Large Format Landscapes

[JeRuFo]

That second one is very strong. Almost abstract with that reflection. The light gives a nice sense of space.

[stradibarrius]

Excellent photos!!! I love Zion!

[Kevin J. Kolosky]

I recently returned from my second trip to Zion National Park and my first exclusively shooting film. My goal for the trip was one good image from the Narrows, and I believe I accomplished that. Thanks for looking!

90mm, f/45, 2:30 Fuji Velvia 50, polarizer



180mm, f/45, 3:32 Fuji Velvia 50, polarizer



90mm, f/45, 3:32 Kodak Ektar 100, polarizer

While I like the subject matter very much, the results of the rather slow shutter speed are, to me, distracting. It doesn't look like "water in a stream" to me. Maybe what is was your intention, and if so that is fine. Its your art and it should be what you wanted it to be. But if it were me standing there I would have used a bit faster shutter speed.

[h2oman]

But if it were me standing there I would have used a bit faster shutter speed.

You might not have been able to. Between the film speed, polarizer, being in a dark canyon and desiring an in-focus image front-to-back, thee shutter speed probably had to be pretty slow.

alef_fela, that second one is outstanding!

[jp]

Linhof Technika III, Symmar-S 210mm f/5.6, expired (2003) Agfa APX @ 50 ISO, 16 min @ 20 C in Rodinal 1+50

Very well seen and captured. I like the abstractness which shows shapes and tones nicely.

[skiers4life]

Thanks for the kind words everyone! They are very much appreciated.

While I like the subject matter very much, the results of the rather slow shutter speed are, to me, distracting. It doesn't look like "water in a stream" to me. Maybe what is was your intention, and if so that is fine. Its your art and it should be what you wanted it to be. But if it were me standing there I would have used a bit faster shutter speed.

I had no choice on the shutter speed. It's extremely dark in most areas of the Narrows and when you combine that with a polarizer, large depth of field, slow film speed, and reciprocity, you get water with no details. I don't mind the look, but it is what most people comment on when I show images. I hear a lot that I should choose a faster shutter, but it's not possible with most things that I shoot.

[McCoy]

Thanks for the kind words everyone! They are very much appreciated.



I had no choice on the shutter speed. It's extremely dark in most areas of the Narrows and when you combine that with a polarizer, large depth of field, slow film speed, and reciprocity, you get water with no details. I don't mind the look, but it is what most people comment on when I show images. I hear a lot that I should choose a faster shutter, but it's not possible with most things that I shoot.

I like it. To me it gives a dreamy look and, even though we have all used this technique, it still seperates the work from the casual, 'I can shoot it until I get it right', digital shooters. Just my thoughts.
- McCoy

[Kevin J. Kolosky]

Thanks for the kind words everyone! They are very much appreciated.



I had no choice on the shutter speed. It's extremely dark in most areas of the Narrows and when you combine that with a polarizer, large depth of field, slow film speed, and reciprocity, you get water with no details. I don't mind the look, but it is what most people comment on when I show images. I hear a lot that I should choose a faster shutter, but it's not possible with most things that I shoot.

While I abhor the use of digital imaging to change whats really there, I think in this case it might be a good thing to just try it if you ever get back to those spots again. You could shoot two negatives, one for the background, and one for the stream, and photoshop the stream into the background. You really wouldn't be changing what isn't there, but instead would be correcting an almost insurmountable technical problem.

Another things one could do would be to use an even wider angle lens, which would provide greater depth of field, and then crop the transparency and enlarge it, to get back to where you wanted to be in the first place.

Lots of work, yes. But for beautiful photographs like yours, it might be worth it.

[Thomas Greutmann]

Thanks for the kind words everyone! They are very much appreciated.



I had no choice on the shutter speed. It's extremely dark in most areas of the Narrows and when you combine that with a polarizer, large depth of field, slow film speed, and reciprocity, you get water with no details. I don't mind the look, but it is what most people comment on when I show images. I hear a lot that I should choose a faster shutter, but it's not possible with most things that I shoot.

I think it is a matter of personal preference. To me that water adds that little special something to the look, and I wouldn't change it. When I first saw the images I thought it was all planned that way, and planned well.

Greetings, Thomas

[Harley Goldman]

Linhof Technika III, Symmar-S 210mm f/5.6, expired (2003) Agfa APX @ 50 ISO, 16 min @ 20 C in Rodinal 1+50

Excellent. Great depth to this one and it plays quite a trick with the eye. Beautifully seen and captured.