Blog

Short blog posts, journal entries, and random thoughts. Topics include a mix of personal and the world at large.

Man maths

I was perfectly content with my iPhone 16 Pro Max… until I saw reviews of the new iPhone 18 Pro series. New to the latest iPhone are updates to the photographic styles - essentially fancy filters for photos taken with the phone. I’ve been a fan of photographic styles since this very iPhone 16 Pro Max was launched with the ability to customize the default tone mapping. I can (finally) toggle the color and dial back the crunchiness that iPhone photos have sort of become notorious for.

New to the iPhone 18 Pro line is more tone options, one of which is film. Right along with the prevailing photography zeigeist, I adore the look of film. My primary shooter is a Fujifilm XT-5. Nostalgia Neg is my preferred film simulation, and I am fully happy with the JPEG files that are straight out of the camera. These days, Adobe Lightroom for me is more of a collation app than heavy editing.

I always thought it would be nice for the iPhone to have such a film simulation out of the box using the native camera app. I didn’t think it would happen, but by god Apple did it! I wasn’t at all planning to spend $1,200 for a new phone this year, yet the mighty corporation from Cupertino has done it again.

This is where a bit of girl man maths comes in. Firstly, thanks to the chronic memory chip shortage caused by the AI boom, both models of the iPhone 18 Pro series has increased in price by $100. I skirted that extra cost by downsizing from the Max model of my iPhone 16 Pro to the regular sized iPhone 18 Pro. Same price as the old phone, just smaller screen real estate. A necessary sacrifice.

Secondly, my existing iPhone 16 Pro Max is fully functional and unblemished, so a perfect trade-in candidate. That knocks the price down by $610. Third, I opted out of buying AppleCare for the new phone, which I bought and carried on the old one. As someone who takes care of his stuff really well, the extra insurance is a needless financial outlay. So, save some additional money there.

Lastly, for the first time in my iPhone owning life, I bought a third-party case. $50 (plus tax) for Apple’s first-party case is ludicrously expensive, given there are so many Chinese-made options on Amazon that are just as nice, for about $15. Even if the third-party case doesn’t last as long, there’s enough money difference to buy two more before equaling the price of one Apple case.

That’s how I do man maths: make a big purchase, then find small ways to alleviate the total expenditure.

It's good enough

It is new iPhone season, and this year I am not upgrading. Even though I can easily afford to, my days of getting the latest iPhone model every year is over. The proper adult thing to do is to check if it serves a purpose beyond the glow of a shiny new toy (it’s a lovely glow for sure). Is there a critical fault with my current phone that warrants a change?

It helps the answer quite a bit when the current phone is a still relatively new iPhone 16 Pro. It’s barely one year old at this point, and the internal systems remain zippy and responsive. Battery life is stellar, and it’s got AppleCare+ warranty for another year. Again, no particular reason to switch.

However, Apple knows how to tug at this hobbyist photographer’s heart. The new iPhone 17 Pro has an upgraded telephoto lens. My style of shooting leans towards the longer focal lengths. The typical 24mm to 35mm range (what the wide lens would be on most smartphones) creates incredibly boring photos. The compression and separation you get from telephoto can tell much better story.

I must resist! As much as I would love the new 48 megapixel telephoto lens on the iPhone 17, I have to be content with the lowly 12 megapixel shooter on my iPhone 16. There’s got to be a “good enough” at some point, right? Innovation is great and all, but certain things can simply be allowed to withstand the test of time.

There’s been newer monitors that are better, brighter, more colorful than the Pro Display XDR I bought back in 2020. However, I’ve no desire to replace it because the mini LED technology in the XDR is good enough. Partly also because I paid $5,000 for it…

Do you even know how?

The best piece of furniture one can have in the home is a chaise longue. There’s nothing better after a long day of work than to plop down on the long sofa and chill. Even in this tiny studio apartment of mine, I made sure to accommodate one. In fact, it’s the only piece of chair furniture in the room. A chaise longue is fantastic for Saturday afternoon naps.

At work we have for checkout some relatively old DSLR cameras (like a Canon 5D Mark III). During graduation time the cameras get checked out quite often, which is rather confounding. The modern smartphone camera is so good - why bother with something so clunky and cumbersome?

Under capable hands, old DSLR cameras can still take superior pictures to the top smartphones. But I seriously doubt the casual users checking out the DSLRs from us have any understanding of the exposure triangle. Leaving the camera in full auto while taking pictures at a live graduation is a recipe for blurred bodies and missed smiles. (Pro tip: when capturing people, a fast shutter speed of at least 1/250 of a second is recommended.)

The latest iPhone would have captured dozens of frames’ worth of information before the shutter is even pressed. The output is going to be sharp no matter what, automatically. For the layperson, the smartphone is the superior tool.

We can talk about perhaps smartphone photographic capabilities have gotten too good. The pictures are too crunchy, too sharp, too perfect. Highlights are never blown, and shadows always recovered. I think the inherent limitations of actual cameras provide a vastly more satisfying outcome. The photographs out of my FujiFilm X-T5 can convey emotion, something largely absent from my iPhone captures.

Judging by how absurdly expensive old point-and-shoot cameras have gotten on the used market, and the fact apps are available on smartphones that take away all their computational trickery - I’m not the only one who feels this way.

That's pretty spectacular

I think we can recognize that tech companies are implementing artificial intelligence features as an excuse to raise their product prices. Adobe did that just today in raising the subscription price of its creative suite. Users will be forced to pay more for AI features with debatable usefulness. Maybe these companies can cloak the upcoming tariff price increases under the guise of AI!

To Adobe’s credit, there is an AI feature of its Lightroom suite that I recently found to be utterly incredible.

