow in the Woods – Farmington, UT – Fujifilm X-T1 – “Kodak Portra 160“
Using software, such as Alien Skin Exposure or any of the many preset filter packs that are available, it’s very easy to turn a RAW file into something that looks analog. I’ve done that for many years, and I appreciate the results. If I can skip the software step and have a finished image straight-out-of-camera, that’s even better. That saves me some serious time! For many people, editing a picture is half the fun, but for me it’s not. I much prefer to not sit at a computer manipulating photographs. That’s just my preference, and it may or may not be yours, and that’s perfectly fine—there’s no right or wrong way, only what works for you. Shooting Fujifilm cameras using recipes to get film-like pictures straight-out-of-camera is what works for me.
I’m amazed at all the different looks that I can get out of my camera using my different Film Simulation Recipes on Fujifilm cameras. Fuji only gives so much control in-camera— they’re constantly providing more customization options with each new generation, but it’s still limited. Despite that, there’s a lot that you can do to create many different looks. It’s possible to mimic various film aesthetics without using any software. Thanks to Fujifilm’s vast experience with film, they’ve been able to infuse into their camera-made-JPEGs an analog soul that’s frankly missing from most digital pictures.
The photographs in this article are all straight-out-of-camera JPEGs that weren’t edited, with the exception of some minor cropping in some circumstances. They’re all from Fujifilm cameras, including an X-E4, X100V, X-T30, X-T20, X-Pro2, X100F and X-T1. In my opinion, in one way or another, they resemble film—an analog look from a digital camera. That’s nothing short of amazing!
10 example pictures, just to illustrate the point:
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
As the owner of a somewhat popular photography blog with millions of page-views annually, it should come as no surprise that I see a lot of internet trolls. I delete a lot of these comments, because their only purpose is to stir up trouble by being purposefully mean-spirited and unreasonable. These comments literally have zero value, and if a value was assigned to such comments, it would be a negative number. The world would be a better place without these people, which is a really sad reality. I mean, what kind of legacy is that? The world is better without you? Who wants to be that person? It would seem like nobody, yet there are so many examples all over the place where that’s exactly the case. If you are a troll, stop what you are doing, and instead spend your time and energy doing something good, something that has a positive effect on those you encounter.
According to Wikipedia, an internet troll is “a person who posts inflammatory, insincere, digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as social media, newsgroup, forum, chat room, online video game, or blog), with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses, or manipulating others’ perception. This is typically for the troll’s amusement, or to achieve a specific result such as disrupting a rival’s online activities or manipulating a political process. Even so, Internet trolling can also be defined as purposefully causing confusion or harm to other users online, for no reason at all.” Merriam-Webster defines it as “to antagonize others online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content,” and, “to harass, criticize, or antagonize someone especially by provocatively disparaging or mocking public statements, postings, or acts.”
Unfortunately, trolls aren’t going away. This post won’t stop them. All I can do is spare you from them as much as practical. However, what I can tell you is that the number of troll comments has been increasing on this website. Also, sometimes trolls can come across initially as genuine, and, like a wolf in sheep’s clothes, only after a level of trust has been established do they reveal their true colors.
This is more valuable than a troll’s words
What is the best way to deal with trolls?
– Heed the sign: don’t feed the trolls. That simply means don’t take the bait—they’re desperately hoping for your response, so don’t give it to them. Don’t even respond to their comments—ignore them. This is the best strategy.
– Call them out. If you do find yourself in a back-and-forth with a troll, call them out. State in your response that you know they are a troll. Oftentimes, for some reason that I don’t understand, calling a troll a troll is like pouring water on the Wicked Witch of the West. I think this works because they often take the angle of being the superior person, so shedding light on their charade takes away that false position they’re hiding behind.
– Block them. I try to; however, some get through, either because they took the wolf-in-sheep’s-clothes approach, or because I let them so as to prove a point, or because their initial comment was borderline trollish, and I erred on the wrong side. Troll’s comments add no value whatsoever, so blocking these comments is a gain and not a loss.
I searched my image library for “troll” and this image came up because it is a trolley.
