alex_hawley Posted April 14, 2003 Share Posted April 14, 2003 Newbie finally got one in focus using the various movements. Had front rise, front shift, front tilt, rear swing and rear tilt.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_poinsett Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Nice work Alex. The viewer can't tell you did any of that stuff which is exactly what you want. Few people realize the complexity of a quality shot like this. Congrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garry edwards Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Excellent work. Like everything else worth doing, it looks easy! Most of my own work is studio-based, where the working conditins are ideal & I appreciate the difficulties of this type of shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tito sobrinho Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Cogratulations and welcome to the straight line world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_schroeder Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Well done, Alex! Your time spent learning your camera has produced nice fruit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_dusk1 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 <img align=center src="http://www.justsayit.co.uk/photos/photo-l-2003/20030330londonwellingtonarch03-l.jpg" ALT="Duke of Wellington Arch - London"><p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domenico_foschi Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 f 3.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_hall6 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Domenico... As I have mentioned to you before, I love your work. Especially that portrait a couple of threads back. In this and others like it that you have done, how do you get that color? I am guessing you do it in PS, but how? dgh PS Phil is still waiting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_hawley Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 Domenico, Steven-- The way you are using the shallow DOF is intriguing; quite contrary to the "school of infinite sharpness" that most of us (at least me) get indoctrinated in. I gotsta try it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_hawley Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 Ken - That View Camera Workout routine you recommended is starting to show results. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_atherton2 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 "The way you are using the shallow DOF is intriguing; quite contrary to the "school of infinite sharpness" that most of us (at least me) get indoctrinated in. I gotsta try it!" ultimate sharpnees and infinite DOF do seem to be an unnatural and unhealthy obsession on this list at times... Lots of photography is actually often better off without one or the other (or both). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_hawley Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 Agree Tim. But the world is full of those infuriating comments such as "lacks sharpness" which is the basis for my using the term "indoctrinated". Just look at the comments on Domenico's current POW. There's a lot of people, viewers and photographers both, that can't get past the infinite sharpness doctrine. By the way, glad to see someone from the LF community get a POW. Congratulations Domenico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_moulton7 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Bravo to both photographers. We stress materials and technique so often that we sometimes forget the goal of all this is to share our vision with others. Both images present excellent interpretations of subjects. And as others have commented/suggested, we know the work put in to create an image that seems as if no work was done at all! Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_lee11 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Alex - How did you get the brown shades ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_hawley Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 Ken, its straight sepia toning using Kodak Sepia II toner. This particular print was about 1 stop overexposed, so I left it in the bleech until all the black was gone. Paper is Adorama RC which seems to be more receptive to toners than Ilford RC is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_fleming1 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 To heck with this no words stuff. Please tell us how you did that. Really. I want to know EVERYTHING. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_meyer Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 just for the record, last time i asked, the adorama rc is ilford mgiv rc. but that could have changed. nice pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domenico_foschi Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 How ?! NINE years of therapy , it took nine years of therapy . : - ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_wolfe Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Interestingly, I have a friend that uses tilts and swings to place most of the image out of focus, leaving just a small portion in focus. It makes very intriguing photos, although, if overdone, the technique takes over and overrides the interest in the image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_dusk1 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 The above shot was taken with the camera positioned about 2 feet off the ground so that the little map was about 1 foot away. The amount of front swing used can only be regarded as absolutely ridiculous - but it was necessary in order to have the centre of the monument in focus along with the monument's image on the map. A measure of front rise is also used to maintain verticals. Focussing would have been impossible if it hadn't been such a bright sunny day. I took the same photo at f32, but I think if things are going to be out of focus then it is better to do it properly ;-) When the photo is much larger it is apparent that the map is one of those that show 'you are here', except this map confused everyone who looked at it because it is drawn facing north but is physically facing due south... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britt_park Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 <p>The f/64 ethic has a certain basis in human perception. (Don't think I'm against images that use shallow depth of field.) The human eye, according to what I've read, is a 15mm f/2-10 system, thus the great depth of field of the human eye. In addition when we survey a scene composed of near and far objects we constantly move our eye focus from one place to another and thus perceive a greater depth of field than the optics of the eye suggest. This is the reason so many fine landscapes with near and far objects in sharp focus are so uncanily "real" feeling, and why small areas of bokeh (or schmuckle as I prefer to call it) on otherwise sharply focused images can be distracting.</p> <p>Aesthetic observation of the moment from <a href="http://www.sciencething.org/photos/photos.html">Blatant Plug</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james___ Posted April 19, 2003 Share Posted April 19, 2003 Nice image Domenico. The use of selective focus predates the f64 mantra of sharp all over. But too often it is used whitout regards to it's effectiveness. Just to use the technique does not validate it's use. There should be some reason it is used. To isolate the subject or a protion of the scene is the oft sighted reason. But also it can be used a negative space. Or positive space. Or to reinforce an abstraction. Just another of those "tools" that schools teach. And another method copied from old. Where is the "new" stuff? I don't think there is much "new" stuff out there. But the "old" stuff, like Domenico's is thriving and very nice. Love the tones. Bet the print is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_dusk1 Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Sorry for the broken link above. My site is now at <a href="http://www.duskart.com">http://www.duskart.com</a><p> And here is the missing photo...<p> <p> <img align=center src="http://www.duskart.com/photography/l2003/20030330englandlondonwellingtonarch03-l.jpg" ALT="Duke of Wellington Arch - London"><p> <p> Steven Dusk 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