What did you compose at Waters Edge?

[chassis]

Attachment 170075 I haven’t used my LF camera in a long while, as I have been using my digital camera. This image was made of a local area with my 4X5 Wisner and Fuji 125mm F5.6 (52mm filter). All the best everyone, John

Nice colors, very peaceful.

[jon.oman]

Attachment 170075 I haven’t used my LF camera in a long while, as I have been using my digital camera. This image was made of a local area with my 4X5 Wisner and Fuji 125mm F5.6 (52mm filter). All the best everyone, John

I like it! Great colors.

[bob carnie]

Thanks John and Paul.

Hey what about me I was the genius that came up with the idea of darkening... I would even go much farther btw and then come back .. the old out flanking method of printing that I love to employ with my work.

[Corran]

Hi Bob,

I do appreciate your thoughts! I said that back in post #5314. A couple nights ago I tried contact printing this image on two different papers - Fomabrom 112 and Ilford ART 300. As I expected, the Fomabrom, which seems to be a fairly soft contrast paper in general, did the negative no favors due to its underdevelopment. The ART 300 fared a lot better and I like the results tonally, but not sure on the texture for this image. I haven't tried plain Ilford Warmtone paper. This negative may be better served getting remade via the digital burn process I mentioned in another thread.

Here's a scan of the ART 300 print. This paper is hard to scan but this'll have to do.

[john borrelli]

Nice colors, very peaceful.

Thank you very much for your comment

[john borrelli]

I like it! Great colors.

Thanks so much for your comment

[Vogel]

This really a beautiful image! And thank you Paul Barden for the technical information.

[paulbarden]

Hi Bob,

I do appreciate your thoughts! I said that back in post #5314. A couple nights ago I tried contact printing this image on two different papers - Fomabrom 112 and Ilford ART 300. As I expected, the Fomabrom, which seems to be a fairly soft contrast paper in general, did the negative no favors due to its underdevelopment. The ART 300 fared a lot better and I like the results tonally, but not sure on the texture for this image. I haven't tried plain Ilford Warmtone paper. This negative may be better served getting remade via the digital burn process I mentioned in another thread.

Here's a scan of the ART 300 print. This paper is hard to scan but this'll have to do.

I really don't like the Art300 paper with its heavy-handed texturing - I don't think its done you any favors. I do urge you to try the Ilford Warmtone, as this is a superb paper with excellent blacks and a very pleasing warmth that takes well to Selenium toning.

[jp]

There are some images which art300 works well for. For that, I'm glad I have it around. Definitely not a general purpose paper.

[Corran]

Yeah, it definitely changes the feel of the image. Whether or not that is a benefit depends on the image, and preference.

I have some images from Arizona that work wonderfully on this paper - they are images of rocks and stone.

The other thing is size - with a small contact print the texture of the paper is much more accentuated than a large print. I haven't printed any ART 300 except from the box of 5x7 paper I bought to try out. I am going to buy some 16x20 soon (and definitely enlarging those AZ images to a bigger size!).