Recent Works

[Hoang]

What a difference. If you hadn't told me I would have thought they were two shots of the same location.  

I was hoping that you had found that magic inexpensive 12mm non-distorting lens  

Still wonder what the original post would look like not so high key, but I like the shot.

Haha, Yeah.. Maybe one day there will be a magic 12mm non-distorting lens but for now, PTLens helps a lot!
Thank you, Mark.

Taken on the 5D with the Helios 44-2. A fun lens with some crazy bokeh!

I really like the third shot, maxima302. The bokeh is really surreal. How it's distorted and sort of curving around the middle of the image. I like the old film-look processing too.

Here's a photo I took while exploring some hills in Irvine. It's sadly not a pano but a cropped shot. I don't think I could have done a pano without the clouds moving, since I had to have a 25 second exposure.



canon 20d . tokina 12-24 f/4 . 24mm
iso 100 . f/11.0 . 25.0s

[jklotz]

shot of Charles deGaul airport, where I spent far too much time waiting on a flight. 5D, 24 - 105 4.0L, 100iso

[Mark F]

Nice, I like the "mirrored" look. Hand held?

shot of Charles deGaul airport, where I spent far too much time waiting on a flight. 5D, 24 - 105 4.0L, 100iso

[jklotz]

Nice, I like the "mirrored" look. Hand held?

Yea, hand held. As an architectural photographer, I could have a field day in that airport. Some really cool angles there.

[dwdallam]

Pier Lights. ISO 100 @ 66 seconds.

[Alexandre Buisse]

Scotland, seen from the way up Ben Nevis (the highest mountain of the UK), last spring :

[dwdallam]

Scotland, seen from the way up Ben Nevis (the highest mountain of the UK), last spring :

Really nice. The work on your site is great too.

[dwdallam]

Trees

[elitegroup]

Hannah@Chadwicks

Canon 1Ds MK II, 70-200mm f/2.8L USM ISO 100, f/8 @1/160th

[wilburdl]

Hannah@Chadwicks

Canon 1Ds MK II, 70-200mm f/2.8L USM ISO 100, f/8 @1/160th

Very good.

[dwdallam]

Hannah@Chadwicks

Canon 1Ds MK II, 70-200mm f/2.8L USM ISO 100, f/8 @1/160th

David nice shots. I see two lights in the first model's eyes, one large and one smaller. Although this is definitely frontal lighting, I'm wondering what the secondary smaller light is to the left, or right as you sit on the model's side. I assume you wanted a little modeling on the other side of the face to offset the frontal lighting?

[Ray]

Scotland, seen from the way up Ben Nevis (the highest mountain of the UK), last spring :

 

[dwdallam]

Evocative and powerful shot. My father was from Scotland. The weather there is lousy and I've never had the opportunity to climb Ben Nevis.

One small point; the shadows seem too black. You have a lot of zero values in them thar shadows. I think just a hint more detail would be appropriate.  

That's a really good call. I was thinking "something" wasn't right with this image, although it is quite good, and you nailed it.

[Alexandre Buisse]

Thanks to both of you, I appreciate it.

@Ray: I actually didn't get to the top of Ben Nevis, unfortunately (a combination of bad weather forecast, lots of snow and too few other people on the mountain in case something went wrong), but the views on the way up are worth the hike anyway.
As for black shadows, I take it you are referring to the lower right corner and not to small rock shadows? The trouble with trying to pull this area is that there isn't a lot of detail in it in the first place, and as soon as there is no (0,0,0) pixel in it anymore, it feels quite wrong and the whole image lacks in contrast. But I'll give it another try, I think this image is worth spending time on.

[Ray]

As for black shadows, I take it you are referring to the lower right corner and not to small rock shadows?

I'm referring to a diagonal band across the whole image, from about 1/3rd up on the left, to the bottom right corner. It seems unnaturally dark on my monitor, as though one were looking into a bottomless abyss. However, if that's the effect you want, then who am I to criticise   .

[Alexandre Buisse]

I'm referring to a diagonal band across the whole image, from about 1/3rd up on the left, to the bottom right corner. It seems unnaturally dark on my monitor, as though one were looking into a bottomless abyss. However, if that's the effect you want, then who am I to criticise   .

Your critic is very welcome, don't worry

On my (uncalibrated laptop) screen, I see details in this band up until the bottom 15% or so where it turns to bottomless black. But as I said, I'll see about trying to pull some more details from the abyss.

[elitegroup]

Very good.

Thanks Wilbur  

David nice shots. I see two lights in the first model's eyes, one large and one smaller. Although this is definitely frontal lighting, I'm wondering what the secondary smaller light is to the left, or right as you sit on the model's side. I assume you wanted a little modeling on the other side of the face to offset the frontal lighting?

Doug You are correct, a smaller secondary head at 1 stop under the Key for subtle modeling and catchlight effect  

key @ f/8
 fill  @ f/5.6  

P.S.

Dear Santa,

I have been very good all year and would humbly appreciate a Hasselblad H2, HC 35mm, HC 100mm, HC 210mm, HC 50-110mm, Leaf Aptus-II 7 Digital Module and a Leica S2 as a back up body. In return I promise to use these tools to defend the cause of the weak and the helpless.
 

[Ray]

Your critic is very welcome, don't worry

On my (uncalibrated laptop) screen, I see details in this band up until the bottom 15% or so where it turns to bottomless black. But as I said, I'll see about trying to pull some more details from the abyss.

You are absolutely right. There is detail there, except for the bottom right corner. I was persuaded to save your image and open in photoshop. Moving the middle slider in 'levels' to the extreme left, produced the following result. My monitor calibration works fine with my printer, so I guess it's your laptop that is giving a false impression   .

[attachment=10453:Ben_Nevis.jpg]

[ecemfjm]

Web is ubiquous. This is an oak web.

[attachment=10458:oak_web.jpg]

Taken last week with my old but nice KM Dimage A1.

Manuel

[maxima302]

I just did some reading on that lens and I really like it. What an interesting lens with interesting history, comrade. I guess these are some super cheap lenses? If so, I'd love to have one for my 1DS3, which I suppose needs a converter ring, since the 44-2 is a 58mm lens, correct? Any more information on those is appreciated. I saw where one was made with the option of manual or auto aperture. So which one do I want? This guy has a entire portfolio with the 44-2:
http://www.trekearth.com/photos.php?cat=lens&id=5434

Thanks for posting that. I like the images too. That lens has a look all its own.

Yes, a very interesting and cheap lens. Because of stop down metering with an adaptor, this lens is really only a good tool for wide open shots, where you enjoy the swirly bokeh...although stopped down it can be pretty sharp. Some hate the bokeh, very destracting, I particularly enjoy it. There were many variations of the Helios 44 (I think there are 4), mine is an older one with the manul aperature. From my understanding, all 44s will produce this type of bokeh though. They are also very cheap. I paid $12.00 for one, and $16.00 for shipping from Moscow. The worst part about these lenses is that you have to wait 2 weeks for them to arrive from Moscow

PS- The lens is M42 mount, which simply requires an adaptor with no clearance issues and infinity focus. Some of the 44s are different mounts though, so for mounting ease, stick to the M42 mount ones.