Jump to content

I like film...(open thread)


Doc Henry

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Adam, congratulations on your experiments with something new. I think the scan is rather nice - certainly for a first-up effort it is highly commendable. As has been said, and you well know yourself, it is just a matter of persevering. What, if of value, isn't, after all? You certainly have the chops to make it work and work beautifully. I have used both cameras - rented - back in the day and did prefer the Linhof in use, but I'd be hard pressed to tell which camera made which photograph now. If you can, get one, and try all sorts of compositions - even if at first they feel wrong. You don't have to get up at 4am during this familiarization period, and you don't even have to scan the results - those trannies are well big enough to evaluate on a light box. Once you "get" the idiosyncracies of that camera I suspect we're all in for a massive treat. Oh and it would be absolutely sensational if you got one in time to take to to Israel this year if you go. No pressure! :rolleyes:B)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam, congratulations on your experiments with something new. I think the scan is rather nice - certainly for a first-up effort it is highly commendable. As has been said, and you well know yourself, it is just a matter of persevering. What, if of value, isn't, after all? You certainly have the chops to make it work and work beautifully. I have used both cameras - rented - back in the day and did prefer the Linhof in use, but I'd be hard pressed to tell which camera made which photograph now. If you can, get one, and try all sorts of compositions - even if at first they feel wrong. You don't have to get up at 4am during this familiarization period, and you don't even have to scan the results - those trannies are well big enough to evaluate on a light box. Once you "get" the idiosyncracies of that camera I suspect we're all in for a massive treat. Oh and it would be absolutely sensational if you got one in time to take to to Israel this year if you go. No pressure! :rolleyes:B)

 

Thanks for the encouragement, Phil.  I was indeed hoping to grab a good copy of a 6x17 for my trip.  But the inventory is very low out there and we leave this Wednesday!! :)  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not such a problem Adam - cut out a bit of cardboard in the equivalent dimensions and carry it with you wherever you go. Hold it up in front of your eyes from time to time as you intuit a scene that might work and repeat. It's one way of getting a feel for the format. And bon voyage! Look forward to seeing the results of this year's trip!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not such a problem Adam - cut out a bit of cardboard in the equivalent dimensions and carry it with you wherever you go. Hold it up in front of your eyes from time to time as you intuit a scene that might work and repeat. It's one way of getting a feel for the format. And bon voyage! Look forward to seeing the results of this year's trip!

 

Thanks for the tip.  I will be scouting out some pano compositions for sure, but also having fun with my Hassys :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of printing large, today I spent a few hours hanging up some pieces at the "athleisure" powerhouse Lululemon in NYC.  This photo, which was shared here first very early this past winter (if you recall I also shared a Tri-X and HP5 version each pushed one stop, but they liked the colors the best :) ), is 48"x48" and printed on aluminum using a dye-sublimation process.  It is about the same price point as a fuji flex print mounted on plexiglass, only it is considerably lighter and completely water/weather-proof.

 

I shot that with my SWC and Ektar, which as a 6x6 printed this big with absolutely no problem.

 

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!

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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!

 

Agfa Ambi-Silette, 35/4 Color Ambion, Ektar

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

 

Agfa Ambi-Silette, Color Ambion 35/4, Ektar

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris - So are you suggesting that I first pay $18 to have a lower res scan made.  Then I spend my day and night editing it.  Then realize that it is a keeper and schlep back to the third party scanning service with my negative and pay another $18 for another scan and then repeat all the editing?  Is this supposed to save me time, expense, hassle?  

 

Perhaps you are suggesting that I have two scans made from the outset, one full and one lower.  Even that has many questions marks in my mind.

 

I am firmly in the school of thought that for those negs that I decide to scan, I go as large as possible so that any keepers that emerge are ready to rock and roll into prime time. :)

 

Nope, and nor can I understand how you might choose to interpret my reply that way.

