Finding Your Path in Photography

St. Francis de Assisi church, Ranchos de Taos, NM 2003.  Kiev 60, Verichrome Pan

If you are just starting out with photography as a hobby, there’s a lot of things to learn.    Most of the time, you are learning about the mechanics of the equipment, and coupled with the understanding of the exposure triangle, it can seem like a lot -- at first. If you are coming from the digital world to the film world, there’s even more ways to discover that you can screw things up.  Fear not.  Like any endeavor that requires the understanding of a subject, you are bound to make mistakes along the way.  Learn from them. All that camera manipulation and understanding of light aside, the thing about photography is that one can use the very best equipment or the very simplest of equipment and be an amazing photographer.  One person may use the very best equipment and have boring photos, and another person might use a toy camera and become a published artist.  And vice versa. There’s no guarantee that using a Leica or a Rolleiflex will make you a better photographer, nor will the latest mirror-less Nikon or Canon digital camera result in a gallery show (if that’s what you want).  It really boils down to your competence with the camera and what’s between your ears.  

Do you follow trends?    Do you ask what so and so used to get an image, or what film stock you should use to get “that look” whatever it may be?    I get it, I really do.    It’s part of the process of becoming a photographer.    However, many times people ask the wrong questions. You may wonder about the film stock, and be totally unaware of what kind of lighting was used in the photograph.  You may ask about a camera, and not think about the lens that was used.    In our naiveté, we often overlook the complexity and think there is a single answer. There are many factors involved in making an exposure.  

In my early days, I was an avid fan of John Shaw, a well-published nature photographer.    I shot a lot of slide film, aiming to get results like I saw in his photographs.    A few times, I think I succeeded. What I didn’t have was his breadth of knowledge, sense of composition, and insight. It took me years to get to the point of being able to get consistent results, and then digital came along, which made macrophotography a whole lot easier and cheaper.    I was able to experiment without thinking about how many shots I might waste on a roll of expensive slide film.    

Were my photos better?    Yes -- because I shot more.    Therein lies the crux of photography. To get better, shoot more.    But wait, that’s not all.    You’ll eventually develop a style, or find your niche.    Maybe it was something that you started with early on, or perhaps you just found out that one day, when you were really in the moment, and the image and your expectations just came together.    Sometimes that path changes over time, as it should.

When I started to take photography seriously in 1999, I had a mentor that was generous with his time, knowledge, and equipment. I’d been taking photos since the early 1970s, but had never taken a class, except for an after-hours class in high school.    I felt that knowing as much as I could about macrophotography would be useful in my career as an entomologist and museums collection manager.    It did, but I learned something more.   

Looking at various books and reading about photography and other photographers, I realized there was so much more to be explored.    So many cameras! So many lenses!    So many different films! And so on.  The thing that I had not expected was the more I learned, the more my photography changed. The macrophotography had run its course, and was useful in my daily work, but what really gave me satisfaction was getting out in the world, learning about other types of photography, and seeing the work of others. My photography improved as my brain was exercised, my eyes trained to see things differently.    Becoming proficient operating a camera was also a key to being open to exploration.    If you are trying to figure out the mechanical aspects of making a photograph, it’s harder to “be in the moment.”          

I believe that the passion you have for something also reflects in your photography. Being affected by your surroundings, and how you interact with them is a key to taking meaningful photographs. Photography is a very personal experience.    What one person does does not mean that he or she is a model for others to follow.    What inspires me probably won’t inspire you.    If you pursue photography seriously, you will find those things that inspire you.    Be aware that one path may lead to another, and do not blind yourself to new possibilities.    Your photographic practice improves over time.

One of the ways to explore what’s possible in photography is to look at the work of others, as well as some more philosophical takes on being a photographer.    I have read that young people today don’t read books, preferring to get their information (infotainment) via YouTube and other social media.    There are some photographers that have excellent YouTube channels, but there are many that I feel are entertaining, but not necessarily informative.    I do believe that if you are serious about photography, you should know something about its history and at least be familiar with some of the photographers.    You might get some of that in a real photography class, but if you want to explore on your own, I can recommend some books that will give you a good overview.

