Stanmer Church In The Dark

The aim here has been to recreate that old feel. This is photograph

of Stanmer Church that has been taken using the Mir 26B medium

format lens attached to Canon 10D via tilt adapter to soften focus

toward left and right of frame. The photograph was taken in near

pitch black, at ISO 3200, f3.5, with an exposure time of 1.5

seconds - HAND HELD. The only post processing has been BW

conversion, sepia tint, slight adjustment of levels, small amount of

noise reduction and then slight sharpen - all in free Canon DPP.

 

There's a fine balance between lightening the image too much and

making it look almost like a really "grainy" daytime shot, and not

lightening enough which leaves the image looking really dull. On my

monitor, and when I print, I have an image that I think works, but

I'd be interested in your thoughts as well. Do you feel the exposure

level is about right so it still looks like night but without being

too dull? Also thoughts on the softening of focus to left and right

using lens tilt would be appreciated. I have a similar photo taken

straight without tilt but I seem to have cocked that one up by not

having sharper focus anywhere - oh the perils of manual focus in the

dark!

 

Thanks very much.

 

Pete

Hey Pete, I think it's a magnificent work that you have done here. I see some sort of horizontal lines on my screen, do you see them too or my computer is getting a little old? I love the amount of grain and exposition tured out to be perfect. Great job.

It's a nice image: with the muted contrast, the shapes have a sort of rounded feel . While there's a dreamy quality to it, I wouldn't say it's apparent that it was taken at night (does that matter?) and, while there's grain, it seems to be a very high quality (perhaps even 'digital') grain which I don't think one would mistake, on close inspection, for old.

 

Too dull? Absolutely not. Successful? If the goal was to create a very evocative photograph with a distinctive tone and feel: absolutely!

It is art, indeed. And a very nice one. Bravo.

 

 

Cheers; Bela

Another great shot, with some fantastic grain, and wonderful tones. Keep 'em coming Pete!

Thank you all for your comments here. Your input is very highly valued. Dave, I agree with you that "old" is probably not right for this image, and if truth be told, I wasn't really aiming for old anyway. What I'm trying to do in a lot of my pictures is to deliberately avoid the perfect reproduction of what it actually there, but to instead produce something that is more "pictorial" I guess, and to convey feelings. Almost like using what is there in my view to draw or paint a picture on the camera sensor or film! It's an enjoyable experience using the camera and minimal post processing to produce images that are far removed from the perfect captures that appear in advertisements for the latest perfect camera!

In that case, you have clearly succeeded!

A few thoughts;

 

I think the tilt works here, I have a bias as I prefer the tilt when it is least noticeable. It gets too overused in a cliche way so your approach is refreshing. If I look at the image I can pick out the tilt effect and see where you placed the focus but this is not the first thing to come to mind.

 

The blur from the long exposure also works well for me you have a steady hand to have that tower so sharp!

 

The overall composition is well balanced my only nit being that it seems to be running downhill towards the left.

 

The one area in which we will no doubt differ is with the high ISO noise. I love grain, I'm mean really love grain. Back in the day, I used to shoot landscapes and even nudes with recording film and push process it to 3600, much to the horror of many people at the time. You would get huge grain that broke the image down almost into chunks. The big eyesore for me with digital noise is the banding. I just can't get past the obvious distraction of a bunch of unintended lines running through the frame.

 

All in all this is a fine image and I applaud you constant efforts to swim against the current.

 

 

Hi pete, I like the composition here The blurred surrounding vs. the accentuated lighter tower and church wall, as well as some light ellements before the church. I don't mind the grain, my thought is( and I think it is hard to change)that the grain is even all over the image ,less grainy parts could add to the diversity of the photo, maybe CS4..... will have it.

 

I think the composition is well cropped, the small differences of the trees heights and forms is well seen, and makes a nice sight despite the blur The tower and church are well situated. The whole has a nice harmony as well as good B/W execution.

Gordon and Pnina, thanks for your comments on this. I know what you mean about the "noise" in the image, with the quite unnatural banding...but I'm not sure what to do to improve it. I've done NR in post processing, but it won't make it look pretty so I chose to accept it for what it is. If there is a way to make it better then please let me know as I'd like to see how much I can improve on it. I suppose I could use the healing tool in Canon DPP to somehow blend it in in the sky which I think is where it's perhaps most obtrusive.

Gordon, I think you may be right...I am perhaps slightly down to the left by a fraction of a degree. I'm quite pleased it was close though considering hand held in the cold, in that dark, with hardly anything to see in the viewfinder and holding it for 1.5 seconds ;)) I know if it had been a bit more out then I would have done the correction but I was sort of hoping nobody would notice :)