Links: See the images and read the full Fuji conclusion here. https://brentbergherm.com/shooting-xt3/ Announcements. My Oregon coast workshop is coming up, just a few days away now. If you have been on the fence about this I encourage you to jump in and allow me to challenge you and encourage you in your growth as a photographer. David duChemin said in the last episode that the print “is a powerful evaluative tool.” In fact, I’m going to turn it over to him once again. And I invite you to come out to the Oregon Coast with me and take the plunge into the world of shooting the beautiful coast and getting excellent prints from those images right there onsite as we dive deep into printing your photography. Topic:  There’s actually a few topics today. I’ll start out by wrapping up the story about my Fujifilm experiment, Mark Morris joins us with a drone safety concern and then I end the show with a listener chiming in on the love of photography. Here we go. I wrote a blog post about my experience trying to switch to the Fujifilm X-T3 camera. The shooting experience was so wonderful. And I’ve talked about it a bit here on this podcast as well as on the Master Photography Podcast too. It’s time to wrap this up.  In short, I sent the camera back. Please do read the post on my website, the link is in the show notes. The reason I sent it back is both complex and simple at the same time. It really hurts to send it back because I just loved shooting it so much. It was amazing. But I couldn’t get over a few details with regards to the types of images the camera struggled with. Most notably the sand image that not even the Fujifilm processing in camera could make look like sand, and an edge issue when shooting silhouetted objects. The processing in multiple programs just didn’t come out right so I lost faith in my ability to achieve my creative vision in post-production. I owe many thanks to Ibarionex Perello, Dan Bailey and David duChemin for coming on the show and talking with me about creativity and shooting Fujifilm cameras. But in the end it just wasn’t for me. For my photography, the ultimate purpose of a quality image is to make a gallery quality print out of it. I did a lot of printing comparing results from my Canon camera and the Fuji camera, and then I did a lot of further printing with just the Fuji files. I got a lot of very good and excellent prints. But a few subjects had too many challenges and I just can’t get passed it. Dan Bailey was also suggesting that I skip the raw processing and go with the in-camera JPG files. I tried that and on the flower subject I photographed in open shade the results were stunning. I literally took the file from camera, resized it, applied minimal output sharpening and it was excellent. However, I did the same with the raw image, also using the Fujifilm color profile, and it was even better, not by much, maybe 2%, but still, it was better. So I think I’ll keep my flexibility of the raw processing for now. But, when you’re in a pinch it’s good to know that usually you’ll have such awesome quality images coming out of the camera’s JPG processor. I also shot some star trails with the camera. My technique is to take multiple images over a period of time and blend them in Photoshop. I should have shot JPG for this process because in the raw as I switched from image to image the stars were not white. They were very distinctly blue, red or green, and they changed color depending on which frame you were looking at. This, of course, represents the rendering pixels but for the stars to not be recognized as white, it would just look too psychedelic. My Milky Way shot came out really great. But the star trails, not so much. The main reason behind sending it back is that I know my shooting experience would be affected by these issues. Most scenes turned out really well with this camera. But a few scenes just didn’t work out. I don’t want to be out there shooting and thinking to myself “I can’t shoot this si