No V2 at Photokina – UPDATED

(Nikon 1 J1, Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300mm, FT-1 Adapter, ISO 400, f/4.8, 1/125s).
My wife caught this Slender Anole with the Nikon 1 J1 using a Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300mm lens with the FT-1 adapter. 
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

UPDATE (September 24, 2012): Photokina ended and there was no Nikon 1 V2 announcement. However, not all hope is lost. Aptina has released a new 1″ 10MP sensor. Aptina provides the sensor for the current Nikon 1 line and it is widely expected that Nikon will use the new sensor for future iterations. General availability for the new sensor is Q1 of 2013, pretty much in line with my prediction that the earliest we will see a significantly updated Nikon 1 camera will be early next year.

 

(Original article, published September 6, 2012)

Looking at the access statistics for this site I noticed that many of you are searching for Nikon 1 V2 release information.  I have to disappoint those of you hoping for an updated V1 any time soon, like at the Photokina show. Nothing I have heard or read points to Nikon having a V2 camera ready.

I think there are a few possible factors that come into play:

1. Nikon is very much focused on their FX product strategy. If they get the D600 right (a good balance of features at a price point below $2,000) they will make the D800/D800E success pale in comparison. IMHO there is a huge market for a D600 “done right”, especially since …. (read on)

2. There is no new DX top of the line camera to replace the D300s. Don’t get me wrong: the D7000 is likely the best DX camera in the world today. However, there are a few things the D300s did better. Soon, the D7000 will show its age so Nikon must focus on completing their DX line of products soon.

3. (here I am purely speculating) Contrary to what many observers are saying, I believe Nikon hit THEIR mark with the Nikon 1 system launch. They may have not hit yours, but they certainly achieved what I think they set out to do: create a camera that makes taking good pictures easy by providing a fantastic and unique blend of performance (AF is still unsurpassed in the mirrorless world, continuous shooting is at prosumer DSLR level), usability (weight, size, simple menus, FT-1 F-mount adapter) and IQ (the Expeed 3 processing pipeline performs wonders with the small CX format sensor). The recent J2 announcement seems to confirm that Nikon will stay this course.

4. (speculating again) As I wrote in an earlier article, Nikon may be looking at making the V2 a much more enthusiast oriented camera. With the DX lineup in transition, they may be reluctant to launch a camera that may cannibalize their own DX DSLR sales even more than today. I expect a V2 to come after a refresh of the D5100/D7000/D300s combo. This puts the forecasted date squarely into next year.

In the meantime, the J1/V1 prices have come down significantly. If you are looking for a small, competent camera now, I suggest you get one and go out there an take great pictures. Shopping can wait …..

How Will the Nikon D600 Influence Your Upgrade Plans?

(Nikon D5000, AF-S DX VR 18-105mm, ISO 320, f/6.3, 1/160s).
IMHO the sine-qua-non condition to getting a shot is to have the camera ready to shoot when you need it. The D5000 was small and light enough to hide under my coat until the rain stopped. Sure, the D3X is weather sealed, but it is huge and costs a small fortune. Would you risk it for a double rainbow shot?
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

It is almost certain that Nikon will introduce in September a new full frame camera, the D600. We now have a very strong line of full frame (35mm FX) products that covers some ground previously held by high end DX format cameras. With the price point for the D600 expected to be below $2,000 and no replacement for the D7000 or D300s in sight, current DX users are facing a tough choice.

It almost seems like Nikon is trying to polarize the DX user base and guide them towards FX or CX. Users previously held back by the hefty price tag of the D700/D800 cameras will now take a good look at the D600. At the other end, DX users that want a competent lightweight alternative to the bulky DSLRs now have the CX format Nikon 1 line. I believe that within the next couple of Nikon 1 sensor iterations the IQ penalty due to the small sensor will be wiped out and the CX format will become a solid option for producing top quality images (not that you cannot get great shots with the current Nikon 1 cameras; on the contrary).

From a bottom line perspective, this move may make sense to Nikon. Both CX and FX lines are very high margin compared to DX DSLRs. The only element lacking is the volume.

From the photographer’s perspective, however, things are a little more complicated. Those contemplating an upgrade from DX to FX should be prepared for a steep learning curve and a significant impact to their bank accounts.

In order to master the new FX cameras and extract the performance they are capable of, photographers need to pay very close attention to shot discipline and technique. The AF system performance is stellar, but demands that the photographer understands it well and is proficient with using it in the field. The high pixel count of the sensor will reflect all the flaws in the shooting technique and pixel peepers are likely to be bitterly disappointed unless they master the cameras.

Assuming shooting discipline is good enough, we are likely to hit the next obstacle: lens quality. The 36MP sensor of the D800 and especially the D800E will out-perform many lenses that work great on the 12 – 16 MP cameras. All previously unseen imperfections now become visible and they will likely frustrate photographers who are trying to realize the full potential of these cameras. Another major problem for the DX shooter moving up to FX is the fact that many of the lenses they already own are likely to be DX format lenses. You may be looking at a full lens re-alignment with all the financial penalty it comes with.

The D600 will have a 24 MP sensor. While not as high as with the D800/800E, the pixel density is still more than enough to make technique and lens flaws clearly visible.

The upside to the new FX cameras is that even if you are not able to expose every last pixel correctly, image quality when downsized and low light performance are still likely to surpass what you can do with most DX cameras. They will also automatically switch to DX crop mode when they detect a DX lens. Given the high pixel count of the sensors, you still get a 12 – 18 MP image in DX crop mode, which is more than enought for most applications.

The real question is whether these benefits are enough to justify the higher cost and steeper learning curve. Time will tell whether the D600 is the answer to this question or not.

Wireless DSLR and Mirrorless Camera Wishlist

Cute dog checking out the pedestrian traffic in Vieux Quebec; Quebec City; (Nikon D5000, Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300mm, 1/400, f/7.1, ISO 200). My daughter lives abroad and Loves dogs. I caught this guy spying on us in Quebec City. I needed every mm of my 450mm telephoto focal length to capture the image, so using my iPhone was out of the question. Knowing how much she was going to enjoy seeing it, I would have sent her the photo right away. Unfortunately it had to wait a week or so until I got home and pushed the image through my workflow. Bummer. See more photos like this in the My Backyard photo gallery posted on my photography website.

…………

It is no secret that smartphone cameras have taken over a large chunk of the camera market. There are different opinions as to why this is happening to such extent and so fast, but there seems to be general agreement with one aspect of the analysis: smartphones simplify the workflow by leveraging wireless communication capabilities and functions. More and more people drop the compact cameras in favor of their phone camera. Coupled with the huge penetration of smartphones with relatively competent cameras (Apple iPhone, Samsung, Nokia) this spells doom for the compact camera market segment. It is only when users need a more sophisticated camera with better image quality and more advanced features that they turn to DSLRs and, more recently, to mirrorless cameras.

Although wireless transmitters have been around for some time now, they were almost exclusively very expensive accessories for high end pro cameras. The WT-5 transmitter for the Nikon D4 retails for $789!! It allows operation of the camera from a PC or iPhone and wireless transfer of files from camera to PC. Even without considering the ridiculous price tag, this is not the functionality that made the smartphone camera so successful. For example, you cannot share images on social networks directly from the camera.

Samsung is the first to introduce built in wireless capabilities in higher spec consumer cameras with their newly announced NX20, NX210 and NX1000 mirrorless cameras. Not only do they provide the functionality the Nikon WT-5 offers in exchange for a small fortune, but they have some built in workflow and sharing capabilities.

I want to throw my hat in as well with a suggestion. How about this:

• build Bluetooth connectivity into the camera
• add an Upload To ….. step to the workflows already existing in many cameras, and/or …
• provide a public API for third party developers to build apps for your camera; the speed of processors, size of memory and simultaneous power consumption reduction makes it feasible to incorporate a much more feature rich operating system in camera (Android?? iOS?? Hmmmm…… )

You may wonder why Bluetooth and not WiFi.

Here is why: many users looking for this set of features already own a smartphone. Chances are the smartphones provide a Bluetooth based tethering feature. Apple’s iPhone (3G and newer) has a Personal Hotspot feature that allows an iPad to use the iPhone as a wireless access point. This gives the iPad access to either WiFi or cellular data networks without actually requiring built in WiFi or 3G/LTE hardware.