“A World History of Photography,” by Naomi Rosenblum is an excellent introduction to the history of photography, with lots  of great images. I think it’s been reprinted many times, and is often used in college photo history classes.

An even larger tome, with more emphasis on European photographers, and profusely illustrated, is “A New History of Photography,” edited by Michel Frizot.    At 775 pages, it’s a monster of a book, but it’s really great.    It is perhaps the most comprehensive volume with less focus on American photographers.

A more easily carried book from Taschen is “A History of Photography from 1839 to the present” from George Eastman House.    It’s over 700 pages, but is not a coffee table book.    I think it’s a great introduction to photographic history, with lots of examples, as well as a glossary.      

Those are just three examples to get you started.    You can start with the obvious list of the “greats” and delve into their oeuvre.    Alphabetically - Berenice Abbott, Ansel Adams,      Diane Arbus, Eugene Atget, Margaret Bourke-White, Henri Cartier Bresson, Anne Brigman, Wayne Bullock, Imogen Cunningham, Walker Evans, Robert Frank, Dorothea Lange, Lee Miller, Elliot Porter, W. Eugene Smith, Alfred Stieglitz, Edward Steichen, Paul Strand, Josef Sudek, and many others.    Contemporary photographers such as Sally Mann, Michael Kenna, David Plowden, Joel Myerowitz, and Stephen Shore are definitely worth looking at.  There are many more that you’ll discover on your own.      

There are also a number of excellent photographer documentaries available on streaming services. Search under "Photography documentary" on your smart TV or digital device.

Writings on the philosophy of photography can be useful, too.    There are a few that I think can be very helpful to photographers:

• Why Photography Matters by Jerry L. Thompson. 2013, MIT Press, 92 pp. ISBN#978-0-262-01928-6.
• Beauty in Photography by Robert Adams. 1996, Aperture Books. 108 pp. ISBN# 0-89381-368-0.
• Ways of Seeing by John Berger, 1980. Penguin Books, 165 pp. ISBN#0-563-122447.
• The Ongoing Moment by Geoff Dyer, 2007. Vintage Books, 285 pp. ISBN#978-1-4000-3168-9
• The Nature of Photographs by Stephen Shore, 2010. Phaidon Press. 136 pp. ISBN#978-0-7148-5904-0
• The Tao of Photography. Seeing Beyond Seeing by Philippe L. Gross and S.I. Shapiro. 2001.    Ten Speed Press. 136 pp. ISBN#1-58008-194-0
• The Art of Photography. An Approach to Personal Expression by Bruce Barnbaum. 2010.    RockyNook Publishers. 352 pp. ISBN# 978-1-933952-68-0.
• The Photographic Eye. Learning to See With a Camera by Michael F. O’Brien and Norman Sibley,    1995.    Davis Publications. 287 pp. ISBN#0-87192-283-5
• Zen Camera. Creative Awakenings With a Daily Practice in Photography by David Ulrich. 2018. Watson-Guptill publishers, 217 pp. ISBN#978-0-399-58033-8.

I enjoy looking at the work of other photographers, and being inspired by them. I’ve said it before, that photography is a big tent, and there are all sorts of processes, styles, subjects, and methodologies to explore, and you’ll find something that resonates with you.    Becoming familiar with what’s been done before is not a bad thing.    I guarantee that whatever interests you, someone has already done it, and reading up on it beforehand will help you avoid the pitfalls and let you concentrate on the creative process.    

This brings me to my final point - photograph for yourself.    Do what makes you happy and inspires you.    Your vision, your imagination, is yours. Make it work for you. Maybe doing that only requires using a smart phone camera. Maybe it requires a wet plate camera.    Maybe you need a DSLR with a 600mm lens.    Whatever you require, shoot as often as possible, and eventually, you’ll get really good at it.    Be proficient with the process, whatever it is.  Nobody paints a masterpiece the first time they pick up a brush.    Photography is a skill set that gets better the more you practice.    So, get out there and photograph!

Note that I have not recommended  a camera, film, or process in the above.  It's yours to explore, and as the saying goes "The journey is the reward." 

The Argus C-3 - The Infamous Brick

After over 15 years of blogging with Random Camera Blog, it's hard to believe that I, a former Argus collector/shooter, have not said much about the Argus Brick.  It's more than a chunk of Bakelite and Aluminum. It represents small-town industry and innovation.  It also represents the birth and decline of American-made products in the post-WWII era.  It represents the birth of 35mm color slides and amateur slide shows, and the post-war photography boom in America.  The Argus C-3 was never a beauty pageant winner, and its rugged homeliness is a throwback to when utility was favored over aesthetics, and the science of ergonomics had yet to be invented.

The Origins of the Argus C series

While Ann Arbor is known as the home of the University of Michigan, I imagine most people have no idea of the industry that was there nearly a century ago.  In 1931, the International Radio Corporation (IRC) was formed by a bunch of businessmen to build small radios for the home. Since this was in the Great Depression, it seems like it was a risky venture, but in fact, it was quite successful.  Summer months were apparently a less busy time for the company, and Charles A. Vershoor, the company president, decided that they could produce a small 35mm camera with the facilities already present at the IRC in Ann Arbor.  He apparently got this idea after seeing a Leica Model A while abroad in 1934.  The result was the Argus A, a fairly simple Bakelite-bodied 35mm camera with a rim-set shutter and plain viewfinder that appeared in 1936 - with nothing in common with the Leica except that it took 35 mm film.  The resulting sales were so successful that IRC sold its radio patents to RCA, and thus the company became the International Research Corporation, later changing to Argus, Inc. in the 1940s.


While the Argus A series of cameras were successful, they lacked rangefinder focusing, and much like the Contax rangefinder camera, the design for "the brick" has a geared focus wheel on the front of the camera that is linked to the rangefinder.  However, the first model, the Argus C (1938-39), did not have the rangefinder linked to the lens focus, and one therefore had to read the distance from the uncoupled rangefinder and then move the focus distance on the lens barrel. The Argus C-2 also appeared in 1938, and has the rangefinder wheel coupled to the lens.  There was no flash linkage on these first two models, which was addressed by the C-3, appearing in 1939, with production continuing until 1966.  That was almost a 30-year reign for a camera, which of course, is unheard of today.  Because of the C, C-2, and C-3 models having some overlap, and the lengthy production run, there are many variations in the C-3, some retrofitted C-2s, and because Argus was often cash short, there can be oddities that pop up that vex collectors. Some of those may have been modification at the factory, or by users.


Argus tried to continue with some basic form of the C-3 in the Argus C-33 (1959-61), Autronic 35 (1960-62), and Autronic II (1962-65).  None of these cameras were a big success. With the availability of much better cameras from Japan and Germany, and a more discerning and prosperous market, Argus sales steeply declined.  Argus barely clung to life into the late 1970s through a series of mergers and acquisitions and it ended its run as a company in 1985.  No cameras have been made in Ann Arbor since the early 1960s, and it's safe to say that the C-3 was the most popular 35 mm camera produced in the USA, with millions produced. 

Argus made many more cameras than the beloved Brick, and the best compendium on the history of Argus and its cameras is the book Argomania (2005) by Henry J. Gambino (ISBN 0-9770507-0-X).  Unfortunately, it's out of print, but you may find a copy for sale online somewhere.  My favorite Argus camera is the C-4, which has a proper 35 mm rangefinder appearance, with a metal body and ergonomics that are enjoyable after using a C-3 for any length of time.

A must-have, if you are into Argus!

Argus C-3 Versions

The first version (1939-1940) of the Argus C-3 came with 10 shutter speeds plus Bulb. The second variant (1940-42) has seven shutter speeds plus B, and was the last version before WWII.  The third variant (1946) was identical to the second, but has a coated lens, standard f-stop designations, and a black shutter cocking lever.

