-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Georgia. Waterfall below Ushinsky glacier. Nagaoka 4x5, Nikkor-Q/9 @ 22, Foma 100 in XTOL 1: 2, 9:15 min.
Yuriy Sanin, Kiev, Ukraine.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8251/2...5ddff313_o.jpg2016-08-23 Грузия Водопад на Ушбой Foma 100 in Rodinal 1-50 20 C 9 min009-04web by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Georgia. Waterfall in canyon. Nagaoka 4x5, Nikkor-Q/9 @ 32, Foma 100 in XTOL 1: 2, 9:15 min.
Yuriy Sanin, Kiev, Ukraine.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8366/2...d4997449_o.jpg2016-08-22 Грузия Foma 100 in Rodinal 1-50 20 C 9 min005-01-01web by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Georgia. Waterfall below Ushinsky glacier. Nagaoka 4x5, Congo 90/6.3 @ 22, Foma 100 in XTOL 1: 2, 9:15 min.
Yuriy Sanin, Kiev, Ukraine.
https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8397/2...2dfa0b20_o.jpg2016-08-24 Грузия Водопад над Ушбой Foma 100 in Rodinal 1-50 20 C 9 min002-01-01web by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
orgraph, those are fantastic. All of them. Really enjoying the view here!
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Sometimes I use techniques of climbing and many hours of trackingl with a backpack, to a height until 3270 m., at a temeperature above + 30C. (and slip in a tent at low temperature) :-)
Yuriy
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
"Kiev Rus", Kiev Region, Ukraine, Tachihara 4x5, Super Angulon 90/8, Shanghai 100
https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8496/2...917abdc4_o.jpgМост by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
"Kiev Rus", Kiev region, Ukraine. Velvia 50 exp 2005. Linhof III, Scheider 135/5,6
https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8269/2...e73e7cd5_o.jpgKiev Rus, Ukraine by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
The last two are my preferred pics, congrats,
Cheers,
Renato
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
August is a great time to be on the moorland of the Peak District when the heather is in flower, this is from a couple of weeks ago. it's almost all gone now.
Grandagon 90/6.8, Chamonix H1, RVP.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Crs08PTWgAAtzYn.jpg
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dave_whatever
August is a great time to be on the moorland of the Peak District when the heather is in flower, this is from a couple of weeks ago. it's almost all gone now.
Grandagon 90/6.8, Chamonix H1, RVP.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Crs08PTWgAAtzYn.jpg
Nice
Its hard to capture that wide open landscape
Martin
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
"Kiev Rus", Kiev Region, Ukraine. Wista SP 4x5, Topcor 90/5,6 Shanghai 100.
Yuriy Sanin, Kiev, Ukraine.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/8/7724/2...ea748d2d_o.jpgРусь. Украина 8 by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
A couple images from the Appalachian Trail. First up are some stone stairs in the most arduous part of the climb up Blood Mountain:
http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/...mtn-4110ss.jpg
And here's a pretty big prominence about a half mile from the true summit:
http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/...mtn-4112ss.jpg
Both taken with my Wehman 8x10 Ultralight, 120mm f/8 Nikkor, on Delta 100 developed in FX-39.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Corran
I do not understand what you photographed. I would not waste film
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Great, thanks for your helpful comment...?
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Lol, I'm sure Arkasha was pulling your leg. I like both photos just fine. I like that you went up a mountain with 8x10 even better!
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Perhaps - but if not, I would like to say I am all for constructive feedback (in fact, I wish there was more here). But "I would not waste film" isn't constructive. Honestly these are certainly not in my top photographs! I am learning a new place - photographing here in the mountains is much different than the swamps of Florida. I think it took me a good 2-3 years to really get comfortable shooting in the wilds of Florida, so right now I'm floundering a bit. I've shot a lot of film in the past couple of weeks and very little of it was worth a damn.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Funny you should bring that up: I was trying to explain this to pro digital photographer friend of mine, but he didn't understand at all. It takes me a long time to really 'understand' a landscape to photograph it properly. I've been going back to the same places for twenty years. You do what you have to do, I understand EXACTLY what you mean. :)
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Corran
Perhaps - but if not, I would like to say I am all for constructive feedback (in fact, I wish there was more here). But "I would not waste film" isn't constructive.