With Bluetooth you could also transfer files and control the camera from any modern laptop or notebook. You might even be able to use the smarphone’s GPS to tag the photos. Nik Software might choose to integrate with their Snapseed iPhone app, allowing it to edit images that are still in the tethered camera, in addition to the ones from the smartphone’s Camera Roll. Possibilities are endless…

This way, the new generation of camera buyers could use the successful and already familiar workflow from either device, smartphone and high end consumer camera, while camera makers could tap renewed growth potential. Problem solved.

.

Going Offline For Two Weeks

A beautiful day to fly over the Muskoka region in Central Ontario (Nikon D5000, Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-105mm, f/13, 1/250, ISO 200) - see more at Sorin Vacaru Photography

I wanted to let my readers know that I will be offline for the next two weeks. As some of you may have read in by bio page, I am finishing my commercial pilot training. Over the next few weeks I will be focusing mostly on preparation for the various flight tests that are part of this process.

I may publish the Photo-of-the-Week post and any earth shattering news that could hit between now and the middle of May, but otherwise this site and the Sorin Vacaru Photography website will be quiet.

In the meantime, happy landings for those of you that are pilots. Everyone else, get out there and take some photos … 😉

More Samples Made With the Nikon 1 J1

I had the chance to take my wife’s Nikon 1 J1 on a shoot alongside my Nikon DSLR. Here are a few samples taken with the J1. I was surprised to find that I had more keepers among the shots taken with the J1, mostly due to better focus and sharper images.

All the photos are JPEGs straight from the camera with minor adjustments, like cropping, some saturation and contrast. I prefer setting in camera processing to standard or neutral and deal with it in post-processing.

Please tell me if it’s only me, but I can’t find too many flaws with the images coming out of the J1. Sure, pixel peepers will see all kinds of worrisome things on their huge screens, but I think the image quality is darn good for a CX format sensor. The focus is razor sharp and I cannot see any big issues with the bokeh either.

Let me know what you think.

Is There Life After the D800 and D4 Generation of Sensors?

The Nikon D800 is out. For those who missed the frenzy, it is the new high resolution (36 MP) full frame pro camera from Nikon, successor to the wildly popular D700. The D800 has been ranked as the best camera in the world by DxO Labs. What is remarkable is that the D800 sensor outperforms medium format sensors like PhaseOne.

But wait! The Nikon D4 is out as well. The successor to the world class D3S is a 16 MP full frame pro camera that seems to have achieved the impossible: equal or better performance than the Nikon D3S while increasing the resolution to 16 MP.

We can now shoot in such low light that we have trouble seeing what we shoot. The D4 produces images at 3,200 ISO that are virtually indistinguishable from shots taken at 100 ISO. We can get perfectly usable images at a mind boggling 102,400 ISO !!

On the landscape and portrait side of photography, the D800 gives us 14.4 EVs of dynamic range and 25.3 bits colour depth with a 36 MP sensor. This is about 3 stops and 3 bits respectively higher than good mid-range DSLR specs today. Last time I checked, photographers were taking amazing images with those cameras, so the new D800 should be everything and more any photographer could dream of. Unless you are into roadside billboards, the 36 MP image will let you crop to your heart’s content and print up to 36 inches wide straight out of the camera.

In a way, we are at the end of the road: there is hardly a need for higher ISO performance, or more dynamic range, or more colour depth. We are quickly entering the territory of diminishing returns.

So, what next? What should we be asking for in 2 – 3 years, when the newly announced cameras approach the end of their life cycle?

My answer today is different from the one I would have provided three months ago. The game changer: I got to play with my wife’s Nikon J1. It is amazing how much easier it is to take shots with a J1 than a D3S. Before you flood my inbox, I am making this statement as a statistical observation. In order to get a shot, you better have the camera with you and ready to shoot. There are so many occasions you do not have your ten pound gorilla ready to shoot. It is either in the bag, around your neck or in the hotel room (or you scared your subjects away with your “look at me, I am a pro” gear). Elsewhere, if you want to make effective use of the 36 Million high quality pixels in your D800, you need that tripod that can hold the 6 pound camera and lens rock steady while you record that beautiful landscape in exquisite detail.

Having the ability to take high quality shots using a small, light package significantly increases your chances of capturing the shot. My wife’s entire Nikon J1 bag, tripod and all, weighs less than my DSLR with the kit zoom and occupies roughly the same volume! Combine that with blazingly fast operation and focus and that perfect shot is so much closer to your sensor.

