The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

More Fun with Large Format Film Images!

routlaw

Member
Those are really impressive images Jeremy. Beautiful tonality, textures and detail. I should not be looking at these. I can barely manage with a 4x5 camera.
+1 Jeremy, the first two in particular have a timeless yet 50-ish style look to them which I find appealing.

Rob
 

Jeremy

New member
Thanks for the positive feedback, guys. This is the start of a new series and I haven't shown these anywhere else yet.
 

Lloyd

Active member
Lloyd, is it the much more obvious human element?

Off the top of my head, a couple of quick things. There is a timeless quality to a large format image with human movement. Harkens back to the early days of the art. I like that very much. I like the setting as well, which is also somewhat timeless (except, of course for the date of establishment on the door. ;)), there is a homey charm to it. Also, I like the relatively low angle of the shot. I like that angle of view, and it lends a proximity to the anonymous, and somewhat mysterious human element. I think there would be a temptation to shoot from a high angle here, which would add some detachment, and I'm glad you resisted. Like I said, my favorite of this series so far.
 

Jeremy

New member
Thanks, Lloyd, that helps me quite a bit as I develop this project. I started on it at the end of January so I'm still feeling out the waters.
 
Last edited:

routlaw

Member
Off the top of my head, a couple of quick things. There is a timeless quality to a large format image with human movement. Harkens back to the early days of the art. I like that very much. I like the setting as well, which is also somewhat timeless (except, of course for the date of establishment on the door. ;)), there is a homey charm to it. Also, I like the relatively low angle of the shot. I like that angle of view, and it lends a proximity to the anonymous, and somewhat mysterious human element. I think there would be a temptation to shoot from a high angle here, which would add some detachment, and I'm glad you resisted. Like I said, my favorite of this series so far.
Jeremy I totally agree with all Lloyd has to say here, its a good critique. By comparison this one just has more soul compared to the somewhat more clinical but well done others of the series. Lloyd used the word timeless, very befitting. At first glance I could have sworn I had just stepped back into the 40's or 50's type of diner cafe. I have mixed emotions about the seat back in the lower right hand corner, maybe the size is just a tad too imposing, about my only nit pick of the the photograph. This is not the normal use for LF but it sure works here.

Well done. :thumbs:

Rob
 

Jeremy

New member
Jeremy I totally agree with all Lloyd has to say here, its a good critique. By comparison this one just has more soul compared to the somewhat more clinical but well done others of the series. Lloyd used the word timeless, very befitting. At first glance I could have sworn I had just stepped back into the 40's or 50's type of diner cafe. I have mixed emotions about the seat back in the lower right hand corner, maybe the size is just a tad too imposing, about my only nit pick of the the photograph. This is not the normal use for LF but it sure works here.

Well done. :thumbs:

Rob
Thanks, Rob, like I responded to Lloyd, it's great to get some feedback on these as I'm just starting this project.

The lower-right corner 'thing' is actually a trash can, I tried to allude to this with the placement of the other trash can next to the door (comparable shape/form). I was very limited on how I could set up to photograph in the space as they were PACKED for the Stock Show weekend in Fort Worth and was alloted 15 minutes from setup to tear down.

After proofing the negative I had to decide if I would prefer to return to the space and reshoot without the trash can, but opted to keep this shot instead due to the abundance of life and I don't believe the removal of the trash can from that lower right corner would make it a *better* photograph in terms of voice. It would make it a cleaner composition and it might be more balanced, but I don't feel the image would be better. And if I came back: no balloons, which would probably result in a different composition. Heh, regardless of this I'll still return to do another shot to see.
 

justin989

New member
Hey everyone,

I am new to LF and am still understanding when to use certain movements such as front/rear swing, tilt etc. I took this shot yesterday, It is literally my first 4x5 chrome shot on provia 100f at f/32. In the shot I noticed that the pilars (highlighted in white) were not in total focus. After going online to find out the effects that certain movemnts had, I thought that this particular composition would call for a front swing movement to get the desired focus to be perfect. Is this a correct assumption? I would not want to alter the composition as it stands now, and if I were to do a front swing, would I focus on the pilars and stop down or focus on the power plant as I had done in this photo?

thanks in advance.

-j
 
Last edited:

carstenw

Active member
You need not only to tilt forwards, to get front bottom and rear top in focus, but also to swing to the right, since the right pillars at the front are closer.
 

justin989

New member
You need not only to tilt forwards, to get front bottom and rear top in focus, but also to swing to the right, since the right pillars at the front are closer.
How much of a front tilt is needed? So if I were to swing the front element to the right, it should be as parallel as posible to the those pillars, is this correct!?

thanks,

-j
 

carstenw

Active member
No, that would be too far. It is somewhere in between, but the correction would look small compared to the effect.

The plane of the film and the plane of the subject intersect somewhere, if you imagine extending them in your mind. The plane of the lens (sideways) needs to intersect those two in the same place. It is pretty difficult to calculate without the exact measurements of the various distances, but you could find it by experiment. Watch this video to get an idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR4m70xr9mE
 

Jeremy

New member
Jeremy,

I may have missed it -- what film are you shooting with? The "50's look" is strong.

JT
Efke 100, though I just switched to Ilford FP4. I had to send a box of the Efke back as the sheets were coated unevenly--first time it has ever happened, but it's easier to just standardize on one film and I already shoot the FP4 in 4x5.

I don't think it's the film as much as the tonal placement (lower contrast and a tendency to print the sky slightly down compared to work today) and composition. I would also argue the corrected verticals add to the 'classic' look. :thumbs:

edit: Also, I process my images in a certain way because they are destined to end up as platinum/palladium prints. I'll often print with robust highlights (think fat histogram) because of the way it translates in the reflective print.
 

justin989

New member
long exposure of the Ravenswood power plant as seen looking east from Roosevelt Island. I was very pleased with the quality of the adox 50 emulsion, it was tack sharp even though I had no choice but to use tmax developer, it definitely brought out some very nice tonality to it. But I would definitely like to get my hands on some APH 09 (rodinal) for the next batch. I used a 150 to give a natural perspective, and luckily the image I feel, is pretty close to how your eyes would see this facility if you were standing where I was across the river, it draws your eyes up to the tops of the stacks successfully.

A brief history:
This is the largest power plant in all of New York State. It used to be part of New York's ConEdison before generation was deregulated and the plant was sold off to Keyspan and then TransCanada. It's located in Long Island City just east of Roosevelt Island and is one of the primary sources of electrical generation for Manhattan with a nameplate capacity of about 2 gigawatts.


It has 4 primary gas fired generators and a number of smaller secondary gas fired generators. The 4 big boys are monstrous. The largest being the 1 gigawatt "Big Allis" or Generator 30 (named after the manufacturer Allis Chalmers). It has two sisters, Generators 10 & 20. All 3 are single cycle gas fired generators. Natural gas is burned, it heats up an air/water mixture, the pressurized steam drives the rotation of a magnet, and this creates electricity.

Smoke stacks from left to right are 40 (not shown), 30, 20, 10. You can see a massive conveyor belt complex in front that goes off the frame, that used to transport coal from river barges when it was first built. The plant upgraded to burning relatively clean natural gas in the 60s. The coal apparatus remains.



Chamonix 45n-1
Schneider 150mm apo symmar L
adox chs 50


http://www.justinwaldinger.com
 
Last edited:
Top