Why?
Why Mirrorless? Why JPEG only?
For me, simple reasons...
WHY MIRRORLESS?
Three years ago, when it finally dawned on me that - outside of professional work - I was no longer taking pictures, I realized it was because my camera gear had gotten "too bulky". So, I thought... what if I had a cool small camera to carry around? Maybe an old retro film camera? But no... I had to admit that film wouldn't be a very practical choice for me.
So, I started looking at what the latest options might be, and discovered mirrorless systems (I had been shooting my 5D with a hooded viewfinder over the LCD for years!). And then, like an answer to a wish - I came across the Fuji x100! Both retro looking and digital. In my eyes, the exact sorta thing I would’ve designed myself. And here, somebody beat me to it! :-)
However, after a great deal of research, I decided to get the Panasonic Lumix GX7, and the Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7 lens (the Fuji having a fixed lens), instead.
And wow... what an impact having a small take-along camera had on me! I started taking pictures again! LOTS of them!
As a result, I coined a new phrase—based on an old one...
“Go small, or stay home.”
I now carry a camera with me at all times, and own more than one. Which one I grab varies — depending upon both mood and destination.
While many of the images on this site currently represent the random pix I take throughout my day, I'll be moving toward a more intentional effort to create my own version of Street Photography — as I’ve said, "...from the streets, to the sand."
And, I imagine my work will grow with depth and complexity, as a result. Stay tuned.
WHY ONLY JPEGS?
As someone who makes his living working on a computer all day, the last thing I needed was a new endeavor that required even more time on the computer.
So, given the great strides that have been made in the advancement of EVF quality, jpeg processing algorithms, and onboard/in-camera image enhancement, I decided that if I could get an image to look, in the viewfinder, as I'd like it to look in final form — composed/created in camera, on the fly — then I could forgo post-production computer time!
And, as I'm extremely well-versed in Photoshop and image manipulation, I knew I could work out all these details very quickly as I shot — as long as the camera provided for it.
On a side note, when it comes to "camera reviews", I feel my approach is really the only accurate way of touting a camera's image taking capabilities (rather than what you commonly see accompanying a review — images that have been post-processed).
And, sure, while the quality of doing it "in camera" doesn't offer the same degree of control or latitude that can be done to a RAW file in post, it was a good enough trade-off for me — in order to keep things simple, immediate, and fun. And, avoid more "work" on the computer.
“I call it camera-based photography, versus computer-based photography.”
I believe in keeping the integrity of a photograph to within the moment it was taken. After all, anything can be done to an image after the fact. And there's nothing wrong with that. I know. I've been doing it for decades, and creating amazing work - often with very little that's reminiscent of the original file I started with. But, to me, an image becomes something else at that point. It's using the image taken by the camera as a starting point for something new.
For me, the idea that began three years ago was to keep it simple. The photographs begin and end with what was captured wholly within the camera the moment it was taken. Then I'll upload them. And move on. Hence, jpegs only.