Today, a troll left a nasty comment on this blog (I blocked it… it was never published). The person had a unique name, so I wondered what would turn up if I Googled them. As it turns out, this person just goes around saying hateful things across the internet. That’s all they do. Literally, the only online records of this person are troll comments, mostly of the worst kind (and often repeating the same words). Likely the identity they use for these comments isn’t their real name, and perhaps they have many aliases. I took screenshots of these comments, and I was going to include them in this post, but I think it’s counterintuitive to give the person the satisfaction of that, so I’m not going to do it—I’d rather them think that they wasted their time (which they did).
Trolls are internet parasites. They suck the fun and life out of it for no reason other than they get some weird jollies from it. If you are a troll, I implore you: stop being a part of what’s wrong with the world, and instead give your life some much needed meaning by saying words of kindness and encouragement. We could all use more of that—a lot more—and a whole lot less of unnecessary spitefulness.
The Fujifilm community is absolutely wonderful! There are so many kind and helpful people who make it great, and I appreciate all you guys a heck-of-a-lot. My hope for this website has always been for it to be a positive resource for the community, and I hope that you find it to be that way. I try not to let the trolls ruin it (like they do on so many other websites), and if one does, I apologize for their awful behavior. If you have a concern about this, feel free to reach out to me anytime.
This post is by popular demand! Ever since I started sharing pictures captured with my new-to-me Fujifilm X70, I’ve been bombarded with requests to compare the camera with the XF10 and the Ricoh GR models. And I fully understand why: there aren’t very many truly pocketable APS-C fixed-lens cameras, yet these are perfect for travel, street, and to just carry everywhere and use literally every day. There’s definitely a draw to them, and I can’t fathom why they’re not even more popular. Every photographer should want one of these, or something like them, but they often stay in a state of obscurity. I find it odd, but that’s the way it is.
We’ll start this off with a comparison of the two Fujifilm models: X70 and XF10. What’s similar and what’s different? Which one is better? Of the two, which should you buy?
At first glance you might think they’re the same camera, because they look very similar, and have nearly identical dimensions. The XF10 is lighter than the X70 because it has more plastic in its construction, and it feels like a cheaper camera (which it is). The lens is optically the same, but the X70 has an aperture ring while the XF10 doesn’t. The X70 also has a tilting rear screen, something not found on the XF10. And then there’s the dial: PASM vs Shutter Knob—regular readers of this blog know already that I don’t prefer PASM (putting it mildly), but maybe you do. The XF10 doesn’t have a hot shoe, or C1-C7 Custom Presets. The X70 has a 16-megapixel X-Trans II sensor, while the XF10 has a 24-megapixel Bayer sensor—I think, as far as image quality goes, they’re pretty similar, and I wouldn’t call one output “better” than the other. The XF10 is newer, released more than two-and-a-half years after the X70.
Fujifilm XF10
There are some things, such as Snapshot, that I like about the XF10, but there are some things, such as a generally sluggish performance, that I don’t. Between the two, it’s clear that the X70, despite being an older model released in 2016, is the more premium option, and it is the camera that I prefer of the two. The X70 is a keeper if you’ve got one; the XF10 is dispensable. With that said, the X70 can be hard to find (those who own them rarely sell them) and are often expensive. The XF10 is much easier to find, but finding a bargain on one can still be a challenge. If you are on a tight budget or don’t have much patience (and don’t mind the limitations of this model), the XF10 is a very good runner-up, but if you want the better option of these two, the X70 is the one to go with. Both models have been long discontinued, so don’t expect to find one brand-new, and if you somehow do, know that it will come with a premium price tag; otherwise, you’ll have to be satisfied with something that isn’t new but is new to you.
How does the X70 (and XF10) compare to the Ricoh GR cameras? I’m most known for my Fujifilm Film Simulation Recipes, but lesser known are my Ricoh GR Recipes; I know a thing or two about both brands. I own a GR and a GR III. The GR II is essentially the same camera as the GR (just minor improvements), so everything that I say about the GR in this discussion will apply to the GR II. The GR IIIx has a different focal-length lens, but is otherwise very similar to the GR III, so what I say about the GR III applies also to the GR IIIx. I hope this makes sense and helps to simplify things a little.
The Ricoh GR models are not as pretty as the Fujifilm models, but what they lack in beauty they make up for in compactness. While the X70 and XF10 are small, the GR cameras are really small, which makes them even easier to carry with you everywhere. The GR III is just a little smaller than the GR I & II. Functionality and feature wise, all of the GR models are more similar to the XF10 than the X70. The rear screens are fixed. There’s a PASM dial. There’s no aperture ring around the lens. The GR cameras aren’t laggy like the XF10, though, plus there’s a hot shoe.
