วีดีโอ

Yes, I agree I need to find ways to show more scale and perspective in some of the images. It’s challenging to do as often the backgrounds are rather unsightly. I do think a drone would be extremely beneficial here as they are legal in this area and would allow me to get aerial perspectives which would reveal the scale and severity of these fires as well as the extremely close proximity (just a short stone’s toss) to hundreds of homes. I don’t have the budget for one right now but would love to partner with a drone pilot to make some images and footage in the meantime. For now, I’m using the G9 and the rather excellent Panasonic 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS (24-120mm equivalent) as well as (just recently) the Panasonic 35-100mm f/4-5.6 OIS. That 35-100 is a 70-200mm IS equivalent and is an absolutely tiny gem of a lens at just 4.7 ounces or 133g.

Thanks for your continued support, Doug! It means a lot. I appreciate that you’re able to see that it’s all about the images and the mindset, ideas and thought process behind them rather than merely the technical equipment used to make them. I do plan to shoot more film, but as I mentioned in my earlier videos, I have some things I need to sort out first before I can trust my film cameras again. I’m not a big fan of playing Russian roulette with 8x10 Velvia 50! 😬

Yes, that’s great! A friend of mine let me borrow his Olympus OM-D EM-5 II for the day in Zion and I had the chance to use the hi-res mode on that. I’d previously owned the original OM-D E-M5 and loved it and used to to make a lot of images back in the day (circa 2012-2015). I was very tempted to get the new Mk III but there were a couple of things I liked/needed on the G9 such as the professional video features that Panasonic is known for and I like the menus as well. But the Olympus cameras are absolutely fantastic, so compact and lightweight, and beautifully designed. If I didn’t need the fancy video features for making my TH-cam videos, I might’ve gone with the Oly. Have fun over there in those German forests! From what I’ve seen they are quite beautiful.

Ah thanks! Sometimes I get fatigued after many hours of editing and things all start to blend together in my head. I really should wait and watch it all through after resting a while before publishing! 😬 Thanks for watching anyway.

He uses slide film.

For experimenting and all of the other reasons he mentioned including time and instant feedback... m43 and his process seems like the best tools for the job. Shooting film is great 👍 and I’m sure Justin will keep it up, but not every photo needs to be shot on film. PS: If you listen to “Brooks Jensen” and his Lens Work podcast, you would know how he used to shoot LF for decades but now uses m43 for the digital convenience as well as depth of field boost.

@@timwatley4793 I develop my own slide film at home in the kitchen. I'm not anti-digital, I'm just saying film doesn't have to be that expensive.

Unfortunately both Fuji and Kodak have put up their film prices by a huge amount this year. I bought a bunch of film in Japan earlier this year because of the Fuji announcement. I can still afford the new prices but it is getting painful. I can imagine others on less income would struggle. A shame but I suppose better than having no film. It used to be 4x5 Velvia cost me about £5 a sheet and processing £4 a sheet now it is £7 a sheet for the film here in the UK.

@@arty2917 slide films are crazy expensive even the 4x5. Check the prices of Fuji velvia 50 8x10... 400 euros if you find cheap box for 25 slides.

You are correct. And also about the Jeep. Least reliable vehicle I ever owned, even after pouring tons of money into it. Already sold the Jeep and replaced it with a Subaru Forester, with its reliable and relatively efficient Japanese 4-cylinder and radically better highway performance, practicality, and comfort.

My friend (and legendarily good large format landscape photographer) Jim Becia told me about that method later in this same trip. He swears by it. He said he has added the mm markings to all his cameras on both sides for convenience and has achieved good results with it.

@@justinlowery6017 Wow Justin, what a coincidence. Just as a side-line, the further your lens moves (the more depth-of-field) (or smaller aperture) is needed to focus. I found if I tilted my lens down in some scenes to where the top and bottom of the picture are in focus, I don't know if you ever noticed but the center of the picture then goes out of focus, the distance between the now-focused top and bottom and center of the picture is less then with no lens tilt. i.e. a larger aperture can be used.

@@will9357 Hi Will, I am sorry, I don't. I read the article in a magazine possibly, that was about '85?. I've tried to find it on the internet but to no avail; seems all they talk about is 35mm cameras. What they did was simply to measure the (resolving power) at all the f/stops to find the sharpest for a give amount of "depth-of-field" measured in millimeters of lens travel focused on the nearest area you want in focus in your scene to the furthest. So in other words, they suggested a certain f/stop to use for a certain desired depth of field. It worked remarkably well for me not only for the sharpest picture possible but that method of focusing a view camera, especially the 8x10 and 11x14, really removed the focusing surprises when I got home. I can dig out the scale if you like.

