This is a perfect example of the lack of red sensetivity of an orthochromatic medium. Notice how dark the bricks are, but how well the grass is rendered.Originally Posted by Roger Cole
This is a perfect example of the lack of red sensetivity of an orthochromatic medium. Notice how dark the bricks are, but how well the grass is rendered.
You're absolutely correct, but I should also point out that the grass is Bermuda grass and this was shot in the winter. It's solid brown (though there are some green weeds!) this time of year. Had it been green in summer I imagine it would have been lighter still.
no - not APO - I don't know the "title" of the construction, but I do know it is damn sharp....
FINALLY... I have gotten around to try out my oldest lens (afaik)...
An ancient fat Ross Petzval lens approx 330mm F4
Amazingly clear and sharp on the GG.. MUCH easier to work with than my Hermagis in same FL....
Camilla again
scan of 18x24 neg. Gandolfi 10x8camera.
(first image is of the lens used)
Fantastic lens! Excellent photo!
Geogeous Portrait!
This was my first ever exposure with a large format camera. Found out about paper negatives by reading this very thread. Got some paper and chemicals last october and took this photo, at night, in the house, lit only by a couple of lamps and a Nikon SB800.
Testing out some new (old) paper in camera.
Kodak 2D 8x10, Ed. Liesegang 18cm 'Aristograph' Petzval, Kodak Kodabrome RC F3 paper negative.
Jonathan
Jon: And I mean this in the most positive of ways - you have an incredible ability to make fascinating images out of nothing! Once again, I like this one a lot. In another post, where you are a bit philosophical, you question how your work could inspire someone. What much of your work does is make me look at "nothings" and try to figure out how they could be turned into a "something." I think you have a wonderful understanding of how your old paper supplies and even older Petzval lenses work together to create images that simply "work."
Peter,
Just about every day I see photos on these forums, or elsewhere on the Web, of landscapes or architecture or ocean scenes or amazing portraits and I think, "I wish I could do that." And quite often I think, "I should get out and do more landscapes, etc." But each time I do I feel as though I am fighting against my own nature, and often the results are sub-par. Then I'll be sitting around the house, playing with my cameras and framing up anything and everything, and that's when I feel most inspired, even if the photos are of ordinary household objects or scenes.
My feeble attempts at it have taught me that landscape photography is no easy thing. It seems like it is: point the camera at a majestic scene and you will have a majestic photograph. But I have produced enough failed landscapes to know that doing it well--heck, doing any type of photography well--is not easy.
I like the idea of pushing myself, of expanding my subject matter and my approach, but I am also trying have more confidence in the things I do take pictures of already. Comments like yours go a long way toward helping me gain that confidence.
Jonathan
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks