post your trees!

[Bob McCarthy]

4x5 TMX, Pyrocat HD, Fujinon 240A, Arca-Swiss Discovery

The Light is very pretty, I like it..

New camera?? You going Arca?

bob


oops, my browser took me to the first page, not last.

still pretty image

[Jim Becia]

Here are a few from this past fall and winter. The first is a bristlecone at Cedar Breaks National Monument taken this winter with a 4x5. The wind was howling but somehow I managed to get an image without any moving branches. The second is from Zion in October taken with an 8x10 on a rain drenching day, and the third is with the 8x10 also just outside of Silverton,CO at the end of September. Jim

On a side note, When I post these, they look so dull on my monitor, yet they look good prior to posting. What am I missing/doing wrong? Thanks

[Sirius Glass]

On a side note, When I post these, they look so dull on my monitor, yet they look good prior to posting. What am I missing/doing wrong? Thanks

You are expecting digital to show comparable quality to analog and chemical prints. Not in your lifetime; not in my lifetime; not in the next generation.

[rjbuzzclick]

Speed Graphic, Ektar 203mm (I think), Fomapan 100, HC-110, scan from a contact print.

[Zaitz]

couple of trees....

Very nice photos!

[Jim Becia]

You are expecting digital to show comparable quality to analog and chemical prints. Not in your lifetime; not in my lifetime; not in the next generation.

You have missed the point of what I'm saying. This has nothing to do with analog/chemical/digital prints. Before posting the images to the LF forum, they look great on my monitor, after posting they become dull and lifeless on the LF board when I view them from the post on my monitor. Jim

[Donald Miller]

You have missed the point of what I'm saying. This has nothing to do with analog/chemical/digital prints. Before posting the images to the LF forum, they look great on my monitor, after posting they become dull and lifeless on the LF board when I view them from the post on my monitor. Jim

Jim, Some sort of compression occurs when you upload an image to this forum. If you notice the file size prior to and after posting are markedly different. I don't know that this is the cause of what you mentioned but it might be. I suspect that if you posted a link to an image as different from uploading an image it might solve this discrepancy.

Best regards,
Donald Miller

[Joel Truckenbrod]

You have missed the point of what I'm saying. This has nothing to do with analog/chemical/digital prints. Before posting the images to the LF forum, they look great on my monitor, after posting they become dull and lifeless on the LF board when I view them from the post on my monitor. Jim

Jim, I concur with Donald - I've found that I simply can't use the forum's image hosting features, since the images somehow end up being resampled and/or compressed. Both color and sharpness suffer. Linking the images through a image hosting site (I use photobucket, for example) solved the problem for me. Beautiful photographs by the way!

[mdm]

5x7 TriX in D-23

[SamReeves]

Here are a few from this past fall and winter. The first is a bristlecone at Cedar Breaks National Monument taken this winter with a 4x5. The wind was howling but somehow I managed to get an image without any moving branches. The second is from Zion in October taken with an 8x10 on a rain drenching day, and the third is with the 8x10 also just outside of Silverton,CO at the end of September. Jim

On a side note, When I post these, they look so dull on my monitor, yet they look good prior to posting. What am I missing/doing wrong? Thanks

They look fine to me. I like #3 the best with that splash of blazing color in the evergreeen forest.

Speed Graphic, Ektar 203mm (I think), Fomapan 100, HC-110, scan from a contact print.

Nice!!