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!

Fun with MF images - ARCHIVED - FOR VIEWING ONLY

Status
Not open for further replies.

PeterA

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

The M8 is 'nice' - but lacks the depth of the MF shots. You want some depth in a landscape - by definition.
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Depth? Love to know what depth is, and by definition why I would want some in a landscape?

Sounds rather like a rule out of the "how to take photographs" manual.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Depth? Love to know what depth is, and by definition why I would want some in a landscape?

Sounds rather like a rule out of the "how to take photographs" manual.
One of the many things that Landscapes typically deal with is the notion of depth - the play of near versus far or near versus further. How the eye is drawn from one place to the next from near to far or near to further - thats depth.

However my comment was not a comment about landscapes in general - I was merely stating the obvious - the shot immediately above the M8 shot has far more 'depth' than the shot made by the M8 - for all sorts of reasons.

As for what you would want in a landscape or not - well how would I know? and why would I care to comment anyway? Your preferences are yours and you are welcome to them.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I'll go out on a limb here (pardon the pun, and it won't be my last :)

Jim's IR shots may lack the immediacy of the "punchier" M8 shot ... yet they grow on you.

They have a lazy, relaxed, even "muffled footsteps" feel to them ... I've seen a million landscapes/forests like the M8 shot ... lots of surface whack, but no stamina ... perfect for the quick internet glance then on to the next "eye whack," then the next. Which is why I am rarely a fan of landscape work ... so many are so ... well ... artificial. The IR shots I haven't seen ... or I should say, "haven't felt" to often."

Another aspect about them, (especially if they were printed large,) is that I feel as If I could be there ... they don't mentally trigger "photograph," instead I'm oddly struck by the lack of the wind ever so lightly rustling the leaves, or distant birds chirping. Perhaps why a Cezzanne feels more real than an academically correct landscape painting.

Jim, personally I think you should explore this further. I am a fan of your "quiet places" work and these landscapes continue that notion so well.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I think I am with Keith here, to be honest. They just didn't do it for me. Jim, I liked your more urban landscapes better. I feel like these are sort of "everything and nothing". The frames are very busy with leaves, branches, detail and texture, but there is nothing that truly jumps out at me. I think photographing in the forest is very difficult for this reason -- your eye goes to something and you want to photograph it, but there are so many distractions around it that are easy to ignore when you are there, but when they are photographed it is difficult to ignore. I don't want to pull Keith's images into this if he does not want them in the discussion, but if you go to his website, there are some photos that demonstrate what I am getting at. For example, if you go to trees, plants and fungi, that first image of the fallen tree in the wood anemones -- it is fantastic, but one of the reasons it is successful is that there are not many competing elements. You have the greens, whites, and the orange/browns of the wood. The composition is excellent and there is very little extraneous in the frame...nothing to distract. Many of his photos are like this -- carefully composed, backgrounds well in hand. They are worth studying. I don't mean to pick on you by any means. I am only saying this because I think you are very skilled and can understand this criticism and make an intelligent decision as to whether to act on it or just take it in stride and keep on working. Again, I think you are very good, so don't take this as a put down, they were just my thoughts in relation to this genre of photography. I have struggled in this same field...I grew up in New England with dense forests. Moving to Iceland was the best idea I had...no trees to worry about!
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

IME, folks seem to either like the lower saturation, less accurate color of false-color IR or not at all --- not too many fall casually in-between. Also, I usually find that folks who like the Velvia look or heavy digital saturation to their images won't like the color IR look at all...

Marc makes a good point that the landscape market seems to be saturated (excuse this pun too) with highly saturated landscape prints, and I assume this is because the masses that actually purchase work prefer them and so they sell better. However, what I see form my small-scale end, is that the prints our workshop attendees actually get orders for and sell, are the ones I refer to as containing "quiet light" --- or the softer saturation, more monochromatic color images, and false color IR seems to be leading this trend.

Cheers,
 

David K

Workshop Member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I think it's safe to say that Jim has found a style that's to his liking. I recall him saying somewhere that it's how he sees the world. I think Marc's observation about feeling as if you could be there is right on the money. I've done some walking through the woods myself and, with respect to the image with the arched branches, feel like I've been right there a hundred times. With regard to my own landscapes, mostly taken early or late, which frequently include clouds and water, I like to bring out those subtle colors in the sky with a bit of saturation. Different strokes...
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Jack touches on a great point here, and one which I discuss with other friends often. That is the point of high-saturation landscapes and the marketability thereof. In our private conversations (only private because we are speaking among a group of friends of like attitude, not really "private") we lament the direction that it seems the market goes when it comes to landscape images which sell. The pumped up, or "juiced" as I often call them, images get loads of oohs and ahhs and sales orders – at least sales orders to the "masses" in a manner of speaking.