This past weekend I shot photos at a wedding reception. A Chinese restaurant in the evening is about the worst lighting conditions this side of a nightclub. Because I was photographing people, I had to maintain high shutter speed (to avoid motion blur). Nor could I shoot at wide open aperture because the focal plane would be too narrow for a group shot. High ISO was the only remedy, which meant lots of noise in the output.

Enter the AI denoise function introduced in Lightroom back in 2023. With a single click of a button, and a slider to choose how strong, the high ISO photos I took came out clean and sharp, like freaking magic. (On my now dated M1 Max MacBook Pro, to denoise a single RAW photograph took about 30 seconds.) No more messing with manual noise reduction sliders and guessing what each of them actually do. Never again will I fear bumping the ISO setting to the limits (dynamic range tradeoffs aside).

I went back to some other high ISO photos I’ve shot over the years just to mess with it some more. For sure AI tools can be gimmicky, but when they do perform seemingly miracles, I’ve no issue paying more.

I don't need it

Speaking of Google Photos Magic Eraser: Adobe released an update to its Lightroom editing software touting a similar feature. Users like me can now harness the power of AI - as is seemingly everything these days - to remove unwanted objects from photographs. That’s nothing for me to get excited about, because I’ve largely stopped editing my pictures. (The most I do now to my photos is straighten the horizon. Dutch angles absolutely grinds my gears.) I am a straight-out-of-the-camera kind of photographer now. Those Fujifilm film simulations are just that amazing and convenient.

In my opinion, the best way to implement AI is to make it invisible. Don’t tell me it’s AI at all. Let AI do all the magic in the background. The user should only see the end result. Take this new Lightroom feature for example: AI removal should be integrated into the existing cropping and cloning tools. The program has always had the capability to crop things out of photos. It’s obviously more powerful and easier thanks to generative AI, but why mention AI at all? Simply say the crop tool is now way better.

I don’t care that Grammarly is using AI to make its writing assistance software better. I only care that the software works, and works well.

Of course, the cynical take would be all these companies are hopping on to AI in order to upsell (hashtag profits). Adobe is adding AI to Photoshop and Lightroom so they can easily justify increasing the monthly subscription fee in the future (mark my words). Microsoft adding Copilot AI to its Office apps is merely an excuse to charge more on the subscription. Extra computing power is not free, am I right? But what if I only want simple Microsoft Word - without the fancy AI stuff? I doubt there’s going to be an AI-less tier for a cheaper price.

What I would not be surprised is Microsoft adding an ad-supported tier of MS 365 for a lower price. Have you used Windows 11 lately? Ads are creeping in already…

A few to remember with

Spring graduation is the best time of the year to be around campus. There’s so many graduates roaming about in their caps and gowns, capturing graduation photos to remember. Shoutout to the budding photographers following these graduates around. I guess in a world of smartphones capable enough to capture the moon (Samsung fakes it, apparently), the value of a “proper” camera is still pretty evident. For a once in a lifetime thing, you’re not handing off your iPhone to a cousin to do the job.

You wouldn’t hire a wedding photographer that shoots with smartphones, right? (Or maybe you should…)

It’s good to see the pro-Palestine protest camping has come to an end, after reaching an agreement with the university. Before this, some of the protesters defaced the San Francisco State University signage at the corner of 19th Avenue and Holloway. This tiny monument thing is where graduates like to take pictures in front of (during graduation week there can be lines). How awful it is then to have that beautiful scene ruined by graffiti. Though I guess any good photographer can photoshop that out (or those A.I. magic erasers in Android smartphones). Moot point: the markings have since been painted over.

I wonder what is the popular photographic aesthetic these days, vis a vis these graduation photos. If I had to guess: retro is definitely in. Technical perfection is out of style. People buy older iPhones to take pictures with, simply for the “vintage” look (modern iPhones do over-process the image, I have to say). Fujifilm absolutely cannot make enough X100VI to keep up with demand, because the TikTok/Instagram crowd has hyped its film simulation to the sky. Heck, I bought a Fujifilm X-T5 because I wanted the retro film vibes.

Photographer: “What picture style would you like?”
Client: “I would like the photos to be slightly shitty.”

Not of this reality

It seems what’s popular these days amongst millennials and Gen Z is buying old iPhones to take pictures. I guess these folks don’t want the latest and greatest in imaging technology that Apple has to offer? An iPhone 7 offers a comparatively nostalgic look in its photo processing, yet still has enough megapixels to do prints. (I remember it was around the iPhone 7 era that I was able to use photos taken with the phone in making calendar-sized prints.) I often see on social media people carrying two phones: an older iPhone strictly for photography, and a modern one for everything else.

I can understand why. Honestly, I am not a fan of how the modern iPhone processes its photos. It’s too sharp, too crunchy, too much HDR. Computational photography deserves kudos for what it can do with such a small camera sensor in smartphones, but at some point it gets to be a bit too processed, a bit too perfect. A photograph’s job is to be evocative, to elicit an emotional reaction. A direct technical copy of how a scene is in real life is not a requirement. A black-and-white picture taken from the real world of color is a great example of this notion.

It seems nostalgia and retro-ness always have a place. What was once old becomes new again. Just look at the return of bell-bottoms and baggy pants (that was the fashion of my high school days). We all think a decade ago were better times: we were objectively younger, with less ingrained responsibilities. The photographs from that time have a certain look, which explains why people are buying older phones (and cameras) to replicate that feel.

The instant film - be it Polaroid or FujiFilm Instax - will never go out of style, even though smartphones have surpassed it in technical image quality a long time ago. It’s the look that people want: a feel that isn’t of this reality, because our reality it too burdensome to bear. That’s how instagram came to its immense popularity, isn’t it? Nostalgic filters to make a photo look not of this present. I too have rose-tinted fondness for the early days of instagram.