www.graemehird.com

For those interested in finding out more, here's the link to the New Scientist article on their web site.

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993356

Graeme

I might be going out on a limb here, but my guess is that his trannies were drum scanned, manipulations were made to optimise them and then they were printed using a four colour process for the book. I would suggest contacting the printers of the book for details about the inks and paper used (if that is what you are asking).

Graeme

Steve's answer was spot on (pun intended...) and so eloquently put.

As a transparency shooter, you set your exposure based on the desired highlights (place them on zone VII) and let the shadows fall where they will. If they are too low (less than zone III) they won't record any detail. If they are important, change your film, your filtration or the lighting (or take a second exposure to suit and digitally blend).

With transparencies, the zone system is really only effective for the exposure portion of the equation. But it does work.

Cheers,

Graeme

David,

Did you say you were selling your Alto? That's the worst sales pitch I've ever heard! ;-)

Graeme

John,

I can't remember the exact term for it, but I'm hoping this might jog someone else's memory: In one of AA's books he demonstrates the effect of over exposing the film to the point where a portion of it flips from neg to pos. The image he demonstrates it with has a black sun in it. I think you've exceeded the limit of the films response curve.

Graeme

Brian,

To see the difference between the two photos on Doug's site you have to click on the images to get the 100% view. There is quite a difference then, but as you say, the 2450 holds up remarkably well.

Cheers,

Graeme

David,

I regularly make 20"x30" prints from my scanner's files and I'm quite satisfied with the prints most of the time. Some tricky images need a drum scan, but most are very good. Close inspection (at very much less than the diagonal length distance) will reveal minor scanning artifacts in the areas of smooth tonal transitions, but at normal viewing distances the prints are quite sharp. 30" wide @ 250 dpi is within the native resolution of the scanner, so no interpolation of the file is needed.

If you like, I can email you a portion of a scan that would print at the equivalent enlargement factor. You can run it through your proposed printer and judge for yourself.

Regards,

Graeme

David,

The 2450 is quite a good scanner for 5x4, and I believe the 3200 is better. I've compared drum scans of trannies with those from the 2450, and there was not much between them at 2400 ppi. The shadow detail on the 2450 was a little lower, and the drum scanner was marginally higher in resolution, but I was very pleased with the overall result of the comparisons. (They tell me that the true resolution is closer to 1200 ppi, but they look fine to me when printed - that's the main aim afterall!)

Lambda prints to 20"x24" are fantastic from the 2450, and very good to 28"x36". I haven't tried bigger enlargements.

I would class the 2450 as a mid-level scanner based on those comparisons, because I'd have trouble fitting another level of scanner between it and a drum scanner. I recommend the 2450 (or its successor) with Vuescan for most of your scanning needs and sending your films off for drum scanning when the ultimate print is required.

I hope this helps,

Graeme

GH,<p>

I agree with your basic premise that using a tripod does not <u>automatically</u> make you a better photographer. However, it <i>can</i> make you better if you have been prone to rushing your work and not considering all angles <u>before</u> making your image. As you note, this is not true for everyone because many people already have the knack of choosing the best composition first go.<p>

Graeme Hird<p>

(not G H)

Best or Cheapest?

I bought some fuel line from my local automotive spare parts dealer. $1 per metre.

I got the bulb from the local hospital (throwing away a blood pressure meter because the tube and bladder were old). Free

Cheers,

Graeme

<i>If you're shooting something in a 00, it may help to have rubber bands/duct tape/prehensile tail/third hand/whatnot handy to keep the shutter open for composition. (At least with mine, are all 00s like this?) </i>

Dave t,

Try using a cable release to lock your shutter open. I've done so ever since my prehensile tail was lost in a tragic accident involving a ride on mower and a pair of short pants.

Graeme

The man himself, ascertaining whether his lense has been effected by newk-you-lar raditation thingimees (they glow in the dark you know!)

(copyright owner unknown - sorry)<div></div>

Is trib a troll? trib is a Troll God!

Sorry trib, I think I scared a few away - better luck next time (I promise not to throw any more stones in the water where your line dangles)

Sandy, I'm on Aussie spare time.

Graeme

I'm wandering how many trib can catch with this troll. The bait's a good one, and he's had a few nibbles already. Will he land the big one?

Stay tuned to America's Greatest LF trolls.

After the break, we'll be back with "was AA a pioneer in the field of landscape photography, or simply in the right place at the right time?"

Good luck trib!

him

Robert,

Your friend is lucky he didn't get extra growths in his underwear.....

Thanks Eric.<p>

The 2450 is what I use for my LF scanning - it was worth every cent I paid for it (and it has paid for itself many times over with print sales). I highly recommend it. I have made 30" long Lambda prints from the files that are very good indeed. I'd love to see what can be done with the new 3200 dpi version. <p>

I've had drum scans done of some of my trannies and was not blown away by the results. That may have been due to a poor operator, but the images from the 2450 compared remarkably well, with similar resolution and only marginally less depth in the shadows. The drum scan was definitely better, but not by as much as you'd think, and certainly not enough to pick on internet images. <p>

The image that you linked to may well have been done on a drum scan, but not necessarily so. I am sure that a skillful photoshop user could produce an internet image of such impact from a scan made on an Epson 2450 (given the tranny in the first place!). It is only when the image is printed out to a large size (say >20"x25" ?) that a difference between a drum scan and a 2450 scan would become apparent.<p>

Australia <u>is</u> huge, but if you came to photograph with me, you'd be hard pressed to find a place to dive - the nearest standing water is 400 km away. And by the way, you are welcome to photograph with me any time you like!<p>

Cheers,<p>

Graeme

By scanning a neg (or tranny) you are able to take advantage of the full resolution available from your scanner (neg resolution will exceed the scanners maximum until about 4000 dpi). Scanning a print will result in little real improvement beyond 300 dpi.

Then there is the dynamic range of the print compared to the neg....

Scanning the neg is better in nearly every aspect - that's why they make film scanners!

Better do some more research Eric.

Well said Karl - the only people who really matter are the intended viewers, whether they can make a decent image or not.

My wife is my second toughest critic. Having seen so many photos, she knows what's good and what's not. She can't even use a 35 mm SLR, but she knows good photography (and bad - geez, does she know bad!).

Graeme

Henry,

The "rear tilts to correct verticals" are simply returning the camera back to vertical from some adjustment which rendered it otherwise. For example, if the camera was pointed up by the user, they would then tilt the rear to make it vertical.

It sounds like you are starting with the rear in the correct alignment and using fall or rise to get the composition you like. Either way works, but yours is more efficient (given a camera that can handle such movements).

Cheers,

Graeme

David Goldfarb said what I would have. Tilt in nearly every shot (but I live in a big flat landscape.)

GH

If it's any help for your thought process, I have a UV filter attached to the lens and the lens cap attached over that. I unscrew the UV filter before I take the shot. Takes a little longer, but I like peace of mind.

GH

Jim,

Looks like the stench blew the windows out of this one. That'll happen if you don't stop the stench - anyone will be free to peer in and experience the BS first hand.

I hope a couple of people will look back on this thread with shame, knowing that they broke the window.

:-(

I'll regisiter an expression of interest here. I'll keep an eye on your web site.

Graeme

Good dog!

I hope I don't find her late one night....