Following

[ 28mm f/5.6, Kodak Tri-X Pan 400 ]

Back in 2012, while on an assignment to shoot architecture and tourism in Indonesia, this little guy above came running up to me and wouldn't stop smiling. Hung around for about 15 minutes. His buddy was there too, but always apprehensive and staying in the back.

Even though my job was to get shots of a local building, how could ya not roll off some pics of this little dude?

That's maybe the most rewarding thing about photography to me, being able to capture a fleeting sliver of time that expresses more somehow.

Now, here's the thing. The tech specs listed are not true. [ 28mm f/5.6, Kodak Tri-X Pan 400 ]

That’s there as a reminder to debate myself when I stumble across this post in the future.

What debate?

Well, will the title activate a certain bias attached to the technical prestige of those specs? And, after all, is it really that good of a photo? Or, is the personal story what makes the image work for me?

For context, I've become a bit camera/film agnostic over the years. Yet, my favorite medium for photography remains film. Mostly because I like the process. The restrictions analog offers is good for my creativity. And I also value my time in the darkroom. You’re literally adjusting physical elements to deliver a result. Clay. Paint. Photography. Being tactile with craft is a thing I’m not agnostic about. My brain craves it.

However, I can and do capture pics with anything and everything.

Beyond that, this is an image from that time and place.

That's the part that's absolutely true. A smile in the moment.

—Matt