brian_austin3
-
Posts
2 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by brian_austin3
-
-
<p>Hi<br>
I am a College Student majoring in photography. Ive decided to try to learn film better as most of my favorite photographers work with it, and I also notice the increased depth and quality it gives. I have been working on a few documentary projects for a long time, and have fallen in love with Bruce Davidson's work and Danny Lyon, not to mention many others. As I look at their images, I am puzzled in a few areas.<br>
It is my understanding that most of the photographers from that era used Tri-x and shot handheld. This means 400 ISO. When I look at some of Mr.Lyon's interior work I am am caught up on how he has so much depth, in such a low light situation, and from what I can tell low noise. I would assume that a photographer would have to shoot wide open in such conditions, thus decreasing the depth. Or they would have to shoot high ISO film and have much grain, but is my understanding that most worked with a ISO 400 B&W film. I also understand that this work is all hand-held unless I am wrong, correct me. Also that most of the focal lengths are 50mm, 35mm and 24mm(ish).</p>
<p>I understand that Bruce Davidson used fill flash and a press view camera for his work on "East 100th Street"...but still some of his low light photos from "Brooklyn Gang" still puzzle me, knowing the possible options for such a shooting condition.</p>
<p>I really want to shoot with film. I am tired of everyone telling me to just raise the ISO of my 5D. I invest a lot of time in my work and I want images wich are of the highest quality I can attempt to get. I also am slight dyslexic, so although ive invested quite a bit of money into books and time on the subject I still have yet to find an answer for me which translates properly.<br>
So I ask sincerely for your knowledge on film and technique... and thank you in advance...</p>
<p>some examples:<br>
Bruce Davidson:<br>
Danny Lyon:<br>
http://www.aperture.org/gloria-and-rosario-santa-maria-1972.html<br>
Eugene Richards:<br>
http://autruchon.tumblr.com/post/1155437208/eugene-richards-still-house-hollow-tennessee</p>
College Student: Bruce Davidson, Danny Lyon ect. & ISO
in Street & Documentary
Posted
<p>Hey thanks for the awesome responses! Just to note I do understand that it is the photographer that makes the image with their vision. I am good at that, and I will upload some examples of my work once school starts in Feb again. I just get stuck on the technical side of wet photography, as I was never taught it beyond how to develop in T-Max, and make a basic print even here in College. Ive had to also self teach myself nearly everything I know.<br>
I have never used D76 & Id have to buy mix my own since T-Max is what school buys for us. I just feel strange at times when I find myself shooting at 6400 or higher in digital in a window lit room, knowing that a lot of work was done with Tri-x. I also still like the density of a film image. Maybe its just I like to work in difficult situations ha. Im not hating on digital though, I do owe digital a lot, and I think once I can afford a 5d mark 2 ill be set in that realm for a long time. So what Im understanding then is really all Im having do really to get to the core of my answer is underexpose with the depth I am trying to achieve and push the TriX? Correct me if Im wrong here.</p>