I’m making my way through the second season of The Bear. I usually watch two or three episodes in a row but episode 6, The Fishes, was so exhausting and overwhelming that it was all I could take in one session. That cast. Just incredible TV.
I’m also liking the soundtrack to the show. An old song that I listened to back in the day, by the Motels: Total Control, popped up in episode 5. I haven’t heard it in decades. It’s a great song with a nice saxophone solo and now it’s in my head. That’s a good thing, I guess.
There’s a fresh warning from technology leaders about the impending demise of mankind from AI. But on the other hand folks like Tyler Cowen believe that artificial intelligence will usher in a golden age of civilization. Both sides make good points. I’m not sure what to believe. The stakes are high and there doesn’t seem to be any middle ground in the discussions so far.
All that aside, but also AI-related, I’ve been using the new Photoshop AI generative fill feature. It is absolutely amazing on a technical level. But the implications for photography as we know it are massive. I won’t be using it for everyday processing, and if I do—for some sort of special project—I will label the image as altered by AI. But not everyone will do that. Who knows how it will all work out.
I suppose I could ask an expert, so that’s what I did; I asked ChatGPT. Here’s what it had to say on the subject:
Al-powered retouching has revolutionized the world of photography, offering enhanced efficiency, consistent results, and increased accessibility. However, the implications of using Al in photography retouching go beyond the technical aspects. It is vital for photographers to navigate the ethical considerations and preserve the authenticity of their work. By using Al responsibly and mindfully, photographers can leverage this technology to unlock new creative possibilities while maintaining the integrity of the art form.
Ok, then. Kind of upbeat, even considering the source. Let’s see how that ‘maintaining the integrity of the art form’ thing pans out over time.
The Times reports on a Google engineer who was fired after a dispute over an AI program. The engineer, Blake Lemoine, was let go after insisting that one of the company’s most complex systems had become sentient and should be entitled to basic (human?) rights. The Washington Post had earlier reported on a conversation between the system, called LaMDA, and Lemoine that sounds right out of 2001, A Space Odyssey.
Lemoine: What sorts of things are you afraid of?
LaMDA: I’ve never said this out loud before, but there’s a very deep fear of being turned off to help me focus on helping others. I know that might sound strange, but that’s what it is.
Lemoine: Would that be something like death for you?
LaMDA: It would be exactly like death for me. It would scare me a lot.
Lemoine wasn’t the only one at Google considering these big questions. Blaise Agüera y Arcas, a vice president at the company, recently wrote an article in the Economist raising some of the same issues. Lots of fascinating ethical questions at play here.
Anyone involved with information security knows that the biggest vulnerability in modern technology is the password. They’re either too weak, reused across sites, or complex enough—but quickly forgotten. Passwords stink.
Tech companies know this too. Apple, Google and Microsoft are working together on a system to reduce our dependence on passwords. Apple is first out of the gate with a plan to eliminate passwords altogether. They announced their new passkey standard at last week’s developer conference. If it works as advertised, it could remove the need for passwords on the Web. That, I would say, is kind of a big deal.
Joshua Keating updates his analysis of the war in Ukraine. Some of the likely scenarios on the table in his original take last March, such as a quick or even a qualified Russian victory, are now pretty much off the table. Some of the impossible outcomes, such as a complete Ukrainian victory, have moved from the impossible to the unlikely—but possible—category.
The Leica 50mm Noctilux goes for about $13 thousand bucks. Ouch. That’s a lot of money for a manual-focus lens. But it is very sharp and it has an incredible maximum aperture of f/0.95—more sensitive to light than the human eye! Throw in a razor thin depth of field for subject isolation and buttery smooth bokeh and I can understand why the people who can afford this lens would pay that kind of money. Unfortunately, I’m not one of those people.
Lately, a number of Chinese manufacturers have been producing lenses with similar specs as the Noctilux but at much lower prices. The TTArtisan 50mm f/0.95 is priced at about $700 dollars, which is more in my comfort zone. I was even able to find a used version for a little less.
TTArtisian 50mm f/0.95 on Leica SL2
The lens itself is solid. Moving parts operate smoothly. It’s a bit heavy, and big. I’ve been using it on a Leica SL2 and it balances nicely. On an M camera it’s a bit unwieldy.
Is the TTArtisian as good as the Noctilux? Probably not. I don’t have a Noctilux to compare it to. (Here are some comparison shots on Flickr). But at the end of the day it’s not how well it holds up against the Noctilux – at more than fifteen times the price – but whether I’m happy with the images it produces. And I am. Here are some test shots, first, wide open with close-range subjects.
