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.

yaya

Active member
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 Fox

Workshop Member
Going through last year's images ... this is one of my favorites ..

PhaseOne DFp65+ with 75-150 at 150, 1/13th at f12
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Some repeats of posts made in the Images to share section:
Sand Dunes and Snow


Totem


Creosote Bush



distant clouds


Sunrise

-bob
 

etrump

Well-known member
Totally awesome workshop images. Jack that grand canyon image is wonderful, great light, weather and a killer composition.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Thanks Ed, thanks Frits! I will be printing that one big for sure, and hopefully tomorrow. I think I'll probably spend a little more time on localized editing first though.

PS: Irony of ironies, that is arguably the worst lens technically in my entire MF stable, yet it continually produces some of my best images! :ROTFL:
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
When I shot with a Mamiya 645, my most used lens was the 210mm f4 which apparently was rubbish, I didn't know it at the time, neither did the people who bought all those pictures over the years :)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I grabbed this shot with the 105-210 at around 170. It's amazing how well these old Mamiya "junker" lenses work:

 

mediumcool

Active member
I grabbed this shot with the 105-210 at around 170. It's amazing how well these old Mamiya "junker" lenses work:

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).

:)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
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.
 

mediumcool

Active member
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.
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.

Yes, digital has the range to move things about, especially in the lower tones—highlights can be problematic in my experience. I have never found the highlight tolerance that many reviews and tests espouse, so I always expose as if I’m using Kodachrome X! [dating myself?]
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
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 :)
 

mediumcool

Active member
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 :)
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.

With digital we have BOBW!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top