My couch-friendliest landscape print so far, coming in at 2x4 feet. Six-pass dry mounted to a sheet of MDF. See if you can spot the small boo boo. I hope it isn't distracting. Actually I shouldn't even bring it up, and just see if anyone notices. Yep, that's the best plan.
nathanm, I'm looking for a tripod foot, camerabag handle, end of a persons foot, darkcloth in frame, or distracting stick. Can't find a one of these but I do see a level something up in right on hill in background..
Nice shot by the way,, what did ya shoot it with..?
regards
No, it's nothing with the photo itself.
Shot with a 90mm Schneider and a red filter, I think. (I should probably use filters more often, I think it made some of those dark rocks even darker.) Shen-Hao 4x5, two left\right rear shift exposures stitched together. Stitched the hard way too, before I bought Photoshop CS3 which makes that part too easy! Probably Delta-100 with perceptol. Or might've been Efke. Can't remember exactly.
Nathan,
That looks impressive, I can't notice any obvious mistakes, but I do see a line in the mat. I am curious, did you print two prints separately and then mount them flush? Or is it two negatives printed on the same print? I am not "old school" enough to have tried such procedures, I'm afraid.
Nice stitching ! Is it that you didn't have oversize matboard (40x60) that you pieced together some smaller ones?
is it along the top on the backing board about 1/3 in from the right? doesn't seem an issue if that is what you are referencing as a booboo
Yep, the mat is in two pieces. I suppose I should've done the seam with a 45˚ cut instead of 90˚. Oh well, it looks okay. It wasn't supposed to have a mat at all, but there was a wee bit of white paper edge showing and I had to cover it up.
Argos33 - The two negatives were scanned independently, combined in Photoshop and printed on the same sheet of paper.
A nice 4x10 camera, or better yet an 8x10 with a 4x10 back would be super sweet, but the rear shift trick is a cheaper alternative. I don't usually care for the wider aspect ratio, but with this lens I move the back around and see all the nice image circle I'm missing out on. It took me awhile to appreciate lens atttributes, but I've discovered just how sharp this one is. All the tree bark is nice and crisp.
Nathan,Originally Posted by nathanm
How did you scan your images?
I use left-right shift on the front standard. Is there optically any difference when no tilt or swing is involved? I avoid wide angle lenses though when using this technique since I will often need to use front rise and it's very easy to get distortion of vertical lines near the edge of the frames. I'll see if I can post an example of what I'm talking of if I can find the negative scan, though it's not a landscape.
Don Bryant
PS How did you print that?
Moving the back of the camera doesn't change the image at all, you're just shifting around the film within the fixed image circle, as if you were cropping the image. I think if you moved the lens it would shift optically. There's no geometric correction required when the two images are combined in Photoshop. The only issues might be a mismatch of exposure or movement of objects within the scene, but Photoshop stitches pretty darn good and usually without noticeable artifact. The seam can be touched up here and there if necessary.
You might run into lens abberations when you are using the far edges of the image circle. I try not to use too much vertical shift or lens tilt so you're taking a more ideal piece right out of the center.
Scanned on Epson V750, printed on Epson 7880 on Red River UltraPro Gloss paper.
Okay thanks for the low down on your technique. Have you drum scanned and of your negs for stitching. Big difference in the level of detail for very large prints though I've not printed as large as you have.
What is the RR UltraPro Gloss like? Is that a baryta coated paper? I guess I could browse the RR site for the info.
Don Bryant
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks