Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Adam, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. And with Hasselblad.... you don't need anything else other that couple (Hass and Leica).

The worst is the weight. When I used to carry my Bronica and lenses around I was half destroyed. When went to a national Park I was completely destroyed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. And with Hasselblad.... you don't need anything else other that couple (Hass and Leica).

The worst is the weight. When I used to carry my Bronica and lenses around I was half destroyed. When went to a national Park I was completely destroyed.

Ileo it's  why I prefer a M camera lighter and ideal for streetphotos very discrete :)

trigger  in silence...

Best

H

Edited by Doc Henry
Link to post
Share on other sites

10

Hi Adam,

 

Put me down for number ten, there is a gloss on the water but it's still plausible and I like the anchor of the foreground rocks being parallel to the lines of the photograph, my lazy eyes did not take to the extreme milky water. But that's just my myopic take on a lovely set of photographs!

 

Regards

Charles

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep Doc, medium format is impossible to carry around. Or, just one camera with the lens attached. Though the quality is superb. The Bronica has incredible razor sharp lens, as Gary knows well. Actually mine has been bought by a guy who worked together with Vittorio Storaro in cinematography.

 

Ileo it's  why I prefer a M camera lighter and ideal for streetphotos very discrete :)

trigger  in silence...

Best

H

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a fantastic series Adam, and your dedication is as admirable as it is impressive.

 

My favourite, subject to the below re no 3, is no 10. The slightly higher position of the camera places the wave breaker (or whatever it is called) well vis-a-vis the skyline. A lower position makes that structure blend with the buildings. The buildings are well defined and beautifully reflect the sunlight. The wave breaker also has the right size and is not so "in your face" as in some of the other photos.

 

Square is a challenge for a scene like this because it risks placing too much emphasis on either the top or the bottom part. But when done well, I think it's the best format to use for this scene.

 

In no. 10, the sky is possibly just a little bit too tall but not so much that it bothers because there is a very nice balance between the three compositional "bands" in the image, sky, skyline/wavebreaker and rocky coastline. The contrast in terms of size between the city and the rocks, both of which have more or less equal definition and detail, is interesting.

 

What I meant above re no. 3 is that it is really an awesome photo, and in my view the very best of the series when all aspects of the image are considered. The reason is that it is so simple. It's effectively no 10 reduced to its bare minimum compositional elements. I only wish it had been square in which case it would have been my favourite. It could possibly be cropped of course. No 3 has a wonderful coastline which in no 10 is disturbed a little bit by the white streaks. The city has just the right size when compared to the wave breaker and the white of the rocks leads the eye into the image. 

 

For say an exhibition having nos 3 (if square) and 10 next to each other would create a very cool comparison, showing how different the city looks in morning and afternoon light.

 

The sky in longer exposure shots can easily take on an ominous look, whether it is entirely or only a bit smoothened out. Compare to how a dominant sky shot from a low camera position with long exposures is often used in cinematography. It may be the "look" one is going for in a series, ie to depict different "moods"/looks of the city, but for a single image it can make the viewer feel a bit distressed, even though it, like nos 1, 6 and 8, would be a very nice photo. I feel that this mood becomes "lighter" or less imposing if, like in no 8, there are lighter streaks in the sky. But for the reasons above I think nos 3 and 10 are the best.

 

Looking forward to the colour versions.

 

br
Philip

 

 

 

I would like to ask you to once again be the great curators that you are - but this time at a strong risk of wearing out my welcome.

I have staked out this spot in Jersey City New Jersey for some time and over the New Year's weekend hit it hard with my Hasselblad SWC/M, Kodak TMax and Ektar.

I treked from midtown Manhattan to this spot for two sunsets and two sunrises.  A couple of the times were uneventful as for as the lighting goes so I had to repeat.  

 

I would like to throw some (ok, 12 to be exact) B&W renditions at you and ask that you let me know which if any strike you as particularly good.

 

As you can tell, I was unsure of the most effective composition so I basically shot the scene every which way  :(

 

Assuming that no one is annoyed by this, I will share some of the color renditions after a due cooling off period...

 

Here we go...

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've spent the day experimenting with room temperature C-41. I found some information on a flickr group at

https://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157607394125990/

and decided to start out with that. I mixed up a fresh presskit (Jobo brand, but exactly the same as Unicolor). The basic recipe is to use the developer one shot at 1+9 at 20ºC, and to do a semistand development. 45 minutes total, with 30 seconds of agitation at the start and again at the halfway mark. I wasn't sure about the timing for blix at 20ºC, so I used a piece of film leader in my freshly mixed solution and it had cleared perfectly by 3 minutes, so I guessed the standard 6.5 minutes should do. If this works, it means I can get more films developed per one litre kit, as it should last for 20 films using 500ml developer solution, or even more with a 300ml tank. I imagine the blix will have to be extended as the number of films gets up there, but I can judge that by doubling the clearing time. I used wash water at 20º too, to avoid any thermal shock and possible reticulation.

It was a dull cloudy morning, so there may not be much bright colour just from the light conditions. In a few minutes I will start the blix, and agitate the first 30 seconds, then for ten seconds each minute, just like I do with B&W film.

 

Later, all done, and the Superia 400 is hanging up to dry. It looks a bit dull, but the film base is about the right colour, and the green flashes that Fuji puts among the sprocket holes are bright. I'll scan it when dry and show you what I've got. None of the promised cats and brick walls seem to have come out though...

 

Chris

 

I'm going  this next, glad to hear it worked. Looking forward  top the images

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to ask you to once again be the great curators that you are - but this time at a strong risk of wearing out my welcome.

I have staked out this spot in Jersey City New Jersey for some time and over the New Year's weekend hit it hard with my Hasselblad SWC/M, Kodak TMax and Ektar.

I treked from midtown Manhattan to this spot for two sunsets and two sunrises.  A couple of the times were uneventful as for as the lighting goes so I had to repeat.  

 

I would like to throw some (ok, 12 to be exact) B&W renditions at you and ask that you let me know which if any strike you as particularly good.

 

As you can tell, I was unsure of the most effective composition so I basically shot the scene every which way  :(

 

Assuming that no one is annoyed by this, I will share some of the color renditions after a due cooling off period...

 

Here we go...

 

It's down to between #2 and #5 for me; and I can't decide.

Hats off to your industrious effort, Adam.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going  this next, glad to hear it worked. Looking forward  top the images

 

I posted them up already! Here. It needs more work, I'm afraid. I think the next thing will be 1+5 for 45 minutes. It's rather cold here today, so it might not happen just yet, or might involve boring indoor pictures.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted them up already! Here. It needs more work, I'm afraid. I think the next thing will be 1+5 for 45 minutes. It's rather cold here today, so it might not happen just yet, or might involve boring indoor pictures.

 

Ahhh ididn't realize you had pasted them. Interesting.

I'll be following the progress closely. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

100 Years of Leica Photography, Berlin.

 

Ilford HP5 - 400

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

And last but not least (or maybe least)...

Thank you very much for your time and your input.  I really appreciate it.

 

9 is my choice !

 

Then 10, 6, 2.

 

 

 

Cheers JM

Edited by jmanivelle
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you folks will indulge me, this is one of my favorite shots of one of my kids.  It dates to 1992 with a Canon EOS1 on VPS (III?)  converted to b&w in Lightroom.   It was a grab shot, underexposed with some camera blur from the slow exposure...   but it remains one of my favorites. 

 

 

23797941370_9b35e6b652.jpgPICT0198 by Roger H, on Flickr

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...