So, back to my wish list for 2018: First, fix all of the inexplicable omissions in the J1/V1 firmware: give us a usable “Quick Access Menu”, a customizable Fn button, custom settings and everything else we have been complaining about. Then, make it into a Nikon 1 X1 with a 12 or 16 MP CX sensor. Give it the low light/high ISO performance of the D4 and the dynamic range and colour depth of the D800. Add built in WiFi and GPS, keep the same size and weight and double the battery life. Don’t ruin the exceptional autofocus of the J1 in good light and add the low light focusing performance of the D4. That would be all.

Seems far fetched??!! Consider this: the Nikon 1 J1 is in many ways significantly better than the D2Xs top-of-the-line pro DSLR of only 6 years ago, not to mention it has fantastic video capabilities.

Will such a camera make me a better photographer??!! Certainly not, but I have 6 years to work on that and get ready to use the 1 X1. 😉

Nikon 1 J1 – Cactus detail – taken mid day with the kit lens; no lack of detail, no issue with dynamic range or colour depth; darn good for a camera that fits in your pocket and is one tenth the price of a pro DSLR (more photos at Sorin Vacaru Photography)

Interesting Samples to Illustrate my Mirrorless Article

In an earlier article I noted that the mirrorless cameras create some exciting opportunities where extremely long focal lengths are required.

With the Nikon 1 series, the combination of a high quality sensor that has good low light and high ISO capabilities with a 2.7 crop factor allows us to obtain impressive 35mm equivalent focal lengths with reasonable cost and manageable size.

I found a nice illustration of this concept here.

With a 400mm prime we get a 2,160mm full frame equivalent. See for yourselves. I think it is pretty cool.

Even more interesting, a 300mm small(ish) zoom will reach an impressive 1,620mm equivalent focal length.

The Right Tool for the Job

(Nikon 1 J1, FT-1 with Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300mm, ISO 100, f/5.6, 1/320s).
Julia Heliconian butterfly photographed with the J1 and the excellent Nikkor AF-S VR 70-300 lens mounted on the FT-1 adapter. This photo was taken at the 220mm setting which is 594mm in 35mm equivalent. The level of detail and overall IQ are outstanding for a small sensor like this.  JPEG straight out of the camera using the Standard profile and Active D-Lightin ON.
See more like this at Sorin Vacaru Photography

Reading this title you are probably saying to yourself: can it get more cliché than this??!!

After constantly coming across a large number of blog posts on this topic I felt I had to throw my hat in. The articles I am talking about, written mostly by certain professional photographers, try to demonstrate that the only key ingredient in a good photo is the photographer while the camera plays no role. They are, IMHO, going too far with this to the point where is seems dishonest, to say the least. One author, for example, explains how great a $100 point-and-shoot is and tries to convince the reader that this is all it takes to make great photos. On the other hand, however, the vast majority of his published, professional work is done using Leica and Nikon D3 cameras sporting lenses a pair of which will set you back as much as a small car. Why is he spending a fortune on his photo gear, when, according to his blog, it doesn’t matter?

There is also the group that goes to the other extreme and chases the latest gadget hoping that it will make them better photographers. Wrong again! If you find that you are unable to consistently get great pictures with ANY camera, no matter how primitive it is, selling your house and buying the latest Mamyia system will not fix that. Guaranteed!

So, what is the real secret? Common sense!

Without question, the photographer is the most important factor in capturing that glimpse of the sublime in a photograph. Composition, light, understanding of the subject, ability to incorporate one’s vision and to stir up the viewer’s emotion and especially hard work are all vital ingredients for a good photo. (sometimes luck plays a role, too …. 😉 )

Then, there is the other, technical side. Compared to the human senses and brain, our tools are so incredibly limited that we can only cover a fraction of the sensory and intellectual spectrum at a time. From the ability to interpret 3D images, dynamic range, color spectrum and tonality all the way to the associations that happen in our brain as we process these physical inputs, the range of human perception is so much wider that our tools’ performance, no matter how state-of-the-art the marketing crowd is claiming the products to be. The tools we have are reasonably competent at capturing the images within a very narrow band of parameters.

