Topic: Recent Format Agnostic Personal Works (Read 214260 times)

Rob C · « **Reply #240 on:** April 29, 2016, 06:25:17 am »

Keith, how do you figure exposures using the Leica - does it have a built-in system of metering?

I ask, because though I find the Nikon Matrix very, very good, my recent shoot has led me to wonder if it may be better using an incident light meter again. I'm not sure how digital capture will really react to such a reading - I did try it out when I got my first digi camera (the D200 that I still use a lot) but though I felt it was an accurate way (hand metering), I didn't, at the time, have enough experience with Matrix to know just how generally good Matrix is, and so I suppose I gave some bias in favour of the incident light meter's possible superiority.

My thinking has been rather confused by the 'full exposure is best' philosophy I find in these parts... conflicts with the expose for the highlights concept. Yeah, noise in shadows is a possibility, but often highlights are more important and I add noise a lot too, intentionally, but that's a different call!

Rob

Rob C · « **Reply #241 on:** April 29, 2016, 09:12:52 am »

Quote from: KLaban on April 29, 2016, 07:44:45 am

Rob, truth is usually by pressing the button and letting Leica do the rest!

If I have any concerns then a half press of the shutter button gives me a preview of the exposure and histogram which is easily tweaked using the exposure compensation ring. The mere thought of going back to a hand held meter fills me with horror.

Simple things for simple minds: works for me!

I wondered - I was always under the impression that Leica didn't generally like to put meters inside.

That's the reason I always use Matrix, too: simple - and accurate - enough. It's just that I wondered if using a manual meter would make for greater consistency with repeat shots in the same rough position. This is especially worth noting with backlit shots, such as my recent ones with the girl at the well, in a black shirt. Her face illumination doesn't change, being backlit and front-lit only by available light, yet a tiny difference of camera angle to include a tad more sky alters the indicated reading, which may be okay for the sky, but not for the face.

Having said this, it's quite remarkable just how much detail exists within the surface of that black garment; I just didn't want to bring any more of it to the fore, but it is certainly available in shed loads. Not so with tranny in that situation.

Rob

Rob C · « **Reply #242 on:** April 29, 2016, 05:27:19 pm »

Rob C

BobDavid · « **Reply #243 on:** May 01, 2016, 01:17:21 am »

Defunct auto repair shop

Rob C · « **Reply #244 on:** May 01, 2016, 04:37:25 am »

There's a strong sense of personal style running through these pictures, BobDavid; it also sends a bittersweet message of how life pans out sometimes: great initial dreams; some luck, and then it all falls down. There's so much written into still images if we take the time to look. Come to think of it, part of the beauty is that existing images allow us to put our own emotions into the frames we come across now and again.

In fact, I sometimes suspect that as photographers, we are guilty - if not even more so than other people - of not seeing what's there on the page. I think it comes from being so tied in, so obsessed with what we are doing that we can become blind to other things outwith our personal shtick.

Rob

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #245 on:** May 01, 2016, 11:10:56 pm »

Went to a Tamron day at a local camera shop (hey, these things do still exist). They organized a lighting seminar and let us borrow Tamron lenses to shoot a model (Molly Gudmundson). I selected 70-200/2.8, and used it at 2.8 most of the time, as I wanted to see the difference with my 70-200/4 in terms of DOF and bokeh. Nice lens. I also tried earlier the new 85/1.8, an equally nice lens. Anyway, these are four shots I like, with different lighting setups.

Rob C · « **Reply #246 on:** May 03, 2016, 11:33:20 am »

Nothing to relate, just a fascination, in the passing, with colour and shine.

Rob

P.S.

I would swear (almost) that I saw this same colour on a Lincoln Capri back in '52. Did metallics exist back then?

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #247 on:** May 15, 2016, 04:14:35 pm »

Nice one, Keith. Just don't tell me you photoshopped the lady in or changed the color of her dress

ErikKaffehr · « **Reply #248 on:** May 16, 2016, 01:02:35 pm »

Hi Keith,

You images show that you have an artist's view on things. I like many of your images.

Personally, I am no artist. Perhaps I amy be an artisan or just an engineer taking some pictures…

Best regards
Erik

Quote from: KLaban on May 15, 2016, 01:40:53 pm

Into the Light. Morocco. Leica M240, 21mm Super-Elmar ASPH.

ErikKaffehr · « **Reply #249 on:** May 16, 2016, 01:09:30 pm »

Hi,

This one is quite recent:

Best regards
Erik

Rob C · « **Reply #250 on:** June 04, 2016, 10:02:59 am »

Starry Night...

Welcome home; I hope it was as enjoyable as the previous trip!

;-)

Rob C

pearlstreet · « **Reply #251 on:** June 17, 2016, 10:17:05 am »

Quote from: KLaban on June 04, 2016, 06:40:46 am

From a shoot last week in Murano. Stormy Skies. Leica M9-P, 35mm Summilux ASPH.

Oh I love this!!!

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #252 on:** June 17, 2016, 04:43:10 pm »

Me too!

Keith, yours are the best water reflection scenes I've seen. Do some more, please!

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #253 on:** June 23, 2016, 05:11:00 pm »

More treasures, Keith.
I guess I've got to get to Venice soon. I hope you marked big Xs everywhere that you photographed, so I'll know where to go to imitate.

ErikKaffehr · « **Reply #254 on:** July 18, 2016, 01:48:13 pm »

Nice images! Congratulations!

Erik

Quote from: KLaban on June 23, 2016, 01:34:23 pm

Leica M240, 90mm Summarit-M.

pearlstreet · « **Reply #255 on:** September 04, 2016, 10:51:24 pm »

Recently sent time waiting while a family member had surgery. These photos were all taken with my iPhone. Sharon

Rob C · « **Reply #256 on:** September 21, 2016, 04:03:16 am »

Sharon,

Now you know why medicine costs so much!

Here's somebody who took too much of it - either in front of, or behind the lens.

Rob C

pearlstreet · « **Reply #257 on:** September 22, 2016, 11:04:19 am »

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #258 on:** September 22, 2016, 01:34:28 pm »

Quote from: Sharon VL on September 22, 2016, 11:04:19 am

:-)

+1.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #259 on:** September 29, 2016, 01:31:02 pm »

I like that, Keith. The chair and room have great personality.

Author Topic: Recent Format Agnostic Personal Works (Read 214260 times)

pearlstreet

pearlstreet

pearlstreet