Hi Bryan,
I understand the feeling you expressed about the viewer's comment. Clearly dependent on one's interpretation.
Since you post here frequently and are reasonably accomplished, others may be reluctant to comment unless you specifically solicit / welcome comments or criticism.
Just a suggestion for you to get the input you'd like to have.
Regards,
Dennis
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DennisD
others may be reluctant to comment unless you specifically solicit / welcome comments or criticism.
Good point. I've thought about adding a line in my signature saying "all comments and critique welcome" or something to that effect. When I was auditing photo classes the critique part was always my favorite class times. It's nice to know when people like, or dislike, a certain photograph, and why.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Hopefully something was lost in translation!
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
I like the wide open bedrock of the second shot. Reminds me of summiting granite hills in the Adirondacks, so an effective photograph to do that!. Bald mountains are cool!
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Corran
Perhaps - but if not, I would like to say I am all for constructive feedback (in fact, I wish there was more here). But "I would not waste film" isn't constructive. Honestly these are certainly not in my top photographs! I am learning a new place - photographing here in the mountains is much different than the swamps of Florida. I think it took me a good 2-3 years to really get comfortable shooting in the wilds of Florida, so right now I'm floundering a bit. I've shot a lot of film in the past couple of weeks and very little of it was worth a damn.
Well, let's talk constructively.
What did you want to show these pictures? What you could bring 8x10 camera on the mountain? It seemed to me that these pictures were taken directly from the path when lifting.
Whether they are shot on 6x6 Hasselblad camera or 11h14, they would have remained with sketches tracking.
Yes, sometimes you can shoot on the move and I'm doing this, but it should see something interesting. Beautiful light or textured sky or something else.
The first shot of the entire oiled because of the wind. Try to re-shoot it on a smaller format with excerpts shorter.
the second shot, I will not discuss the - too many rocks.
I did not want to offend, I'm surprised such a reaction to the negative review ...
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Arkasha,
No offense taken - I simply felt the statement of "I would not waste film" was a bit less than helpful and wanted to point out that helpful criticisms should be encouraged.
As evidenced by Nicholas' comments above, we all perceive things differently. I wanted to evoke the feeling I had when climbing the mountain and reaching the summit. I clearly failed in this regard for most viewers but it resonated with Nicholas. That's the interesting thing about photography (or art). Ultimately I shot what I shot with the camera I had on hand. Please understand that I was not trying to debate the merit of the photo, just the presentation of the critique. There may be some language barriers and cross-cultural things here too. No problems.
I absolutely welcome any and all thoughtful critique on anything I shoot. I am always learning.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Arkasha, your more constructive criticism in post #12044 would have sufficed. The comment about wasting film was quite rude.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
I'm not foreign to wasting film. This was my first, or second shot with slide film. The composition isn't exactly great. But the light and colours look ok in my eyes.
https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8353/2...beba84c2_b.jpgMasfjorden 2 by Fredrick D. Fjeldsbø, on Flickr
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Corran
. . . . . "all comments and critique welcome" or something to that effect. When I was auditing photo classes the critique part was always my favorite class times. It's nice to know when people like, or dislike, a certain photograph, and why.
Corran's comment about learning a new landscape is something I can relate too. Mountain scenery comes a little easier to me than say Florida swamps (I have lived nearly all of my life in the Adirondack or northern Rocky Mountain regions). I think I would have a hard time getting interesting photos in Florida unless I lived there awhile
I like both of Corran's recent scenes (post #12034), but the trail one has better composition and tonal range. The exposures on both are good (the slab less so), and again, the trail scene is especially good given that woods scenes can be tough to expose well.
Were these hand-held shots? It's hard to tell, but some of the foliage looks blurry in the trail scene -- was it windy?
I wonder if the rock-slab scene could be improved with better composition (the slab less centered than it is now), and including an interesting crack that could lead the viewer's eye somewhere, or at least into the scene. Of course your scene does have a crack, but it is not prominent throughout. The scene sort of falls apart near the middle. Stronger side-lighting could help, but then long shadows from trees could interfere.
