Some Photography

[Muzikman]

Speaking of Cemetery shots.

This one was taking somplace along 394 in NY on my trip up to Niagara Falls.

[Bluestrike_2]

Speaking of Niagara Falls....



This image had a blue hue to it. By adding some greens to the midtones, I think I managed to get rid of it. Come to think of it, that entire roll had a blue hue(transparencies).

[Muzikman]

I really need to get up to Niagara Falls in the summer. The last two times I have been there it's been winter and fall. The garden was dead both times:)

I did alittle color adjustment, level adjustment and USM on one of your photos. What do you think? It brings out the colors alittle more and makes the image a bit crisper.

[Bluestrike_2]

Three more from Schenley Park. Scanned from prints.

Sorry about bringing it back up, although better than a brand new thread.

Muz, very nice. Thanks. I'll have to apply that to the main file. On another note, what do you think about that shot itself?

[Muzikman]

I like the garden shot and the Shenley Park ones are great. I love the city parks. The maid of the mist one is "eh". The boat is a tad dark, and there really isn't anything besides the boat. I do however like the American falls shot with the maid of the mist in it.

It looks like most of your scans could use a little USM. I don't know if this is the way the original shot turned out or if it's just the scan.

[CaliMagFan]

blue--

be careful of "convergence".. that is where you might shoot something that is tall and thin in a corner of your shot... like the 'obelisk' style pillars on the wall in the cityscape above... when you look at a scene like that with your eyes, you're viewing the world thru the 3d corrective filter called your brain... but when you point the camera up at an angle and put that image on 2d film you lose that correcting feature of your mind... what happens is the angle of the plane of the film is no longer parallel to the plane of the pillar so the distance from the root of the pillar to the edge of the photo is less than the distance from the edge of the photo to the top of the pillar.... so it looks like everything is pointing toward the top center of the print.... according to ansel adams (originally-in The Camera vol.2) ad to most other photographers convergence is undesirable in medium to large format prints.... so, try and stay "on plane" ..

my only other critisisms (totaly intended to be constructive) are:

watch your white balance if you're shooting digital... nice job by muzik to edit those shots to close to life color.... but you wont always have that luxury...

the maid of the mist picture is compositionally flawed in a couple of places... the ship is lacking detail because it is dark... in the upper left you have a blurry mist cloud that kills the whitecaps on the water below.. this is ok, so long as you can juxtapose it to something in the opposite corner of the picture... also... muzik pointed out that the image is pretty barren... true... its just a boat and some mist... but the real problem is that your eye is only drawn one place.... diagonal lines are a good way to draw the eye across a scene..... in this case you could have use a mist rainbow (really cheesy, yet effectice) or a line in the surf or mist to sepparate the image on a diagonal....

good shots, keep them comming.... i'll try and post of up some of my own one of these days..

-kyro

[Bluestrike_2]

The Camera, Negative, and the Print are excellent books.

I have yet to break into digital. Sadly however, when I got that specific roll back, everything had this blue hue. Which was quite sickening really.

USM - Yes, I noticed that too. Although the prints are as sharp as a whistle. But one must realize that sharpness is dependant on image size.

Although the MotM shot was just spur of the moment. No real use for it, and I would probably pitch it. However I have this nasty tendency not to destroy bad shots....


The Schenley Park images were taken with a Fuji medium format rangefinder. Kodak Ultra Color 100. The chromes were 35mm Fujichrome Velvia.

[Muzikman]

Well, sharpness is dependent on image size to a point. The larger the image the more detail you see there for the less sharp the image looks. The smaller the image, the less detail you see, there for the shaper the image looks.