Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2016 · Sophie in the Snow

  
 
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Sophie in the Snow


Here's a few images from a recent modeling shoot I lent a hand with. I shot some film for myself, thoughts I could post here for some input! Comments and critique are certainly welcome! I'm not extremely accustomed to shooting this type of work, so needless to say I feel that I'm terrible at posing and directing; I didn't give much direction at all... Any tips for the future?

Thanks for looking!


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Edited on Jan 26, 2016 at 07:23 PM · View previous versions



Jan 26, 2016 at 11:40 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Sophie in the Snow


The images are posted at such a large size I can't see a complete image.

Post processing looks interesting but it makes for harsh bohken ... but again, that's seeing it without being able to see the whole picture.




Jan 26, 2016 at 06:24 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Sophie in the Snow


Hi Andre! I do apologize for the huge sizes, Imugr allowed me to adjust the dimensions in the past but recently they've seemed to have taken away that feature! I think you should be able to hit "control" + "-" to zoom out your view.


Jan 26, 2016 at 07:06 PM
CW100
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Sophie in the Snow


matsmithphotography wrote:
Here's a few images from a recent modeling shoot I lent a hand with. I shot some film for myself, thoughts I could post here for some input! Comments and critique are certainly welcome! I'm not extremely accustomed to shooting this type of work, so needless to say I feel that I'm terrible at posing and directing; I didn't give much direction at all... Any tips for the future?

Thanks for looking!

mg]


yes, the photos are very harsh with distracting background "bokeh" and they are extremely grainy.
Perhaps reduce the size and show the pics in color?






Jan 26, 2016 at 07:21 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Sophie in the Snow


There we go, sorry about the sizes guys. Hopefully that helps!

CW100, I actually shot these on BW film so no color available haha. As for the bokeh... that's natural, I didn't use any post on these aside from the basic contrast etc. I was using the 35mm summicron, which is well known for it's extreme bokeh.



Jan 26, 2016 at 07:25 PM
CW100
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Sophie in the Snow


matsmithphotography wrote:
There we go, sorry about the sizes guys. Hopefully that helps!

CW100, I actually shot these on BW film so no color available haha. As for the bokeh... that's natural, I didn't use any post on these aside from the basic contrast etc. I was using the 35mm summicron, which is well known for it's extreme bokeh.



OK, so you can't do any more processing. It's an 'artistic' thing. But honestly, from my perspective they look like bad (really bad) cell phone pics !
next time shoot in digital and film !







Jan 26, 2016 at 07:31 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Sophie in the Snow


How are you scanning in your negs? What film did you shoot? I ask because certain scanning techniques and settings can over accentuate the grain. I also see a lot of blocked highlights and crushed blacks.

You didn't do the model any favors by shooting with a wide angle lens, especially in the close ups. Given her physiognomy, I would be reaching for a longer portrait lens, at least 135mm and more likely in the 200mm range. She would also take some careful posing to present her at her best. I would even be tempted to run her through Portrait Pro (gasp!) to do some subtle changes to help her out.



Jan 27, 2016 at 09:03 AM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Sophie in the Snow


I'm scanning with a Pakon (Doug just helped me out with the grain issues) but how can I take care of the highlights and blacks? All I have for my Leica as of yet is a 35mm, I was just shooting for myself; I didn't really give any thought to the focal length. But I see now how a tighter lens would help flatten things out a bit.


Jan 27, 2016 at 12:46 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sophie in the Snow


matsmithphotography wrote:
I'm scanning with a Pakon (Doug just helped me out with the grain issues) but how can I take care of the highlights and blacks? All I have for my Leica as of yet is a 35mm, I was just shooting for myself; I didn't really give any thought to the focal length. But I see now how a tighter lens would help flatten things out a bit.

There's a couple of things you could try when scanning. First is to scan very flat, don't correct contrast in the scanning software. Adjust contrast in post. Take a look at the histogram when scanning. If you can't fit the entire dynamic range in one scan, which is often the case, you can do successive scans, just like doing multiple exposures for HDR photography. Then you can use HDR software in realistic mode to combine the images.

I had a 4x5 negative of storm clouds over an old barn. I used the multiple scan technique to tame the insane dynamic range.



Jan 27, 2016 at 01:14 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Sophie in the Snow


never thought of merging scans like that, interesting idea! I'll have to rescan some frames and see how it goes.


Jan 27, 2016 at 01:22 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Sophie in the Snow


matsmithphotography wrote:
never thought of merging scans like that, interesting idea! I'll have to rescan some frames and see how it goes.

I don't know how feasible it would be using a Pakon. I just did some reading and it is really set up for commercial use. It looks like it's harder to dink around with it compared to a flat bed scanner.

Best of luck!