 

I'm saying a large negative can be scanned with very satisfying results without going to such enormous file sizes. I scan 4x5" negatives routinely with a Flextight and I won't accept anything over 500MB. The same applies to 10x8" negatives scanned on the V850; my limit is 500MB. Who is ever going to see the difference? I don't know your circumstances - it might be that you have lots of storage space, or only a few scans to store (I doubt the latter). But it is not mandatory to let a 6x17cm scan be that large. I don't use that format, but I do use formats with larger areas and I can scan them satisfactorily using less space. Obviously you can do what you want when it comes to your scans, and I wish you well with them. But please don't accuse me of asking you to buy an $18 low res scan, nor of asking you to spend a day and a night editing it (we won't discuss post-processing excess here), nor even then going back for another $18 scan at higher resolution and then repeating the editing at the presumed cost of another day and night.Those would be your choices and nothing to do with me. If you envisage a print half the size of a wall, I assume you will pay whatever the cost might be and I hope you can charge enough to still make some small profit.

It's likely obvious to all that you should do your own scans and eventually amortize the cost of a good scanner by owning it rather than purchasing scans on one belonging to a business. That's all up to you, and no doubt we all will respect your decisions. I still like the photo.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, and nor can I understand how you might choose to interpret my reply that way.

 

I'm saying a large negative can be scanned with very satisfying results without going to such enormous file sizes. I scan 4x5" negatives routinely with a Flextight and I won't accept anything over 500MB. The same applies to 10x8" negatives scanned on the V850; my limit is 500MB. Who is ever going to see the difference? I don't know your circumstances - it might be that you have lots of storage space, or only a few scans to store (I doubt the latter). But it is not mandatory to let a 6x17cm scan be that large. I don't use that format, but I do use formats with larger areas and I can scan them satisfactorily using less space. Obviously you can do what you want when it comes to your scans, and I wish you well with them. But please don't accuse me of asking you to buy an $18 low res scan, nor of asking you to spend a day and a night editing it (we won't discuss post-processing excess here), nor even then going back for another $18 scan at higher resolution and then repeating the editing at the presumed cost of another day and night.Those would be your choices and nothing to do with me. If you envisage a print half the size of a wall, I assume you will pay whatever the cost might be and I hope you can charge enough to still make some small profit.

It's likely obvious to all that you should do your own scans and eventually amortize the cost of a good scanner by owning it rather than purchasing scans on one belonging to a business. That's all up to you, and no doubt we all will respect your decisions. I still like the photo.

Well, I am responsible for my own interpretations!

 

In all my years of scanning, I don't think I've ever scanned at less than the absolute full resolution.   It's probably horribly wasteful, and perhaps it will be finally catching up to me with this larger format, but it is what it is.  I'll have to adapt.  If I start quibbling over the cost of storage space I might as well get out of the game.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much again, Wayne.  I really appreciate your feedback.  Yes, I most probably will be buying a 6x17 and if I buy the Linhof it will probably be on emotion and have to do with the joy that I having with my 60 year old Linhof Technika Press that my late Father used with so much joy.  They are truly masterpieces of workmanship and that holds a special place in my heart. :)

 

As for my photo, as I continue to view it at full resolution, it continues to grow on me.  I was drawn to the juxtaposition of the massiveness of the base of the Brooklyn Bridge on the right with the elegance of the sprawling  nature of the Manhattan Bridge on the left.  The foreground was a bonus and I honestly didn't know how prominent it would be given that I have never shot in this format before.  I personally don't think it takes a more prominent place than it should in the frame.

 

I will, due course, take a more conventional photo of the two bridges converging on one another, with the frame centered between the two and each starting from the far end and running into the middle of the frame.  That's a "bird in the hand" shot. My eyes were drawn to this less conventional perspective and I wanted to see how the lens and format would do in executing on my vision.  I think it did pretty well, and will make a large print to test out the theory further...

 

I have one more from my trial run that I am still trying to lasso to the ground given its size  :o

 

 

So, are you going to buy the camera? :)

 

 

It is loads of fun considering your photographs. The are so well done that a person cannot help but consider, in more detail, what is happening to his/her vision. I wonder if the draw to the foreground is not rooted in the maganitude of presence presented by the huge bridge pier on the right. it is like.....whatever hits it, e.g. your vision, ricochets back and to the left.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Love those two above, Edward - that feeling of a sultry tropical night really comes through very strongly. I can almost smell those fritters (yum!).

