1.03.2012

Kirk Tuck's Amazing and Obvious Predictions for 2012



I love the world of photography.  It's so diverse and so wide that you can't ever master the whole mixture. You can only stake out your aesthetic territory and dive in.  I make my living making photographs for use in advertising and public relations.  I specialize in taking portraits and, if I had to define my specialization even further I would characterize my best work as being portraits on locations.

I would define my personal work as a mix of black and white portraits taken in the studio and bits and pieces of modern life shot in coffee shops, on the city streets and while at work in my real job as a photographer.  My biggest prediction for me, in 2012, is that I'll shoot lots of photographs with an ever changing array of interesting cameras and lenses.  Second prediction?  That I'll spend more time writing books than ever before.  My one big resolution for the year is to get my long languishing novel out the door.  Of course it's all about photography.....

But my purpose today is to stand on my soap box and make general and specific predictions about what I think will happen to the markets, clients, and photography business this year.  And to also predict what will happen to our tools.  Those little gems.  The cameras and their best friends, the lenses.  This is all for fun so don't take it too seriously.  But this is how the "whole picture" seems to me:

1.  We'll see a general recovery in the U.S. economy.  We always do in election years.  It's a historic metric.  The interesting thing is that in the year following presidential elections when the Democrats win the White House the stock market always climbs.  When the Republicans win the stock market recedes.  I'm staying away from politics here for the time being but regardless of your party affiliation remember to make some hay in 2012 while the sun shines.

2.  Following point one I think the market for commercial photography will improve somewhat for two reasons: a.  A rising tide lifts all boats.  As the economy recovers there will be a release of pent up corporate and retail demand for fresh images and a total marketing refresh.  I think this will translate into more assignment work.  b.  More people will be re-employed or more fully employed at traditional job functions which means they'll have less time and fewer opportunities and inclination to dip their toes into the freelance market.  Fewer players means less downward pressure on the remaining participants.

3.  Both of the above points will have the effect of putting more income into the hands of the huge installed base of people who love photography as an art and a hobby and they'll drive a recovery of the camera, lens and experience (workshop, location experience, seminar) markets.  More demand means more new products.

4.  2012 will be the year the overwhelming number of cameras in every category (including even pro cameras) leave the optical prism finder behind and replace it with fast acting, super high resolution electronic viewfinders.  Traditional photographers will riot and rend their clothing in rage and frustration.  The rest of us will realize that progress is progress.  Unstoppable and relentless.  And, hey, it's really nice to see a fully configured preview, with information overlays, right there in the finder.  This will drop the prices on entry level and mid level cameras since the corollary to the move to EVF's is the logical elimination of the moving mirror.  And the moving mirror with its mass and mechanical complexity is the nexus of most mechanical problems and mis-focusing problems in DSLR's.  Eliminate the moving mirror to gain robustness and minimize the number of parts required to make a camera.

Nikon, with their V1 camera, has shown that technology has eliminated the one issue of mirrorless cameras; their slower autofocus process.  They've put contrast detection (accuracy) and phase detection (speed) in one camera and done it well.  These capabilities will doubtless trickle up and down the product lines.  The combination of AF capabilities will also go a long way toward eliminating the need to have micro-focus adjustments in cameras...

(here's what Trey Ratliff says, http://www.stuckincustoms.com/2012/01/04/dslrs-are-a-dying-breed-3rd-gen-cameras-are-the-future )

Get ready.  We're going EVF.  If you really hate it all that much (and that presumes you've looked at the latest finders, not some superzoom compact from 2004) you might want to stock up on some of your favorite bodies in the hopes of riding out the new wave.  The rest of us?  We'll manage.

5.  This will be the year that convinces us that sensor size doesn't really matter as much as we thought.  With the noise performance of the Nikon V1
 trumping the last generation of m4:3rds cameras, even though its sensor is less than half the size, and with the rave reviews for the even smaller sensor in the Fuji X-10, I think we've come to the point in the road where most people are going to be satisfied, from an image quality point of view, with just about any sensor size above the standard compact camera sized sensor, like the ones in the Canon g12, and the Panasonic LX-5.

6.  As more and more people embrace the cellphone as their primary imaging tool the public perception of what defines quality and professional metrics will keep falling faster than lead balls in a vacuum.  A tandem trend is the need to continually increase the compression of web graphics to make them manageable on mobile devices of all kinds.  This will define the new schism between "professional" results and "amateur" results.  More and more documentary images (and videos) will be taken with iPhones and other smart phones.  The images needed for print advertising, display prints and other uses will come from traditional cameras.  BUT, after a few years of being inundated by small sensor, handheld and heavily processd images, the images derived from full frame captures will seem to us like the very best of the digital medium format captures seem to us now.  This means that smaller sensor cameras will become our "workaday" cameras while FF digital cameras become the new "high end" standard and medium format becomes an even more highly specialized and expensive niche market.

7.  2012 will see the acceleration of software designed to emulate the look of previous cameras, both large sensor digital cameras and the four by five inch and medium format cameras from the film era.  Better and better selective focus filters and selection processing will give us the "bokeh" most people seem to crave, and use as an excuse for not wanting to use smaller format cameras.  By the end of this year it will be possible to shoot a portrait with a small sensor camera at f11 and, with the touch of a button, have the background rendered as soft as a baby's butt, without the telltale edge garbage of current selection processes.  And the effects will be so well feathered that only a handful will be able to see the slight-of-hand of the process.  This will make iPhone users even happier.

8.  The current year will become known as the amazing year of prime lenses!  The m4:3rds market got off to a rough start when the only option for lenses was a handful of tame, mid-focal length zooms with apertures that started at 3.5 and quickly rushed to 5.6.  Couple a smaller sensor, increased depth of field and increased high ISO noise with a crippled optic and it's hard to make the whole package an easy sell.  Then one lens turned around the whole space.  Panasonic launched the brilliant 20mm 1.7 pancake lens for the format and sales started soaring.  The best implementation of this lens is on the Pen EP-3.  The camera provides really good image stabilization while the lens gives back high sharpness at an aperture almost guaranteed to ameliorate the need to go to nose bleed ISO's to capture everyday images.  And, did I mention the high sharpness wide open?

It didn't take the manufacturers long to learn the lesson and now, Alpha-Blogger, Michael Johnston, has named the recently launched 45mm f1.8 Olympus Pen
 lens as his "lens of the year."  It's fast.  It's sharp.  It's cute and cuddly.  And it works on more than one camera system.  If Olympus have fatally shot themselves in their own foot the lens will work just as well on the Panasonic m4:3 camera offerings.  (See points 5 and 6 above.  These cameras may be all you need).  Hurray for open systems.  This time....

The 45mm was followed by an amazing 12mm (24mm equivalent) and, in the Panasonic camp, a Leica branded 25mm f1.4 that's gotten the kinds of lens reviews usually offered only for the most elite and expensive of optics.  In fact, the one review I recently read was extremely boring.  It basically said:  "Sharp and perfect across the frame, wide open and stopped down.  No weaknesses that we could see."