Topography in heavily forested mountain scenery is hard to capture for obvious reasons. One subject that may be fun to try are the small, forested streams. These mid-scale scenes are usually more manageable under a wide range of lighting than the broader landscape scenes -- at least it works that way for me.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Here is a scene I am not very happy with, but was inspired to post it after responding to Corran's recent posts (it's not easy to capture mountain scenery well). This is Bear Butte, near Sturgis, South Dakota, taken in early morning this spring. The sky was much more interesting up until about 5 minutes before I took the picture. Bear Butte is a striking feature up close and from afar, but I found it hard to capture because of the many distractions around it (roads, power lines, etc). I cropped it so to remove some shrubs and trees in the foreground, I usually leave them in, but I could not fit them in a pleasing way.
Attachment 155020
Comments (+and -) are welcome, as usual.
This was taken with a 90-mm F8 Schneider-Kreuznach Super Angulon, 1/18 sec f22, with K2 yellow filter, with some rise, on Ilford FP4+ developed normally in Ilford ID-11
One thing I have trouble with is sizing the photos according to the LFPF rules. When the width is set to 750 pixels, the photo becomes quite soft on the screen. I noticed that at least some photos posted far exceed the LFPf's pixel limits. Does this photo look sharp enough? (the negative is very sharp).
Thanks.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
If the photos are hosted somewhere else, say on your website or Dropbox, you can size them as you'd like. You use the [img] [/img] command with the url to the image between the tags.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
mmerig, thank you for your in-depth commentary! Your comments regarding using a crack as a compositional element is especially apt. Not something I had thought about, as I am not used to having that option.
With some thoughts in mind I was actually out on the trail again this afternoon/evening. I was hiking near an area named Three Forks, on Hawk Mountain. I took this photo, on 4x5 with my 58mm XL:
http://www.oceanstarproductions.com/...rks-4172ss.jpg
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Bryan -- Interesting effect from that 58mm lens.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Arkasha_from_Russia,
What is there to understand? I will forgive the language issue, I know English is not your first language, but "I would not waste film" is going to generally be taken to mean that you think this is "wasting film," or rather that you do not feel the artist has enough merit to even show this.
Perhaps that is not your meaning, maybe. Perhaps you meant to say something more sophisticated, but language did not come out right.
And, yes, I might agree that I do not "feel" something from these images, like I have felt from many of my own images, or some others who post here, but these images have merit, and they are not a waste of film. They are the vision that one photographer -- whether you agree with his art or not -- is trying to show us. This is not a photography or composition class. There was no "assignment" here, the photographer chose to simply shoot something that made him stop and look, and that should be more than acceptable for us. That said, we can certainly question his motives, his composition, his choices, but more professionally and humanely.
If I were to give criticism -- constructive criticism -- I would say this:
The first image has wonderful contrast. However it is not as successful as I think it can be, because of the composition, which seems to be a result of poor positioning, or a selection of framing that I think could have been better. I like the busy-ness of the background, and the tonality in the whole image, but there are bits and pieces of foliage in the foreground of the frame that feel distracting, and I might have chosen to reposition the camera or use some tilt-shit to selectively focus on what would be more important to the composition.
The second image is more successful, and reminds me of things that I shoot. There is decent tonality in it, but I think some post- work would make it spectacular. It has the makings of a high-contrast image, and you can selectively dodge/burn, or use other techniques to bring out the contours and texture of the rock. I might have tried to reposition the camera again here, to remove the small crack at the very bottom edge of the bottom-right of the frame.
That is my critique. I hope this was constructive and useful.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arkasha_from_Russia
Corran
I do not understand what you photographed. I would not waste film
One person's "waste of film", is another's masterpiece.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mmerig
The sky was much more interesting up until about 5 minutes before I took the picture.
I say embrace the blank sky! Sometimes with a stark subject like this butte it is more effective than clouds.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
h2oman
I say embrace the blank sky! Sometimes with a stark subject like this butte it is more effective than clouds.
Thanks -- That is good advice.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
krishmandal
Arkasha_from_Russia,
What is there to understand? I will forgive the language issue, I know English is not your first language, but "I would not waste film" is going to generally be taken to mean that you think this is "wasting film," or rather that you do not feel the artist has enough merit to even show this.
Perhaps that is not your meaning, maybe. Perhaps you meant to say something more sophisticated, but language did not come out right.
And, yes, I might agree that I do not "feel" something from these images, like I have felt from many of my own images, or some others who post here, but these images have merit, and they are not a waste of film. They are the vision that one photographer -- whether you agree with his art or not -- is trying to show us. This is not a photography or composition class. There was no "assignment" here, the photographer chose to simply shoot something that made him stop and look, and that should be more than acceptable for us. That said, we can certainly question his motives, his composition, his choices, but more professionally and humanely.