 

This picture is one that I hope further illustrates the (subjective) value of pictures taken with a mindset that there is sometimes a picture there when there isn't one:

 

p364758218-5.jpg

 

Once Was A Doorway, Moorabbin 2014

Mamiya 7ii (now departed), 65mm (ditto), Fuji Reala (ditto)

Oh, yes! "There is sometimes a picture there when there isn't one." Dialogue prompt if ever there was one. The door that isn't there that was there, instigating the photograph that is here from the photographer who was there!

 

The artful juxtaposition of the two-dimensional field of bricks against the three-dimensional perspective lines of the cement walkway raises an element of tension, conflict, in this easily dismissed moment. I want to come back to what I said in an earlier posting with some questions I have been asking myself and some fragments of notes.

 

Earlier, I wrote: “The question is whether a photograph can evoke emotion. Is the photograph a mirror or reflection, realistic or abstract? Is it allegorical, metaphoric, literal, or do we simply run out of adjectives?” Reconsidering, the question of whether or not the photograph can evoke emotion is perhaps not only naïve but too limiting. The slope I was sliding down was to illustrate the conflict between image and text.

 

Fragments and some of the questions come to mind: does the photograph enlist a measure of chance? What is the photographer’s perspective, perhaps, as opposed to point of view; is one on the surface and the other below the surface? See Erwin Panofsky’s “Perspective as Symbolic Form.” Also, Damisch, Hubert (1994). “The Origin of Perspective.” What does the photograph instigate? What does the photographer instigate? Does the photograph prompt imagination?

Invite dialogue? In other words, what does the photograph say; to what does it speak?

 

To your point about amateur photographs, Barthes separates photographs into those that simply document (studium) and are generally disaffective in contrast to those that are affective (punctum). Just his way of thinking about it as a non-photographer.

 

Something of interest, though, is the photographer engaged in unmasking, laying bare, some unapparent agenda of the persona, the mask, held up for public view? Or is there an apparent agenda? What is the scrutiny of the camera/eye? Note to self. Semiology of signs: Roland Barth’ s “Camera Lucida.”

 

Can the camera be used in an abstract way to reflect emotional texture, tone, and color? Does the photograph suggest a narrative? What is the risk of illuminating content? Eliminating content? Black-and-white photography is fictional perception.

 

Note to self. See Saul Leiter, Clyfford Still, Mark Rothko, Kline, Bill Jacobson, David Armstrong, Ralph Gibson.

 

There is no doubt you (and others) have grappled with these questions. I realize they may be pedestrian, but I am just thinking out loud, so forgive that expression on my face, “I never thought of that angle.”

 

P.S. I went back to Godard's "Alphaville" from my viewing decades ago, and you are absolutely right. The echoes of Chris Marker's "La Jetee" were more than notable, but the "Blade Runner" parallels even more astounding. Thank you so much for the aha moment. BTW I was lucky enough to pick up a signed copy of Mary Ellen Mark's "Scene Behind the Scene/Forty Years of Photographing on the Set." Thanks, again.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, yes! "There is sometimes a picture there when there isn't one." Dialogue prompt if ever there was one. The door that isn't there that was there, instigating the photograph that is here from the photographer who was there!

 

The artful juxtaposition of the two-dimensional field of bricks against the three-dimensional perspective lines of the cement walkway raises an element of tension, conflict, in this easily dismissed moment. I want to come back to what I said in an earlier posting with some questions I have been asking myself and some fragments of notes.

 

Earlier, I wrote: “The question is whether a photograph can evoke emotion. Is the photograph a mirror or reflection, realistic or abstract? Is it allegorical, metaphoric, literal, or do we simply run out of adjectives?” Reconsidering, the question of whether or not the photograph can evoke emotion is perhaps not only naïve but too limiting. The slope I was sliding down was to illustrate the conflict between image and text.

 

Fragments and some of the questions come to mind: does the photograph enlist a measure of chance? What is the photographer’s perspective, perhaps, as opposed to point of view; is one on the surface and the other below the surface? See Erwin Panofsky’s “Perspective as Symbolic Form.” Also, Damisch, Hubert (1994). “The Origin of Perspective.” What does the photograph instigate? What does the photographer instigate? Does the photograph prompt imagination?

Invite dialogue? In other words, what does the photograph say; to what does it speak?

 

To your point about amateur photographs, Barthes separates photographs into those that simply document (studium) and are generally disaffective in contrast to those that are affective (punctum). Just his way of thinking about it as a non-photographer.