Ricoh GR
Image quality on the GR cameras are similarly good compared to the Fujifilm models. My opinion is that the GR, which was released in 2013 and features a 16-megapixel camera, has the “worst” technical image quality of all of these cameras, but there’s some sort of pixie dust that gives it a special quality—I’m not exactly sure what it is, but there’s an unexpected appealing quality to the images (this applies also to the GR II, released in 2015). The GR III, which has a 24-megapixel sensor and was released in 2019, has superior technical image quality over the GR, but lacks a little of that pixie dust. Is technical image quality more important, or that hard-to-define special quality? Your answer will reveal which GR camera to consider. I personally like the GR III a little more than the GR.
What’s better, though: Fujifilm or Ricoh? That’s a really tough decision. I do like Fujifilm’s JPEGs a little more than Ricoh’s, but they’re both very good; the “color science” and approach to JPEG output is different, so you might prefer one over the other (I personally prefer Fujifilm’s, no surprise, but everyone is different). Between the XF10 and any of the GR models, I would go with Ricoh, but Ricoh isn’t the hands-down winner—the XF10 is nearly as good, but the GR cameras are slightly better, in my opinion. Between the X70 and Ricoh, I give the X70 the edge, because the design and shooting experience is superior. Even though the GR models are noticeably smaller and fit just a little easier into my pockets, I’d choose to take the X70 with me instead, as it’s more fun to shoot with. The GR III is the only model that you can still buy brand-new, so if you don’t want to purchase a used camera, it’s your only option.
The best case scenario is if you can own multiple cameras, because each have their advantages and disadvantages. There are times when each of the models discussed in this article could be the best choice. If you own a Fujifilm camera and a GR camera, that allows you to choose which one you think will work best for you in the situations you anticipate encountering. However, if it can only be one, I recommend the Fujifilm X70 (even though I’ve only owned it for a short time), followed very closely by the GR III, then followed very closely by the GR or GR II (get the GR II if the price is the same), then followed very closely by the XF10. Some might disagree with that ranking, but that’s my opinion. I do hope this article is helpful for those trying to decide which one to get.
None of these cameras are perfect by any means, but they are all perfect for shoving into a pocket and carrying with you everywhere. Can’t afford any of them? Don’t worry, just use your phone—if you have an iPhone, be sure to try my RitchieCam camera app! This can serve a similar purpose, and since you already have your phone on you, it’s not necessary to also carry a camera. While I have a phone with RitchieCam in my pocket, I’ll often have a Fujifilm X70 or Ricoh GR III in a pocket, too.
Download the Fuji X Weekly App for free today! AppleAndroid Download the Ricoh Recipes App for free today! AppleAndroid Download the RitchieCam App for iPhone for free today! Apple
I read a couple of articles over the last several days that bothered me, both of which stated that you must shoot RAW. These articles come up often—it’s nothing new. I’ve written about it before, and even before that. The sentiment of “only amateurs shoot JPEG” and “you really should shoot RAW” get old. Those are tired, worn out statements that are largely based on “truths” that are no longer true. My hope with this article is to simply provide a counter-point. This blog and all of you who use Film Simulation Recipes are a strong testament that speaks louder than this article ever could, so I’ll try to keep it brief.
First, I want to make this very clear: do what works for you. If RAW works for you, do that. If JPEGs work for you, do that. If editing JPEGs works for you, do that. If film works for you, do that. Or any combination of those things or anything else, do that. Whatever you have found that works for you, that’s what you should be doing. If what you are doing isn’t really working for you, try something else. There’s no right or wrong way to do things, just different ways, some of which work for some and some of which work for others. Different strokes for different folks, right?
One reason why I think the “RAW vs JPEG” debate keeps coming up is because more-and-more photography consumers (not photographers, but those who view photographs) detest photo manipulation. Photoshop has become a bad word. Whether it’s a photo contest where the winner exceeded the editing allowed by the rules (and so has their title stripped), or the magazine cover where the girl no longer looks like how they really look, or the picture in the news where things were added or subtracted to change the meaning of the image, or the image that’s just been edited so much that it’s no longer believable—whatever the story, sometimes photography consumers feel that photography is dishonest, and the manipulation of an image equals a manipulation of the one viewing it. There appears to be a lack of honesty by photographers, particularly when they edit so much. You might agree or disagree with this sentiment, but the sentiment is real. I know this because I once defended Steve McCurry’s use of Photoshop, and because of this someone accused me in a college paper of wanting little girls to have low self-esteem.
I think a lot of these “RAW is better” articles and videos stem from a response to this sentiment, which is fine. I don’t blame anyone for trying to defend what they do when someone criticizes it. Trust me, I get it. Where I do have a problem is that many times in the defense of RAW the JPEG photographer is insulted. The argument is, “I have to shoot RAW because JPEGs suck.” Or, “Only amateurs use JPEG.” It’s as if the JPEG shooter must be put down in order to make the RAW shooter feel superior. That’s just lame. Yes, there was a time early in the development of digital camera technology where the straight-out-of-camera JPEG was no good and so RAW really was the only viable option for quality images, but that day has long passed, especially for (but certainly not limited to) those who use Fujifilm cameras. That argument is old and tired and no longer based in truth. It once was true, but now is a myth. Perpetuating that myth helps no one. Insulting people definitely doesn’t help.
Of course, Ansel Adams is always brought into this. Well, he was the darkroom master, so obviously he manipulated his photos to a significant degree. Usually an Ansel Adams quote is included, which proves the point that you should never rely on straight-out-of-camera pictures. Adams never would have. Except this ignores his work with Polaroids—he loved Polaroids, something a lot of people are unaware of. There’s a whole chapter (entitled One-Step Photography) in one of his books where he discusses the benefits of not having to use a darkroom. Ansel Adams is hugely inspirational, and his words are highly motivating, but I don’t think he would be strictly a RAW shooter and staunchly against straight-out-of-camera JPEGs—it is a disservice to the legendary master to just assume he would be against JPEGs.
The real arguments that should be made to defend the use of RAW are these: – It’s my art, and as the artist I get to decide how it’s created. I understand that not everyone will like it, but a lot of people seem to, so I’m going to keep doing it my way. – I capture undeveloped digital images that, like film, must be developed through a process, and I have a specific process for it that works well for me. – Images have been manipulated to create the final picture since the beginning of photography—over 150 years!—so what I’m doing is nothing new and well within the traditions of the art. – I enjoy using photo editing software, and adjusting the pictures is half the fun for me.
Straight-out-of-camera JPEG from my Fujifilm X-E4 using the Positive Film recipe.
Notice how all of those arguments are strong, and none of them insults anyone. Unfortunately, there will always be those who disagree, and you’ll never change their minds. Perhaps just being as honest and straightforward as practical will help. If you swapped the sky with another sky, just say so. If you removed people from the frame, don’t hide that fact. Don’t make the manipulations that you did a big secret, which makes people believe that you’re hiding something from them. Or do keep it a secret—it’s not really any of my business what you do or don’t do, and I don’t really care. It’s your art, after all, so you get to decide what you do and what parts of your process you want to keep a mystery.
My process is straightforward. I program Film Simulation Recipes into my cameras, and I use camera-made JPEGs that are unedited (aside from minor cropping and straightening). While I basically don’t edit anymore, I certainly used to. I used to be a RAW photographer. I used to spend up to 30 minutes on each picture in software. That process worked alright for a time, but my current process works for me now. It saves me so much time, it makes creating photographs more enjoyable, it allows me to be more in-tune with my camera and the scene (because I have to get it right in-the-field or else), and I still get the look I want—the aesthetic I would have made if I had edited a RAW image in software. I love it! But I fully understand that it’s not for everyone. If it works for you, great! If it doesn’t work for you, great! If it works for you sometimes but doesn’t other times, great! You’ve got to do what works for you, and ignore those who say that there’s only one “right” way to do things.
The “RAW vs JPEG” debate needs to end. Photography consumers don’t care how you achieved your picture, except in those cases where people feel that they were duped by a heavily manipulated image. I suggest being upfront about how much editing you did, if you did a lot—but that’s up to you, and is between you and your audience. Otherwise, nobody cares if you shot RAW and edited in-software or if it’s a straight-out-of-camera JPEG, or anything else in-between. One process isn’t better or worse than another—they each have advantages and disadvantages, so it is simply a matter of if what you are doing works for you or not. If it works, that’s awesome! If it doesn’t, then try something else. Mic dropped, debate over.
It’s my pleasure to introduce you to the wonderful photography of Gerardo Celasco! Although you might not have seen his pictures before, there’s a decent chance that you’ve seen Gerardo. He’s a model-turned-actor (among other things, including internationally competing show jumping horse rider, accomplished volleyball player, and financial expert) who does photography as a hobby. He has a lot of talent, and whatever he does he does very well—photography included.
Although he was born in Miami, Gerardo grew up in El Salvador. He later moved to Texas and studied at Southern Methodist University. His home base is now in California, but he frequently travels internationally, and of course brings a camera along—a Fujifilm camera—to capture the moments.
Gerardo is perhaps best known for playing Miguel Lopez-Fitzgerald on the NBC drama Passions from 2006-2007. He also played Carlos Peña in Moneyball, Mark Kovac in two episodes of Bones, Xavier Castillo during Season 5 and 6 of How To Get Away With Murder, Ty Salazar in Next, and Dr. Nick Vega in a recent episode of Good Sam, among other things.
In the coming-soon-to-Netflix series Devil in Ohio Gerardo plays Detective Lopez. We’ll get more into this in a moment, but below you’ll find the trailer, which you should definitely take a moment to watch right now.
Fuji X Weekly: Hey, Gerardo! I’m truly honored for this opportunity to interview you! Let’s begin at the very beginning: where did your early interests in photography come from? Were cameras and pictures a big part of your childhood?
Gerardo Celasco: We didn’t grow up taking a lot of photos in my family and we didn’t have lots of cameras around when my siblings and I were growing up. My dad was an engineer and my mom worked in sales and retail for a shoe company in El Salvador. To this day, we still don’t take many photos when we’re together. When we’re on a trip we always say, “We have to take more group photos!” And since I always have a camera on me, I’m always the one taking the photos so I’m rarely in the pictures.
Fuji X Weekly: How did you get started in photography?
Gerardo Celasco: I got started in photography pretty early on, but not necessarily behind the camera. When I was in high school I was asked to be the model for a campaign in El Salvador. Roberto Aguilar was the most sought out photographer in El Salvador. No one was doing what he was doing, and I got to be in front of his camera several times—it was my first time being in front of the camera. We became really close friends, and I learned so much from watching him work. He moved to Europe and became a professor in France for a few years, and is now living in London. Roberto was my first influence in photography, but I can also say he was my first influence in “performing” as well. I never went to drama school. I have a degree in Finance from Southern Methodist University—a life in entertainment wasn’t really in the cards for me growing up in El Salvador and the son of entrepreneurs.
Photo by Gerardo Celasco
Fuji X Weekly: What made you pursue photography further, take it more seriously?
Gerardo Celasco: This image [above] is my first one that shocked me when I saw it imported into my computer. I believe I shot it with a Leica D-Lux 4. There was no plan—it was on auto—and I got that “bokeh” everyone talks about. I didn’t know how that happened or how to recreate it, so that inspired me to really learn about the art form. I decided to enroll into a UCLA extension course for Photography, and did that for a few months. That’s where I learned about aperture and depth of field and things like that.
Fuji X Weekly: What was your most memorable photography experience?
Gerardo Celasco: I think that first image I shot that shocked me is the most memorable. It’s what inspired all of my other images. I still love the photo so much. It’s very raw, very real. I can feel so much when I see it. It was shot in El Salvador in La Libertad near the beach. It was sticky and damp. The two women were working and cooking on open fire in that heat. Maybe it’s because I was there, but I feel all of that every time I see the image.
Photo by Gerardo Celasco
Fuji X Weekly: What was your first camera?
Gerardo Celasco: My first camera was one of the really small Canon PowerShots. It was a matte silver. I carried that thing everywhere—way before we had cameras in our cellular phones. The list goes on from there: Canon 20D, Leica D-Lux 4, Canon 5D Mark II, Fujifilm X100T, Sony a7, Fuji X-T2, Fuji X-Pro3—that is the trajectory into mirrorless, but more importantly how I found Fuji. I also shoot film with a Canon AE-1 Program, and my everyday—always with me—Olympus Mju II, which always sparks a conversation or a laugh when I pull it out.