I'm a fan of rather conservative processing (not saying I always achieve what I hope), and really shy away from images that strike me like a scene from CSI Miami. I also find that I'm not a huge Velvia fan, though I have seen work done with it that I liked.

That said, I really do like Jim's work, though of the recent postings in this thread I prefer the style of the image in post #201 above, to the M8 example here and those on Jim's site. All are very nice to view, but I don't find his example with the Horseman above to be pumped up at all. Maybe it is, I don't know, but it looks like many walks I have been on and I love the "depth". Sure, it's a very busy shot and that may be a distraction for some, but for me the two limbs/trunks bending over and the pathway are strong enough to carry it.

I like what Jim does, but the IR style is not one that I'm drawn to, at least not in quantity. Sometimes this kind of image can hit me as if an effort to salvage an image with an avant-garde tweak that didn't otherwise work. Please don't misunderstand that to mean that this is what I'm saying has been done. I know that they were shot with purpose and to a style that was in the eye of the photographer. It's just a personal thing.

Jim, I really enjoy seeing your images, Horseman, color, landscape, urban, or IR. Thanks for sharing your work here. It continues to humble me.
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I have to say it's refreshing to see people here discussing images rather than cameras and image quality.
 

JimCollum

Member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I have to agree Keith.... I'd prefer a discussion over what does and doesn't work for someone in an image, rather than just hearing the 'nice pic'.. or 'look.. no CA'

I do appreciate everyone that's participated in this...

A couple of my early influences when I started were Eliot Porter and Richard Misrach. With Porter, I've always been attracted to the 'ordered' chaos he was able to capture.. and it's very similar to the way I see the world (to the dismay of my wife :)

When I walk thru a forest, I see the seemingly random tangle of branches, leaves, light... and in this tangle, there sometimes arises an 'order' beneath it. When an image works for me, is when I'm able to see and then capture some of this underlying order... there's some chord that's struck that's very hard to put into words. Often I'm the only one who sees it (i know.. there's medication for this.... ) but often I find an individual or two who might see the world in the same way. For someone who sees the world in an 'orderly' fashion.. these images can be.. distressing.. for want of a better word. Jack may be able to better describe that.. he tends to see the world in a much more orderly manner than me (maybe the word is just 'messy' :)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Jack may be able to better describe that.. he tends to see the world in a much more orderly manner than me :)
Jack is also OCD...

:ROTFL:
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I'm guessing that my garage looks more like Jim's than it does Jack's. I'm not sure which disorder(s) I have, but ORDER is not one of them.

:D
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Having spent many years wandering aimlessly amongst the ancient woodlands of southern England, hugging trees and banging my head against them in frustration, I've come to the conclusion that the only way I can realise my goal is to attempt to bring a sense of order to what is essentially a chaotic environment.

OCD rules!
 

jlm

Workshop Member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I had the pleasure of viewing some of Jim Collum's prints at the Moab workshop and they are gorgeous in their own right. Personally, I've stumbled along with a more saturated perspective. here is one using the 205TCC, 40mm and CFV. I am particularly fond of the range and depth of color and the abstract composition. the colors themselves are as important to me as the image
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

I had the pleasure of viewing some of Jim Collum's prints at the Moab workshop and they are gorgeous in their own right. Personally, I've stumbled along with a more saturated perspective. here is one using the 205TCC, 40mm and CFV. I am particularly fond of the range and depth of color and the abstract composition. the colors themselves are as important to me as the image
You aren't shooting natural landscapes ... which is what this discussion has been centered on John. I LOVE your stuff, especially the saturated color and sense of design ... which is enhanced by being square IMHO.
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

"You aren't shooting natural landscapes..."

Now there's an interesting concept Marc, "natural landscapes". Thankfully the Gods didn't give us a colour chart.



A few minutes prior to taking this shot the scene appeared as almost monochrome. At the point of capture the scene appeared pretty much as shown. A few minutes after taking this shot the scene was light by strong sunlight.

Natural or unnatural?
 

David K

Workshop Member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Beautiful capture, Keith. Living in Florida I no longer have the pleasure of seeing those fall colors and I sure miss them.
 

David K

Workshop Member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Thought I'd take the big gun out for a spin yesterday... with the two 1.4x mutars stacked on the Hassy 350 SA it's nearly a 700mm focal length. Couldn't make up my mind whether I should have mounted the camera to the tripod with the lens hanging off or the way it's shown. Maybe I need two tripods for this setup :)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

That is some serious camera porn!
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Re: Fun with MF images, part 2: What are you shooting with that MF back?

Man-o-man David ... I'd want an armed guard with that kit. Dead serious cash sitting on that tripod.

Nice candid shot, what aperture was that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top