The sixth variant (1955-56) has the "Color-Matic" settings such that the shutter speed dial, aperture dial and rangefinder dial are color-coded to match the "Color-Matic" settings.  The shutter was simplified to five speeds (1/10, 1/25, 1/50, 1/100 and 1/300), which remained for the run of the camera.  Further variations are pretty much cosmetic.  The "Harry Potter camera" -- an Argus C-3 Matchmatic (1958-66), has a two-tone leatherette and an EVS system that was supposed to simplify operation.  It also came with an LC-3 Selenium exposure meter.


The C-3 Standard was manufactured from 1958-1966, and it looks a bit more dressed up than the previous versions.  That's probably the most common Argus C-3 that people will run into these days.  The lens is recessed from the front just a bit, and the dials and button look more polished.  However, it's a C-3, and is not functionally different from the first C-3 in 1939.

My only remaining C-3s - both are users

My history with the Argus C-3

I picked up my first Argus, an Argus 75 box camera in the summer of 2000 at a thrift shop in Cheboygan, MI.  I didn't know squat about Argus cameras at the time, and I later picked up an Argus A and then a C-3 in 2001.  They were simply something interesting to try out, but then I started learning more about Argus, and that the cameras were made in Ann Arbor.  Once I found the Argus Museum at the site of the original factory, I was hooked into learning more about these cameras and started collecting them. So did my daughter Marjorie, and between the two us us there were probably close to 50 Argus cameras in the house at one time.  At that time, in the early 2000s, Argus cameras were dirt cheap.  After all, with digital becoming a big thing, those old Argus cameras could not have been worth anything!  So, we managed to acquire some rare models and pretty much all the variants in the C series. All of my rare Argus cameras were sold quite a while ago, and except for a few models, I gave the remaining Argus cameras to the Argus Museum before I moved to North Carolina  in 2019.

A few of the Argus C series that went to the Argus Museum

I kept two C-3s.  One is a third variant, and the other is a sixth variant.  Both work very well, and one has a 35 mm Argus Sandmar wide-angle lens instead of the standard 50mm f/3.5 Argus Cintar.

What's that, a 35 mm lens?  Yes, the Argus C-3 is capable of using other lenses made for it.  It's not a quick process, but Argus sold the 35 mm Sandmar lens and a 100 mm f/4.5 Tele-Sanmar lens.  Soligor and Fuji also made lenses for the C-3.

One of the wonderful things about Argus cameras is that aside from being popular in the USA, there were a number of companies that made accessories for them. Collecting such items is quite a feat by itself: close-up filters, series filter holders, flash guns, close-up kits, underwater housings, etc. can be found, though I suspect that what used to be fairly common has now become hard to find as a lot of such accessories were probably tossed in the trash.

Using an Argus C-3 

While I only occasionally use an Argus of any kind these days, I know that if I pick up a C-3, I can get good images from it. If the camera is in good working order, the lens clear, and the rangefinder accurate, you should be able to take very good photographs. In fact, I challenge you to find a better-US-made 35mm camera from that era that still works as well as when new. It's not going to be in the same ballpark as German-made cameras such as the Kodak Retina II, but it was far more affordable at the time.  An Argus C-3 can be ideal for long-exposures, and I have used one to take urban night shots.

Mark Dalzell, holding the Giant Argus C-3 at the Argus
Museum in Ann Arbor. There are several giant display
versions of Argus cameras at the museum.

Basic Features

• coupled rangefinder focusing of lens
• separate rangefinder and composing viewfinders (much like a Barnack Leica) 
• manually selectable shutter speeds on a front L dial
• manually selectable aperture on front of lens
• I(instant) and B (bulb) select for exposure at base of shutter button
• front-mounted shutter cocking lever - can easily do multiple exposures
• manual reset of frame counter on top-mounted counter
• film wind knob on top L, film rewind knob on bottom R
• Tripod socket on bottom L
• Flash sockets for bulb-type flashgun on L side
• Shutter speeds from 1/10- 1/300 sec + B

- what, you want more? fuggetaboutit!

