Peter Figen wrote:
Dan - You're making me want to go back home and visit the old stomping grounds. It's beautiful country there.
I've been gathering images for a new website coming soon and I keep re-working images that seem to want a new life. Here's a Harp-Guitar I shot for one of the guitar mags. Kodak EPN was always the best film for shooting the wood of musical instruments. This was on 4x5.
Peter, that EPN really does render the wood well. How long has it been out of prod?
I have some expired/cold-stored KODAK Ektachrome E100VS. Is that similar?
Yes, Monterrey & Carmel are favorite places nearby. I feel a trip with the 4x5 in the works!
rattymouse wrote:
Welcome to FM and welcome to the film thread! You are off to an amazing start. I love 400H and your examples of shooting it +3 stops makes me want to try it even more.
Do you shoot all your weddings on film?
Thank you so much for your kind words. I haven't shot any weddings yet and don't intend to for about a year or so. I am just starting out and i am not really yet to commit to anyone do shoot their wedding, even for free.
At the moment i am just looking at doing Portraits and Engagement shoots to build up a portfolio, experience and confidence.
But everything i do will be on film. When its getting low light i will switch to 1600 ISO colour and when its night it will be 3200 B&W.
lenticular11 wrote:
jbrown86 - Rattymouse's response reminds me to comment also and apologies for not doing so earlier.
I applaud your use of film for your planned return to wedding photography. The two you've posted above and the rest in the referenced thread all look good to me. Use of film is a great way to distinguish your work from the majority.
As a query however, is the overexposed look very much a current wedding trend?
My stepdaughter was married last Nov and the photographer also did a great job, however I would have reduced the 'blown highlight look' in many of his shots.
Regards to Hampshire (it was an escape zone for me when I lived in Camberley!)...Show more →
Thank you again for your kind words. I love using film, always have and always will and i do believe that it will help to distinguish myself in the 'Local' market.
The "Overexposed" look is a current wedding trend at the moment and using film it makes it easier to retain details in the highlights. I took my Nikon D700 along with the shoot, i set it up exactly the same as my Hasselblad H1 and took a photo and it was almost completely white.
I may post a comparison of my D700 compared to Fuji 400H ranging from -3 exp to +8 exp
dswiger wrote:
jbrown86
Really like the wedding shots. I am thinking about doing the same thing,
Dan
Thank you for the comments Dan. It was very satisfying shooting film, not looking at the screen and the exciting waiting for the film to come back.
The BEST thing about it however is the work flow. If i shoot digital, i would after the shoot come home, get out my laptop, go through 500 photos, pick out the best, the spend ages editing them, sort them into folders etc etc.
With the 7 rolls i shot, i got home, had a cup of tea, popped them in the post, drunk many more cups of tea, 1 week later i get my scans back via email with all colours, contrast, tones all done to my specification, went through the 100 photos, picked out the best 24 and done. I spent about 15 minutes on the laptop not hours and hours. The LAB i use is very important to me as they do nearly all the work to my specification.
None of the photos from this shoot were touched with Photoshop
Dan - EPN was always very flat compared to other emulsions, both in contrast and in saturation, and maybe because it tended not to emphasize anything too much, like Velvia, it just worked well for the wood. Then again, maybe it's just color color of the boxes - y'know - Kodak yellow boxes do yellows well and Fuji green boxes do greens well. Regardless, we certainly have more control over the final image today than we ever had back IN the day.
Did I ask you if you've ever taken the Old Coast Road from Bixby Bridge to Andrew Molera State Park? If not, then do.
Peter Figen wrote:
Dan - EPN was always very flat compared to other emulsions, both in contrast and in saturation, and maybe because it tended not to emphasize anything too much, like Velvia, it just worked well for the wood. Then again, maybe it's just color color of the boxes - y'know - Kodak yellow boxes do yellows well and Fuji green boxes do greens well. Regardless, we certainly have more control over the final image today than we ever had back IN the day.
Did I ask you if you've ever taken the Old Coast Road from Bixby Bridge to Andrew Molera State Park? If not, then do....Show more →
Definitely looks like a trip worth taking. I had planned on a Carmel/Monterey trip but I could do Bixby earlier in the day & work my way back up the coast.
Probably a Toyo & an RZ day
BTW, I picked up an RZ 75mm shift lens. Any experience with it?
Thanks for the tip.
Dan
Dan - I never owned that lens as it was a weird focal length for product shots. I most shot those either longer or wider on 4x5, usually preferring the look of a 90mm or even a 65mm on 4x5 for that type of work. It will be interesting to see how it works for you - also in terms of stitching to get wider shots. Could be interesting.
Peter Figen wrote:
Dan - I never owned that lens as it was a weird focal length for product shots. I most shot those either longer or wider on 4x5, usually preferring the look of a 90mm or even a 65mm on 4x5 for that type of work. It will be interesting to see how it works for you - also in terms of stitching to get wider shots. Could be interesting.
Peter, the stitching is what I had in mind. Got it pretty cheap for condition. i have been pleasantly surprised by the RZ optics. I have a 180 mm & a TC which are very sharp together.
Desmolicious wrote:
Strolling down Pacific Ave in San Pedro, testing a Rollei MX-EVS that Fleenor just serviced.
20 year old Kodak Lumiere 100 E6, shot at box speed.
The idea was to document it before the inevitable change..
What happens when you developing c-41 and you forget your timer because you are posting on FM? Not much. This is gold200 shot at 100 developed for 8min48sec (normal is 3:30min). A massive push! Negs were super dense. The pakon handled it like a champ. In fact, only editing was cloning large dust specs and sharpening and adding some vignette (the pakon natively compensates for vignetting).
A digital copy (using a slide-duplicator on a Sony A7R) of a slide taken in the 1980s or 1990s (further research required!). I'm going to compare results from this method with an LED light-table and a macro lens.
Original would have been taken on a Pentax (probably Z-1, with its mediocre standard-range zoom).
Lindisfarne Priory ruins, Northumberland. Slide film type unknown (possibly Ektachrome 100).
