April 2012 Portraits

[Jay DeFehr]

Without much thought to subject?! A nice hard backlight, grey allmost white hair and a man who's just retired and complaining about his wrinkles... heck, they designed the damn thing for this situation kidding aside, perhaps I should have used the 5.8 disc to make it a bit sharper but I wanted to try how soft it really is without any of the discs
Here is version with a sharper lens but a bit underexposed I'm afraid. I tend to like the soft version more... or do I...?

Tom

I meant no offense, Tom, and was commenting more generally about the SF work posted here. FWIW, I prefer this one.

[D-tach]

No worries Jay! Beginners need critiscism :-)

[SergeiR]

Without much thought to subject?! A nice hard backlight, grey allmost white hair and a man who's just retired and complaining about his wrinkles... heck, they designed the damn thing for this situation kidding aside, perhaps I should have used the 5.8 disc to make it a bit sharper but I wanted to try how soft it really is without any of the discs
Here is version with a sharper lens but a bit underexposed I'm afraid. I tend to like the soft version more... or do I...?

Tom

Actually i like this one better too More tonal range in skin.

[Jay DeFehr]

No worries Jay! Beginners need critiscism :-)

Thanks for being a good sport, but I'm in no position to critique anyone. You've clearly made a creative choice, that's what I was commenting on. I knew going in there was an even chance I was wrong about any particular person or image.

[D-tach]

Actually i like this one better too More tonal range in skin.

Damn! But there's none in the shadows - just banding

Thanks for being a good sport, but I'm in no position to critique anyone. You've clearly made a creative choice, that's what I was commenting on. I knew going in there was an even chance I was wrong about any particular person or image.

But you're right... I must admit that those lenses and they're effect have an addicting effect on some people and I might be one of them :-) I don't know exactly what the reason is (blame Jim and Stefan!) perhaps it's because of a certain nostalgique look they give or so... just exploring what others did allready 120 years ago

[SergeiR]

Damn! But there's none in the shadows - just banding

Ah, yes, but i do share sentiment of Mortensen , coming from similar painting background, that shadows are in fact not as important for portraiture, as having proper tonal range in skin

[Jay DeFehr]

But you're right... I must admit that those lenses and they're effect have an addicting effect on some people and I might be one of them :-) I don't know exactly what the reason is (blame Jim and Stefan!) perhaps it's because of a certain nostalgique look they give or so... just exploring what others did allready 120 years ago

I understand, I have a few SF lenses, too. I haven't removed the 150 SF-C from my RB67 since it arrived -- part learning curve, part fascination.

Sergei,

I would have agreed about the shadows in portraits until I started printing in carbon. It's truly amazing what can happen in the bottom of the tonal scale in a carbon print. If it was just featureless tone it wouldn't be very interesting, but the long scale and straight line characteristic curve allow the viewer to see deeply into the shadows, if there's anything there to see. Using a film like TMY-2 or Acros, it's possible to get excellent separation in the shadows, and the effect can be mesmerizing.

[Ray Bidegain]

Here is a new portrait of mine. The model is named Lilith and this is a scan of an 8x10 platinum print I made.

Ray Bidegain
me on flickr

[Jay DeFehr]

Love that one, Ray!

[Ray Bidegain]

Thank you Jay. It is one of only 2 sheets I did.