or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Post your photography skills! (self-gloss)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Post your photography skills! (self-gloss) - Page 268

post #4006 of 4210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikos View Post

The last one is great, especially considering you focused manually. I would assume you used the hyperfocal technique, but then again it is very sharp.
By the way, if you like Saul Leiter, I recommend Alex Webb (but then you probably know of him already).

Thanks. I had not heard of Alex Webb, but now I'll have to check him out.

The technique that I learned from the birds-in-flight shooters is to prefocus on a particular area, and then vary the focus a bit forwards and backwards while the camera is shooting continuously on its slow burst rate. You don't want a fast burst rate (like 10 FPS on the Sony NEX) because you get too many duplicates for not much focus change. It was easier for me because I knew the skaters were coming at me and where they were jumping, so I could not only prefocus, but also just vary the focus mostly in the direction that they were coming at me. Also, since I shoot RAW only, I turned on the B&W filter mode with its sharpness and contrast turned up all the way up so I could more easily see the red focus peaking edges. I think I averaged about 1 good shot for every 4.
post #4007 of 4210
The sky is burning. Yesterday's sunset was pretty cool.

post #4008 of 4210
A few from Utah. Southwest is amazing...





post #4009 of 4210
I've been shooting 120 film the last couple of weeks. First, it was a Fuji GW690III rangefinder with its 8 6x9 cm negatives/roll, and then last weekend it was a friend's Hasselblad 500C/M with its 12 6x6 cm negatives/roll, and I'm totally smitten! I also developed my first rolls of B&W film this weekend, and it's actually very easy. I've been digitizing with a Sony NEX-5N with an adapted Canon FD 50/3.5 macro. Making contact sheets is pretty easy right now, but I still have to figure out how to get really high quality scans of the negatives with the camera.

Film's tonal response is so different and better-looking than digital. Ironically the tonal qualities of film are easily captured with a digital sensor, but it's just not easily replicable with a digital image that didn't come from film in the first place.

I've been shooting both Velvia and Acros, and I think B&W is where this stuff really shines. Color's beautiful, but B&W tones on a huge medium-format negative is really something else. Acros also has a ridiculous highlight range, and it feels like you can't overexpose it (but you can), which in and of itself opens up new expressive possibilities you can't get with digital.

Now I'm on the hunt for a Hasselblad outfit, which is actually not very expensive these days --- about the same as a new entry-level DSLR kit (< $1000 USD).
post #4010 of 4210
post #4011 of 4210
How to nail a composition and ruin an exposure, a lesson by me:


Edited by Laurens - 7/23/13 at 5:33pm
post #4012 of 4210
I like it
post #4013 of 4210
Found this at work...the fucker wouldn't get off my hand after I picked him up.

post #4014 of 4210
I don't know if I would call that ruined Laurens. I think it looks cool. Now if you said it didn't come out the way you envisioned it...
post #4015 of 4210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crane's View Post

I don't know if I would call that ruined Laurens. I think it looks cool. Now if you said it didn't come out the way you envisioned it...

It's just that there is so much potential for a much better shot. It bugs me.
post #4016 of 4210
Of course, one of the first photos I had to take with film again is a cat. (The focus is a bit off.)

9357918402_db182b6eb8_b.jpg

Fuji Neopan Acros 100, 1+50 Rodinal, 9 min. 25C
Hasselblad 500C/M, 80/2.8 T*, A12 back with slight trap light leak
Scanned with 4 stitched shots by Sony NEX-5N, Canon FD 50/3.5 macro

This film back has the classic trap seal light leak which I have to fix. It's not too bad here because it leaks on the white parts of the picture, but you can see the effects on the end of her tail.

The highlight tones of negative film are just blowing me away. The rule seems to be expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights --- overexpose and underdevelop.
post #4017 of 4210


Not Provia 400X....cry.gif
post #4018 of 4210
That sucks. I think more people are upset over the loss of Neopan 400. Coincidentally, I think I picked up a roll of Provia 400 to try out a day or two before this announcement.
post #4019 of 4210
I'm not upset by Neopan, there are plenty alternatives for that.

But Provia 400X has no alternative, it was nice because it pushed to 1600 easily (marginal grain increase and almost no colour casts) and could go to 3200 or higher if you were willing to deal with the casts. It was the only slide for true low light (ISO1600 and above) and imo slides push better than C-41, so it maybe was the best fast colour film bar none.

Only downside was the price, 14 euro per roll and 7 euro for C-6 developing...

I seriously need to stock up now.
post #4020 of 4210
I didn't know it was that versatile and there certainly are not many 400-speed slide films around. That is an insane price. I looked at my receipt, and it is $9 USD here for a 120 roll of 400X. Processing E-6 is about $6 for 120.

I just bought 25 rolls of Acros 100 in 120 for about $3.87/roll ($3.58 before local taxes).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Post your photography skills! (self-gloss)