Fuji X Weekly: What made you buy your first Fujifilm camera? What do you shoot with now?
Gerardo Celasco: A trip to Morocco with my 5D led me to give up on my entire Canon photography gear. It was so heavy, and was very distracting. You couldn’t really get away with shooting discretely with a camera that size. At the time my good friend, cinematographer and camera/steadicam operator Eduardo Fierro, was a Fuji shooter. His exact words when I complained about my Canon were “Vendé esa mierda y compráte la Fuji” (which means: sell that shit and buy a Fuji!). So that’s what I did, and the X100T was my first Fuji. I now shoot with the X-Pro3, paired with a Fuji 27mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2, or 16-55 f/2.8.
Photo by Gerardo Celasco
Fuji X Weekly: What is your favorite aspect of Fujifilm cameras?
Gerardo Celasco: What I love most about the Fuji lineup—other than the obvious size and price—is the menu and the film simulations. The user interface is great and easy to get around. But for me, the film simulations are what really sets it apart from anything else. I don’t do any post editing on my images (because I haven’t learned Capture One or Photoshop), and I shoot everything JPEG (mainly because I don’t know what to do with a RAW file, and have never felt the need for it). Fuji X Weekly is my go to App for Film Simulation Recipes. Funnily enough, I believe that is how we met: I sent you a DM on Instagram, praising all of your Film Simulation Recipes and the RitchieCam App on the iPhone.
Fuji X Weekly: That’s right! I definitely remember that day—it was a nice surprise, and a bit of a shock. By the way, which Film Simulation Recipes do you like best?
Gerardo Celasco: My favorite film simulations are Portra 400, Portra 800, and the Ilford black-and-white ones. I honestly like the output of the Fuji Portra recipes more than the images I get with my film camera using real Portra 400 film—and it’s also cheaper.
Photo by Gerardo Celasco
Fuji X Weekly: What do you photograph most now?
Gerardo Celasco: I like shooting life, but I don’t like calling it “street photography.” I don’t have a style, and I honestly don’t know what I’m doing most of the time. I just shoot when I’m inspired. And I shoot what seems interesting to me at that moment. But I never have a plan. I just simply shoot, and share my images. I don’t like the pressure of someone asking me to photograph something or an event—I get so much satisfaction in just showing up with a camera and capturing beautiful moments when I haven’t been asked to, and then sharing those moments.
Fuji X Weekly: Who are your photographic influences?
Gerardo Celasco: I don’t have a list of photographers that have influenced me—I can probably only name a handful of them—but it’s not like I’m trying to do what they did. Vivian Maier, Ansel Adams, Garry Winograd, Henri Cartier-Bresson—those names comes to mind without me cheating and looking at my bookshelf.
Photo by Gerardo Celasco
Fuji X Weekly: How has your acting career influenced your photography?
Gerardo Celasco: Most people think that being an actor influenced my photography, but what it did was enhance it. Photography (in front or behind the camera), was my first step to becoming an actor—I’ve always felt that photography led me to my acting career. Being on set has made me more comfortable in front of the camera but at the same time it inspires me to want to shoot more. I’m always chatting up the cinematographer or the camera operators when I am on a set—mostly I’m just asking lots of questions about composition and lighting. Those men and women know so much, and I just try to learn and soak up as much as they are willing to share. Their work is what inspires me today.
Fuji X Weekly: Tell me about your upcoming Netflix series, Devil in Ohio.
Gerardo Celasco: Ah. Devil in Ohio! I feel like you and your wife have been patiently waiting for that. I think I was shooting that when I found RitchieCam and we started talking, only to find out you were the same person behind Fuji X Weekly! We’re only a couple weeks away from the premiere day. It will air on Netflix on September 2, and all 8 episodes will be available.
The show is based on a book by the same name written by Daria Polatin. Daria is also the showrunner for the show. The story was inspired by true events, which always makes it more interesting. I would describe it as a family drama meets a suspense/thriller. It has elements of both. Emily Deschanel (who I worked with many years ago on the final episodes of Bones), plays Suzanne Mathis, a Psychiatrist who is caring for an underage girl who has turned up at hospital clearly in distress. No one comes looking for the girl, so Suzanne decides to take her into her home until they can find a family for her. Doesn’t take long to realize that the girl has escaped from a cult, putting the family and their relationships in danger. I play Detective Alex Lopez, who is a transplant from big city Chicago. He’s a fish out of water, and by-the-book, but also has no idea what he’s dealing with by taking on this case. We had a great group of actors, great directors, and an incredible crew. I hope people find it and enjoy it!
