- This topic is empty.
Nails
-
Getting ready for the Trinity Ball-
Scanned from Kodak 160 NC 8×10,
Taken with an 11″ f/3.3 Voigtlander Petzval from 1862.Light from window, with a reflector, late in the evening, so using the very last light-
She was rushing too, we only had a couple of minutes to make a few exposures;
I haven’t developed the others yet-
Class JB. Lovely soft light, relaxed expression too considering the rush.
Quite amazing from a 148yo lens really.Some boots :)
Thanks Mark, oshead…
The lens has a definite signature, not all of it easy to work with-
It’s very sharp towards the centre, but not so much towards the edge.
It’s got massive field curvature too, helping the boots more than the face in this one, unfortunately-It only covers 5×7 at infinity, at this distance, the corners are being vignetted.
A little closer up, and they’d be gone-This is the other colour negative I made, not much to choose between them, they’re just different expressions-
I like them both equally, though I suppose I should have made a selection before posting-
alhough they’re processed a little differently, any preferences regarding the colour?Thanks for the comments, appreciated-
JB
I prefer the contrast from the first, but it seems a little purple, but that could be a profile thing on the web i guess
i actually prefer the expression in the first too, but i prefer the shapes created by perspective in the second. the legs look more in scale. if that makes sense
I think no.2 is a better photo. The boots look like Fionn mac Cumhaill’s in the first
shot because the perspective is all weird. The contrast between that impish
grin and the “don’t feck with me” footwear is very comic in the second picture. It’s
a clever composition too. I’d like to see her trying to get away with putting
her feet on the furniture in this house – Mrs Bloke would be severely unamused!i prefer the contrast of the 1st one as already said by stcstc, also i think the expression of her face on the first 1st one is more interesting.
Thanks Steve, Pete, Angelo-
I was pretty sure the perspective didn’t change, so I checked-
only difference is a slight change in head height, she dips her head when she smiles-There is a difference in colour, and processing though-
perhaps that’s giving an impression that something physical has changed?I like them both, she’s my favourite niece, and they’re both her, if that makes sense-
though I think I’d go for the second, if I had to make a choice-
that’s the one I printed for her…Pete, those boots are furniture…
Thanks again-
I looove these, esp. the 2nd one: Nice smile; lightly better focus perhaps, the boot looks cooler and the colours are a bit softer/warmer, too.
Re: oshead’s first comment: The look of this pic is aided by the skilful choice and use of the tools; – not achieved despite them :)Thanks!
You’re right, of course, the picture looks like this because of how it was taken-
Although the lens is near as dammit a 300mm 2.8, used at a distance of a couple of meters,
it produces a field of view (on this format) identical to a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera.I’ve done comparison tests-
and considering the debates you see about the difference between a f/1.4 and a f/1.2,
the results are, quite simply, of a different order-Thanks for the comments, appreciated, glad you like it-
Both images are excellent. They have a timeless look about them. I like the second one better, probably because of her expression. There’s more of a connection with you and it looks a bit more spontaneous. The contrast and colour in the first is slightly more appealing.
The Fine Print wrote:
The look of this pic is aided by the skilful choice and use of the tools; – not achieved despite them :)
How could you construe what I said as meaning that? :| …. :)
oshead wrote:
There’s more of a connection with you and it looks a bit more spontaneous.
Thanks David-
Using this camera, you remove the dark slide, and step away to make the picture-
the connection is through the lens, and to the film-There’s still room for spontaneity, though perhaps not a lot of movement-
I’d agree, the second is more attractive, though the first might be the better picture-
as it’s a colour negative, the final colour is controlled by the processing-
Still have the b/w to develop, though they won’t be much different to these, I expect-Thanks again for the comments-
Hi Joseph,
Sorry about the tardy reply.
Been a bit hectic round my place lately what with trying to
keep a business afloat and a dust assisted off/on trip to
Paris.I like these pictures.
I’d say you are awfully relieved to hear that.I prefer the second one for that grin and maybe the
colour too.The detail re the equipment used is very interesting.
Sometimes I think I know very little about this stuff.
But I like the results.Cheers.
John.Thanks John, that is a relief-
You have been busy, can see by your posts-
However, this just turned into a trilemma-
I processed the BW, and it’s technically the best-
less movement on the face-
plus, I’ll be able to make a proper print…So it’s not an either/or, more like, in addition-
ok, this is it, no more-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