The first thing is to familiarize yourself with the controls of the C-3.  I think the number one thing that stumps people is opening the back.  Press down on the raised chrome spot on the body latch that's on the L side of the camera. The back can now be pulled open if you have pressed hard enough.  Oh look, the film loads on the right side and the take-up spool is on the left, the reverse of most 35 mm cameras.

Argus C-3 third variant, 1946-48

The Weston numbers were replaced by ASA numbers in 1948

push that chrome bump in to open the back

be sure to move the film catch to the L when you begin to advance
 the film

yes, it loads from right to left

Go to the Argus Collector's Group website for more information on the Argus cameras, manuals, and sample images.  I am reproducing two of their images that show the parts and layout of a typical Argus C-3.

C-3 Features Front, courtesy of the Argus Collector's Group

C-3 Features Top, courtesy of the Argus Collector's Group

While writing this article, I felt that I should go back through my rolls of film shot in the C-3 and re-scan them.  My shots date primarily form 2001-2003, before the age of Flickr and a lot of online sharing, so it's been good to see them again. If anything, there were more errors in my film processing than in the operation of the camera. I have to say, I thought a share of the negatives were pretty good, and if you are looking for a cheap 35 mm camera with full manual control, the C-3 should be considered.

A few things I wish Argus had done differently:

• Strap lugs.  Argus isn't alone in this, but it would have been nice to have strap lugs on the camera body, and not to have to use the leather case with a strap.  I'm not a fan of ever-ready cases. 
• A faster lens. A maximum aperture of  f/3.5 isn't great, and f/2.8 would have been nice.  However, based upon the lens design, it would certainly have made the camera more expensive, and bulkier than it already is.
• A better system of attaching the back!

While its easy to talk about the shortcomings of the Argus C-3 in the year 2020, one should think about just what was available to the amateur photographer in the USA in 1942.   First of all, large format and medium format was the realm of professional photographers.  The cameras that used 127 film were mostly aimed at the occasional photographer, and box cameras that used 620/120/127  in the USA were aimed at the beginners and household photographers.  The “miniature” format of 135 film was really just getting popular, but it offered more control and less to carry around.  The cameras, however, were relatively expensive.  If one wanted to pursue 35 mm, the Argus C-3 was probably the most quality at an affordable price.  The Argus A series (starting in 1936) certainly made 35 mm affordable, but it was the C-3 that gave professional results.  Once war started in Europe, the German-made cameras became much more difficult to acquire, and the Argus was the obvious choice in the USA.   It wasn't until after the war ended, that the post-war 35 mm photography boom really got going, and while there were many American camera manufacturers, none of them sold  cameras as dependable as the Argus C-3.  Kodak was the exception, and its German-made Retina series cameras were a far better, more compact, and also more expensive option.  The Kodak Pony, originally made for 828 film, became a 35 mm camera in 1950, but it lacked rangefinder focusing.  The Kodak 35 Rangefinder (1940-42, 1946-51)- perhaps the most ungainly-looking camera ever, lacked the ruggedness and simplicity of the Argus C-3.  The earliest models lacked flash synchronization, and the camera was always more expensive than the C-3.

In today's dollars the C-3 would be about $675!

Speaking of WWII, the American photographer, Tony Vaccaro, served as an Army Infantryman, and carried his Argus C-3 throughout his service.  His photographs were taken as a soldier, and it wasn't until 50 years after the war ended, that he exhibited them.   There is no doubt that the rugged and easily repaired C-3 served him well, and his images show the stark reality of the war from D-Day until Germany surrendered.    There is an excellent HBO documentary (2016) -  Under fire. The untold story of PFC Tony Vaccaro. It's available online now.

You can still use a C-3 today.  They are great for making multiple exposures as you can cock and fire the shutter without advancing the film.  As I said above, if the camera is in good mechanical and optical condition, it will do as well as the person using that is using it.  There is something about using a 60-80-year old 35 mm camera in 2020.  While it's easy to poke a bit of fun at The Brick, it paved the way for a generation of photographers.

