mom

damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
edited January 16, 2011 in Street and Documentary
Had lunch with my mom today and got this photo:

Untitled-18.jpg

Contax G2, 45mm Zeiss Planar f/2 (shot at f/8), Ilford Pan 400, D76
«1

Comments

  • run_kmcrun_kmc Registered Users Posts: 263 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2011
    Very nice environmental portrait. Nice light...

    The more I look at it, the more I like it. Framing is excellent & interesting..

    I want that G2. :D
    photos | twitter
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2011
    Thanks kmc...the G2 is sweet; I've only had it since Monday but I already miss it each night when I go to sleep.
  • lizzard_nyclizzard_nyc Registered Users Posts: 4,056 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2011
    damonff wrote: »
    Thanks kmc...the G2 is sweet; I've only had it since Monday but I already miss it each night when I go to sleep.

    Laughing.gif! :) as to your comment.

    The shot, I love.
    Liz A.
    _________
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2011
    thanks Liz...I'm not even kidding...
  • M38A1M38A1 Registered Users Posts: 1,317 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2011
    What a great perspective for that shot! thumb.gif Your Mom should be proud.
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 13, 2011
    Thanks Scott.
  • rainbowrainbow Registered Users Posts: 2,765 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Wonderful perspective. I especially like the open space above her.
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Thanks Rainbow.
  • jirojiro Registered Users Posts: 1,865 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Very nice work on this one, Damonff. I like the pp, it's just right. thumb.gifthumbthumb.gif
    Sitting quietly, doing nothing. Spring comes and the grass grows by itself.

    http://imagesbyjirobau.blogspot.com/
    http://500px.com/williebau
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Thanks Jiro. The only pp I did though was scanning the negative!
  • ruttrutt Registered Users Posts: 6,511 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    This is beautiful. You know, I was scrolling down to see the comments and the effect was to crop some of the sky. What do you think about the idea of a square crop for this (croppimg only the top?)
    If not now, when?
  • bdcolenbdcolen Registered Users Posts: 3,804 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    damonff wrote: »
    Had lunch with my mom today and got this photo:

    Untitled-18.jpg

    Contax G2, 45mm Zeiss Planar f/2 (shot at f/8), Ilford Pan 400, D76

    Definitely one of your all-time best - the way its framed, and the way her hair, and her hand, work with the trees - really nice, Damon! And you didn't waste anytime souping the 'filum.' rolleyes1.gif
    bd@bdcolenphoto.com
    "He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan

    "The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    rutt wrote: »
    This is beautiful. You know, I was scrolling down to see the comments and the effect was to crop some of the sky. What do you think about the idea of a square crop for this (croppimg only the top?)

    Hey Rutt, thanks! Will you do me the honor of one of your edits?
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    bdcolen wrote: »
    Definitely one of your all-time best - the way its framed, and the way her hair, and her hand, work with the trees - really nice, Damon! And you didn't waste anytime souping the 'filum.' rolleyes1.gif

    Wow! Thanks BD. I'm a little impatient in regard to seeing what happened after the shoot. I ordered a c41 kit from B&H last night. Wish me luck!
  • bdcolenbdcolen Registered Users Posts: 3,804 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    rutt wrote: »
    This is beautiful. You know, I was scrolling down to see the comments and the effect was to crop some of the sky. What do you think about the idea of a square crop for this (croppimg only the top?)

    You know how much I like square...But there's something about the upward reach of this, and the open sky and branches above Mom's head that is saying to me - don't crop. But...
    bd@bdcolenphoto.com
    "He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan

    "The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
  • ruttrutt Registered Users Posts: 6,511 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Damon, nothing to do. It's great. I just wanted YOU to look at the square crop and use your own great eye to consider it.
    If not now, when?
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Wonderful photo. All the Greats have spoken, but I vote for keeping the trees. There's something about their shapes and textures that complement the human figure (that ain't no human, that's my mom!).
    You've listed D76 - does this mean you developed the film?
    Sara

    www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    Hi Sara, thanks. Yes, I developed the film myself. I know this is digital grin, but I only use film these days - sold the 5D2. It's filmgrin for me now!

    BD, I agree with you about the upward reach.

    I tried your idea Rutt, but I couldn't make it work. I thought you saw something I hadn't so I asked for your skills.
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited January 14, 2011
    damonff wrote: »
    Hi Sara, thanks. Yes, I developed the film myself. I know this is digital grin, but I only use film these days - sold the 5D2. It's filmgrin for me now!

    BD, I agree with you about the upward reach.

    I tried your idea Rutt, but I couldn't make it work. I thought you saw something I hadn't so I asked for your skills.

