nels Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936889.KumbhalgarhFort01.jpg "></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936891.KumbhalgarhFort02.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/o4/35/596435/1/57936898.KumbhalgarhFort06.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936902.KumbhalgarhFort10.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936903.KumbhalgarhFort11.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936912.KumbhalgarhFort19.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936910.KumbhalgarhFort17.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936915.KumbhalgarhFort22.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936918.KumbhalgarhFort25.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936923.KumbhalgarhFort30.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936927.KumbhalgarhFort33.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/g3/35/596435/2/57936930.KumbhalgarhFort34.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 Wouldn't be complete without our impeccably dressed driver Ranjeet.<br><br> <center><img src="http://i.pbase.com/o4/35/596435/1/57936900.KumbhalgarhFort08.jpg"></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 You should have taken a film camera with print films for this type of lighting conditions, Nels. My snaps using a Minox GL fared somewhat better. Only, I had to use the ND filter a lot as the top speed on that featherwiegt camera was 1/500s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug grosjean Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Very nice. How can you tell that it wasn't print film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom h. Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Vivek, I don't necessarily think "you should" is an appropriate response to what Nels has shown here. While his compositions may not be my personal bag of rocks, his consistency is undeniable, and he does knock out a cracker from time to time. It sure beats waxing about summicrons and what-color-leather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom h. Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 <center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4279630-lg.jpg"><br><i> </i></ center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 Vivek - I don't know...with the poorer dynamic range of film, pictures in such harsh contrasty afternoon light may not have fared much better. If you have any scanned, please feel free to post. We were so pressed for time, and this place turned out to be much farther away from Udaipur (where we stayed) than what we anticipated, so we ended up there in the middle of the day. Needed to be here early AM or very late afternoon. This was one of the most contrasty light I've shot in. It was painful just to keep the eyes open. Maybe next time, I'll plan my hotel stays more carefully and closer to the destinations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom h. Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 (No offense Nels, 2:25 and (1st) 2:28 float my boat, but the rest of them I ain't feelin') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 None taken, Tom. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Alright, I wasn't making any observations on Nels' composition, subjects and the like. If "should" was offensive, please excuse me for picking a bad choice of a word. My apologies. Nels, If I find some rolls, I will scan and post them. I will make sure that they get your attention. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 <i>It sure beats waxing about summicrons and what-color-leather.</i> <p> I agree, Tom. Let me also add that Nels' contributions here are much appreciated as well<br> (not to mention the humour- <i>low D-range of film</i>). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nasmformyzombie Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 <i>Nels _ , mar 30, 2006; 04:18 p.m.<br> Vivek - I don't know...with the poorer dynamic range of film</i><br><br>Since when does digital have the dynamic range of film? I have yet to see it. Digital images can be very clear and precise, but to me inferior in terms of dimensional and dynamic range when compared to film. If the difference is the medium or the <i>lenses </i>used I still have yet to see where digital is superior in the manner you claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattalofs Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 I like them Nels.<br><br><center><img src=http://www.1point4photography.com/images/02360047.jpg><br><img src=http://www.1point4photography.com/images/02360039.jpg><br><img src=http://www.1point4photography.com/images/02370004.jpg><br><img src=http://www.1point4photography.com/images/02370032.jpg><br><a href=http://www.1point4photography.com>Matt Alofs www.1pt4.com</a></center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nels Posted March 30, 2006 Author Share Posted March 30, 2006 Vivek, Gary, et al - Without getting side-tracked into yet another digi vs. film debate, I'll just point out that it's well known that digi does better shadow details. With a good full frame sensor RAW file and good processing technique, one can extract much more accurate color and dynamic range than ever was possible with 35mm film. Hope this is not news to you guys. From the Leica Guru Erwin Puts: "... a much higher dynamic range than can be put on paper." http://www.imx.nl/photosite/comments/c009.html "Electronic sensors have a larger dynamic range than film (at least the better sensors do)" from http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html Thanks, guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now