Jan 27, 2016 at 01:25 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Sophie in the Snow


I can adjust basic settings in the scanner, so it may be possible to do.


Jan 27, 2016 at 01:26 PM
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sophie in the Snow


dmacmillan wrote:
There's a couple of things you could try when scanning. First is to scan very flat, don't correct contrast in the scanning software. Adjust contrast in post. Take a look at the histogram when scanning. If you can't fit the entire dynamic range in one scan, which is often the case, you can do successive scans, just like doing multiple exposures for HDR photography. Then you can use HDR software in realistic mode to combine the images.

I had a 4x5 negative of storm clouds over an old barn. I used the multiple scan technique to tame the insane dynamic
...Show more

You cannot see the histogram in the pakon. Their is a learning curve as far as scanning on the pakon goes. Depending on the film I normally reduce contrast (For BW) in the scanning software between -25 and -40. This reduces a lot of the grain and produces a slightly flat scan contrast wise but it preserves the highlights and shadows so that in LR you can add back the contrast etc. without having HUGE grain.
Each film is a little different. I also think developing is a major factor. I switched to xtol a while back because it reduced the grain a TON. I think Mat may be using HC110 which is a great all around developer but will produce larger grain than say xtol or microphen.

I also think analog prints need to be made with each film so that you have a baseline for what the image "should" look like. I have prints made every so often with each film each way I shoot it (pushing, box speed, etc.). Then I can use the print to match my scan and LR edit to in order to make sure I am coming up with something close to what the analog finished product looks like.



Jan 27, 2016 at 02:18 PM
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Sophie in the Snow


http://www.dougtreiber.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Lindsey43.jpg
http://www.dougtreiber.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Lindsey44.jpg
The above images are both delta 100 shot at 250 developed at 320 in xtol.
Scan was done on the pakon with the contrast reduced to -25 I think (the lower ISO films have less grain to begin with so I do not need to reduce the contrast as much to control the grain.). They were then finished in LR with my regular film preset.

I have also occasionally had to apply slight NR in LR in order to bring the grain down to what the print would look like. The digital versions of film shots viewed on monitors are often times very harsh compared to what a print looks like.
I have been doing some at home printing on my Canon Pro-100 and I find that even the inkjet prints have WAY less grain than what you see on the monitor.



Jan 27, 2016 at 02:23 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Sophie in the Snow


hardlyboring wrote:
I also think developing is a major factor. I switched to xtol a while back because it reduced the grain a TON. I think Mat may be using HC110 which is a great all around developer but will produce larger grain than say xtol or microphen.

Xtol is a very nice developer, probably better suited for negs to be scanned. You're right about HC-110, especially when used in standard dilutions. It was a good all around developer with relatively short development times. A big plus was you didn't need to mix dry powder. D-76 and HC-110 have a lot of sodium sulfite that helps grain at the expense of acutance.

My favorite film/developer combination was Agfapan 100/400 in Rodinal. It wasn't well suited for 35mm because of grain, but it looked great in medium format.



Jan 27, 2016 at 02:48 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Sophie in the Snow


Yea, Doug HC-110 is all I've been using for a while now. Sometimes I'm eager to play with different methods but worry about ruining the roll; so I'd wanna make a test roll first. Do you make your own enlargements, Doug? I'm gonna rescan now and see what results I can come up with.


Jan 27, 2016 at 02:53 PM
hardlyboring
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Sophie in the Snow


no all my negatives are sent out to Robert Cavalli who is a master printer in Cali. He is fantastic.


Jan 27, 2016 at 03:17 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Sophie in the Snow


I may look into that, I want to get some analog prints but I really wanna do it myself haha.


Jan 27, 2016 at 03:23 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Sophie in the Snow


matsmithphotography wrote:
Do you make your own enlargements, Doug?

Funny, hardlyboring and I are both Dougs. You'll have to specify. I suggest "young Doug" for the other and "old fart Doug" for me.

I think you were aiming at young Doug, but I do my own enlargements using a Canon PixmaPro 9500 MKII. I like it because it uses pigment based inks and will print true B&W.

BTW, I started printing nearly 60 years ago when I was 8. When I was a full time commercial photographer, I would go through as many as 2,000 sheets of 8x10 RC paper (using a Royalprint processor) a month.



Jan 27, 2016 at 03:40 PM
matsmithphotography
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Sophie in the Snow


haha small world. Well "Old Fart Doug" that's amazing! If I only had a bit more room in my basement for an enlarger and a bigger sink... I always wondered about the entire process; I understand that you'd make a contact sheet first exposing the negative at various times to see which gives the best exposure, right? But do you use a cheaper/different type of paper as to not be wasteful?


Jan 27, 2016 at 04:00 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.