xcapekey.com Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 i was sent out to shoot some portraits for the local paper on a bar owner who's establishment was turning 5 this weekend...i didn't want to pop a flash as that just about kills things most the time so i loaded my cams up with fujipress 800 and found an open door to sit him by...luckily it afforded a decent glimpse of the bar behind him with some nice sidelighting from the other door in the bar...shot with an m2/50mm hexanon and m4p/21mm kobalux....<br><br><img src="http://www.xcapekey.com/images2004/alex_0004.jpg"><br><br><img src="http://www.xcapekey.com/images2004/alex_0003.jpg"><br><br><img src="http://www.xcapekey.com/images2004/alex_0001.jpg"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben z Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 In the second shot (I presume made with the 50 at a wide aperture), those not-quite circular spots reflected off the chrome barstool legs, would that be what people are referring to as bokeh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_marshall1 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Do you mean 2.8/21 Kobalux? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob___10 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 some different colored billiard balls would have been nice to have been set up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Nice, Russ. These days ISO 800 negative film (Fuji in general) is all I use. The grain is very even, the colors are muted, it is cheap and it can be developed quickly. It also has nice exp. lat. And it desaturates nicely in Photoshop. The middle shot is very good. The last shot is probably what your editor would want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric friedemann Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 I like the first two shots. In the last shot, it looks like the guy is cold. CZ800, sold in multi-roll 36 exposure packs as Press 800, is a swell film. It has rich color and good latitude for an 800 speed film. For newspaper shooting, CZ800 is a fine film, as most images don't get printed larger than 4x6, so grain isn't an issue. Then too, the hard copy is on newsprint so the greater apparent resolution and finer grain of a slower film would be lost anyway. Unfortunately for Fuji, I don't know any newspaper or editorial shooters who are still using film, except for a few feature pieces, like Russ's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcapekey.com Posted January 20, 2005 Author Share Posted January 20, 2005 thanks for the comments...yes...the 21mm 2.8 kobalux....i also managed to pop off a roll of neopan 1600 which i've yet to develop...i'm in the middle of a move and am trying to set up my darkroom.... for now, shooting with the leicas is still a viable option for me...the paper comes out twice a week so my deadlines can still be met with film....i usually drop my color neg off at the 1 hour photo place, pick up the negs in fifteen minutes...do a quick edit with my loupe and scan some selects with my minolta scan dual iv and email them to my editor...of course, i'm making practically no money with this but am getting some clips and building my portfolio,,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thanz Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Very nice, I have started to shoot alot of Fujipress 800, in brighter light I shoot it at 400. I like the second image out of all three, seems to be comtemplating a question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_eaton Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Why are the highlights green, and why am I the only one who noticed? I looked at this shot and knew immediatley it was either Press 800 or Superia 800. Both notorious for crossover like this. Please get some NPZ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 I've heard the the 800 NPZ is great film and the documentary style commercial photographer telling me that said it solved a lot of problems on a shoot for him. Didn't need correction. I've got some that I'm going to try and will post if anything intereting comes out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric friedemann Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 "Why are the highlights green, and why am I the only one who noticed?" 1. We are merely human and your sense of color is keener, like a dog hearing a high-pitched wistle. :-{) -OR- 2. Your monitor is better-balanced the the piece-of-crap monitor in my office, where the highlights appear, if anything, a bit blue. I do agree with Scott, though, that NPZ is a better film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier_reichenbach Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Mr Eaton: "Why are the highlights green, and why am I the only one who noticed?" Maybe because the seven who posted before you just don't care and don't feel it necessary to remark. But more likely, because they are all morons, and you are soooo superior to them. "I looked at this shot and knew immediatley it was either Press 800 or Superia 800..." So did I after reading Russ' post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_amiet2 Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Why are the highlights green, and why am I the only one who noticed? Quite possibly because there is some fluorescent light present and the print has been (presumably) balances for the daylight component. On second thought, I think it may be a general cyan cast which is also killing the facial colour. The recommendation of NPZ is a good one. The 800 press is better in artificial lighting, but not for (natural) skin tones. Russ, I would have liked to see you get the bar owner more involved with something, anything! He looks quite bored with his five years. Either playing on his pool table, drying a glass, or whatever was to hand in the bar. Even holding a glass to the the camera as in 'cheers' would carry the story well for a local newspaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericd Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 Hey this is color negative. I'wonder how it was processed/scanned to have such a green cast. I would search a better lab before using pro film.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericd Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 BTW burned-out highlight how much overexposure ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew n.bra hrefhttp Posted January 20, 2005 Share Posted January 20, 2005 <i><<a href="http://4020.net/">4020.net</a>></i><p> I've been using both Fuji Press 800 and NPZ for years now. Basically I use the Press film for mucking around and NPZ for important shots (the film has better colours and slightly lower contrast).<p> There's a good reason (at least in Australia) why 800 Press is $AUD 4 cheaper a roll :?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcapekey.com Posted January 21, 2005 Author Share Posted January 21, 2005 i guess i'll have to switch to npz now ;)...thanks for the tips... has scott ever responded to anyone with anything positive to say? or atleast in a halfway decent respectful way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier_reichenbach Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Right, Russ. It's a shame Scott so often tends to comment in this pretentious, self-promoting, condescending and disdainful manner. When he's not downright rude. He may have interesting things to say, from time to time, but who cares? He only provokes hostile reactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Luttmann Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Scott's an interesting one. He was banned a couple of months ago then allowed back for some silly reason. He's about the only person I know that would need a parachute to jump off his ego! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier_reichenbach Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Dave, Russ, regarding Scott Eaton, you might be interested in going to the "Film and processing forum." If you go all the way down the page to the "Older questions by category" and go to the "Processing film" category, you will find a thread that I initiated entitled "Bad results with HC-110" from Jan. 13th. Read it. At a certain point, Mr Eaton speaks, in his usual pretentious and rude way. I answer him, with a certain dose of irony, but politely, and prove him entirely wrong. Then, another member comments on Mr Eaton's manners, or lack of. And suddenly, bam!, the moderator locks out the thread because we happen to criticize Mr Eaton. I just couldn't believe it, so much so that I sent a private e-mail to the moderator. That may explain why he's back on these forums, and in particular on the Leica forum where all he has to say is that we're a bunch of idiots toying with expensive and useless Leica equipment. 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