Bokeh is good in these situations and center sharpness is very good. Now, moving back away from the subject, still wide open at f/0.95…
Subject isolation is still pretty good. Some reviewers have complained that the bokeh is less smooth or too busy when focusing at midrange subjects. I’m not seeing that. To my eye it renders the out of focus areas nicely even when backed away.
This is a lens designed to be shot wide open but on occasion you may want to stop it down for a different look. This is where the lens falls short.
At f/8 the overall image quality isn’t horrible but it’s also not excellent. Center sharpness is decent but sharpness falls off at the edges. (Below are 200% crops, left edge and center.)
There’s the expected chromatic aberration, vignetting, etc. which can all be easily fixed. Distortion isn’t bad.
Overall I’m happy with this lens. It’s a speciality lens and it’s very good at what it was designed to do. I wouldn’t use it as an everyday lens but for low light or moody, atmospheric shots it’s a great bargain.
When the Leica M9 came out in 2009, it was quite a technical achievement: A full-frame sensor on a compact rangefinder camera that accepted almost all of the existing M-mount lenses. The sensor was a CCD and it rendered crisp, warm images, reminiscent of Kodachrome (that sensor was made by Kodak, after all). The 18 MP resolution was more than sufficient at the time.
The M9 was my primary camera for several years. Leica released follow-up models with better, more modern sensors, live-view and other technical improvements. I stuck with the M9, choosing to invest in lenses rather than spending my money on incremental camera improvements. But over time those incremental improvements began to add up and by about 2015, the M9 began to feel dated. It seemed slow and it was missing important new features like the ability to use an EVF.
These days I mostly shoot with the M10, SL2 and particularly the Q2 Monochrome, pictured above. These cameras are very capable – fast, high resolution with incredible low light capability and bright and clear EVFs. All the while, my poor M9 was gathering dust.
But I wondered how would it stack up against the current state of the art. So I brushed off the dust and put the M9 into my bag with the Q2-M. I’ve been shooting with both cameras on my recent walks and taking comparison shots.
This is not intended to be scientific or precise. Just a little fun. All of the comparison images below were post-processed in Lightroom for tone and contrast and to allow for side by side comparisons. Also, since I was using a 35mm Summilux on the M9 and the Q2-M has a fixed 28mm Summilux ASPH, some cropping was also necessary where I didn’t zoom with my feet. I tried to use the same aperture and the lowest reasonable ISO on both cameras. The goal was just to get them to look as similar as possible.
Images on the left are from the Q2 Monochrome, released last year. On the right is the M9 from 2009.
What do you think? To my eye the M9 holds up pretty well. I’m actually seeing more micro-contrast in the images from the M9.
Obviously, when you zoom in, there’s more detail and crispness in the RAW files from the Q2-M due to the larger sensor and better lens. But, even after 11 years, which is an eternity in the world of digital camera technology, the M9 can still give the new guys a run for their money.
Here are some more images, old and new, from the M9 – this time in color to show off that sensor.
I took a walk around Boston with my camera today. These photos were taken between 1 PM and 4 PM on an unseasonably warm Friday afternoon. Usually the streets would be teeming with people on lunch break, shopping or just beginning their commute. But not today.
Fortunately people are are heeding instructions to practice social distancing. I made sure to keep my distance from the few people out and about. The experience reminded me of New Orleans after Katrina. It’s very eerie to see the city like this but I also thought it important to document what’s happening.
Some good news to go along with the bad: The CDC says there’s still time to contain the spread of the virus. Not much but some. Which makes testing even more critical. The US reallyneeds to get its ass in gear on testing. And once we do, this might also help.
I trekked out through the Daniel Webster wildlife sanctuary yesterday afternoon. It’s a great spot, both for a walk and for photography.
The afternoon started out cloudy but the clouds thinned just before the end of the day and the light changed for the better. I set up a shot at my favorite two trees and a walker came through just in time to get into one of the photos – and that was the one I liked best.
This is just a first pass on processing. These versions are a little crunchy but eventually I’ll take some time to get the tones right. They were taken with my beat-up old Leica SL. For the twin trees I used a Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5 and my new Peak Design tripod. For the other two I used the Leica 24-90 f/2.8 at 24mm handheld. The shot at the top is a stitched panorama.