    I loved film and the many hours I spent in the darkroom, but I'm not going back...good for you, though. :D
    Sara

    www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
  • PattiPatti Registered Users Posts: 1,576 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    Love the space above your lovely mum. Well composed and executed. Yeah to the film!!!
    The use of a camera is similar to that of a knife. You can use it to peel potatoes, or carve a flute. ~ E. Kahlmeyer
    ... I'm still peeling potatoes.

    patti hinton photography
  • ruttrutt Registered Users Posts: 6,511 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    One thing that's interesting technically about this shot is that it retains highlight but not shadow detail. I know this is partly an aspect of Damon's style, but I wonder if it's a film vs. digital thing as well? If you had exposed just a bit more, would you have opened up the shadows? Would you have lost the sky? Did the scan have anything to do with it, or is it already decided in the negative?

    Deep rich shadows that retain detail are perhaps the most challenging PP goal. Holding detail in both shadows and highlights while retaining a natural drama , even more so. Does film make this easier or harder. I've heard and seen evidence on both sides.

    This is a beautiful portrait and unmistakably yours. Don't don't mistake technical curiosity for artistic criticism.
    If not now, when?
  • lizzard_nyclizzard_nyc Registered Users Posts: 4,056 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    Out of curiosity. I don't really know how film works.
    Ok so you develop it, scan it and import it.
    Damon, do you then further tweak it in LR or leave it as is? (aside from cropping).

    This is a great learning thread.
    Liz A.
    _________
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    Patti wrote: »
    Love the space above your lovely mum. Well composed and executed. Yeah to the film!!!

    yeah!
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    rutt wrote: »
    One thing that's interesting technically about this shot is that it retains highlight but not shadow detail. I know this is partly an aspect of Damon's style, but I wonder if it's a film vs. digital thing as well? If you had exposed just a bit more, would you have opened up the shadows? Would you have lost the sky? Did the scan have anything to do with it, or is it already decided in the negative?

    Deep rich shadows that retain detail are perhaps the most challenging PP goal. Holding detail in both shadows and highlights while retaining a natural drama , even more so. Does film make this easier or harder. I've heard and seen evidence on both sides.

    This is a beautiful portrait and unmistakably yours. Don't don't mistake technical curiosity for artistic criticism.

    Hmmm...maybe. I will try to expose a little more this weekend. The scan compromises it a little (I'm not an expert yet) but I think mostly it's me. I want to try to get better shadow detail. This can be my new project.
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    lizzard_nyc wrote: »
    Out of curiosity. I don't really know how film works.
    Ok so you develop it, scan it and import it.
    Damon, do you then further tweak it in LR or leave it as is? (aside from cropping).

    This is a great learning thread.

    I scan them into tif format, then open LR and turn them into jpgs. I usually don't have to do anything except trim the edges a bit because I suck at scanning, I can never get the strip properly aligned!
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    I tried to recover shadow detail in LR:

    Untitled-18.jpg
  • ruttrutt Registered Users Posts: 6,511 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    Well,you did recover some, didn't you? I think that looks nicer. Not to be picky (although the whole thing is picky by definition) I think you lost some of that good highlight detail in the process.

    It's really frustrating to try to get this perfect and really only worth it if you think a particular photo is going to take you someplace new (like a magazine cover or a prize or a fellowship.) (Remember Nachtwey and his printer?)

    In PS, you's use the negative of the image as a layer mask to keep the shadow recovery from touching the highlights... Oh, but this is film. So I think it ruins some of the fun to get out the heavy PS artillery. Try exposing a couple of rolls a little more and see what happens. Then you can correct. That's film, after all.
    If not now, when?
  • damonffdamonff Registered Users Posts: 1,894 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2011
    rutt wrote: »
    Well,you did recover some, didn't you? I think that looks nicer. Not to be picky (although the whole thing is picky by definition) I think you lost some of that good highlight detail in the process.

    It's really frustrating to try to get this perfect and really only worth it if you think a particular photo is going to take you someplace new (like a magazine cover or a prize or a fellowship.) (Remember Nachtwey and his printer?)

    In PS, you's use the negative of the image as a layer mask to keep the shadow recovery from touching the highlights... Oh, but this is film. So I think it ruins some of the fun to get out the heavy PS artillery. Try exposing a couple of rolls a little more and see what happens. Then you can correct. That's film, after all.

    Exactly. I am shooting Ilford Delta 400 at 320 this weekend. Thanks Rutt.
  • ruttrutt Registered Users Posts: 6,511 Major grins
    edited January 16, 2011
    I had one more thought about this. That very composition that everyone noticed is also the reason for the slight underexposure. So much sky pushed the auto exposure to favor the sky over the subject. This might have been a good place for either manual or AEL.
    If not now, when?
  • swifteyeswifteye Registered Users Posts: 156 Major grins
    edited January 16, 2011
    Technical issues aside, this is a proud portrait. Mother embraced by Mother Earth and the eternal sky above. It is Love!
    Jamie Cunningham
    http://www.jamiecunninghamphoto.com
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Franconia-NH/Jamie-Cunningham-Photography/165561066804213
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=113458738664148
Sign In or Register to comment.