Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
That's cheating. :ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:Wish I had a longer lens with me tonight...this is a tiny 400p crop out of an 80MP frame...scaled up to 700p
Wayne, love the light on that one!Going through last year's images ... this is one of my favorites ..
Thank you for the kind words sir!Words cannot express my admiration Jack. Your processing skills are the pièce de résistance of an incredible eye...
Very much enjoy the tonality in the dark foreground—without the detail and texture (to use Zone System terminology), it would simply be a big black blob (aka BBB).I grabbed this shot with the 105-210 at around 170. It's amazing how well these old Mamiya "junker" lenses work:
Aesthetically, you made the right choice. AA maintained that Zone II was the first zone with texture, and given film’s characteristic curve, that was appropriate in the day.Thank you Medium. Ironically, that foreground was *darkened* to the zone I - II levels on purpose for that reason. There is a lot of DR In MF files and it was captured at around II-1/2 to III-1/2 which to my eye was distracting the other direction.
Just looked it up; K-X ran from 1962–1974 and I would have shot it in 1971 or ’72. K25 was a late-comer, around 1974. I always found it a bit wimpy after K-II and K-X—much more contrast in these films.Indeed, you need to protect highlights to maintain color fidelity and tonality. FWIW, I go back to the days when my films of choice were Kodachrome 25 or Panatomic X