edwardkaraa Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41341 Posted October 18, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) 500C/M 80 Planar Fuji RVP Epson 4870 Gary Lovely action shot, Gary! Who said you can't shoot action with medium format? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 Hi edwardkaraa, Take a look here I like film...(open thread). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
edwardkaraa Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41342 Posted October 18, 2017 I feel I need to say how disappointed I am at the rudeness of a comment directed towards Henry a couple of pages back, and of the rather sheepish +1 and +2 of a couple of members whom I otherwise greatly respect here. Henry's response indicated that he found the initial comment hurtful, and I wonder why anyone would set out to do that. We all, I'm sure, know Henry's thoughts on matters of film and digital, and I'd thought that we all accepted it as part of the rich pageant that is obviously the man, and that is just another quirky part of this thread. A very rare internet thread, I'd add, in that everyone here seems - or is that seemed? - to get on well and be supportive of each other no matter what our individual differences or opinions. To me, and I think to the majority of us here, Henry is first and foremost a gentleman of the highest caliber, and he is immensely passionate about his love of film - it is why he started this thread in the first place. He's never hidden his views, and I think that we've accepted his stance in good grace. He is also the most supportive member of any forum I think I've read - always a positive, uplifting comment about pretty much every photograph posted here. His is a messianic passion for film, and that does not hurt anyone here - in fact I, and I think others, find it quite charming, and part of the charm of this immense thread. If you happen to find his comments about digital "a yawn", perhaps you could be so polite as to let him know in terms that are not so offensive. Or alternatively you could just bugger off. I hope that apologies to Henry will be forthcoming. Well said, Phil. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41343 Posted October 18, 2017 Azzura shot with HB503 180mm Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 11 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41344 Posted October 18, 2017 rain drops Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 16 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41345 Posted October 18, 2017 love the fine details you can get with 8x10 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suede Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41346 Posted October 18, 2017 Bronica ETRSi 80mm Fuji RVP Epson 4870 Gary Gary, are these the botanic gardens in Hamilton? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suede Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41347 Posted October 18, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Fantastic, Neil. love the fine details you can get with 8x10Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suede Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41348 Posted October 18, 2017 I feel I need to say how disappointed I am at the rudeness of a comment directed towards Henry a couple of pages back, and of the rather sheepish +1 and +2 of a couple of members whom I otherwise greatly respect here. Henry's response indicated that he found the initial comment hurtful, and I wonder why anyone would set out to do that. We all, I'm sure, know Henry's thoughts on matters of film and digital, and I'd thought that we all accepted it as part of the rich pageant that is obviously the man, and that is just another quirky part of this thread. A very rare internet thread, I'd add, in that everyone here seems - or is that seemed? - to get on well and be supportive of each other no matter what our individual differences or opinions. To me, and I think to the majority of us here, Henry is first and foremost a gentleman of the highest caliber, and he is immensely passionate about his love of film - it is why he started this thread in the first place. He's never hidden his views, and I think that we've accepted his stance in good grace. He is also the most supportive member of any forum I think I've read - always a positive, uplifting comment about pretty much every photograph posted here. His is a messianic passion for film, and that does not hurt anyone here - in fact I, and I think others, find it quite charming, and part of the charm of this immense thread. If you happen to find his comments about digital "a yawn", perhaps you could be so polite as to let him know in terms that are not so offensive. Or alternatively you could just bugger off. I hope that apologies to Henry will be forthcoming. I appreciate your thoughts, well articulated and succinctly put. I hope this unfortunate kerfuffle sorts out, good sense prevails, good humour and bonhomie restored. Play for the team, guys... My good wishes to all. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshtog Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41349 Posted October 18, 2017 Here's a couple of shots from the recent Elvis Festival here in South Wales. Leica M4-2 Super Angulon 21mm f3.4, Ilford XP2 18 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbealnz Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41350 Posted October 18, 2017 Gary, are these the botanic gardens in Hamilton? No Suede, Wairakei International Golf Course, near Taupo. Gary 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbealnz Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41351 Posted October 18, 2017 (edited) I feel I need to say how disappointed I am at the rudeness of a comment directed towards Henry a couple of pages back, and of the rather sheepish +1 and +2 of a couple of members whom I otherwise greatly respect here. Henry's response indicated that he found the initial comment hurtful, and I wonder why anyone would set out to do that. We all, I'm sure, know Henry's thoughts on matters of film and digital, and I'd thought that we all accepted it as part of the rich pageant that is obviously the man, and that is just another quirky part of this thread. A very rare internet thread, I'd add, in that everyone here seems - or is that seemed? - to get on well and be supportive of each other no matter what our individual differences or opinions. To me, and I think to the majority of us here, Henry is first and foremost a gentleman of the highest caliber, and he is immensely passionate about his love of film - it is why he started this thread in the first place. He's never hidden his views, and I think that we've accepted his stance in good grace. He is also the most supportive member of any forum I think I've read - always a positive, uplifting comment about pretty much every photograph posted here. His is a messianic passion for film, and that does not hurt anyone here - in fact I, and I think others, find it quite charming, and part of the charm of this immense thread. If you happen to find his comments about digital "a yawn", perhaps you could be so polite as to let him know in terms that are not so offensive. Or alternatively you could just bugger off. I hope that apologies to Henry will be forthcoming. Agreed Phil. I think most that are honest will agree, his passion is infectious, just look at the way the thread races along when he's here, and dawdle when he's absent. I consider myself fortunate to have become involved in the thread, and even more to have witnessed first hand personally the infectious nature of Henry. He truly is a one of a kind. If his only failing is that he constantly gushes forth his views on digital then I for one can accept and live with that. At worst mention it privately to him, rather than how it came out here a page or two ago. Let's all get back to doing what we enjoy, shooting film and or digital if that is what you enjoy. I shoot both, but post my digital in the appropriate threads, X-Vario or T. Gary. Edited October 18, 2017 by gbealnz 9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41352 Posted October 18, 2017 I feel I need to say how disappointed I am at the rudeness of a comment directed towards Henry a couple of pages back, and of the rather sheepish +1 and +2 of a couple of members whom I otherwise greatly respect here... ... If you happen to find his comments about digital "a yawn", perhaps you could be so polite as to let him know in terms that are not so offensive. Or alternatively you could just bugger off. I hope that apologies to Henry will be forthcoming. (quote edited only for brevity) I have to agree with straycat. I come to this thread mostly for the pleasure and relaxation of looking through a lot of very beautiful images, and I take Henry's commentary as an integral and very positive part of the dialog. He has his views about film and digital, and while I still use my digital cameras, I can absolutely endorse what he says, and his right to express it in this thread (which he started, after all). The net is full of the contrary opinion - often stated as though it's an accepted truth - for instance, that digital color "long ago surpassed film color" or that the "quality" of a digital image is much "higher" than a film image. These sorts of opinions on blogs, articles, forum posts are simply commonplace. If someone can't take a few well-meaning comments that balance those generally accepted views, from an extremely active and encouraging poster like Henry, then maybe this thread isn't for them. Just wish my snapshots were worthy of being shown side-by-side with some of the very talented photographers we're privileged to see here - then my participation would be more than just passive viewing. In the meantime, I look forward to seeing more, and continuing to read Henry's perfectly acceptable and humbly expressed opinions. 10 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_may_ Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41353 Posted October 18, 2017 Final photos from Scotland for now, this time from Jura. M6, FP4+ Mono_R7 (8).jpg by Greg.May, on Flickr Mono_R7 (15).jpg by Greg.May, on Flickr Mono_R7 (19).jpg by Greg.May, on Flickr Mono_R7 (16).jpg by Greg.May, on Flickr Mono_R7.jpg by Greg.May, on Flickr FWIW, I don't care what medium people use, just make interesting images. 14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41354 Posted October 18, 2017 Another soulful scene from the Western Wall (Kotel) in Jerusalem (in the full res the words in the prayer book are very clear and are from Psalm 94, which happens to be the daily Psalm that we read every Wednesday as part of our morning prayers ) Cinestill 800T (120 format) Hassy 503cw, 80mm Planar Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3377715'>More sharing options...
