Camera Day On The RMS Queen Mary
This past weekend was National Camera Day. The ocean liner-turned-hotel RMS Queen Mary permanently parked in Long Beach held an event. There where vendors, and I was able to snag a spot on a private tour with Nikon brand ambassador Vincent Versace. This was one of the hardest days in photography I’ve had so far.
I brought 4 rolls of film, two color and two black and white: Ilford HP5+ and Kodak Portra 400.
This past weekend was National Camera Day. The ocean liner-turned-hotel RMS Queen Mary permanently parked in Long Beach held an event. There where vendors, and I was able to snag a spot on a private tour with Nikon brand ambassador Vincent Versace. This was one of the hardest days in photography I’ve had so far.
I brought 4 rolls of film, two color and two black and white: Ilford HP5+ and Kodak Portra 400. I had no idea what to expect. Lighting conditions on the Queen Mary are rough, very rough. You go from hard sunlight to interior lighting from back in an era where indoor lights where a full 4-5 stops darker than modern lights. This isn’t reflected in most modern digital pictures and walk through. As such, 400 speed film at box speed is too slow for indoors on this ship. ISO 1600 is barely light enough being forced to work with F/2 and F/1.4 at 1/60 and 1/30th of a second. Down in the engine room/hold of the ship, that isn’t even close, that is about 4 EV below that as well. On top of that, the tour went from light to dark and ended with a model shoot. On top of everything Versace based his photo shoots around modern digital cameras with high speed sensors and auto focus, shutter and aperture cameras. I do regret not trying out a Nikon Zf that the folks at Nikon where allowing people to borrow for free.
Registration started at 3 PM, and my tour was at 5 PM, so I killed some time with some above deck and top deck shots. Portra 400 and HP5+ at box speed.
Next, we went below decks. It got really dark here. I burned half a roll of HP5+ and reloaded the second roll and set the meter to 1600, and attached my speedlight. Needless to say that even down here, finding a shot that you could meter at 1600 was difficult. Still, a few hits.
From the holds of the ship, we where shown three locations with studio lighting and models posing for us while Versace went over lighting. The lesson itself was worth the price of the VIP tour. Portra 400 is very versatile film designed for digital editing. I was able to bring out the background and really bring out the color of the models in post. Still: I wish I had some Portra 160 for this one.
Bottle of champagne that was set against a light. This was an easy one. A table with a plain tablecloth and flier with a bottle of champagne that was pre-arrange and lighting was pre-done. This was an easy one.
On the way out I ran into some of the models again. They where pretty chill about me snapping some extra shots. My forte is street photography, shooting ambient light. Back in my element, I do my best work.
NOTE: Two versions for the lady in the hall ways, changing the saturation to try and get the vibe of the 1920s and better capture the earth tones inside the ship. I am split on which ones I like more, saturated or de-saturated.
Supposedly the ship is haunted. They had a separate ghost tour, but the tour guides did in fact tell me that the passenger suite B340 is one of the haunted rooms. Its locked, but they have a light on, and you can look inside. Metering is intentional here. Portra 400 has really great dynamic range, but pushed HP5+ black and white is super spooky.
One last photo. I saw a fellow photog standing on the rocks outside the ship pointing his camera through a gap in the fence on some rocks. I decided to check it out. I’ll give this one as a freebie. If you are going to see the RMS Queen Mary to take pictures look for a chain running between two fences past the bow. Bring a 50mm lens, and get the camera between the gaps where the chain is. The 50mm focal length with 35mm/FX sensor is absolute perfect, and the gap will line you up close to perfect, just get the fence bits out of the photo. All I had left was 3 shots left of HP5+ at 1600. This looks fine as is, but really doesn’t do it justice.
Shootout: Kodak TriX vs Ilford HP5+
I’ve long been a Kodak guy. TriX 400 for decades has been my go-to black and white film. When I wasn’t shooting TriX, I was shooting the gamut of other Kodak B&W films. Ilford is a legendary black and white film. When I first started in the film era, the “serious” black and white only photographers generally gravitated towards Ilford. Ilford film, Ilford developer, Ilford photo paper.
Ilford in general is the anti-kodak. While TriX has that harsh grainy contrast, Ilford tends to be softer, with finer grain and stronger mid-tones. Previously having shot some FP4+ at box speed in daylight, left me unimpressed. But for April’s Beer And Cameras, I was going to give HP5+ a direct head to head shootout against TriX, both being native 400 speed films.
