Pages: 1 ... 110 111 [112] 113 114 ... 137   Go Down

Author Topic: Without Prejudice 2  (Read 720175 times)

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3313
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2220 on: December 10, 2016, 04:28:04 pm »

I still use enlarger lenses. They work great with the Actus view camera.  The EL-Nikkor 105 f/5.6 is a bargain. It's razor sharp, contrasty and is virtually free of CA and linear distortion. I have a Rodenstock Rodagon APO 80 f/4 N, which is comparable to an 80mm Digitar. My favorite is the Rodenstock Rodagon WA 60. I think that is about the sharpest lens I've ever used.

I use the Actus both with the Olympus E-M5 II and a Sony A7r.  I purchased all but the 60mm on eBay. They are in mint conditions and were a steal.
Logged

muntanela

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 687
    • BRATA
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2221 on: December 13, 2016, 11:36:55 am »

I have this exuvia  (Vipera berus, I think) in a drawer of my nightstand.  I found it in Western Grosina Valley last summer.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2222 on: December 13, 2016, 02:14:37 pm »

I have this exuvia  (Vipera berus, I think) in a drawer of my nightstand.  I found it in Western Grosina Valley last summer.

The second one is very clever; gives me an idea for my old Ms Coke series! Now, if I could only locate a `Psycho' house!

In my nightstand, other than pills and socks, I would like a 9mm Beretta with a couple of full clips. I wish nobody harm, but feel totally helpless to defend myself should harm come calling some night - or even day - as I spend my time innocently at home. A snake? Not on your life: it would be as likely to kill me as anybody else I tried to point it towards, especially after being kept in a drawer for any length of time.

Rob
« Last Edit: December 13, 2016, 04:02:36 pm by Rob C »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2223 on: December 13, 2016, 05:27:30 pm »



Light-reading. And not a Weston in sight. For no certain reason I suddenly wish I had a Pontiac '73.

Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2224 on: December 16, 2016, 03:33:57 pm »



Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2225 on: December 18, 2016, 05:26:07 am »

Sunday mornings on those rare winter Sunday mornings I can face. Oh winter light-starvation! I hate getting up in the gloom and finding it already bleak at five in the afternoon. But hey, I remember that at three in the afternoon in Glasgow. So, small mercies, I guess.



Rob

Chairman Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3352
    • flickr page
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2226 on: December 18, 2016, 12:01:55 pm »

.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2227 on: December 18, 2016, 01:25:13 pm »

.
A scene from a certain Hitchcock movie?   ;)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2228 on: December 19, 2016, 04:28:39 am »

I liked her confident stance...



Rob

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9264
    • site
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2229 on: December 19, 2016, 03:20:42 pm »

A scene from a certain Hitchcock movie?   ;)

Or from two of them together?

Jeremy
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2230 on: December 20, 2016, 04:05:02 am »

Thing about being outsided and in the street, there's always a vestige of hope!



Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2231 on: December 25, 2016, 04:40:06 am »

You can't hear the rain, though.



Rob

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2232 on: December 26, 2016, 10:57:51 am »

1980s Kodachrome. Nikon.



Rob

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2233 on: December 26, 2016, 04:30:42 pm »

Kodachrome…lovely! I bet just about anyone photographing that scene today would want to open up the bottom half. IMO limited dynamic range has its pluses.

-Dave-
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22813
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2234 on: December 26, 2016, 08:07:22 pm »

Ah, Kodachrome!

Several years ago I borrowed a Nikon slide scanner and scanned a selection, maybe a couple of hundered, out of my collection of a few thousand slides. My aim then was to get digital versions that looked as much like the original Kodachromes as possible.

Just recently I took some of those scans and played with them in LightRoom to see if I could bring out more detail, and I was astonished how much I could pull out from some seemingly impossible-looking slides. But I suspect Rob will find that my reworked scans look too "digital."   ;)

Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2235 on: December 27, 2016, 03:41:10 am »

Thanks, Dave; yes, there is a temptation to do that (open shadows), but there are also times when doing so adds little but a flattening of the idea, the impression.

I seldom did early 'morning glory' photography - the only other time I can remember in any detail was once in Cannes, if only because it was the only way we could get an emptyish beach to ourselves, life there starting way too early with beach-cleaners, trucks hosing down the roads etc. et-spensive-cetera.

The Formentor shot was indeed very early, and my son was with me, no doubt bitterly but silently regretting having agreed, the day before, to get up and go with me. The camera location is just up from a car park at a pretty high and precipitous sea-cliff - which most of that northern Mallorcan coast is - and that early it's quite spooky, with lots of gulls swooping and crying in the sky around one. I wonder what they all lament; perhaps they were once human. It is easy to believe anything up there.

Eric, I started my website with nothing but scans, and without Kodachromes there wouldn't have been one, most likely. But scanning is a pain, of that there's no doubt. I often think it would have been wonderful if the transition to digital had been as simple as changing the back on a 500 Hassy, for not much more money than a film back, and simply carrying on shooting on 6x6 format, but to a sensor, instead. Perhaps that would have been the ideal way: no slow, expensive and painful trawl through umpteen small incremental steps, but a straight swap into instant forty or fifty megapixies of back. Impatience is the problem, the entrepreneurial desire to get rich immediately. The product should have been fully developed and only then announced to the world. However, had Kodak realised where it was going to lead, perhaps it would never have been born.

Rob

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2236 on: December 27, 2016, 04:54:50 pm »

Almost all the "vintage" photos I've posted here over the past few years, like the one of my Aunt Anna & me, are re-photographed Kodachromes. I used an Olympus E-M5 with macro lens, a lightbox and a stable platform for the camera made of stacked Heliopan lens hoods. Some of my favorites have been underexposures that my dad kept even though he never showed them to anyone.

I've attached an outtake from my folks' wedding in June 1958. It's well underexposed, at least two stops, but with extra re-exposure via the E-M5 is actually quite okay. It would've been taken by dad's friend Ben (a pro journo-snapper), likely just reacting to the moment without time to adjust settings. It's also one of my favorite photos of my mom.

-Dave-
Logged

muntanela

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 687
    • BRATA
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2237 on: December 28, 2016, 09:59:45 am »

These shots and talks are the reason why I keep coming back to LULA.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25166
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2238 on: December 28, 2016, 02:49:58 pm »

No microwave ovens, but probably something else.



Rob C

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1813
    • Some of my photos
Re: Without Prejudice 2
« Reply #2239 on: January 03, 2017, 12:00:26 pm »

Busted.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 110 111 [112] 113 114 ... 137   Go Up