Some sample images from my C-3 cameras over the years

2008 Argus Day Meetup

Book Review: Vivian Maier – A Photographer's Life and Afterlife, by Pamela Bannos

Giving Vivian Maier A Voice

Vivian Maier – A Photographer's Life and Afterlife, by Pamela Bannos. 2017, The University of Chicago Press, 362 pp. $35.00, hardcover.

For the past eight years or so, many of us have been fascinated with the story and found photographs of Vivian Maier. Part of the fascination has been the stories about Maier – a secretive nanny with an odd French accent; her Rolleiflex around her neck, seemingly everywhere; her trove of images that had never been seen by the public; and her photographic travels in Chicago and New York. The other part of this has been the images themselves. No one can deny that that she made some fantastic photographs that certainly are as good as any other photographer that was known for street photography at that time. Her output was prolific, and of course, since we only know of her after her death, we will never know exactly why she chose to not share her work. Until this latest book by Pamela Bannos, the Vivian Maier story was being told and promoted by those that had much to benefit from the massive find of a lifetime. I don't fault John Maloof for promoting his version of Vivian Maier's story, nor the authors of other books, which I will list at the end. One thing all of them have in common, is that they tell an incomplete story, and the narratives are largely devoid of in-depth research -- partly because of the fact that it was in the self-interest of the owners of Maier's photographs to publish and promote her images. In the rush to capitalize on the popularity of the Vivian Maier story and the photographs, Maloof and others determined the narrative, sometimes obscuring or ignoring information that would have provided us with a more complex version of Vivian Maier. She had to be more than a nanny, and she was not a photography savant.  Don't get me wrong, I love seeing her images in print -- but until Bannos' book, we did not have the sort of arduous and exhaustive scholarly work that was needed to more fully inform us about the actual photographer.

My first inclination to think we were not getting the full story, was when it was reported that she was using a box camera and then went suddenly to a Rolleiflex TLR. Those 6x9 cm images were not of box-camera quality, and were quite possibly done with a 120 roll-film folding camera, which would have allowed for a variety of exposure settings and focusing. That “box-camera” narrative was carried on throughout the Maloof version of events. Pamela Bannos (a professor of photography at Northwestern University) also realized that this was incongruent with what she was seeing, and her meticulous research on Vivian Maier's life and ancestry has provided us with a fascinating read that has the parallel juxtaposition in the text of the arcs of her life and of her “afterlife” – the scattering of her belongings and how they came to our view. She also addresses the issues of copyright and ethics of the factions involved with her estate.

Vivian Maier was far more than a nanny - she was a world-wise traveler, a keen observer, a daring and self-confident photographer, and yet, she chose not to exhibit her wonderful photographs. Bannos' research provides us with a more complete account of Maier's life, and in a way, gives her a voice that was not present in the previous attempts by other authors. In this book, we actually see a timeline of Vivian's whereabouts, and on how she photographed a scene – not with one shot, but with an obvious planned approach with an image sequence that gives us an idea of how she worked. Yes, Vivian Maier was an unconventional person. Had she been famous in life, she would be shoulder to shoulder with all of the other “unconventional” women of her time. There is no doubt of her photographic artistry. We are left with a legacy of work that others have promoted, curated, printed, and sold without Vivian's oversight or background stories. I think Pamela Bannos has given balance to the Vivian Maier phenomenon, and her book is a must-read if you are at all interested in the Vivian Maier story.

Other books on Vivian Maier (in chronological order):

Maloof, John. 2011. Vivian Maier, Street Photographer. Power House Books, Brooklyn, NY.

Cahan, Richard and Michael Williams. 2012. Vivian Maier. Out of the Shadows. CityFiles Press, Chicago, IL.

Maloof, John. 2013. Vivian Maier: Self-Portrait. PowerHouse Books, Brooklyn, NY.

Cahan, Richard and Michael Williams. 2014. Eye to Eye. Photographs by Vivian Maier. CityFiles Press, Chicago, IL.

Maloof, John. 2014. Vivian Maier: A Photographer Found. Harper Design, New York.

-->

(Generally, the images from the Maloof collection are in his books, and the Jeffery Goldstein Collection is featured in books by Cahan and Williams.  )