 

Something of interest, though, is the photographer engaged in unmasking, laying bare, some unapparent agenda of the persona, the mask, held up for public view? Or is there an apparent agenda? What is the scrutiny of the camera/eye? Note to self. Semiology of signs: Roland Barth’ s “Camera Lucida.”

 

Can the camera be used in an abstract way to reflect emotional texture, tone, and color? Does the photograph suggest a narrative? What is the risk of illuminating content? Eliminating content? Black-and-white photography is fictional perception.

 

Note to self. See Saul Leiter, Clyfford Still, Mark Rothko, Kline, Bill Jacobson, David Armstrong, Ralph Gibson.

 

There is no doubt you (and others) have grappled with these questions. I realize they may be pedestrian, but I am just thinking out loud, so forgive that expression on my face, “I never thought of that angle.”

 

P.S. I went back to Godard's "Alphaville" from my viewing decades ago, and you are absolutely right. The echoes of Chris Marker's "La Jetee" were more than notable, but the "Blade Runner" parallels even more astounding. Thank you so much for the aha moment. BTW I was lucky enough to pick up a signed copy of Mary Ellen Mark's "Scene Behind the Scene/Forty Years of Photographing on the Set." Thanks, again.

 

Thank you, Rog, yet again for your generous and considered thoughts on my photograph. I always intuited that it was a reasonable picture but completely lack the academic rigour to understand why. Your incredibly astute thoughts certainly serve to illuminate wider issues (of, for example, art, perspective, culture) that even these most simple of pictures are able to evince. “I never thought of that angle.” Indeed.

 

And again your questions raise more questions. "...instigating the photograph that is here from the photographer who was there!" Yes - precisely! Let us not forget that a photograph only exists because the photographer was there (well, OK, not strictly always but whatever). It represents a GPS co-ordinate in space and time of where that camera was being held by that photographer. Like a painting, a film or a novel that is "of its time" that photograph is precisely of time and space, and of all those things that aligned to put the photographer there, camera in hand, in front of that scene. That's a pretty cool concept.

 

I guess I'll have to attempt Barthes again! I've had Camera Lucida since the seventies and still haven't quite managed to get through it with any feeling that I'm quite getting it, but I'm inspired now to try again. The same goes for On Photography which I bought the same day in 1979 or whatever. I'm pleased you were able to pick up a copy of Mary Ellen Mark's book, especially one signed by her. At the workshop I attended she spoke a little of photographing on movie sets, but said at a previous workshop that all one attendee had been interested to ask her was "What's Johnny Depp like?" So I never quite raised the gumption to ask her about her experiences on the set of Apocalypse Now! which I would have loved to have done. Oh well. She was a very wonderful person and I feel so privileged to have met her.

 

I now understand far more clearly what you meant with your question of whether a photograph can evoke emotion and the tension between images and words. The questions you raise are of course unanswerable, and only by referring to works by masters such as the ones you mention (interestingly, Franz Kline's (whom you mention) work seems to share many of the qualities with the work of Bruna Stude of whom you have made a wonderful portrait in the "Portraits" sub-forum) can we have a reliable base to contemplate them (I'd add Atget, Edward Hopper and Édouard Manet to the list, among others). But in not finding answers, if indeed there are none (perhaps I'm wrong about that - it has been known!) we explore areas which, once illuminated, can and practically must help to further our own work. Is black and white photography really fictional perception? I thought black and white are the only colours of photography (apologies to Robert Frank!).

 

I'm so pleased you revisited Alphaville after many years - it is a wonderful film. I think I may have done my children a great disservice by showing it to them at too young an age - even now as adults I just have to mention Alphaville and a kind of disdainful, distasteful glaze comes over their eyes. Same with Le Cercle Rouge though, thankfully, they both love Le Samouraï. And Blade Runner.

Edited by stray cat
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

And better lighting, same gear except 50 Summicron

Gary

 

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!

Edited by gbealnz
  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica M5 + 50mm Summilux f1.4 ASPH + Ilford FP4

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!

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica M5 + 50mm Summilux f1.4 ASPH + Ilford FP4

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!

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica M5 + 50mm Summilux f1.4 ASPH + Ilford FP4

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!

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica M5 + 50mm Summilux f1.4 ASPH + Ilford FP4

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!

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...