If I were to give criticism -- constructive criticism -- I would say this:
The first image has wonderful contrast. However it is not as successful as I think it can be, because of the composition, which seems to be a result of poor positioning, or a selection of framing that I think could have been better. I like the busy-ness of the background, and the tonality in the whole image, but there are bits and pieces of foliage in the foreground of the frame that feel distracting, and I might have chosen to reposition the camera or use some tilt-shit to selectively focus on what would be more important to the composition.
The second image is more successful, and reminds me of things that I shoot. There is decent tonality in it, but I think some post- work would make it spectacular. It has the makings of a high-contrast image, and you can selectively dodge/burn, or use other techniques to bring out the contours and texture of the rock. I might have tried to reposition the camera again here, to remove the small crack at the very bottom edge of the bottom-right of the frame.
That is my critique. I hope this was constructive and useful.
"What is there to understand? I will forgive the language issue, I know English is not your first language, but "I would not waste film" is going to generally be taken to mean that you think this is "wasting film," or rather that you do not feel the artist has enough merit to even show this.
Perhaps that is not your meaning, maybe."
Whatever the intended meaning was, the comment itself was utterly RUDE!
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Film used is not film wasted no matter the outcome. Film sitting in a fridge waiting for just the right occasion is a waste of film. JMaHO. A sheet ruined by pulling the darkslide too soon is not wasted. It should be a lesson learned. Some of us learn it more than once or at least have to be reminded occasionally. A shot filled with a massive rock is not a waste of film. There is always something to learn.
As for Bryan's shot I think the only problem with it is the lighting and time of day, something that is not always and rarely under our control. If you don't know take the shot. At least you can learn from it. I think this might work quite well with some low angle light and a dark sky and perhaps some adjustments in composition.
Bryan, I love the latest photo. It has a nice pleasant feel.
Nits: the highlights are a tad blown but that is a tough situation with the shade and direct sun. I can see what you are going after here. Just a few paces from here is an old oak with spanish moss hanging from its low limbs. I have shot countless frames at that tree trying to do exactly what you are doing here, portray the glow from the back lit plants yet capture the textures of the trees in the shade. Like I said a tough situation. Perhaps another approach would to expose for the plant glow and let the shade go dark. It might be more dramatic with a lower light and higher contrast. JMaHO. If it were me I think I would have tried to exclude the large tree as its mass is dominating the delicate nature of the ferns. At the least perhaps placement would be more to the left and up or down. But again, JMaHO.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Some of the Ten Peaks on Moraine Lake, Yoho, Alberta, Canada
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ld4xObSFl...2B150mmweb.jpg
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
First a disclaimer: I think the sub-thread on critique runs the danger of becoming personal to either Arkasha or Corran, and it should not. I think Arkasha raises some valid points which are being discounted because of the English, which in his post #12044 has some phrases garbled beyond recognition, such as "remained with sketches tracking." I thought there might be a language translation program at fault, but even if not, since I cannot write a single word in Russian (cyrillic script anyone?) I am not about to throw away the entire comment because of some language issues.
But to get to the positive, here are the thoughts Arkasha presents which I believe are valid considerations in any critique:"What did you want to show these pictures?," "it should see something interesting. Beautiful light or textured sky or something else."
In my words, but taken directly from Arkasha's comments, we make most photographs because something in the scene resonated with us, there was something we wanted to show the viewer. In the majority of images we intuit pretty immediately what that was, either something that struck us as beautiful, or a center of interest which caught our eye and imagination, or sometimes a sense of irony (Austin Granger, for example, has an eye for the slightly out-of-kilter scene). I think it is a fair question to ask if we see an image which seems to lack the above. Now one must be careful, because there is a whole body of imagery which looks very commonplace, such as Steven Shore's large format work, or perhaps Robert Adams's, which appears to violate the principle. Still, if one doesn't understand why an image was made, other than to simply document "I was there," the question is legitimate.
