Show us yer film shots then!

Opinions please!

This entrance is one of the oldest in the village, the doorway itself dating back to 17th century. ( shame about the modern handle but there you go)

I have actually exposed it several times from slightly different perspectives and focusing but as yet not found one that I am truly happy with. ( Iirc I posted one in here some time ago)

The problem lies with the verticals/horizontals as they are all over the place which even with all the movements of a view camera are proving impossible to redress.

Much as it is as it is, given its age, as a photograph, I'm finding it difficult to accept when viewing it.

However, this attempt has got the lines considerably better than previous attempts ( believe it or not!)

Out of these two, which do you feel works better ? ( ignore any dust etc)

Maybe I should just abandon the idea altogether??


No 1

Retouched 2 copie.jpg




No 2


Retouched 1 copie.jpg
 
Difficult to judge on a tablet, where I can't even see one image in its entirety without scrolling. Having played "Spot the Difference" (which is like Winnie the Poo but different) I prefer the second.

You said that the horizontals and verticals pose a problem. With old buildings, sometimes it's the building that is out of true; Holy Trinity church in York is very out of true and simply can't be straightened. Even without this, as Ansel Adams demonstrates in "The Camera", when you have intersecting planes, it can be geometrically impossible to avoid slopes and convergences.

Edit to add; I presume the change from "poo" to "pooh" is simply an excremental one :exit:
 
Last edited:
Asha said:
Opinions please!
Click to expand...

So this is my opinion...

That specular highlight in the middle of the window is a big distraction for me, as is the amount of oof stuff around the edges. For me, the subject is the stairs, handrail & window and I'd prefer to see the oof wood panelling(?) more as a frame and less part of the image. For me, the straight lines need to be the stairs and the window. The handrail is supposed to be angled and thus the subject is composed "correctly" (i.e. how I'd like to see it). As for the light, I'm guessing it's a reflection of the bare bulb providing the illumination in the space? If so, turning it off would dramatically change your exposure, so if it matters *that* much, have someone stood up there out of shot with a diffuser to kill it, or ask if they have a shade they can put on it. I wonder what it would look like off... The exposure would change, but to what ?

So a bit closer or a longer focal length and move back a bit to make that panelling less pronounced. And go on a day when that light isn't reflecting off the window. That's my tuppence ha'penny.

[/opinion]
 
excalibur2 said:
Some of the scenery where you live would be great in colour...but thinking IMO it's best with at least a MF camera and would be too much lugging it up hills... a MF and LF camera as well as digi camera.
A ETRS is quite small and takes good shots like this, OOD Fuji 400Hpro
R7PKTfN.jpg
Click to expand...

The post *23,744 I've given incorrect info..anyone want to read my story ? o_O:sleep:
Assuming you do, what happened is I took the same shot with 35mm and ETRS and had to scan the ETRS nesg on my V750....well for some reason (which I had forgotten) it doesn't like 6X4.5 negs some are full size and some are not and this shot was too thin in width and assumed looking at the jpg it was 35mm :rolleyes:
Check configuration and it's set for 6X4.5 so I'm stuck with it unless I try Vuescan or whatever :(
 
FishyFish said:
Yashica Mat 124G
Ilford Pan-F Plus
Ilfotec DD-X 1+4 8mins @ 20°


Baa by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Well I see loads of sheep and cows but thought they weren't worth shooting as a group, but somehow you have made it interesting...is it the two in front looking at you or cos it's B\W???
 
excalibur2 said:
Well I see loads of sheep and cows but thought they weren't worth shooting as a group, but somehow you have made it interesting...is it the two in front looking at you or cos it's B\W???
Click to expand...

I think, had they not been looking, it wouldn't have worked as well. It's a shame they weren't a little closer but, as I was stood in the field with them (the footpath runs right through it), I guess I was fortunate that they stayed as close as they did.
 
FishyFish said:
Thanks Ian. Waist-level finders for the win! :)
Click to expand...
I find this does make a difference in perspective when viewing a scene. Placing a camera at the equivalent of chest level when standing often brings a different (and more pleasing) view of the world than when taking the same shot at eye level, particularly if you are on the tall side.
 
Mr Badger said:
I find this does make a difference in perspective when viewing a scene. Placing a camera at the equivalent of chest level when standing often brings a different (and more pleasing) view of the world than when taking the same shot at eye level, particularly if you are on the tall side.
Click to expand...

And this one was from my tripod at its low setting, so maybe 18 inches off the ground.
 
Asha said:
Opinions please!

