I wanted to share some images from a personal project I'm working on called 1902. I'm always trying to create things that are a little different and that demonstrate a story. For the series I'm calling 1902 I want to give the viewer the feeling that they found these images in an old shoebox covered in dust in someone's attic.
Let me know what you think...C&C are always welcome!
@friscoron I'm just taking these photos while I'm at client shoots of the same scenarios so sometimes the clothes doesn't match...but I still want the mood to be there!
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.
If you're really looking for the whole finding thing, they need a bit more grain, fading, and cracks.
Also there were no small cameras or fast film back then. So any photo taken in such a dark setting with a moving subject would have to be wide open on a fast lens on a large camera. I.e. way too much dof here...
About the clothes. I do think in private setting some people would dress like this in 1902. And being I'm what seems like a remote setting, it doesn't feel so 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.
what you have to do to simulate some images from 1902 is very simple. get some chicken grease... rub it on your sensor. then only use shutter speeds less than 1/15 of a sec and underexpose the images and then bring them back in post. perfect!
The clothing, I completely get, but as I stated in my last post I'm taking these in the middle of client shoots, so it's not something that I setup to shoot. I don't want to mimic 1902 photographs perfectly, I just want them to have the feel...not the exact specs.
I'm always looking to find inspiration from different compositions, ideas and PP looks.
But I appreciate everyone's feedbacks. Maybe I will setup a shoot and mimic it as close as I can in the near future, it really does sound like a fun idea.
That's the challenge when you give something a name like "1902", people have an idea in their head what "1902" should look like.
I don't know what the client shoots entail (commercial, editorial, ) 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".
Or you can just say 1902 is a random number to the series and not the year
) 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".