How popular is the use of prime lenses on the mirrorless cameras (including Sony's, Olympus and Panasonic)???? Leica is currently in an extreme backorder situation with nearly all of their "M" optics, and since M9 camera sales haven't followed the same curve it only stands to reason that those lenses are ending up on something.  That something seems to be inexpensive mirrorless cameras.  Great sensors coupled with exhilarating optics in small packages.  Isn't that what the great documentary photographers always wanted?

9.  This will be the year that we, as professionals, and the rest of humanity, as well as our markets, redefine what it means to be a professional camera.  The days of the glandularly engorged D3's and the obese Canon 1D series cameras is likely at an end.  The things that made them sought after are losing their relevance to most consumers and shooters.  Fast frame rates?  Get a Nikon V1.  Low noise at high ISO's?  That might still be the provence of the full frame sensors.  The ability to carry them around?  Gone with the softening of our culture.  The ability to pay for those premium cameras with the diminished earning power of most professionals means less of a logical connection to offering them.  We used to offer premium services to clients in exchange for high rates.  If the rates are cut in half does it still make sense to provide the premium tools?  Especially if their greatest levels of performance are only called for in a tiny fraction of the total number of jobs we undertake?  It's a tough sell.  I got it when architectural photographers charged day rates of $2500 but brought along view cameras and tens of thousands of dollars of lighting equipment.  Not to mention the expertise to concept the shots and use the gear.  But when most people will pay a couple hundred dollars to shoot a house and will be happy with anything that's adequately lit and reasonably sharp is there any logic in making enormous and non-recoupable investments in premium gear?

No.  The market is shifting and the tools will shift along with the ability to generate profit and the resetting of taste and discrimination.  If I can do a great job shooting a portrait with a m4:3rds camera and I can make the background go all gooey with a software program, and then quickly retouch said portrait with Portrait Professional, or similar software product, why should I spend $20,000 on a medium format camera?  There's a price ceiling in every market for commercial headshots.  My having a big investment in a camera won't change that reality.

10.  This will be the year that we re-invent the portrait.  We've spent the last ten years trying every type of lighting and light design and every type of location you can possibly think of.  Now we're going to re-invent it to add value in a different way and make people demand the new product.  I don't know how we're going to do it but I can feel it in my bones that the old looks and old methods are going to be chased out the door by the new.  It might be a mix of video and still work.  It might be something 3D.  I don't know and I may not  even be able to make the jump but someone will and it will breath life back into the market for consumer portraits.  Remember, we thought we'd done it all when Aaron Jones invented the Hosemaster and made lightpainting a giga-trend for a while.  Now Trey Ratcliff is riding the trend of HDR.  But there's a next and it's coming to the portrait space.

Now for the easy stuff:  Product releases.


Nikon will release some really boring consumer DSLR cameras that will tick all the boxes and have great specs.  They will also have hit with the replacement model for the D700.  But the real news will be the fleshing out of their Series One product.  Look for the release of three killer, prime optics.  I'm guessing a 6.5 or 7mm wide angle with an f2 aperture.  Of course there will be a 35mm or 50mm equivalent, normal optic with an f1.4 aperture and also a 38mm (105mm equivalent) telephoto portrait lens.  I'm guessing this one will also be under f2 and razor sharp wide open.  Also look for adapters to fit into the proprietary shoe to give you ooodles of flash control with Nikon's current SB flashes.  Finally, they'll have a new pro body that gives you the much desired (by some but not necessarily me) PSAM dial and a few other "critical" external buttons.

Most users who started their careers with big digital cameras will turn their noses up at the Series One but their careers will be decimated by a whole new generations coming up behind them who see the value proposition and the lower barriers to entry and use systems like the Series One and the m4:3rds to compete at a lower cost.  They'll make whatever shortcomings we perceive with these cameras into stylistic selling points.

As Nikon's bigger cameras and lenses become less relevant to a growing part of the market look for prices on big glass and big cameras to continue to rise.

Canon will see the writing on the wall and come at the mirrorless market in two directions.  First they'll pump up their G family and add cameras in the $600+ market that are akin to the Fuji X10.  Bigger and quieter sensors, more in cameras processing and an ability to go toe to toe, in good light, with everyone's entry level APS-C cameras and m4:3rds cameras.  The pro market will tentatively buy the new pro camera (the 1DX) but huge numbers will wait to see what replaces the 5Dmk2.  If that replacement implements the AF technology of the 7D and keeps the full frame with a modest increase in pixel count and an improved control implementation for video the remaining pros will keep it on backorder for years. And it will come to define the Canon Pro market for the 95% who aren't shooting Luge at the Olympics and NFL football games from the sidelines.

But, here's my huge prediction for Canon.  They will introduce a mirrorless APS-C camera, styled like a rangefinder, that has it's own line of lenses and is compatible with EF-S lenses as well.  It will be sexy, riff off the Leica and Contax rangefinders of the 1950's and some of the optics will be luxe.  It won't necessarily be cheap but it will exude hipster coolness and become the thing that the Fuji X100 should have been.  Gorgeous, but with interchangeable lenses.  The lines at the stores will look like an iPad introduction.

Olympus.  They were so close.  And then the scandal.  Will they recover?  My money says that the Japanese government won't let them go down the toilet. They have a great brand name, a raft of new products and a profitable medical imaging business to help support them.  And they have finally hit their stride with the Pen products.  Sadly, the conventional 4:3rds cameras are soon to be toast.  If you love the e5 I'll say you should stock up.  Squirrel away the lenses you want and warehouse some bodies because my spider sense tells me that the financial dramatics are essential cover for the abandonment of a whole product line.  Rationale?  We couldn't survive without a laser like focus on our most profitable line....something had to go.  Either that or...."

With the older line off their shoulders (and ledger) Olympus will continue their agressive march into the mirrorless space.  Next up?  A pro-version of their EP3 with a new chip from Panasonic.  I'd love to see the well reviewed G3 sensor in the body.  And I hope it hits by the Summer.  I've got plans.  Look also for them to flesh out the lens offerings with an 8mm wide angle and a fast 60 or 65mm portrait type lens.  And count on the next implementation of their top camera to have a built in EVF.

Panasonic.  Hot on the heels of their success with the new sensor look for them to keep fleshing out their Leica badged lens line, to the delight of both Panasonic and Olympus fans.  A 90mm Apo Summicron equivalent (45mm f2) with fast focusing would go a long way to professionalizing the line. But a few fast and longer optics wouldn't hurt either.  Both Panasonic and Olympus could snag more and more shooters into using the m4;3rds as their primary cameras (instead of their fun "hobby" cameras) if they round out the mix a bit.  I'd love to see a 70-200 f2.8 zoom equivalent and also a 180mm f2 equivalent (90mm f2).  The new sensors have breathed new life into the GH2 and the G3 and, as the sensor rolls into the rest of their product line they become a very competitive alterative to everyone else's APS-C lines.

Sony.  I'm amazed at Sony.  So much good technology and so much really bad marketing.  They need to get a rational lens line figured out and put into place and they need to figure out who the Nex cameras are being made for.  Great sensors with oversized lenses and undersized camera bodies.  Huh?

The top end of their offerings needs a big time refresh.  The 900 and the 850 need to be mirrorless and video able.  The Zeiss line needs to be fully implemented and available.  And they have to put them into the hands of world class shooters, not the second string.  And then they need to market the hell out of the art potential of their product line.

Lighting.  The shift will happen this year.  The days of the tungsten light, in photography, video and cinema are nearly gone.  In three years the "hot light" fixtures will be museum pieces.  So will the consumer market for big, powerful studio flashes.  Continuous light will move inexorable and unstoppably to LEDs.  As the CRI (color rendering index) of the bulbs improves with each generation, and the introduction of tri-color fixtures accelerates, LEDs will become the absolute standard for lights that have to be on all the time.  And, for most people doing portraits and products, the LEDs will be even more popular.  Why?  Because what you see is what you get.  A set of LEDs and the LCD on the back of your camera and you've got an interactive lighting class at your fingertips.  Self propelled.

My prediction is that you'll see more and more LED panels in more sizes and outputs than we ever imagined.  Most of them will be able to run off highly efficient lithium batteries and a/c, your choice.  That means well be able to use them in cars, in bar, to light stars and just about anything else that doesn't require enough raw power to overpower direct sun.  I used three panels recently to light books for a catalog and I was able to do my shoot in a fraction of the time because of the WYSIWYG nature of the lighting.

Florescent fixtures will start to drop off at the same rate film dropped off after 2001.  The reason?  Too fragile, too unwieldy and too hard to use with a myriad of modifiers.  Also, who wants to try and travel with a bunch of fragile glass tubes filled with traces of mercury?  Not me.

In the flash space we'll see more and more "cross-overs" like the Elinchrom Rangers and the Quantum Q lights.  Big enough to do a reasonable job for portraits and general studio work but small and efficient enough to go out on location get good results.  But the real market for professional and wannabe professionals will be more products like the Alien Bees and their companion Vagabond Lithium battery pack.  Small, light but capable monolights coupled with lightweight and efficient but powerful lithium batteries that mean you can do studio work anywhere.  No wall plugs necessary.

While I like LEDs we still need flash for it's very high CRI ratings in color critical shoots and for action  stopping.  But mostly we need bigger flashes because they provide enough pop to do really big outdoor effects, even in sunlight.  I have Elincrom Ranger RX lights and Profoto lights but going forward the much lower cost of the Alien Bees+Lithium batteries is alluring.  We'll see a continual move away from high cost and lux feature sets to low cost and utilitarian.  Bye-bye big boys.

On camera flash?  Yawn.  I think we've hit a good spot with lots of flexibility and control.  Anything beyond this for right now is window dressing.

Finally, the actual art and business of photography.

We've spent, as a culture, so much time looking at screens and creating for isolated viewing protocols that there's bound to be a backlash.  I think people want to make prints because they are at least an echo of the hand made tradition of the darkroom and the fine print.  We like things we can hold in our hands and we like things that provide a uniform and objective experience.  I think we're going to see more gallery shows and more impromptu sharing of prints for the next few years as a counterpoint to the endless squinting at tiny cellphone screens.  And I think prints will become more manageable as a result.

When a show is a "once in a lifetime" retrospective there's an almost unstoppable momentum to print as large as a file will allow.  But when you show a lot things have to become more manageable.  Frame sizes will have to be affordable.  Viewing distances taken into consideration.  And albums constructed on a human scale.  We'll have a renaissance of print viewing but we'll also share "theater style."

There's something social that gets lost when you share your work out to the world on a screen.  Any artist will tell you that much of the fun is seeing the reaction of guests at a gallery opening, chatting and sharing with peers and fans.  Drinking too much wine and eating to much finger food.  A show creates a vibe and the way to understand the vibe is.....to be there.  Sending a link just isn't the same thing as walking through a crowded room full of men with beards and funky glasses and women in tight black outfits with seductive snarls on their lips.

But the middle way would be to do a show like theater.  Here's my idea for a group show and I'm sure it's already happening all over the place.  Select a gallery or a space.  Create a theater environment with lots of black drape and a giant, state of the art television monitor.  Can we say 60 inches or larger?  Something very high res.  Get 10 slides from each participant and do a slide show.  Invite everyone you know and everyone everyone else knows and the room rotates through the show through the night.  Just outside the "theater" is an area for discussion and socializing.  On the wall is an enlarged index of images from each participant.  Art buyers and gallery goers choose the image they want and choose a size available from the artist.  They order, leave a deposit, and the artist delivers the print.  Either directly or to the gallery.  Even if no sales the show works.  It works because it keeps everyone in the social mix.

I expect that the enthusiasm over having all images manipulated in software and HDR will abate just as soft focus and psychedelic effects did in the 1960's.  Or monumental black and white landscapes did in the 1980's.  Or studio fashion in the 1990's.  Or hand colored prints in the 1950's.  Or bromoil prints in the 1920's.  The first decade of the new century will probably be forever remembered as "that time when everyone destroyed their images with post processing."  Just as real estate markets reflect sinusoidal waves of over building and underbuilding I think we're about to undergo our "market correction" and go back to a style where content drives the perceived value of images.  It will be interesting to see if the same people who are so good at applying glitter to their images really have anything cogent to add to an adult conversation.

I also predict that people's appetites for blogs will inevitably decline.  At some point we all come to the realization that none of us know for sure about anything important.  It's all just conjecture and personal prejudice.  We'll probably become so enamored of actually creating work with messages and context and point of view that we run out of time and energy to hear someone else's opinion about the inevitable downfall of civilization as we know it and we'll double click on the little application icon, shut down our computer or whatever you use to cruise the web and we'll head out the door for a good, long walk with out cameras in our hands and a determined smile on our faces.  And we'll face the new year knowing that we don't know.  And that's okay.  As long as there's still coffee.

Thanks.  Happy New Year.


Here is an old blog post of my end of year predictions going into 2010.  Check out #5.....

1.02.2012

Soup. On location.


I was working on a story about a non-traditional Thanksgiving feast for a spa magazine out of California and we needed to do some "studio" shots of the various presentations coming out of the home kitchen of the writer.  I kept scouting around for a good location in the 1980's style kitchen but not finding anything that would work well with the various dishes and the stylish bowls and plates we were using.  I took a moment to walk outside and re-center my thoughts.  This would be the moment the photographer goes outside for a cigarette except that I don't smoke.

While I was standing in the writer's back yard looking at a small, kidney shaped pool, my eyes rummaged across the remains of a home improvement project.  Probably tile used in the rehab of a bathroom on the second floor.  I grabbed four pieces of the tile and headed back into the house.  I built a small stage with the tile on the floor of the living room because it was the space with the least traffic, the closest proximity to the kitchen and the most space in which to set up lights.

The lighting was very straightforward.  One electronic flash in a medium sized softbox from the top left of the frame and one big piece of white foamcore as the fill from the opposite side.  Incident light meter reading with the ball of the meter aimed directly at the camera.  Power on the pack juggled until I got f16.  I used a Bronica SQ-Ai, medium format camera with a 150mm lens and Fuji ISO 100 transparency film.  We took Polaroid tests to make sure we had the exposure right and then proceeded to shoot ten or so dishes.  The soup was my favorite.

