dmacmillan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
friscoron wrote:
I don't mean to be a jerk, but have you looked at photographs from 1902? The processing does not remind me of 1902, and the environment, such as the clothes, are going to make you or break you. In this case, they're breaking you.
Agreed. Either you have the wrong title for your concept or the wrong concept for your title.
I'm blessed that my family loved photography and that they never threw anything away. I have hundreds of photographs and negatives from the late 19th century through the late '20's, including 5x7 glass plates from around the turn of the century. Therefore, besides seeing photographs from the period in books, I get to see photographs of my great grandparents and great uncles and aunts.
If your intent is to evoke photos you might find in a box, there are some things you can do to help. Shoot with a "normal" lens (eg 50mm on FF). To replicate the fairly shallow DOF from back then, shoot wide open (1.8 or even 1.4). Shoot mostly with the sun over your left shoulder mid morning/late afternoon. If you can't use a slow shutter speed pretend you have to use one. A lot of these photos were shot at 1/50 or thereabouts. Some were photographed (with a tripod) even slower. Pose your subjects as if they had to hold still for a long exposure time. Use period correct clothing. Use only natural light.
I like the concept. Do some more homework if your intent is to approximate the look.
|
) or if they lend themselves to be designated "1902" or not but when the viewer looks a the image and doesn't make a connection to the title, then the pictures may be seen as less successful than if the title was "Betsy in the woods".