I never saw the version with the house Graham, but the one without it really rocks. There's a mildly HDR look to it which I rarely like but in this case it's really nice and probably the only way to handle those extremes.
Wish I'd taken it!
Now we're getting somewhere! Nicely done photochop skill-z.
Contax 645 with 45-90mm
What lens is this?
Mamiya ZD w/ 80mm D; this was not staged.
So you didn't sell it after all. Are you keeping it, or still debating?
Couple of shots from a foggy afternoon shoot near Red Feather Lakes, CO last month.
Sharing a few from the Ozark National Forest. Spring is a wonderful time in NW Arkansas. All images Cambo RS 1000 w/P45 DB.
Smith Creek Nature Preserve w/72mm:
Same place 100 yards downstream. Two shot pano playing around with WA perspective using the trees to lead into the image. I think the trees are a little extreme so I'll shoot it again with a more natural perspective:
Long Pool Falls w/35mm (Larger image here):
Justin and Ed, your respective second shots are great!
Justin, I like the mood in those images, particularly first two.
Ed, those pix really say "Spring" to me!
I had insomnia the other day (24 hours of light...), so I drove out into the countryside at 5am. I found a beautiful valley of lava rocks and dormant (I hope) volcanoes. I climbed one of them and took these shots -- I still can't get the colors right -- something with digital medium format and color does not work well for me. I think I need to figure out how to make custom white shading files...something seems off with mine. The colors should be more or less spot on right out of the box, but they just aren't. I just cannot seem to get it right. This would have been helped by a neutral grad, but I do not own one. These were with the Hy6 and E54LV and 40mm and 110mm lenses. Anyway, it was an incredibly beautiful place and time -- just one of those perfect days. I look forward to seeing how they came out on film too...
You can see my car down in the bottom right:
And a black and white version that I think works better:
These were taken around 7am I guess...though sunrise is at 3:30am...
jmv...love those shots
I can see what you are saying Stuart ( well as much as a screen view can show anyway) - beautful sceneray - I dont know looks like the light is a tad dark ..
btw I prefer the colour by far.
Stuart - I like the color version better as well. I particularly like the first one with the meandering stream.
These images are really rubbing in my disappointment at not being able to come up this year.
I had real issues with WB/color with my DB. I now do a custom white balance shooting through an LCC white reference or expo disk and make an exposure holding a white/grey/black reference card at arms length into the frame. Between the two I can almost always get color as I saw it.
Sometimes when the scene is a majority of one color (green foliage or blue sky) the custom WB shooting through the LCC plate or expo disk can skew the balance which is why I make an image with reflected grey reference.
Stuart, very nice shots.
Could you go into a bit more detail about how the colours are wrong, and what your workflow and setup is, including colour profiling? That is the first I have heard of something like this.
Stuart, the first one catches my eye and makes me 'explore' all the little details..
stuart: nice shots. i find with the 6008 and same lenses and P20 set to daylight that the colors are almost perfect when they come up in C1. When using the 205/CFV and Phocus, I had always to correct kelvin and tint a bit, usually the same way
Thanks everyone for the comments.
Ed -- I was trying to make the insomnia work for me -- I wanted to get an idea of when the shooting light was good for you. Basically, on June 1st there was good shooting light from around 6:30pm until 11, then again from 4am until 9 or 10. Of course it can be good outside of these times, but it is more "daylight". The light should be similar on July 12th, which is 21 days after the solstice. As you get further from the solstice, things get later (in the morning) and earlier (in the evening) by a total of about 6-7 minutes a day.
I have to go to work soon, but a few things that I think are at play here in terms of the color -- I think flare is playing a role in desaturating. The 40mm flares a bit into the light, and I do not have a shade, so I had to use my hand. Not ideal. The colors in the telephoto one are better and closer to accurate. Two -- there is something about the moss that covers the lava that tends to defy accurate color balance. I have never really found a camera that can photograph it the way it looks to the eye. I am wondering if it is an IR effect or something, but it does the same thing with the M8 and IR filters. I will try a polarizer.
As for my color management -- I basically shoot it at the daylight setting on the back. I bring the photos into Exposure to be converted to DNG's, then I edit them in Capture One. My monitor is calibrated with an XRite system, and it is an Eizo Color Edge monitor.
I will see if I can answer more later as well as edit some more photos.
Which profile you use in c1 since there is no specific profile for the Sinar back.
For this reason I try to use the Exposure software as much as I can also for converting the dng.
I found some color shift in some images I took in high altitude (around 2500m) and harsh light with snow with the 40mm.
I guess inextreme light it can make sense to shoot and use LCC. (I never do though)
Edit: I'll get to this later.
Graham -- Sometimes I can get a decent white balance in eXposure, but I find the program to be very very poor, so I avoid it as much as I can.
In all programs, the standard daylight white balance is way off. The back's standard daylight balance is listed 4843 +47 magenta tint. It should be 5500 +10. The presets in eXposure are also very odd. Tungsten is 6000 and 0? Flash is 6400 +4? Tungsten should be 3800 or so. Again, this is not critical, but the overall workflow in eXposure just makes it unwieldy, and I try to just get the RAW files turned into DNG's and then get into a better program. Sadly, the better the program's workflow, the worse it seems to be as an actual converter. eXposure probably does the best job, but it is terrible to use. Capture One does a good job, but is not all that enjoyable to use. Lightroom is a breeze to use, but does not give particularly good results. Anyway....
Ok, here are the film shots. Digital certainly has the better dynamic range, though the slides look much better than these scans. It is very difficult to replicate the contrast range and color that slides have in a scan, particularly in these extremely contrasty lighting conditions. That said, these colors look a bit more "right" to me. I have not had time to edit the digital colors to more closely mimic the film. Neither is "right" though. These shots are velvia 100, which I just happened to have on hand. Astia or E100G would have been much better for the lighting conditions.
And from a rusted out car nearby:
And some black and whites:
Try to guess where I shot this image. Contax 645 with Aptus 65.
Processed with an OldPhoto and Sharpener plugins.
aptus 75s, horseman swdII, 55mm lens (all images from full range rise and shift... then some cropped appropriately)
Last edited by JimCollum; 6th June 2009 at 23:18.
are you still using film today or are these "old" shots.
If you are using film, which camera do you have? And which scanner do you use?
I cannot get rid of the idea to do some work again in film as I have now the Hasselblad Flextight X5 as scanner and currently scanning all my old 6x6 and 645 material - a wonderful machine! And the magic of a good 6x6 scan is something where even the best of today's MFDBs are miles away
I could easily buy a Hasselblad 503 with 3 lenses and 2 film backs for €3000.- and just continue with 6x6. It will take years (maybe decades) before 6x6 digital backs will be available for a reasonable price and maybe that would never happen ....
Thanks for your thoughts ....
I suspect after your trip in Arizona, you will have an Phase back racing you home -- maybe even waiting at your door before you get there
Peter -- those are current. Those particular shots were taken with a Rollei 6008AF (black and white ones) and a Hy6 (the color 645 ones). I use an Imacon 646. It is a great scanner, but even it cannot fully replicate the color range and contrast range of a difficult slide -- slides are just really tricky. I agree that a good film shot and a good MF digital shot are miles away, but probably not in the way you are thinking. For me it is about the "look" of film. I honestly cannot explain it, but it almost always looks better to me than digital, and this is not just for my own photos, but what I see in others' work as well. It is just what my eye prefers. I will readily admit, however, that for almost all intents and purposes, digital wins on the technical details -- it has higher apparent sharpness, more resolution, wider dynamic range, and more flexibility. But for whatever reason, film seems to look better to me, which is why I put up with it.
As the Borg say, "Resistance is futile."
Poking around in the back yard looking for ideas... Mammy ZD back, 120 macro.
All garden variety, I know!
Beautiful color Jan!
Here are two from a road trip I took on Saturday night. These were taken around 11:30pm.
The mountains are called north and south Hádegisfell (noon mountain?). It is on a road to Kaldidalur (Cold Valley).
A weekend trip to Colorado Springs a few weeks back. From the hotel window. Saturday morning, above; Sunday morning, below.
Added two more to my Industrial Observations Within the Western Landscape series that I posted here a little while back.