I don't mean to disparage the photos or anything, btw. Perhaps it's a subject for another thread. Personally, I feel it is very muddy looking and kind of drab. I can think of a couple other photogs here that generally have the same "style" in tonality. Just not my cup of tea.
My blog about shooting film in south GA:
I think I know what you mean, Bryan, and I have a similar reaction. It seems as if some take an almost mathematical approach to imaging, with an emphasis on stretching the dynamic range so far everything looks....dim, lifeless. I understand Luke's problem with the distracting highlights caused by his lens, and to be fair, his images look a lot better (to my eyes) on my iPad than they do here at work, similar to the images I posted in the tiny formats thread, but I see it as a problem that demanded a compromise, and not an effect to be pursued.
But maybe you're right and this is a subject for another thread. I hope I haven't offended anyone.
I opened them and applied more contrast just to see what they would look like and they would be very nice, the softness of the image counters the harsher light. Good photos either way and it's good to see them. I think the Aero-Ektar makes trendy photos, I prefer more of an edge in subject and tonality, but they are excellent images for what you were going for.
285mm Wollaston Meniscus, f:8, 5x7 Deardorff, on Arista 125
..... John E. ....
More about the lens here: www.Re-inventedPhotoEquip.com
Thank you all very much !
Frank could you Post One edit you have made in Order for me to See the difference?
Im really interested and would like to learn more,
I really Appreciate all of your Input on that matter, cause i am starting Out in LF and this is my First half year
Want to learn more :-) and John yes there is plenty of Woods over here