During the day you can capture amazing shots of urban human landscapes with a $50 4 MP fixed focus camera. Try now to use it to photograph that elusive squirrel monkey 90ft high up in the jungle canopy after sunset. I have a feeling you won’t be happy with the result. The right gear for this is probably a D3S, D700 or D7000 with that ultra fast 400 or 500mm telephoto lens. The price tag: anywhere between $5,000 and $20,000.

Picture this now: you are in Washington State photographing stands of giant redwood trees with your Mamyia 645 with a 50 MP back and a Sekor lens you had to mortgage your house for. You pack your gear at the end of the day and drive north to Vancouver to cover the post Stanley Cup riots. Even assuming that the conspicuous camera screaming “look at me, I am a reporter” does not ruin the shot, it might be the last frame you shot with your $60,000 camera system. The right gear for this: most likely an iPhone 4S or a small mirrorless camera, sparing you a broken bank account and most likely some broken bones ….

I could go on and on, like for example taking a wooden view camera, ten pound tripod and all, on that first ascent of the Everest North Face, but you get my point.

Case in point, here is one pretty good photo taken with a 4 MP G2. Unless I have to print it larger than 8 x 10, it is all I need. On the other hand, I had to squeeze everything out of my Nikon DSLR with the 300 mm stabilized telephoto lens (450mm full frame equivalent) to catch this quetzal perched on a branch in the distance.

We need to understand very well the physical parameters of the environment where we find our subjects and the capabilities of our tools. Once we do that, we can choose the tools to meet the requirements of our shooting style, ability and aspirations.

My point is that in photography, there is no “one size fits all”, regardless whether it is the size of the photographer’s ability, talent or ego or the size of the latest and greatest camera. Photographer and tool have to meet in the right place at the right time to create something special.

Post-processing ethics in landscape and wildlife photography (part 1)

This year Santa came early for me. He brought me the Nik Software Complete Collection. For those unfamiliar with the product, let me say it contains some of the most highly regarded digital image post-processing applications in the industry. Color EFEX and Silver EFEX are certainly viewed as best-of-breed color and B/W post processing packages.

In the process of getting up to speed with these tools, I have watched countless web tutorials and participated in many webinars. One of these webinars was presented by a well known landscape photographer who was stepping through his own workflow using many of the Nik products. At one point, he demonstrated how to replace a bland looking sky with one he picked from his “dramatic sky library”, a step he seemed to use regularly in his post-processing work.

Later that day, while browsing through the same artist’s web gallery, I found myself skipping over all photos that included a dramatic, powerful sky. I realized that I was not trusting the image and the artist’s intentions anymore; how much of the supposed landscape was Photoshop or Nik software, disguised as an image of our surrounding natural environment and how much (or little) of it was the photographer’s hard work and artistic vision.

I know full well I am getting in hot water here with all the heavy post-processing gurus. Where does the grey area lie between landscape photography and graphic art? Don’t get me wrong: I find it very satisfying to enjoy graphic art derived from images of nature and the surrounding environment; go ahead and solarize, posterize and colorize to your heart’s content, as long as you are not trying to pass it as a landscape photo.

When I see a dramatic sky, I think of one of two things: the artist had an encounter with Lady Luck and stumbled into a great moment or, more frequently, the artist worked long and hard at capturing the exact moment when everything came together. Shooting dramatic skies and then blending them with the image of the Delicate Arch taken at mid day in bad light is OK if you are selling stock, but not if you show it as fine art.

I do a lot of post-processing myself. Being a perfectionist in photography, I always try to find that little detail that could still be improved. I do use post-processing filters to extract every little detail from that grey sky or shadow area, but I stop short of replacing it with one that will suit the image. For me, doing that would render the image almost worthless or worse, would lie to the viewer.

Without going through my workflow at this point (maybe I will do that in another post some day), this is the executive summary of my general post-processing objectives:

– remove or reduce the impact of the limitations of digital photography, camera and lenses (RAW sharpening, noise reduction, aberrations and distortions, dust removal, dynamic range/HDR, etc.)

– remove or reduce the negative impact of atmospheric elements (white balance, color cast, haze, contrast, luminosity); accentuate the aspects that work in my favor

– adjust or re-create lighting to suit the subject; this is probably the most significant change I impose on the captured image

– use other tricks to guide the viewer’s eyes and keep him interested (blur, vignette, creative sharpening, etc)

– output processing to compensate for the limitations of the output device (web color space conversions, output sharpening, etc).