The chef brought the soup in a pan and carefully poured it into the bowl, which was already positioned on the set.  He then garnished the dish and added the olive oil drops.  When he moved out of my light I snapped a three shot bracket and we moved on to the next dish.

The story ran eight pages and looked good.  Sometimes work is straight forward, once you figure out what to shoot on and where to shoot.

1.01.2012

An old post becomes my mantra for the new year.

12.22.2009

"The cave you fear to enter holds the treasure you seek." Joseph Campbell


"The cave you fear to enter holds the treasure you seek."  Joseph Campbell

Nearly every photographer I've ever met is afraid to approach strangers in public and ask permission to photograph them.  The few that were not afraid were most probably sociopathic.  So, how is it that some people are able to overcome this fear and take photographs of strangers in public?

They begin by confronting their fears.  You work up your courage.  You approach the situation with butterflies in your stomach and you ask.  And, surprisingly, most times the person smiles and says yes.  They are flattered.  They are human. They are part of the continuum of humanity.

The more often you practice the better you are able to push down the fear until you nearly conquer it.  Then you move on to the next challenge.  The next fear.  Joseph Campbell says it better an I in one quick sentence.  

Consider this next time fear of a deadline, a meeting, a new way of doing something presents itself.  By pushing against the fear you may unlock doors of which you only dreamed.  Steven Pressfield, in his incredible book, The War of Art, basically says that resistance is strongest the closer you get to accomplishing your goals.


Happy Holidays!   Kirk

added Monday morning:  good article on multi-tasking, etc. by Mike Johnston:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/01/quality-time-multitasking.html





It's a new year. I'm playing with a new camera. No. Really.


Why?  What was I thinking?

If you've read my blog for a while you know a few things about my camera habits.  I'm generally spending my days in a state of confliction.  I think the future of cameras and imaging lies in the smaller sensor cameras like the micro four thirds and cameras like the Nikon V1, and even smaller chipped cameras like the Fuji X10.  I also think the proliferation of electronic viewfinders (EVFs) is welcome and inevitable.  The conflict comes from my endless trail of legacy cameras and thought processes that, like little anchors, keep me from fully embracing what I see as the future of photography.  I am also rooted in its "glorious" past.

I love the look of a portrait done with a medium format camera and a medium/short telephoto but I know from experience that the quality is just an echo of the look I used to get when I would shoot portraits with a Zeiss 240mm f5.6 Planar on my 4x5 inch Linhof camera.  Those images were sublime.  And, recently I've come to like the look of the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 ZE lens on my Canon 5Dmk2 or the older but no less elegant 1DS mk2.  But those images are an even fainter echo of my original film standard.  But time and tastes move forward.  And I'm pretty convinced that I can learn to love the look of the Olympus 60mm f1.5 on a micro four thirds camera.  It's an adjustment but I've been adjusting downward since the start of my career.  And so has most of the market.

So, some days I shoot things with the old Hasselblad and some days I shoot with the Canons and sometimes I'm convinced that the smallest of my cameras is sufficient.  If you are wired like me you have my heartfelt condolences...

For the last three years I've been exploring just how much can be done with the smaller gauge cameras and I've come to find that you can actually do a lot.  The images look good and the introduction of faster lenses is giving us back some of the DOF control for which we longed.  The small cameras have come a long way in a very short time and show no signs of slowing down.  My favorite "flavor" has been the Olympus Pen line.  I collected their ancient film ancestors, the Pen FT series, from the 1980's on and I use the older, manual focus lenses interchangeably with the new optics being brought to market by Olympus and Panasonic.  And, with the release of the EP3, I was a very satisfied customer.  If you haven't handled an EP3 you might want to play with one.  It's a cool camera and it's small, light and svelte (but no, you can't fit it in the pocket of your jeans) and the files are solid and well finished.

But you've probably been reading about Olympus in various financial publications or in news aggregation sites on the web.  They've been having some self-inflicted legal/ethical problems lately in their executive suite and the fall out might affect the stability or even the life of the company in general and the camera division, specifically.  If you have an investment,  emotionally, financially or artistically in the use of Olympus Pen cameras this thought has surely crossed your mind:  "If Olympus craters what happens to my investment in all the cool glass?  What's my future roadmap for new bodies?  How will I be able to keep using the format I've come to enjoy?

I rejoiced, in 2009, when Olympus launched the EP2 because in many was it was the camera I'd been looking for through the years. In a way it was my dream camera.  I could program it to shoot in the square format I'd come to love in my medium format days.  I could use an eye level viewfinder with an EVF that showed my chosen aspect ratio.  The lens flange to sensor distance made the use of my older, Pen FT lenses easy and even allowed me to use Leica and Nikon lenses on the camera.  It's small, light and beautifully designed.  What was there not to like?  The EP3 was even better.  The whipped creme on the whole confection was the well implemented VF-2 EVF.  It was very satisfying to see the effects of filters, exposure settings and fine tuning in the eye level monitor as I shot.  I would have used the cameras for everything if not for a few oversites in design vis-a-vis professional, commercial use.  For example:  Would it really have been so hard to include a PC sync port separate from the hot shoe?  If that had been done I could shoot with my studio flashes and still be able to compose at eye level.  Would it have broken the design bank to add an external microphone socket instead of bringing the signal through the hot shoe plug in?  If they had done that I could use high quality external microphones in my video projects and still compose and follow action (especially in bright sun) with my EVF.

But, over time, I made peace with these shortcomings and learned to enjoy shooting with the cameras.  I bought back up bodies.  I bought batteries and lenses, started settling into the system (in tandem with my bigger Canons) and then.....the financial revelations and scandal rocked the company.

Once the news spread across the web I started thinking about alternatives.  I wasn't worried so much about the lenses because of the ability to use so many legacy lenses.  When it came to the dedicated lenses I didn't blink either because they so rarely fail.  My real concern was/is bodies.  I didn't want to find myself with a drawer full of wonderful, small lenses and nothing fun on which to put them.

Of course, the logical destination for all my market research was Panasonic, a partner in the m4:3rds consortium.  Panasonic is a giant in the electronics industry and dwarfs Olympus in resources and financial strength.  

I started looking around and was immediately drawn to the GH2.  In many ways it is the complementary adjunct to the slender and stripped down EP-2 and 3.  I see it as a chunky but reliable tool that brings more flexibility and depth to the overall system.  
My first use of the camera was this morning at Barton Springs Pool.  A giant, spring fed pool in the center of Austin.  It's a tradition to start the year off with a jump into the 60-something degree water.  Today the air temp was 45(f), some years it's in the 20's.  People still come and jump.

I walked around to the far side of the pool so I could photograph my friends doing their big, simultaneous, group jump.  This is a stone stairway on the NE corner of the pool.

Air mattresses and floats are only allowed at the east end of the pool.  The lifeguard stands have been there without change since I moved to Austin 37 years ago...

Random Jumpers.  I was getting used to the timing of the GH2 and the reach of the lens.

My friend, Ed, leading the charge off the diving board.  Afterwards we go to his house for homemade waffles and great coffee.  Not much shutter lag...