Photo by Gerardo Celasco
Fuji X Weekly: Gerardo, thank you so much for taking time out of your day to allow me to interview you—it’s been such a pleasure!
Gerardo Celasco: I’d just like to say thank you for including me in this. I’m a big fan of Fuji X Weekly, and for you to ask me to be a part of it is really cool.
Check out Gerardo Celasco on Instagram (Here and Here)—give him a follow plus “heart” some of his pictures. Mark your calendars now, and be sure to binge-watch Devil in Ohio on September 2nd!
When the Nikon Zfc was announced in 2021, I preordered it, and waited a long time for it to come. When it finally arrived, I pulled the Zfc out of the box and began to use it, and I was quickly disappointed. I said that it was most similar to the Fujifilm X-T200, yet significantly bigger, heavier, and more expensive. Still, I put the camera through its paces, and even created 11 Nikon Z Film Simulation Recipes using the Zfc. Then the camera went back into its box, and I strongly considered selling it.
Right now I’m working on my full-review of the TTArtisan 35mm f/1.4 lens (coming very soon!), and that means using it. In the process, I made four more recipes—I guess I couldn’t help myself! Three of these are black-and-white and one is color. If you add these four to the 14 others, I now have 18 Film Simulation Recipes for Nikon Z cameras!
Obviously, I made these JPEG recipes on the Zfc, so it will render differently on the full-frame models, but I’m not sure exactly how differently, as I’ve never used a full-frame Z camera. The reports have been positive, though, so I assume that they work well, including on the more expensive bodies—I just have no first-hand experience myself.
For those who might not know what “Film Simulation Recipes” are, they’re JPEG camera settings that allow you to achieve various looks (mostly analog-inspired) straight-out-of-camera, no editing needed. It can save you a lot of time by simplifying your workflow, and it can make the process of creating photographs more enjoyable.
These will be the last Nikon Z recipes that I create, as I decided not to keep the Zfc. If you are interested in buying it (bundled with the 28mm pancake and TTArtisan 25mm lenses), let me know. It’s gently used, and has spent more time in its box than out of it. Just send me a message if you are interested. Why am I selling the Zfc? Partly because I have never been fully satisfied with it, and partly because I’ve yet to figure out where it makes sense in my photographic process—it seems out of place in my bag. If sometime in the future Nikon makes a better effort on a similar camera, I’ll certainly consider buying it; however, the Zfc was just not the one for me.
Dramatic Monochromatic
Nikon Zfc — Dramatic Monochromatic
Similarities to using a red filter with B&W film.
Picture Control: Monochrome Quick Sharp: 0.00 Sharpening: +3.00 Mid-Range Sharpening: +2.00 Clarity: +1.00 Contrast: +1.00 Brightness: +1.00 Filter Effects: Red Toning: B&W Active D-Lighting: High High ISO NR: Low White Balance: Cloudy WB Adjust: B6.0 G6.0 ISO: up to 6400
Nikon Zfc — Dramatic Monochromatic
Nikon Zfc — Dramatic Monochromatic
Nikon Zfc — Dramatic Monochromatic
Nikon Zfc — Dramatic Monochromatic
B&W Push-Processed
Nikon Zfc — B&W Push-Process
Resembles the contrast of B&W film that has been push-processed.
Picture Control: Graphite Effect Level: 100 Quick Sharp: 0.00 Sharpening: +2.00 Mid-Range Sharpening: +2.00 Clarity: -2.00 Contrast: +2.00 Filter Effects: Yellow Toning: B&W Active D-Lighting: Extra High High ISO NR: Low White Balance: Direct Sunlight WB Adjust: A0.0 G0.0 ISO: up to 6400
Nikon Zfc — B&W Push-Process
Nikon Zfc — B&W Push-Process
Nikon Zfc — B&W Push-Process
Nikon Zfc — B&W Push-Process
B&W Film
Nikon Zfc — B&W Film
Reminiscent of black-and-white negative film.
