


No post production involved. Vignette achieved by putting a 135mm lens hood on a 28mm lens.
WaterModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
14 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Hi Mate. Firstly welcome to the forum.
The images are different I'll give you that. You've got a nice silky water effect in all of them, and I think the vignette suits that shot. I have to ask though, the colours look very yellow. Look forward to seeing some more. Cheers, Owen.
Thanks. ![]()
The silky effect was what I was aiming for. I took the shots with exposure times of 1-2 seconds. I experimented with the vignette a couple of times (more to come). Yes, the colours are very yellow in a few of the shots. That's a result of using Kodak Royal 25 ASA (a noble film which is sadly no longer made), and partly due to the long exposure time. I was happy burning out the background for the sake of the water in the foreground.
I should stitch these together: ![]() ![]() ![]()
Good to see you over here Fortigurn, welcome!
![]()
Thanks guys. I actually wanted the yellow look, because it captured the slightly gold glow in the scene as the afternoon light started to fade (it was a winter afternoon, between 3 and 4pm).
Now for the details:
This was my first camera, a fully manual Pentax Spotmatic with only a very basic inbuilt light meter to guide me. I worked out all the shots by taking a good look at the scene and calculating the f-stops and speeds with a piece of paper (ignoring the light meter). I still have this camera. It's about 30 years old now, and was maybe 20 years old when I took these. Last edited by Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
That first one I really do like myself. I did enjoy burning out the background in the other shots, just for the sake of the silky water in the foreground (this was while I was following Peter Dombrovskis' photography, and experimenting with water shots), but I wanted that shot to be evenly saturated, and I really love how it turned out. Last edited by Fortigurn on Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
not sure if it's the monitor i'm looking at but the shots look really moody, the first one is my fav but the last one has better silky smooth water.
well done
Do you mean moody as in dark? It could be the monitor, or the scanning job I did on them (they were scanned a few years ago, and I didn't really scan them at a high enough resolution, nor did I save them at a high enough resolution - I had a lot to learn back then). Thanks for the encouragement.
When I first looked I thought, that looks really filmy. Then I started looking for traces of digital manip into film, and read that you used kodack. I gotta say, I really like the film look. Almost polaroidish? Anyway the saturated look works for me because of the fact that you used film. It looks authentic.
For me, who just came in during the digital age, that's might impressive!! Nikon D7000
Thanks. After about 12 years of photography, I still haven't moved over to digital. I love film, and I have six film cameras (the oldest being a 60 odd year old Yashica medium format). I can usually distinguish between digital and film images (anything up to 5MP is pretty easy, but past 6MP with professional cameras it does get more challenging), and prefer film. Having said which, I do intend to move to digital this year (Nikon D50). I really wish Kodak hadn't discontinued Royal Gold. It was a stunning film. I have yet to find a replacement.
Thanks. I have to say I was moved by all the digital shots on this forum to post a few Old Skool shots, just to remind people what film can do, and how good some of the earlier equipment really was. I spent about 8 years working with fully manual equipment like this before I even had my first automatic camera. I believe that did me a lot of good.
Previous topic • Next topic
14 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|