This entrance is one of the oldest in the village, the doorway itself dating back to 17th century. ( shame about the modern handle but there you go)

I have actually exposed it several times from slightly different perspectives and focusing but as yet not found one that I am truly happy with. ( Iirc I posted one in here some time ago)

The problem lies with the verticals/horizontals as they are all over the place which even with all the movements of a view camera are proving impossible to redress.

Much as it is as it is, given its age, as a photograph, I'm finding it difficult to accept when viewing it.

However, this attempt has got the lines considerably better than previous attempts ( believe it or not!)

Out of these two, which do you feel works better ? ( ignore any dust etc)

Maybe I should just abandon the idea altogether??


No 1

View attachment 282616




No 2


View attachment 282615
Click to expand...
#1 for me, really good photo IMHO
 
Bronica SQA, Portra 160, shot whilst shooting some digital images for my daughter's etsy shop (hope no one minds me giving it a plug for face masks, bags and other prints search iceandseashop at Etsy)

https://www.etsy.com/shop/iceandseashop by Chris H, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
sirch said:
Bronica SQA, Portra 160, shot whilst shooting some digital images for my daughter's etsy shop (hope no one minds me giving it a plug for face masks, bags and other prints search icseandseashop at Etsy)

by Chris H, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Typo in text?
 
sirch said:
#1 for me, really good photo IMHO
Click to expand...

Flip, I wasn't expecting a response like that from anyone :wideyed:

Now I dunno wether to say thanks or to hate ya cos your comment has given me a sudden feeling that it's worthwhile printing, a decission that I had pretty much decided against.
Now I'm indecisive again…..arghh!:bat::LOL:
 
Asha said:
Flip, I wasn't expecting a response like that from anyone :wideyed:

Now I dunno wether to say thanks or to hate ya cos your comment has given me a sudden feeling that it's worthwhile printing, a decission that I had pretty much decided against.
Now I'm indecisive again…..arghh!:bat::LOL:
Click to expand...
I'd lose the bright reflection but I like the focus on the rear wall and the hand rail leading who-knows-where, good tonal range and details through the window
 
sirch said:
prints search icseandseashop at Etsy
Click to expand...


which differs from the name in the photo....

And as for "Que?" I assume the SQA is a Manuel camera.
 
Last edited:
FishyFish said:
Yashica Mat 124G
Ilford Pan-F Plus
Ilfotec DD-X 1+4 8mins @ 20°


Crucifix by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr
Click to expand...
This is exceptionally well done! I often find graveyard compositions call to me, but I usually find I can't pull them off. I'm assuming this is a longer lens, and it has worked very well indeed. The only jarring note is the inwards lean on the building top right, but I guess that's unavoidable...
 
Well I don't think I've posted this one before and for those that prefer B\W..my ctricism is:- it would look nicer if the sun was in a better position or not diffused or shafts of sunlight (you know what I mean) and if I lived nearby would probably get some top winning shots in the area...well you know monkeys and typewriters :D

ETRS 50mm lens, OOD fuji Pro400H
coEUUgP.jpg

pAU778i.jpg
 
ChrisR said:
This is exceptionally well done! I often find graveyard compositions call to me, but I usually find I can't pull them off. I'm assuming this is a longer lens, and it has worked very well indeed. The only jarring note is the inwards lean on the building top right, but I guess that's unavoidable...
Click to expand...

Thanks Chris. Just the fixed 80mm lens used for this shot and sat on a low tripod, hence the converging verticals. It was quite harsh light, but it works quite well as it gives nice contrast and definition to the grave marker.
 
horrocks said:
Interesting that in 'Sunday Morning' the dark areas are a bit underexposed, whilst in 'He can't get me' the exposure is perfect. The light conditions look very similar.
Click to expand...

They were taken from pretty much the same spot (give or take a few metres) - the shot of the barge was looking eastwards towards the sun (overcast and we'd just had a lot of rain, but it was beginning to clear and the sun was breaking through the cloud). The shot with the horse is looking in a more southerly direction. That might affect it to some degree, but my metering might have been out on one of the shots too (most likeley the barge). I might also have reduced the histogram too much when scanning to keep detail in the sky - which is probably why it looks quite grainy.
 
Last edited:
horrocks said:
What do you use to scan, as a matter of interest, Nige. I've just got myself a MF camera, but I've only got 35mm scanners.
Click to expand...

I use an Epson V550 for medium format, and Plustek 8200 for 135. I find that the Plustek scans are better quality than 135 scans on the V550, but because medium format negatives are much larger, they tend to be able to hide the difference better unless you really start to pixel peep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top