Picture Control: Carbon Effect Level: 100 Quick Sharp: 0.00 Sharpening: +1.00 Mid-Range Sharpening: +1.00 Clarity: -2.00 Contrast: +1.00 Filter Effects: Orange Toning: B&W Active D-Lighting: Extra High High ISO NR: Low White Balance: Natural Light Auto WB Adjust: A0.0 G0.0 ISO: up to 6400
Nikon Zfc — B&W Film
Nikon Zfc — B&W Film
Nikon Zfc — B&W Film
Nikon Zfc — B&W Film
Vintage Agfacolor Fade
Nikon Zfc — Vintage Agfacolor Fade
Reminds me of Agfacolor slides from the 1930’s
Picture Control: Graphite Effect Level: 50 Quick Sharp: 0.00 Sharpening: 0.00 Mid-Range Sharpening: +1.00 Clarity: -2.00 Contrast: +1.00 Filter Effects: Red Toning: Blue Green 0.00 Active D-Lighting: High High ISO NR: Low White Balance: Incandescent WB Adjust: A6.0 M1.0 ISO: up to 3200
Nikon Zfc — Vintage Agfacolor Fade
Nikon Zfc — Vintage Agfacolor Fade
Nikon Zfc — Vintage Agfacolor Fade
Nikon Zfc — Vintage Agfacolor Fade
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
Back in May, while on a lengthy roadtrip, I stopped in Santa Rosa, New Mexico, for the night. A small town along historic Route 66, Santa Rosa pretty much exists to provide food, fuel, and beds for travelers passing east-and-west through The Land of Enchantment. Like a lot of old Route 66 towns, Santa Rosa has seen better days—there are many abandoned buildings along the highway, and some others that appear to not be far from their inevitable fate of abandonment.
Santa Rosa might be best known for a scene in The Grapes of Wrath, where Tom Joad watches a freight train cross a bridge over the Pecos River. Scars from The Great Depression are still visible if you look hard enough. The biggest tourist attraction is the Blue Hole, a natural swimming pond fed by a vast underground water system. While visiting Santa Rosa, I was asked by locals a couple of times, “Are you here for the Blue Hole?” I guess it’s a big deal, but I didn’t make time to see it.
I did make time to photograph a few of the abandoned buildings. One was an old Exxon gas station. This particular service station offered two grades of gas, two stalls for vehicle maintenance, and two restrooms. You could buy maps or a soda from a vending machine. Inside was an old Dairy Queen sign that I do not believe originated from this particular gas station, but probably another building elsewhere in town, perhaps owned by the same person.
In an empty grass-filled lot next to the gas station I found some old playground equipment. There may have been a campground or RV park there at one time, but the playground is the only thing left. I suppose on hot summer nights, the ghosts who still use the teeter-totter can get a coke from the abandoned Exxon next door.
Exploring and photographing places like this is both fascinating and frightening. It’s like a large time capsule that broke open years before being discovered, now filled with retro nostalgia and haunting decay. You don’t know what you’ll find—what’s hiding behind a corner—and even if there isn’t any danger, it’s still not safe. Going into abandoned buildings is never safe. I do believe that it’s important to photograph these places for several reasons: they’re always changing (due to nature and vandals) and will eventually be completely gone, they offer a glimpse into a previous time that’s long gone and fading from our memories, and to document the way societies deals with unwanted junk from broken lives and broken dreams. As Troy Paiva put it, these places are “steeped in Wabi-Sabi feelings of accepting loss and finding beauty and nobility in decay.”
The sun was low while I was there, preparing to set behind the western horizon—I had about 30 minutes of wonderful “golden hour” light to work with. I used my Fujifilm X-E4 with a Fujinon 27mm f/2.8 lens attached to it to capture these images. The Film Simulation Recipe that I used for these photographs was Kodak Portra 400 v2, which is one of my favorites—the Kodak-like colors and tones are just so lovely—an excellent option for this particular scene and light.
Ring – Santa Rosa, NM – Fujifilm X-E4 – “Kodak Portra 400 v2”
Nobody pays me to write the content found on fujixweekly.com. There’s a real cost to operating and maintaining this site, not to mention all the time that I pour into it. If you appreciated this article, please consider making a one-time gift contribution. Thank you!
