This is the first scene I photographed on my fall of 2014 trip to Zion. I've shot this bend of the canyon in the past, but on my 6x17. I've always wanted to shoot it on the 8x10. This was taken on the weekend when there were quite a few people back in the narrows. It was also a day when there were some clouds drifting by at times. This glow lasts for maybe 45 minutes, but there was only one small window during those 45 minutes when there were no clouds, or any people. That brief 2 minute window of solitude was quite enjoyable.
Very nice Ben. Some probably won't like the lack of detail in the shadows but I don't think it hurts the image and if anything helps the composition. After all there isn't a lot of details in dark shadows. Spot on exposure for the foreground boulders and you have the river flow just right. What method do you adopt for reciprocity failure?
I used an 8x10 Wisner Expedition for a number of years with Schneider and some old Goerz Gold Dot Dagors mounted on Ilex shutters, add to that film holders, a Ries tripod and all the other bits and bobs and well... you know how heavy that can get so well done to you for humping your gear up the Narrows!
Love it, I shot and Ebony 8x10 for a number of years but have gone all digital in the last few years. This has the look I always liked, as Nigel said maybe the shadows are bit dark but over all the rest of it is spot on. I have to give you credit carrying all that down there, that is a heck of a work out.
Love it, Ben. The film provides such realistic yet deep and rich colors. A look that is quite hard to perfect with digital in my opinion. I like the sweeping dark black wave on the right and its counterpoint on the left. The water flows perfectly into the wave and then the eye is led back over and down into the scene once again. Very nice!
Lovely image and scene, Ben. I know we were there together one year and my capture that day is still one of my faves. And that few minutes of solitude is when you are doing the real work!
Nice image Ben! Very nice flow from the lower right curving back toward the glow. I think the shadow areas are just fine. I am puzzled by so many wanting "details in the shadows" these days. These really define the mood of an image. There are areas in nature that are supposed to be dark! To me, the exposure is spot on. Also, you've got much more experience in the Narrows than I do...what did you think of how crowded it was this year? Seemed like a lot of people to me.
Dec 19, 2014 at 11:07 PM
Mark Metternich Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Nigel Turner wrote:
Very nice Ben. Some probably won't like the lack of detail in the shadows but I don't think it hurts the image and if anything helps the composition. After all there isn't a lot of details in dark shadows. Spot on exposure for the foreground boulders and you have the river flow just right. What method do you adopt for reciprocity failure?
I used an 8x10 Wisner Expedition for a number of years with Schneider and some old Goerz Gold Dot Dagors mounted on Ilex shutters, add to that film holders, a Ries tripod and all the other bits and bobs and well... you know how heavy that can get so well done to you for humping your gear up the Narrows!
Thanks for the feedback Nigel. I do have a bit more shadow detail in the negative and can certainly reassess that if I print this. I don't remember exactly, but I believe some of those dark areas on the left wall were metered around -5 or so on my meter. I adjusted my exposure to be on the brighter side so they will hold detail in a natural way.
With Ektar, they don't list reciprocity failure numbers, so you have to figure that out with experimentation. I find that adding between 1 and 1.5 stops of exposure has been good -- on top of exposing for the important shadows. That can certainly result in some long exposures, but color neg deals with it quite well compared to certain slide/B&W films.
Luckily my setup is quite reasonable in weight, so I can haul it into some pretty awesome places. There's something very rewarding about hiking with that gear on my back. While hiking out of Subway this year, it might sound a bit strange, but my legs really liked the resistance when hiking up that last hill.
Ben Horne wrote:
Thanks for the feedback Nigel. I do have a bit more shadow detail in the negative and can certainly reassess that if I print this. I don't remember exactly, but I believe some of those dark areas on the left wall were metered around -5 or so on my meter. I adjusted my exposure to be on the brighter side so they will hold detail in a natural way.
With Ektar, they don't list reciprocity failure numbers, so you have to figure that out with experimentation. I find that adding between 1 and 1.5 stops of exposure has been good -- on top of exposing for the important shadows. That can certainly result in some long exposures, but color neg deals with it quite well compared to certain slide/B&W films.
Luckily my setup is quite reasonable in weight, so I can haul it into some pretty awesome places. There's something very rewarding about hiking with that gear on my back. While hiking out of Subway this year, it might sound a bit strange, but my legs really liked the resistance when hiking up that last hill. ...Show more →
With all due respect Ben, I wasn't the one that requested more shadow detail or that the shadows were too dark, I actually stated that:
"Some probably won't like the lack of detail in the shadows but I don't think it hurts the image and if anything helps the composition. After all there isn't a lot of details in dark shadows.."
I don't feel that you need to make the shadows any lighter or attempt to bring out anymore shadow detail. It's only recently that since digital manipulation has become king that it seems that shadows with little detail have become a real no-no with the less knowledgable because that is what they are told and that is all that they see nowadays.
Luckily there are still photographers out there that understand that there is no such thing as a perfect exposure, especially when there are extreme highlights and shadows, but rather an exposure that matches our pre-visualization and concept of what is before us.
Nigel Turner wrote:
With all due respect Ben, I wasn't the one that requested more shadow detail or that the shadows were too dark, I actually stated that:
"Some probably won't like the lack of detail in the shadows but I don't think it hurts the image and if anything helps the composition. After all there isn't a lot of details in dark shadows.."
I don't feel that you need to make the shadows any lighter or attempt to bring out anymore shadow detail. It's only recently that since digital manipulation has become king that it seems that shadows with little detail have become a real no-no with the less knowledgable because that is what they are told and that is all that they see nowadays.
Luckily there are still photographers out there that understand that there is no such thing as a perfect exposure, especially when there are extreme highlights and shadows, but rather an exposure that matches our pre-visualization and concept of what is before us.
My response was more a matter of me thinking out loud about shadow detail, and what is possible with this image. I definitely did read your post thoroughly and appreciate your comments.