AntonioF Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41355 Posted October 18, 2017 Another soulful scene from the Western Wall (Kotel) in Jerusalem (in the full res the words in the prayer book are very clear and are from Psalm 94, which happens to be the daily Psalm that we read every Wednesday as part of our morning prayers ) Cinestill 800T (120 format) Hassy 503cw, 80mm Planar I like the colors of Cinestill in these frames. Do you meter for 800 or 500 like some suggest for the daylight? thanks 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemgb Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41356 Posted October 18, 2017 Just wish my snapshots were worthy of being shown side-by-side with some of the very talented photographers we're privileged to see here - then my participation would be more than just passive viewing. In the meantime, I look forward to seeing more, and continuing to read Henry's perfectly acceptable and humbly expressed opinions. Snapshots are often wonderful, post them. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41357 Posted October 18, 2017 I like the colors of Cinestill in these frames. Do you meter for 800 or 500 like some suggest for the daylight? thanks Thanks, Antonio. I think all i had was my spot meter and i am pretty sure that i set the meter to 500 iso and metered on the bright part of the wall and then opened up 2 stops to get that bright part on zone 7. This brought the dark areas no darker than zone 4 (perhaps 3 in the very darkest areas), which is key bc i find that the shadows crush very easily with this film at night and at night the film really benefits from a lot of light. I dont think I have ever overexposed this film at night. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41358 Posted October 18, 2017 Thanks, Antonio. I think all i had was my spot meter and i am pretty sure that i set the meter to 500 iso and metered on the bright part of the wall and then opened up 2 stops to get that bright part on zone 7. This brought the dark areas no darker than zone 4 (perhaps 3 in the very darkest areas), which is key bc i find that the shadows crush very easily with this film at night and at night the film really benefits from a lot of light. I dont think I have ever overexposed this film at night. It's interesting that we have different experiences with this film. I find it produces a lot of color shifts when overexposed. I like to shoot it slightly under actually. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrism Posted October 18, 2017 Popular Post Share #41359 Posted October 18, 2017 Oh dear. Why do Leica forums have to show that they deserve the reputation they have for bitchiness? It's not just the sniping of the unconvinced non-owners against those they perceive as wealthy poseurs, but Leica owners seem to be at the throats of other Leica owners. I'm quite willing to admit that the amateurish film photographs I show here are, in a sense digital photographs, and that my scanners are actually digital cameras - of course they are. I can't see any doctrinal difference between a negative scanned with a Flextight, or re-photographed with a Nikon D810. There may be technical differences in the output, but it's not a matter for shunning or burning at the stake. I do maintain that there is a difference between those images that have the film step before digitisation and those that are recorded initially by digital means. Sometimes that's due to the imperfections of film, and sometimes it's due to factors where film still outperforms digital, but mostly it's due to the altered mindset we are all familiar with when we use film. I doubt that either Henry or Reeray would find those statements objectionable, and it ought to provide the common ground upon which we manage to rub along together. We ought not to forget that we are in a rather special position in this thread on the l-camera-forums since a cheeky member begged Andreas to allow us special permission to be able to post film photographs from any camera, rather than only Leicas, and I think this has helped the thread thrive as we celebrate film rather than a single camera brand. Let's not risk that very special thing, and while this is an open thread we all know it is Henry's passion (and no doubt a good deal of time and effort on his part) that keeps it so active and so inspiring to all of us. The ability to disagree in a civil fashion, and keep on talking to each other and thus keep on learning from each other ought to be a universal quality among adults. A quick and painless word of apology can save the day. I have never met, in person, any of the participants of this thread, and yet in some strange way I feel I know a good deal about many of you from your photographs alone. That's quite a peculiar thing to be able to say, and perhaps could inform a debate between existentialists and essentialists. One thing it means to me is that I would be diminished if I were to lose any of you. Shall we rise above these current difficulties and continue to show everyone that film still has an honourable place in the world? 20 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted October 18, 2017 Share #41360 Posted October 18, 2017 I like the cool color rendering in this shot, Adam! Is it due to different light/time of the day or film characteristics? Many thanks, Edward! I think it may be a little of both. The Velvia 100 has a different signature relative to the Velvia 50. Sometimes i like it, other times not so much. In my experience it doesnt have a consistent WB rendition and very much depends on the nature of the light. In this case, the light was from the very early morning and was selective in its appearance. The film naturally tended toward a cool WB in the dark parts, although thankfully not in a distortive way. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.