That’s it. The rest should be the composition and the artist’s ability to trigger an emotional response from the viewer.

If you have an opinion you want to share, send me an email or we can continue the discussion on facebook, twitter or google+. In a couple of weeks I will share my thoughts regarding the ethics of wildlife photography (hint: should you disclose if the photo is of an animal in captivity?).

Until next time …..

Film or Digital?

There has been a lot of ink spilled lately over the film vs digital debate. Which one is better?

Digitalphobes say film allows them to get better photos with less post processing. Those who embraced digital photography say “that is rubbish”.

Let me start by saying that to contemplate this comparison in general terms, without regard for the type of photography being considered is nonsense. If you shoot subjects that require continuous shooting you have to change film rolls every minute. Forget any action, sports, wildlife and similar shoots if you are shooting film. You find yourself at a huge disadvantage compared to your fellow photographer who at the end of the day gets to choose the best of the thousand frames he shot of Federer during a Masters 1000 final. Not to speak of the fact that he can adjust his settings using the immediate visual feedback, while you shoot and hope that your bracketing settings cover the correct exposure, etc.

Which brings us to the other circumstances when you shouldn’t even think about shooting film: whenever you need instant feedback. I know, I know: film shooters will tell you to think about your shot first and get it right, rather than shooting garbage and throwing it away. They have a point, but I am talking about shoots where you have to interact with a model, for example. The best way to tell a model what you want is by showing them the setup shots. There are many other similar situations where immediate feedback on your camera’s LCD, an iPad or a studio monitor are essential for a successful shoot.

So where should we consider film, if anywhere at all? One of the remaining applications of film is landscape photography. By its nature, the shot is usually developing more slowly and there is ample time to consider composition and exposure. We can slow down and shoot fewer and better quality frames with a DSLR too, but in the case of film, lack of shooting discipline has a direct impact on the bank account. As a result, we tend to be more careful when we burn one dollar for every two shutter presses.

There are other features that make film cameras a viable option for landscape photography: resolution and depth of field. Most DSLRs use a sensor that is half the size of a 35mm frame. These cameras are severely diffraction limited. I discussed the subject at length in a previous article, so all I will say here is that at f/11 we are limited to an equivalent resolution of no more than 12-16 MP. While the resolution is adequate for prints up to 32″, the depth of field we get at f/11 may not be sufficient for landscape photography. If you print big and need lots of DOF, you can either stitch or move up to a larger format camera.

A full frame 35mm DSLR with a core set of lenses will cost you 8 – 20 thousand. You can now shoot 24 MP frames at f/16 without worrying. However, if you shoot 35mm film at f/16 and scan it at 4,800 dpi you get a 35 MP 16 bit TIFF photo. Hmmmmm, interesting, isn’t it?!

But wait! It gets better. Technological advancement in DSLRs is concentrated mainly in the sensor. If you want something more technologically advanced you need a new camera. Oops! There go at least $3,000 and as much as $11,000 for a Leica. In the film world, most of the improvements are in the actual film. $8/roll get you state-of-the art film technology and you can still use your old 35mm film camera.

What if you need to print really big and require extreme DOF? You need to move to medium format for both. Again, the difference is the cost. MF in the digital space carries a $30-80,000 price tag for resolutions in the 50 MP range. A scan of a MF film frame can easily top 100 MP with 16 bit/channel and you can use your old Rollei or Pentax with impunity. There is a wealth of used film cameras at ridiculously low prices on the market.

So far we were able to get similar results for both film and digital , albeit at price points one order of magnitude apart. It gets even more interesting when we move into the large format cameras. There isn’t a practical digital equivalent for the large format film view cameras. A brand new view camera is about $2,000. With frames up to 8×10″, the possibilities for large prints and infinite DOF are almost unlimited.

For most of us, schlepping the 20 lb view camera and tripod up the mountain and sticking our heads under the black cloth to get that one 8×10 shot is never going to happen.

What you should do if you are a landscape photographer is pick up your old film SLR or get an F80 for $90 used and shoot some of the new films like Ektar 100 or the Velvia slides. Have your film scanned at the lab and enjoy the results. Who knows, you might find renewed love for the old art form of film photography with a modern twist.