safe haven for tiny formats

[SamReeves]

I had the great pleasure to work with this young lady today. She is like a for-real model and pageant girl, having won some large regional ones apparently. Quite the looker too. Anyway, I'm hoping to work with her in the future for some film stuff (this was for her personal use and needed to be done ASAP), so for now, some D700 images, first with a 50/1.2, AIS, second, with an 85/1.8 AI:

Really fantastic. She totally looks ecstatic which makes it fun to view this.

Kammeron, she likes big wood.

Canon D60, Canon EF 17-40mm ƒ4L, ASA 400.

[austin granger]

A bit over the top, but I couldn't resist. More seriously, how did you meter the shot of the lantern (the one by itself on the ground)? Did you bracket or nail it on the first try? Nice work in any case.

Jonathan

I made two exposures of the lantern (2 seconds and 4 seconds at either f5.6 or f8 I think) and ended up going with the one that was a little underexposed as I liked the feel of the blackness better. In working on it in the computer, I treated the lantern itself separately than the rest of the picture as I didn't want the light source totally blown out. So basically there're two different contrast levels going on there. Other than that, it was very straightforward. It was a picture I never considered making until it kind of hit me in the face. I set down the lantern (to make another picture actually) and it was like; "Oh! Look at THAT!" A lot of my favorite pictures are ones that happen that way. I love that after all these years of making photos, we can still be surprised.

[Roger Cole]

I had the great pleasure to work with this young lady today. She is like a for-real model and pageant girl, having won some large regional ones apparently. Quite the looker too. Anyway, I'm hoping to work with her in the future for some film stuff (this was for her personal use and needed to be done ASAP), so for now, some D700 images, first with a 50/1.2, AIS, second, with an 85/1.8 AI:

Corran,

Those are some nice photos of a very pretty young lady. The character of the out-of-focus areas, though, is distracting.

I know some folks won't like it and find it distracting. Myself, I like it. If I had had more time I would have tried some different aperture settings though to see the difference.

I wish I could poll some non-photographers about this. It seems to me that the character of OOF areas of photographs is something we, as photographers, spend a lot of time analyzing and debating, so we are hyper-aware of it. I am not immune to the appeal of discussing which lenses have the creamiest "bokeh," but are other people as attuned to this as we are? I wonder if a more average, casual viewer would find the f/1.2 bokeh distracting or simply think, as I did, "Wow, she's cute!"

Jonathan

Jonathan, probably the latter.

I use mostly Nikon primes for my non-action shots. The bokeh is often quite harsh. I'd really like one of the DC lenses, but I can't afford one. Since I see it so often in my own work, it stands out when I see it elsewhere.

On the other hand, if you're going to go by what the casual viewer thinks, then none of us would be using LF.

I actually like the bokeh here, though this particular lens wouldn't be ideal for many other shots in terms of its out of focus rendering. But in this one, particularly the first one where it's more apparent, it makes the specular highlights look almost crystalline. In the second photo the specular highlights in the background are fewer and smaller and I think neither help nor hurt. They're not that obvious and the smoother toned areas are more smoothly blurred.

That first one sort of sparkles though, and in this case with the blond model and smile, I like the effect. YMMV of course.

[jcoldslabs]

I made two exposures of the lantern (2 seconds and 4 seconds at either f5.6 or f8 I think) and ended up going with the one that was a little underexposed as I liked the feel of the blackness better. In working on it in the computer, I treated the lantern itself separately than the rest of the picture as I didn't want the light source totally blown out. So basically there're two different contrast levels going on there. Other than that, it was very straightforward. It was a picture I never considered making until it kind of hit me in the face. I set down the lantern (to make another picture actually) and it was like; "Oh! Look at THAT!" A lot of my favorite pictures are ones that happen that way. I love that after all these years of making photos, we can still be surprised.

Thanks for the detailed info. I was impressed that the mantle (or filament? or bulb?) of the lantern was still discernible with a hint of detail in the flood of light.

Jonathan

[Corran]

Thanks for all the comments guys. It's always interesting to hear others' thoughts. I think Jonathan is right, we as photographers do sometimes look at things differently.

[mdm]

Panasonic LX5

[mdm]

Panasonic LX5
Take that Mr Friedlander.

[tuco]

No sunlight was used in the making of this picture!

Mamiya 7, 80mm, Delta 400 (cropped square).

Jonathan

The resulting curve looks like a parabola.

[tuco]

Out testing compression on a roll of Acros. You don't need to meter out in the sun with this exposure index. Just use the Sunny 11 rule in any direction you aim the camera.

100ACR @ EI 6, Y2 Yellow Filter, PMK, Sunny 11 Rule

[austin granger]

I'm not sure exactly what that means, but you always get good results Tuco. I love the motion of the figure in the door.

Early Morning, Burns, Oregon


Desert Theatre, Burns, Oregon


http://www.flickr.com/photos/austingranger/