Where the EP3 is a svelte and designed for eye appeal the GH2 is designed like a pudgy miniature DSLR.  But in several compelling ways it trumps the Olympus camera for sheer usability in a commercial arena.  The camera has a built in EVF that's at least as good as Olympus's VF2.  That leaves the hot shoe open for flash triggers, flashes and microphone feet.  A separate connector for an external stereo microphone means not having to make a choice between external microphone and EVF, as you must make when using a Pen camera.
I bought the camera with the 14-140mm lens.  It's the equivalent angle of view to a 28-280 on a full frame, 35mm camera.  This is the 14mm end.  It's pretty darn sharp, wide open.

This is the 140mm end of the lens from the same position as the image above.  It passes my sharpness tests, wide open.  Nice lens.  The hood comes with it.  
Suck on that, Canon. (not cranky, just making a point.)


The other big advantage of this Panasonic and its less expensive and complex sibling, the G3, is a new sensor that provides more resolution with less high ISO noise.  The GH2 uses 120 hz sampling in AF and processing and matches the EP3 for focusing speed and accuracy.  But, the camera is much bigger and bulkier.

After an hour or so of skimming reviews I went off to the camera store to play with one.  I liked the way it worked and I liked the way it focused so I bought one on the last day of 2011.  I bought it in black and I sprung for the 14-140mm lens because the review on SLRgear.com was compelling.

I've had the camera for about 26 hours and I think I will end up liking it very much.  It has a touch screen on the swivel LCD that's well implemented and easy to use.  It focuses about as fast as my Canon 5Dmk2 and all the files I've shot are good.  I like the lens and think it's fun to have a 10x zoom range.  In operation the camera has been rock solid. 
zoomed way out.  Very snappy focus in good light.

I'm not recommending that you go right out and buy yourself one.  Especially since I've heard rumors that a GH3 might be in offing. And I am optimistic that Olympus and its investors will work out their issues in a way that leaves the camera arm of the company healthy and innovative.  In the meantime it's nice to know that there are alternatives in the wings.  Many of you will profess to dislike the GH2 because it's bigger than the sexy Pens.  I agree.  But the Panasonic G3 is much smaller, less expensive, and uses an even better sensor so that could also be an option.   But I'll be doing some more reports as I have more experience with the machine.  I'm looking forward to doing video production with it as well.
Based on what I've seen so far you could do 90-95% of the images most commercial photographers need to do for money with this camera and lens.  Nice.
I'm a sucker for industrial stuff.  I've spent way too much time shooting annual reports.

 The shadow on the building didn't trick the light meter for even a second.  I never get tired of shooting the Frost Bank Tower.  It's a nice looking building.

While it's a bit harder to throw stuff out of focus with shorter focal length lenses it sure is nice to be able to keep lots of stuff in focus when you need to...

I would like to thank the W Hotel in Austin for giving me the opportunity to use 
one of their bathrooms, both for the call of nature and to test the image stabilization of the 
14-140mm lens.  This was shot at 0.8th of a second (as I understand it that's almost a full second) wide open.  And to make the test even more punishing it was right after leaving Caffe Medici and their wonderful, full strength, cappuccino.  I'll say that the IS works pretty darn well.

If you click on the photos they get bigGER.

As far as bulk and weight goes, it feels to me like the GH2 is right in the middle between one of my full sized Canons (think 5D2) and the Olympus EP3.

Always fun to start the year out with a new toy.  So far 2012 is exceeding my expectations.  I hope it's a great year for you and everyone else.

a program note:  The "no comments" initiative we embarked on in mid-December has yielded remarkable results.  The emotional comfort metrics are out of the ballpark.  We'll keep it in place just a bit longer until we get a good idea of how this year is panning out.  If you really need to comment you are always welcome on our Flickr forum:  http://www.flickr.com/groups/visualsciencelab



12.31.2011

2011. The year in review.

For me 2011 was the year of LEDs.  I started writing a book about how photographers and videographers use LEDs as main light sources in late 2010 but the bulk of the writing and shooting for the book was done in 2011.  And I learned a great deal not just about LEDs but about how our choices of tools tend to shape our vision as artists.  For example, it's easy to shoot without blur if you use flash, and it's easy to shoot at smaller apertures when you use bigger studio flashes but there's always a trade off.  Every stop smaller means more and more is in focus and that might not be the effect you want if you really stop to think about it.

I learned that it's fun to work at the edge.  A lot of lenses fall apart when you get close to wide open and a lot of us aren't as great at focusing as we think we are.  Neither are our cameras.  DSLR's are fast but the trade off, at least at the widest apertures, is accuracy.  Shooting with continuous lights that aren't as powerful as tungsten lights means having to pay more attention to technique.  Depth of field is a fickle ally at f2...

I learned that writing a book about a subject that is just becoming popular is harder than writing a book about something you've been practicing for 20+ years. (Go figure...).  To the best of my knowledge my LED book will be the first book dedicated to showing photographers what's out there and how (and why) to use it.  This means that you can't really research much on the web besides product availability and manufacturer hyperbole.  You have to actually buy the stuff and play with it and use it until you get the hang of it.  And then you have to translate what you learned.  I'm sure, in a year, there will be dozens and dozens of books that deal with the same subject and I'm equally certain that most of them will use the entrails of mine to make a new product.  Happens all the time in the book business.  One only has to look at all the "Small flash on location" books that have hit the market in the last three years to see that.

Writing a book like this is harder than it looks.  You have to pioneer some stuff.  You have to go out exploring in other fields like the video industry and interior design but, toughest of all, you have to sit down and write.  And every time you get the thoughts marshalled just right someone comes out with something new or you realize that you need to create a series of images to show what you're talking about.  And for me that generally means finding a model, setting up both the shot and the behind the scenes shot and then creating captions for the photos that are short enough to fit and long enough to get the ideas across.

Once you've written and re-written the manuscript and selected and corrected the 150 or so images you send the whole package off to your editor and wait for their input.  Invariably I talk about something that really requires an illustration and the editor is quick to point out the gap.  Which means I have to go back to the project and shoot again. The LED book weighed in at about 45,000 words and has been edited down by at least 20% (thank goodness).  You make your final corrections, have Belinda proofread it again, send it back and cross your fingers.  But it doesn't stop there because every book is really your baby and if you want it to do well you have to play a major part in the marketing.  That means getting it in front of people, cajoling good reviews for the all important Amazon.com page and also getting your local camera store to push the book.  I'll do book signings anywhere in Texas.  Really.

But there's a downside to all this.  In fact, there are two.  The first is that authors don't get a paycheck, they get royalties.  But the royalties don't come in the mailbox until the book is written, photographed and sells.  The royalties follow the initial sales by about six months.  No sales mean no royalties which means you basically spent half a year of your life working hard on something with very little return.  When I believe in what I'm writing that's a risk I'm willing to take because, to a certain extent (a large extent) whether or not the book does well is in my control.  I can try to concept better, write better and make better illustrations.  I can decide to work harder on marketing the book(s).  

