Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.186 #18 · ZE/ZF/ZM Images (Official Thread!) | |
philber wrote:
And yes, it means I am an altoholic. My name is Philippe, and I am an altoholic...
I'll think that I'm also altoholic, or at least zeissoholic... I would like to post also to landscape forum sometimes but they have so limiting forum rules that I have never bothered to create separate thumbnail size images for other forum.
akul wrote:
Samuli,
That picture reminds me of Kurosawa's film, either Kagemusha, or Ran. Sort of ghostly beautiful.
Regarding fogs. I notice that I can see the fog up to the border of water and trees, and it is quite visible on the lower side of the picture on reflection with brighter background ( sky ), or it could be above water? I can't tell. It is beautiful and mysterious as it is to me, and drive me crazy to hear it was a failure !
Well, having said that, your comment got me thinking of my past 'life' experience as theater lighting designer long time ago. I was quite obsessed with using theatrical fogs, and fogs tend to pronounce very dramatic when back lit or side lit in theatrical setting ( like Blade Runner), it tends to be less dramatic when front lit. If this was a theatrical setting ( meaning to fool human eyes in controlled setting ) , I would probably find strong spot light, hide in the trees on the left of the image so you would not see the light source at all, and side light the fog with 'barn doors' so that light cone is wide rectangular horizontal pyramid, this will prevent light to never touch water but cover wide depth of fogs. Problem is, camera eye is so much more sensitive and this can easily look too fake and 'staged'. This may or may not at all be helpful, or even close to what you are after, but, like I said, you got me thinking....Show more →
Thanks Akul. I'll have to see how I could do something like that, typically locations I could shoot something like this won't have possibility to do side lightning - this might work better actually with strobe(s) and tight snoot with honeycomp, that would freeze the fog. When I shoot the photo there was fog slowly moving above the water, and I hoped to capture that and when I didn't I got disappointed (I shoot 5 different versions, none worked) ==> failure.
denoir wrote:
<.....Old town with 21ZE on multiple posts.....>
Luka, liked your old town images, specially the two with bicycle leaning to wall (one side, one from back).
Paul Yi wrote:
Took it on a hike .... ZE 100 ....
Paul, to me your 100ZE shots look very similar to your 100C/Y shots, bokeh might be slightly softer. How you find the lenses differ from each other?
Bobu wrote:
Samuli, do you like this one better (with less digital GND)?
Yes, a little. I'm sure this is not common problem, mostly my own personal issue, but I still find that distracting the water is brighter than the sky. Kind of reason why I don't shoot with grads but prefer HDR instead. When I shoot with grads on film days I really hated the darkened mountain tops and tree tops in addition to this kind of larger area issues grad filter causes. Also HDR is easy to ruin with similar issues.
-------
Why lens needs to be sharp at landscape shooting situations at wide apertures? Because at moonlight correct exposure is about 2 minutes at f/2 @ ISO 100  - Lempäälä by night 01 - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2/35 @ f/2, 121s, ISO 100
Samuli
|