Then Arkasha expands on the thought, pointing out that sometimes an image is made simply because one finds the light beautiful, or the appearance of the sky. If all of these elements are deemed lacking, one can critique the image. Whether or not others agree with the critique is a separate issue, but that is exactly why we have these discussions, and speaking for myself, exactly what I am looking for when I post images. (I was at my monthly New Jersey Photographer's Forum meeting last night, and came back with a whole bunch of notes about improvements I could make to the images I showed to the group.)
And I think it is fair to apply those questions to Corran's hiking images which were posted. Personally I find some of them interesting, such as #12052, where to use our "standards" from above, the lighting makes the image work, the almost perpendicular split between the unlit side of the scene, and the lit side. Some of the others seem, to me (and I stress the "to me") to be large format snapshots. Isn't that the point of critique?
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
The only rule on this and other image threads is stated clearly at the beginning,
"Critiques should only be offered if requested by the original poster."
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Corran
Good point. I've thought about adding a line in my signature saying "all comments and critique welcome" or something to that effect. When I was auditing photo classes the critique part was always my favorite class times. It's nice to know when people like, or dislike, a certain photograph, and why.
Randy: The large red bold letters don't apply in this case. Or to be more precise, Corran said he was interested in critiques.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peter Lewin
Randy: The large red bold letters don't apply in this case. Or to be more precise, Corran said he was interested in critiques.
Yes they do. Many ignore the Mod's admonition.
Bryan did not ask for critique in his first post. http://www.largeformatphotography.in...=1#post1350746
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Let me first say that I do not bear Arkasha any ill will. My original response pages back was a bit sarcastic because I felt the response was somewhat curt. After reflection there was the issue of a possible language/culture barrier (though I don't want to assume - there are plenty of multilingual posters here). Regardless, I will readily admit the image is not strong. Some folks may only post their absolute best work here but I think posting less strong work (and gauging reaction) can be a helpful learning tool. I know I often pre-visualize a scene but don't necessarily achieve that vision. This is a weakness of mine and I continue to work on it. His second post is certainly much more constructive though.
Also, I think the topic engendered some good discussion, which is positive. Also, I apologize for not remembering to post that I always welcome thoughtful comments and critiques.
Moving on - thanks also for your comments, Peter and Marty, on the previous images. The interesting thing about the mountains is you can have wonderful light at one part of the trail and then crest a hill and the light is gone and it's just drab flat light. Both the back-lit forest scene and the top of the mountain scene was around the same part of the day. Looking at the previous image again, I think I will try a square crop, placing the clear line of light and dark dead center. I think that might give it more visual interest.
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
I certainly wasted some film during this session, forgetting to change my meter to the correct ISO for the first two shots. For that and other reasons, I've decided it's not a good idea for me to work with more than one camera at a time (I had a 645 camera with me as well). Fortunately I noticed the error and got an exposure I'm happy with:
https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8089/2...1ff61b9d84.jpg
Firelight by Jeff, on Flickr
4x5, 300mm, Provia + 81A
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Monashka Bay, Kodiak, AK
https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8558/2...2edeab33_b.jpg[url=https://flic.kr/p/LqzrHp]
Chamonix 045n2,
Schneider Super-Angulon 90mm f/8 SC.w/3stp GND and #25 red filter
Delta 100, XTOL
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Chris7521: Wow! That landscape/weather photo stopped me in my tracks. Can you or anyone explain what sort of weather phenomenon is at work, or is it just the difference between NJ and Alaska weather? (Incidentally, I'm impressed by your understanding of how to combine the GND and red filters, i.e. its one thing to see an image, another to capture that vision.)
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peter Lewin
Chris7521: Wow! That landscape/weather photo stopped me in my tracks. Can you or anyone explain what sort of weather phenomenon is at work, or is it just the difference between NJ and Alaska weather? (Incidentally, I'm impressed by your understanding of how to combine the GND and red filters, i.e. its one thing to see an image, another to capture that vision.)
Thanks for the compliment. I thinks it's just the edge of a weather front. The clouds taking over from the south. You can see that anywhere from time to time. As far as any technique with filters...I am still learning. Sometimes, it works out😊
-
Re: Large Format Landscapes
Buki canyon, Ukraine. Nagaoka 4x5, Fujinon 180/9 @ 22, Foma 100 in XTOL 1: 2, 8:30 min.
Yuriy Sanin, Kiev, Ukraine.
https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8102/2...6e340dff_o.jpgБуки 4 by Yuriy Sanin, on Flickr