The year in which you actually do all the writing and shooting is grueling because, since there's no income from the project yet, you have to keep working at your "day job" and for me that means being available to clients at the drop of a hat to do photographs.  And it must be Pressfield's law that the more in the groove and motivated you are to finish your book project the more the clients want and need you.  When you hit the last lap of book production is when you get the high production, out of town job that has the world's tightest deadline.  And that deadline is usually the day before the book is due.

I remember when I wrote my first book.  I'd never done a book project before and I was afraid that the publisher would take a look at my stuff and declare it crap and cancel my contract.  I worked and worked on the book and ten days before my deadline I got booked on an out of town assignment for eight days.  Lots of details and lots of travel.  I would shoot all day, travel in the evenings and try to polish my book late into the night.  When I got back home I was trying to do the final lighting diagrams on my computer and I started seeing dark spots in my peripheral vision.  Then I couldn't focus on the screen correctly and my heart was racing.  I stumbled into the house and asked Belinda to drive me to the hospital.  I was certain I was having a stroke (I'm an ace hypochondriac...) and we rushed to the emergency room.

The diagnosis? Acute panic attack.  The short term cure?  Half a milligram of Xanax.  The book got done and went out on time via Fed Ex.  And I waited for feedback.  On the edge of my seat.  And.....nothing.  I was certain the publisher was shaking his head and moaning.  Finally, a week or two later I called.  They loved it.  And the book was successful.  But the birthing process, for me, was incredibly painful.  And it's nearly as bad each time.

But here's the thing that sucks about writing a book, or putting photos on the web, or basically doing any sort of time intensive project like a movie or a book:  the minute is hits the book stores, or Amazon or, in the case of movies, a DVD being offered for sale it's stolen and copied and pirated everywhere.  I can go to a dozen bit torrent sites right now and download stolen or pirated copies of all four of my current books in English, Polish, Italian and Chinese.  Someone will recommend one of my books on a forum and actually post a link to a bit torrent site where they can get it "for free."  Pisses me off.  But how many days of your life can you commit to doing "take down" orders/requests/submissions?

I hope the LED book hits its audience.  But even if it doesn't I enjoyed the process and I enjoyed the "time in the water."  And I know it's part of the process of becoming a better writer.

What will 2012 bring?  I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this will be the year we re-invent the whole idea of portraiture.  From the ground up.  New rules.  No rules.  I'm out to figure out how to make portraits that people look at, gasp, and demand to have at any cost.  That's the business goal for me.  And I think there might even be a book hiding in there.  Sure would give me an excuse to re-invent my whole genre.  Yes?

Below.  A random LED sampler.

















I did want to say that through good times and bad, here on the Visual Science Lab I've had a wonderful time getting to know really smart and engaging people; readers, from all corners of the earth.  I've had heart warming e-mails, notes in the real mail and been the recipient of stories that brought tears of happiness to my eyes and a catch to my throat.  I know I have a tendency to change course and change my mind but in spite of that I try to write honestly and from the heart.

Some of you think I should be relentlessly positive but that's not a holistic portrait of my humanity.  We get pissed off, we see things that shouldn't be, we resist change just for change's sake, and it's folly not to speak out when you feel it.  But I do try to layer in as much of a sense of satisfaction and wonder as I feel.  And I feel it most days.

Happy New Year.  May your pictures make you happy.  Screw the critics.  See the world through your own lens.  That's genuine.  Take your photographs instead of copying what everyone else has already done.  Be there for your family and friends but make time for yourself.  Thank you for being here.

12.30.2011

It's not, "Who Moved My Cheese?" It's "Who Moved the Path?"


Belinda standing in front of a painting she did in school.

Making art has never been easy.  Well, that's not strictly true.  The process of making the art is as easy or as hard as the artist makes it, but figuring out how to make a living doing the art you want to do is the incredibly hard part.  I had it all figured out in the 1980's and 1990's but then the path to profits for photographers changed.  We went through the same transition art directors and designers did when they became typesetters and color separators.  We learned how to become our own color labs and printers.  But the print part didn't last very long and most of what we learned through long, dark hours in front of glowing screens and of massaging ink jet printers to get them to spew out color correct prints has already fallen by the wayside. Nobody wants or needs prints anymore, they want digital files they can use now.  On an iPad or in a website.

There's cheese out there and it's still in the same spots.  It resides in client checkbooks and client direct money transfers.  It resides in P.O.'s and credit cards.  But our evolving culture, intertwined with fun and disruptive technologies changed the path to getting to the cheese.  And we need to learn a whole new process of navigation.  We, as professional photographers, need to figure out a new way to get to the cheese.

Here's how not to get there:  

1.  Depend on gear.  Why? Because clients no longer care, the market no longer cares and the images no longer care.  If the image is shot on (God Forbid) an iPhone or an 8x10 view camera nobody really cares as long as it's technically usable and the image looks great.

2.  Depend on print sales.  I don't know where to start on this one other than to say that we had a good recovery year in 2011, as far as billings go, but this is also the first year when we really had nearly zero request for prints.  At all.  Zero.  Clients want images for mobile devices and high res images for commercial process printing but the era of display prints is as dead as a 8 bit computing.   Ask your friendly neighborhood wedding photographer how those print sales are coming along...

3.  Depend on traditional imaging.  And by this I mean learning the rules for "three point" portrait lighting, the rules of "correct" architectural photography or the rules that pertain to how all of this has always been done in the past.  Nobody cares if the colors match up exactly (except big companies with products) and no one cares if the lines are straight (except for architects...and maybe not even them).  If you are still doing headshots with two umbrella lights and a cute little spot on the background you may already be done with the profitable part of your career.  In this regard change is good.

4.  Depend on selling stock photography.  The world market now contains billions and billions of stock images.  And unlike the billions and billions of burgers McDonalds has sold they have not been digested and returned to the earth to fertilize the land.  All billions and billions of them will live like zombies, seemingly forever, and the prices will continue to spiral down and down like a dying seagull.  Heading for the zero zone of the horizon.  Have you played the lottery lately?  Are you one of the handful that have won millions of dollars?  No?  Have you broken even on your lottery "investment"?  No?  And chances are you never will.  Nor will you make any real money ( or even fake money ) in the stock photography business.  There's always a person or two who can point to some income but if you strip out the camera costs, the time and the learning you'll find them radically upside down and not the least bit dependent on stock sales for survival.

5.  Depend on print sales of "fine art" prints.  Here's the funny deal:  In a way, photography is a mechanical process and people in our culture have an enormous belief in the power of the creative machine.  They respect the camera more than the artist.  Now cameras have become incredibly easy to use.  When poeple want art, more and more, people are buying their own cameras and shooting their own art. Which is fun. Which leaves them less disposable income (and inclination) with which to buy your art.  Sorry.  I know it's probably better art, but the great unwashed have a different metric for just how good the art on the walls needs to be than we special artists....  And remember, people don't really want prints, they want stuff for their screens.

6.  Depend on the corporations.  They're busy tapping into their own employees for "free" art.  You know Bob in marketing?  He's a wiz with a camera and he's volunteered to do all of the XXX art work for the XXX project.  And the best thing is that since he's doing it on company time not only do we get it for free but the company also owns the copyright or IP.  And if Bob's stuff doesn't turn out quite as well as the stuff they're used to paying for they have a graphic designer who's a wiz with PhotoShop and she can fix it in a heartbeat.  

