Ever since I started getting interested in photography, I began to read reviews, reports and forum opinions about supposed good and bad lenses. Sharp lenses, high contrast lenses, lens resolution and so on and so forth. I even gazed blankly at a couple of charts and graphs, which I’m sure have all sorts of scientific backing behind them. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one for proclaiming that “I ain’t much for book learning” – I’m sure that the science behind lens sharpness, contrast, chromatic aberration, and so on, is sound as a pound. But really, who’s got the time for all of that?
I love the many different characteristics of cities. Since I started carrying a camera (aside from the iPhone) with me most of the time, some of my favourite shots have been off the cuff.
I like these two snapshots, of moving traffic.
There is some debate amongst analogue photographers about the degree to which using different brands of film affect the final result. Or, whether it matters at all.
The fact that I get labs to develop my film is a sure sign that I’m clearly not a serious film photography buff. I just haven’t got the patience, time or space. But mainly, I just haven’t got the desire.
All of which makes much of what I’m going to say highly debatable – at least amongst those who spend, much time experimenting and discussing the merits of various film emulsions and developers.
Which is great, as it brings out the textures of the city beautifully.
And, otherwise, how on earth would we be able to take such interesting photographs?
Some more comparison photos from my east London photo jaunt.
No entry
Went back to the home town recently, for a number of projects. Obviously the camera was involved in many of these.
The city is constantly evolving – it’s different every time I visit it. Anyway, let’s let the pictures do the talking. Read More
OK, not the snappiest title in the world. But anyway, here is the first shot from my recent revisit to locations that I first photographed more or less twenty years ago, in this series.
