Can't escape math, even in film.

I was never particularly good at math growing up. Mostly, it was probably because I found it to be dull. I also had problems processing orders of operations when nothing seemed to be associated with anything tangible.

When I went to film school, I kinda figured I could stop doing math all the time.

Holy hell was I wrong.

Obviously, you're constantly dealing with frame rates, focal lengths, f and t-stops, etc. Finally, the inverse square law became something that I think about several times a day almost every time I'm working.

The fun thing about jumping back into large format photography is that the camera is big enough that the inverse square law even applies inside the camera. I've been spoiling myself, just like almost everybody else in photography, with smaller formats wherein the light source being focused through the lens is close enough to the film plane or digital sensor that one doesn't have to think about it. With the new set-up, which includes bellows extensions, close focus shots could reduce the light transmission from the lens to the film by three or more stops.

Basically, especially since I'm planning on mostly using the camera for portraits, I'm gonna be doing math for almost every shot.