7. Depend on magazines. Right.  I'll just let that one lay there while we all think about it.

If the traditional paths are nearly gone we have to find  new ways to make money with our art.  People are quick to tell you about new career paths you might want to consider.  You could make "apps" for other people's cellphones.  But that's not what you bought your first camera to pursue, is it?  And you could teach but it would have to be in workshops because the number of faculty positions is static and the professors already teaching are so frightened by what's happened to the market in the last ten years that they'll never venture out away from  academia.  But maybe you're a loner, an introvert, a working artist, and you don't relish the idea of spending weekends with groups of people toting overstuffed camera bags around and trying to figure out how to use their cameras.  And maybe you're tired of the question they ask over and over again in your landscape workshop:  "How can I make money shooting landscapes?"

The real answer, going forward is that you'll have to invent new paths to profitability and that's going to take some hard work, some experimenting and a lot of new marketing.  The cheese is still out there and it's going to go to the people who identify the new "needs" of the market and deliver.

I'm not sure where everything is going but I know it's not going to go on the same way it has been.  I'm pretty sure that my business would be a lot less profitable if I didn't write books and articles.  I've made some in roads into the video business.  I'd love to figure out how to make "old school" art portraits deliverable to a new market.  And I'd love to find a way to package and sell the stuff I want to shoot.  I am convinced that an iPad app that shows just images isn't going to be nearly as profitable as an iPad app that shows an experience.  And I'm equally sure that people are becoming more and more interested in the experience of experiences than in the souvenirs.  But there might be a way to explore all these options and still stay true to the art you want to do in the first place.

As Seth Godin would kinda say,  "Choose yourself."  If you have a book project in your head, and you know you can do it, don't wait to be invited by a publisher.  Put together a package and sell it to your own investors.  Don't wait for the market to find you.  Find the market.  Don't wait for the money to decide to head in your direction, put together your product and go find the money.  

But I guess the biggest thing is to decide what you really want to do.  Are you an artist or are you a business person?  If you are just in this field to make money you've chosen poorly.  If you would pursue your art regardless of all the hurdles and blocked avenues then you might want to separate the idea of what you do for love and what you do to live.  Find easier ways to make money and live so you can do the hard work of doing the art as a separate part of your life.

The pathways to profit have changed and now we need to act like pioneers instead of map readers.  It will take re-invention and exploration to find new ways to keep doing what you love.  Ask any working professional in the arts if he or she is still doing it the way they did it ten or even five years ago and I'm sure you'll quickly find that the successful ones have learned to tack into the headwind and keep moving forward.  They might be adding stuff they never thought they'd do before but that's part of the deal.  

And the ones who are still doing their art exactly the way they did it ten or twenty years ago fall into two camps:  1.  People who support themselves outside the construct of the working artist.  Or, 2.  Those whose work is so individual and so beautiful that it falls outside the run of the mill and is coveted by clients.  Regardless of how anachronistic the delivery or approach.  What a great spot to be in!  

Most of us have chased the business so hard we've lost part of what the art meant or means to us.  Maybe the re-alignment of the economy is a way for us to get the meaning back.  Compass ready?  Move forward.

One last point.  There's still work out there.  It's going to the people who market best.  The analogy is one we all should understand.  If we want the sharpest photograph we should use the best technique. In most cases that means putting your camera on a tripod. But most of us forego the tripod far too often.  Getting work means cold calling and meeting with potential clients but it's far easier to just put up a website, throw some stuff up on Tumblr and wait.  The marketing is the tripod.  It is the technique.  While we're looking for the new roadmaps it's a good idea to make sure you're marketing well to the people/clients you can identify right now.

note:  This was written from the perspective of someone whose sole income is derived as a freelance artist and writer and it was intended to speak to other people in the same boat.  If you are in a different business and the market hasn't shifted yet for you then count yourself lucky.  But don't think all other trades and professions are immune.  The digital shift happens in a heartbeat.  And the cure is nearly always a mystery.  Anyone can give advice but the best advice generally comes from those who've been there and survived.

final note:  This is not angry, cranky or pessimistic.  It wasn't written with that intention.  It's meant to encourage people to think of new ways to do what they already love and continue to make a living.  


12.28.2011

It's all about the multi-tasking. And good food.

I originally posted this in 2010.  It's an article I wrote for a printed-on-real-paper magazine.  It's a review of Mexican food restaurants for Tribeza.  Since then I've written two more books and I feel strongly that working photographers are going to have to become masters of multiple mastery.  You need, at the minimum, to be a good writer as well as a good shooter.  Here's the kind of editorial work that comes and goes in the magic flux that keeps me busy and paid:


12.13.2010


My story on Austin Mexican Food For Tribeza Magazine. Just for fun.

This story ran in Tribeza magazine a while back.  I was driving with my kid yesterday.  I told him that good writers were rare in our society and that he should practice his writing.  I went on to say,  "If I were in charge I'd make you write a new essay every day."  He immediately countered with,  "If you did that I would be a much more rebellious child..." Touche'  This article may not appeal to everyone but it's a classic example in the editorial world of getting more work because you can put two disciplines together.  It's cheaper to put a writer and photographer on a plane if they are the same person........ And you get paid for both parts....



 A Taste of Mexico

Story by Kirk Tuck

There is a time and place for shiny, novel, ersatz, newcomer Mexican food, but the time is generally after an evening of drinking and the place is usually somewhere I really don’t want to be. Like most Austinites, I want my Mexican food to be authentic, tasty, and time tested. There has always been an uncomplimentary inflection involved in the discussion of Tex-Mex food that stems from the conceit that the clichéd gooey-cheese, orange grease, and tortilla-laden cuisine, cut with hot peppers, was invented only to insulate the human system from the onslaught of margaritas and beer and doesn’t really constitute nutrition or “cuisine.”

I couldn’t disagree more. Some of my all-time-favorite meals have come from a handful of Mexican restaurants sprinkled around Austin—meals that married incredible combinations of ingredients with masterful preparation. In fact, when “foodie” friends from either coast hit town in search of great meals, we usually default to one of three established favorites. These are restaurants that have three things in common: (1) They’ve stood the test of time and are just as relevant to diners today as they were the day they opened. (2) They’ve focused on providing engaging dining experiences that combine great food with just the right ambience. (3) The food is still the compelling reason for their existence.

The three restaurants I refer to are Fonda San Miguel, Manuel’s (on Congress Avenue), and El Azteca. They are totally different in style, presentation, and aesthetics, but each provides a rich experience in its own right.

In fairness, I should make this disclosure before going any further: We’ve been going to Fonda San Miguel for more than 25 years and El Azteca for at least that long, and we were around for the birthing of Manuel’s, which turns 25 this year.


These three restaurants offer totally different dining experiences; El Azteca is the prototypical family-run Tex-Mex-style restaurant serving traditional dishes that blend the tastes of South Texas and Old Mexico. Along with Matt’s El Rancho, El Azteca has set the standard for Mexican “comfort food” in Austin for decades. It’s the perfect place for cabrito and all our usual “combination plate” favorites. It’s very casual, with prices to match.

Manuel’s is the opposite of El Azteca’s homespun, East Side, laid-back feel. Located at the epicenter of downtown, Manuel’s is sleek and stylish. A study in black and white with touches of warm neon. The crowd on any given day is composed of young downtown professionals, a mix of advertising and magazine creatives with a blend of politicos and attorneys thrown in for flavor. The food is a perfect blend of interior Mexican traditionals with a generous nod to ongoing culinary evolution. And the presentation of the specialties is second to none.

Then there’s Fonda San Miguel: a world-class restaurant with a split personality. It can’t seem to decide between being a celebrated destination dining venue or a museum-quality art gallery, so it gracefully merges both inclinations to present a unique visual and gustatory experience beyond that of any other restaurant in Austin. Chef Miguel Ravago is doing wild and wonderful things that marry the finest traditions of haute cuisine with nuances of Old Mexico. When the food is combined with the incredible collection of art, the result is an evening that is very much a special occasion.

I’ll start with our Tex-Mex traditional, El Azteca. The building is modest and shows its age. The restaurant has been there for 46 years, after all. Walking in the front door, we were greeted by Daniel Guerra, the son of the restaurant’s founders. The walls are decorated with won- derfully kitschy Mexican calendars depicting “ripped” warriors atop Mayan pyramids and ample, half-naked women in ceremonial outfits from the ancient Aztecs, if the ceremonial outfits had been designed to be worn by Jessica Simpson at a car show. The calendars are a tradition started by Daniel’s father. He imported them from Mexico to be given away to regular customers. Now they are available for sale.




The highlight of our recent lunch was roasted cabrito (young goat) served in tasty, small chunks and accompanied by a traditional mild sauce, guacamole salad, and frijoles à la charra. The cabrito is a specialty of the house, and it was just right, almost crispy on the outside, tender and moist on the inside. We also ordered a vegetarian combination plate that took us right back to our early Austin Tex-Mex roots.

Refried beans, rice, a vegetarian taco, acres of wonderful queso, and an enchilada. Nothing heroic, just perfectly proportioned, and served promptly. From the fresh, hot chips to the easy-to-eat house-made salsa, everything about El Azteca says “rich, comforting food served up by family.” The one thing that will surprise you is just how affordable the food is.

Manuel’s Downtown is a great blend of streamlined, modern decor fused with authentic interior Mexican dishes that never disappoint. I love coming in for lunch with a fairly large party and sitting in one of the rounded, plushly upholstered corner booths with a view of the entire dining room. But the restaurant really comes alive during the dinner service, with the kind of bustling energy you normally experience in the most popular New York cafés. The waitpeople, dressed all in black, whip through the room. The patrons, also dressed mostly in black, meet and greet with alacrity, though the lucky ones who’ve already been served are oblivious to everything but the beautiful presentations and addictive smells and tastes of the great food.

On a recent visit we sampled an interesting trio of disparate dishes. The camarones veracruzanos, served on a bed of perfectly cooked rice, was a shrimp lover’s wish come true. Huge, plump sautéed shrimp, painted with a delicately spicy red veracruzano sauce, dominated the plate. The folks in this kitchen do seafood really well. Next we turned our attention to a crowd-pleaser, the enchiladas verdes. I order these chicken enchiladas covered with a piquant tomatillo sauce nearly every other visit to Manuel’s. The blend of cheese, chicken, and salsa is as close to perfection as you’ll find in Austin. On my last visit, I was pushed to try something new, so as a compromise I ordered the enchiladas banderas. The banderas are like an ultimate enchilada/ salsa pairing “taster” plate. Your choice of chicken, beef, tender pork, cheese, or mushroom enchiladas is sauced in all three of Manuel’s handcrafted signature salsas: verde, suiza, and adobada. Now I have a new favorite dish.

Most of the entrées are served with black beans and Mexican rice. Another dish that blew us away was the chile relleno en nogada. This is a roasted poblano pepper stuffed full of shredded pork, almonds, and raisin picadillo, topped with a walnut cream brandy sauce. A visual note that took the presentation to the next level was a sprinkling of brilliant vermilion pomegranate seeds. For lunch I can never resist the pork tacos, and I have another friend who is just addicted (really, in a very clinical way) to the ceviche.

I saved Fonda San Miguel for last because it’s so different from any other restaurant and even our own cultural expectations of what a restaurant can or should be. The luxe quality of the food is a given. But the food is just one part of an amazing blend of art, decor, cultural touchstones, attention to craft, and details, all of which come together perfectly. In most restaurants, waiting for your table is a bothersome experience that requires the more compulsive among us to keep one eye on our dinner companions and the other on the seating hostess to prevent “bureaucratic table loss.” At Fonda San Miguel your short stay in the atrium area will find you surrounded by exotic plants, graceful design nuances from the best of Old Mexico, and a collection of exceptional art. That would be real, museum-quality pieces that rotate through the restaurant from Tom Gilliland’s remarkable collection of eclectic and renowned international artists. Combine this with drinks from a well-versed bar staff and perhaps a plate of salmon tostadas to munch on, and you’ll find me hoping it takes at least half an hour for our table to be ready.

The two dining rooms are amazing. The larger room is delicately lit with strands of small spotlights that supplement the warm glow from a grand collection of majestic hanging bronze fixtures in the center of the room. The smaller room has some of my favorite paintings, and it also has a graceful sense of privacy about it. There is always one problem that afflicts Fonda San Miguel regulars, though. In a nutshell it’s this: If you order one dish you don’t get to order something else. Go for the Jaliscostyle steak caballero—a succulent 16-ounce bone-in ribeye served with chile de arbol chimichurri—and you won’t have any room left to even try the enchiladas suizas de jaiba (enchiladas stuffed with crab and covered with a white sauce). It’s a sad state of affairs for the indecisive.

On one of our recent visits we went with a dish that transcended the entire category of Mexican food. It was the cordero. Four plump, perfectly grilled lamb chops served with a chipotle cheese potato casserole and a mixed green salad. The lamb was easily as good as any cut of meat you’ll have at any premium steak house, while the subtle bite of the potato casserole provided a perfect counterpoint. Also sampled was a classic pescado Veracruzano. A broiled fish fillet in a traditional Veracruz tomato sauce sprinkled through with onions, Spanish olives, and capers. It was a definitive rendition of a popular dish. The range of the menu is breathtaking, and the kitchen rarely stumbles. Add in a few extras like the person in the corner show kitchen continually making hand-formed flour and corn tortillas that come hot to your table, and a well-stocked selection of fine wines, and you’ll understand why people come from all over Texas for the Sunday buffet or from as far away as Paris to sample the offerings.

So the next time one of your confederates suggests “grabbing some Mexican food” at some new place that used to be an auto shop or at some dive that puts grated cheddar cheese garnishes on the tacos, that will be the perfect time to step up everybody’s game with a visit to one of the genuine masterpieces of Mexican cuisine. From basics to blue sky, these are the restaurants that deliver what you really want. If you haven’t been to these three temples to the various genres of Mexican food, I truly envy you. Now you get to try each one for the first time!