I’ve long been a Kodak guy. TriX 400 for decades has been my go-to black and white film. When I wasn’t shooting TriX, I was shooting the gamut of other Kodak B&W films. Ilford is a legendary black and white film. When I first started in the film era, the “serious” black and white only photographers generally gravitated towards Ilford. Ilford film, Ilford developer, Ilford photo paper.
Ilford in general is the anti-kodak. While TriX has that harsh grainy contrast, Ilford tends to be softer, with finer grain and stronger mid-tones. Previously having shot some FP4+ at box speed in daylight, left me unimpressed. But for April’s Beer And Cameras, I was going to give HP5+ a direct head to head shootout against TriX, both being native 400 speed films.
The Shots
Left is HP5+, and right is TriX 400. Subject is something that used to be a big staple of my work. Classic cars. Both of these films 20th century Pedigrees. On the righ we can see that TriX has that hard contrast TriX is famous for. In this case it looks sharper, but you can see more detail with the HP5+. In post, we could probably edit the ilford, but likely just wind up like the TriX one. I personally like the TriX here. Looks sharper.
Next up is some Abstract wall art, paired with some sort of hose port. The TriX is more shadowy, and the contrast of the black and white wall art is the same between the two. The HP5+ has better detail of the foreground, and is much clearer here. Win for HP5+
Outside the Boomtown Brewery. Left is HP5+, Right is TriX. The extra contrast from the TriX gives more tones, and more details, and a bit sharper. The HP5+ has a more vintage look, which works great with the industrial looking tank out front of the building. The illusion is broke with the bubble-car style SUVs on the right. Either case, both are fine. I lean to the TriX here, but you could argue for either
Up next is another favorite subject of mine: Dark stuff. Meter the light source, so we have an overall dark, moody and shadowy scene. Usually these require post processing. But lets compare the unedited photos first. HP5+ on the left, TriX on the right. HP5+ has more detail, but TriX 400 gets more shadow. Neither are publishable as is, but lets see what happens when we apply contrast. Does the extra detail of the HP5 get preserved?
I think still in the miss pile, if due to lack of real subject, but we can get a better view. TriX seems to have better details with highlights, especially look at the couch in the foreground, but the background, HP5 comes out on top. Either case, really a wash
Up next we have some architecture and lines. Left is HP5+, and right is TriX. Here you can really tell the difference between films. Both, are equally good. We have the top right element of the building is a solid mid grey on the HP5+ and a light shade of black on the TriX. The harder contrast of the TriX produces darker more aggressive shades of grey. the HP5+ is greyer and more comforting. They are both equally as sharp, and equally as appealing, very much a presence here. This one is a draw, they are both really good
Up next is some street art. Someone stenciled some "Black Lives Matter" graffiti on the sidewalk. Combination of spray paint on concrete gives a very stark, bold, statement-oriented piece. HP5+ on the left, TriX on the right. The TriX is harder contrast and thus, the gives the monolithic piece some pop to it. The HP5+ has much more detail of the concrete. Both are acceptable. Both are good.
HP5+ on the left, TriX on the right, again. We now move from street to high art in a near by gallery. We can see how both handle abstracts such as lines. For the lines themselves, its about the same. For the sides with the columns, we can see some more contrast with the TriX giving it a slight leg up, but either would be acceptable
For the last two we have some people shots. This is Adam, who runs LA Film lab, and Beer and Cameras LA. Left is HP5+ and right is TriX. I think he's a little more clear with the HP5+, so giving this a win for the HP5+ getting people, especially in shade or shadowy conditions.
Last is the Beer and Cameras meetup. You have a good variation in skin tones here, so its a good test of shooting people of various races. HP5+(left) dealing with mid-tones better makes it a clear winner for dealing with people.
Conclusion
Each film is going to have diffrent strengths depending on subject and lighting conditions. TriX works better for objects and stark urbanscapes. Especially makes the image look sharper where hi-contrast is needed. For shooting mixed light, and people, HP5+ wins.
Rules Of Street Photography
I don’t think there are any real rules of street photography. Many post similar, slightly different variations, of a photographers “do no harm” philosophy, but there is no consensus on any of it, and many historical street photographers blatantly didn’t follow it. Weegee shot corpses, drunks and bums. Bruce Gilden is quoted on camera as having no morals. There is the laws on what you can and cannot take pictures, but even that isn’t followed. But none-the-less, everyone has their own code. I thought I’d preface with that, before you think that there is some cosmic force that will damn you for eternity for following this, and this is just my take, and how I shoot.