Thank you! Couldn’t agree more. 🙌🏻

Yes, we used to go later but have moved back into the second half of October in recent years. By the first week of November the leaves tend to be past peak or gone in much of the park.

For what it’s worth, I (as well as my closest friends who shoot LF) shoot mostly color, about 95% or so in color in fact. It just so happens that I tend to like black and white when working with dunes, particularly when there aren’t any colorful clouds in the sky behind them. 😄 So if you watch my other videos you’ll see a lot of color work.

All the more so with large format, especially color, and particularly 8x10!” Add in processing costs, and it’s like buying a new camera or lens on every trip, only you’re paying that just to use a camera you already own. Definitely not cheap!

It’s in 4K UHD! 😄 It’s a brand new upload. Check back in about half an hour or so and TH-cam should have finished processing the file.

When I was watching It was only in 480p and could not change it. I see the HD ones now. Thanks for responding

You are correct regarding improved reliability with more expensive cameras. Unfortunately, there are significant reasons why I can’t go that route. Firstly and most importantly, they cost between $3500 - $9,000 for a good high-end professional 8x10 view camera such as an Ebony, Chamonix, or Arca-Swiss. I am not interested in using an old used one, so new cameras are the only options, and they are all cost prohibitive. Secondly, they all weigh dramatically more as well, with average weights from 9lb-13lb, vs. the 5lb of the Intrepid. Considering that I routinely hike and backpack over harsh, steep terrain where losing my balance could be fatal and fatigue is a real concern over long distances, a heavier camera is likewise not an option. I know Ben Horne does it, but you will notice he tends to hike shorter distances and stay in one area for a long time, whereas I tend to hike longer and stay for less time in one area. So I need both affordability and portability, neither of which are offered by any other camera on the market in this category. Also, Intrepid has very kindly sent me their cameras for free for years now, and that is the main reason I’ve been able to “afford” to shoot 8x10 at all. I would not otherwise even work in this medium. 4x5 is a little better in terms of other options on the market, but they still cost about 4x as much and weigh about 2x as much, in addition to having only a 1/4th size negative. If I’m going to go to the hassle and expense of dealing with large format at all, I prefer to have the larger negative if possible. So right now, my options realistically speaking in terms of what I need are: deal with the limitations of these cameras, or give up on large format entirely. Hence my dilemma. Notwithstanding their inherent quirks, I consider these cameras serious image making tools which have worked incredibly well for me and countless other photographers for years now and produced hundreds of perfectly successful images for me and many of my friends. I am just frustrated by their ongoing unsolved quality control issues, which definitely need to be addressed once and for all. I definitely agree that professionals and serious photographers in general need to be able to rely on our tools, and if we cannot, that is a serious problem. To be fair, I’ve had similar issues with Pentax, Mamiya, and other film cameras as well. But those are old and issues are to be expected. I do expect better from a new camera.

@@justinlowery6017 Perhaps make it a habit of shooting one test sheet of a cheap film before the trip, just to make sure all is well.

Hi Phillip, I haven’t yet talked to them about it, but I am certain they would make it right immediately, as they always do have excellent responses and customer service and stand behind their products, even when things do go wrong. I also know that this was a one-off mistake on my specific camera, as others (Ben Horne for example) have the exact same model and have not reported any issues with theirs. My original Intrepid 8x10 is also light tight. (I also have the prototype model which was pretty solid as well.) So I wouldn’t write off the camera just yet as it is a very light weight, affordable and nicely designed camera. I would however be sure to carefully check every detail and test it thoroughly for leaks before putting any expensive film though it. Considering the alternatives on the market are both thousands of dollars more expensive and two to three times the weight, there aren’t really any truly competitive options out there for those of us looking for a light and affordable 8x10. So I hope Intrepid treats this QC issue seriously and fixes it so we can all have 8x10 cameras that are lightweight, affordable, and most importantly dependable.

@@justinlowery6017 thanks for the response. Yes I would agree with you 100%. Intrepid do make a good product, I have the 4x5 mkII and I love it, that is why I am upgrading to the 8x10, but slowley. It will be in the new year before it arrives, but in the meantime I need to find a couple of lenses. 300mm an 420mm or thereabouts. Keep up the good work. Phillip.