February 2012 portraits

[johnielvis]

chemical focus is what you get when you drink....

[johnielvis]

sort of like beer goggles

actually it's what the film "sees"...it has different spectral sensitivity than the eye does...usually for most peeps

[cowanw]

see this
http://books.google.ca/books?id=CU7-...graphy&f=false
Some early lenses focus only one wave length of light, which may differ from what the film recognizes. Some people suggest this is why Margaret Cameron's portraits were not quite in focus. Although her response was: who is to say what correct focus is. Such lenses had a small adjustment made after ideal visual focus had been achieved.

[Tim Meisburger]

Interesting. And I think Margaret was right. My portraits are not out of focus, it was all intentional. And I don't need glasses! My wife calls it denial, but I insist it's art...

[Joshua Dunn]

Skraps66,

Very nice self-portrait, especially given the fact it’s your first large format shot. Congrats!

-Joshua

First large format attempt. Self portrait speed graphic. fp4

[vitality]

Sinar 4x5, Ross Cabinet no.3 @ F/3.4
Rockland tintype

[ImSoNegative]

Sinar 4x5, Ross Cabinet no.3 @ F/3.4
Rockland tintype

Very nice portait, i gave up on the rockland tintype kit, i tried several times with no luck, you did a very good job here.

[Corran]

I am really not much of a portrait photographer, but I'm trying more these days, so critiques very welcome. This is a portrait of a good friend (we are both flutists). Taken with an 1897 Gundlach 8x10, Nikkor 300-M @ f/16, on Fuji Super HR-T green-sensitive x-ray film and toned in PS:

[Michael W]

First large format attempt. Self portrait speed graphic. fp4

Good portrait. This looks quite 1940s to me - was that intentional, or just a result of you wearing your regular clothing?

[Zaitz]

Hey Corran I think that looks good. The pose/composition work well. How bout opening that bad boy up a few stops?