I don’t think there are any real rules of street photography. Many post similar, slightly different variations, of a photographers “do no harm” philosophy, but there is no consensus on any of it, and many historical street photographers blatantly didn’t follow it. Weegee shot corpses, drunks and bums. There is the laws on what you can and cannot take pictures, but even that isn’t followed. But none-the-less, everyone has their own code. I thought I’d preface with that, before you think that there is some cosmic force that will damn you for eternity for following this, and this is just my take, and how I shoot.
Jack’s Rules For Street Photography
Rule 1 - Carry business cards
First rule of street photography: “carry business cards”. Make sure you have as much of these as you do film. Mine are super fancy because I can afford, but don’t feel shame in having a more basic card. Hand these out to people you shoot, people who ask, people who even look remotely interested in what you are doing. Hand them out liberally. Make sure you keep these stocked. Make sure you have them somewhere, where its easy to grab and hand out.
The business card has a few functions. First, is to sooth any fears people might have of someone just walking around with a camera taking pictures. Its one thing to explain you are an artist, its another to prove it. This is fairly good at getting you out of trouble with property owners, would be assailants, and paranoid people who’s first inkling is you are up to no good, either as Law Enforcement or some sort of creep. Second, is to give an avenue of contact for people in your photos in case they have any questions, concerns or want their photo taken down. Third, promote yourself, sell your artwork, give contact info to would be clients, get your name out there.
So what goes on a business card? Name, or alias you do photography as, somewhere your work can be seen such as a website, flickr, or instagram account, contact info you feel comfortable sharing with the public, and a good representative piece of your work. For me, that contact is an email, blurred out for the internet because spam reasons, but you can very much get the email by running into me IRL and getting a card. The picture on the background is “Amsterdam Billiards and Ball”, the only work of mine that currently hangs on my own wall, and has long been used to represent my work. Card in picture is the old one with my Flickr and Instagram account. The new ones have a linktr.ee, and the batch after this will have this website.
And always: Leave the back side blank white so you can write on it. Either your own notes or give to someone else, and bring a pen
Rule 2 - If The Subject Says Take It Down, Take It Down
The law states that any picture taken in a place where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy is legal. That said, there is no obligation to go right up against the edge of the law, and against rules of taste. I’m not a creep or the paparazzi, so if someone decides they don’t want their picture being used, it doesn’t. This could be as the photo is being taken. This could be after its published or years later. The subject could agree and just not like how the photo came out.
As I hand out business cards, you can contact me via email or various social media on the card, for takedown requests.
Exception: If the picture is part of a newsworthy event, and the picture is being sold to a reputable publication. Reputable meaning non-tabloid, non-gossip column. Public right to know outweighs personal privacy.
Rule 3 - Observe, Don’t Interfere
This is everything from don’t get too far into people’s business, or any further than you need to get the shot, don’t wreck an urbex site, if there is a fight or conflict, do your best to as neutral as the Swiss. There are going to be exceptions to this, if someone needs medical attention, or genuine help.
Rule 4 - Portray Things in Context As They Are
Don’t frame a photo or shot to be misleading of what is actually going on. Abstracts of portraying nothing really at all are fine.
Rule 5 - Get Lost And Be Found
Step off the beaten trail. Buy the ticket, take the ride. Follow the white rabbit. Take the side quest. Discovering something down a back alley and wandering off with a camera is a good way to find scenes and photos usually not observed. Get lost with your imagination, and find photos not otherwise taken.
Rule 6 - No Asses, Backs Of Heads
Do not capture a subject with both ass(buttocks) and back of head. They are completely turned away from you, and you got no expression of what they are doing, and could be bordering on creeper shot. If you have multiple subjects in a photo, at least one face and front.
If you absolutely need to take a picture of an ass, the subject needs to turn their head so at least part of their face is on the camera. If for whatever reason they are unable or unwilling to do this, please re-assess what you are doing.
Rule 7 - Don’t Abuse Artistic Privilege
Society, especially Los Angeles has let you bend certain rules if you make quality art. Don’t abuse this. Don’t be a creep. Don’t take non-consensual nudes. No erotic shots of unsuspecting victims. No gratuitous shots of bums, corpses, and disadvantaged people that isn’t part of larger story telling. Don’t violate people’s privacy…too much. No non-consensual pornography. Its not possible to be a street photographer without being a little weird. Don’t push this too hard, and don’t abuse it.
Shootout: Cinestill 800T vs Portra 800
This is the first of my series doing filmstock comparisons. When I do a “shootout” of film stock, I am loading two film stocks shot at the same ISO in two bodies, my Nikon FE2, and FM10. I am taking the same picture seconds apart with the same lens, at same aperture and shutter speed, by simply moving the lens from one body to the other and copying the shutter speed. The result should be a fairly accurate comparison, especially when comparing a new photostock to a familiar photostock.
This is the first of my series doing filmstock comparisons. When I do a “shootout” of film stock, I am loading two film stocks shot at the same ISO in two bodies, my Nikon FE2, and FM10. I am taking the same picture seconds apart with the same lens, at same aperture and shutter speed, by simply moving the lens from one body to the other and copying the shutter speed. The result should be a fairly accurate comparison, especially when comparing a new photostock to a familiar photostock.
For this edition, we have Cinestill 800T vs Kodak Portra 800. When I first got back into photography in early 2024, I noticed a lot of things have changed. Some things where the same, such as TriX, TMAX and Portra. FujiFilm was more or less gone, and all these new boxes where now in the film store. One of the new films, was Cinestill.
Cinestill, like Portra is made by Kodak. Originally sold as Vision for 35mm movie cameras, companies like Cinestill remove the anti-halation layer, so it can be processed directly with C41, and then package it in 135 Canisters. The people at the film store(LGFL) told me it was great for neons and halations, two big items that feature heavily in my work. I decided to give it a try, but I was going to test it against my old go to Kodak Portra. Again note, these are both same ISO film, with same shutter speed and aperture. As much as possible, same lighting conditions as well. No flash was used. Also these are the raw negative scans, and are NOT edited, so they will be slightly different from the published versions.
Venue of choice was the Pinguino’s annual Ninja Penguin party. Lots of Glowey stuff, in a dark dance floor. Perfect choice for 800 speed film.
Left is Cinestill 800T. Right is Portra 800
First up is a people shot. This is a tricky one as its in dim club lighting, and our subject is wearing a very shiny reflect suit. Portra easily handles the highlights better, as well as gives much richer shades of green in the background. The Cinestill looks flat by comparison. You can see much more detail on the man’s face. The tungsten balance might adjust for the artificial lighting, but it kills the mood.
Next up is “Camera in a Dream”(Left), and its Cinestill alt(right). You can see when doing abstracts with light play, the color and warmth of the Portra just blows away the Cinestill.
Light and Shadow play a white fuzzy vest with LED lights in it. Lighting is pretty close, with you can see the portra being sharper, with a crisper image. The Cinestill is softer and dreamier. About even with this one
An attempt at wall art. This one is pulled from the “miss” pile in both, but does a decent job highlighting the characteristics of the film with light. Both are unedited. Portra clearly has more exposure lattitude, as well as better contrast for dealing with shadows. The colors are more vivid and rich. This might be attributed to the tungsten balance. That would make sense for film clear shots for commercial purposes, but it falls short delivering vivid crisp images for artistic endeavors.
The last two are some costume play. Its not clear from the post, but that is a prop of Bruce Willis’s pistol from “The 5th Element”, appropriate given that was the theme of the party. Here is my friend doing some cosplay outside the venue with said prop, illuminated by a sodium vapor lamp street light. Gives a good comparison of how the film performs for nighttime street photography. You can see the tungsten balance of the Cinestill neutralizing the soft yellow glow of the street light, while the portra beautifully soaks up the vibe. This is going to be preference, but I like my streetlights yellow. The Portra captures vibes, the Cinestill extinguishes them
One last one, again pulled from the miss pile, but of technical note. You can see how the cinestill interacts with streetlights. All the streetlights in frame are sodium vapor lamps, which appear white, with some really ugly red halations. From a technical note, none of the color in this scene really looks good. The mid-tones and shadows look OK. That is it OK. Portra, and even Kodak Gold(now UltraMaxx for 400/800), make this look a fuckton better.
Conclusion: Kodak Portra 800 wipes the floor with Cinestill 800T
Jack’s Photoblog
Welcome to my website. I’ve finally bitten the bullet and got myself a website. I will have a gallery for my work. I will also have links to my social media and other presence.
Welcome to my website. I’ve finally bitten the bullet and got myself a website. I will have a gallery for my work. I will also have links to my social media and other prescence.
I also plan to use this blog for my musings on photography. Gallery showings, book announcements, and more art fair engagements