jerome_m
Member
The series is very nice and the post processing fits very well. Is this the same grain that Olivier Chauvignat uses?Gaucho from Entre Rios, Argentina.
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!
The series is very nice and the post processing fits very well. Is this the same grain that Olivier Chauvignat uses?Gaucho from Entre Rios, Argentina.
Ed, I always use the tripod with this lens. I can get away without the extra support system if using high shutter speeds >1/250s. Even with the extra support, speeds around 1/15s, are problematic; the addition of the Manfrotto is then very helpful.Hi Tim,
I've got this lens and the 1.4x but have yet to use the combo much. Are these all taken with the tripod and full support system we have discussed before, or can you get away with faster shutter speed shots using less support?
Hello Jerome and thank you , I don't know what Olivier uses, but I think it's quite a more complex method he does. I don't "need" that complexity to fake grain. It's only LR processed and I'm happy with the results.The series is very nice and the post processing fits very well. Is this the same grain that Olivier Chauvignat uses?
I can't check what Olivier wrote about it because the forum where he posted details it is not accessible from Germany any more, but I recall that he used a different grain for the dark and for the lights parts of the image.Hello Jerome and thank you , I don't know what Olivier uses, but I think it's quite a more complex method he does.
I don't know. CI does not answer my mails. I have access when on holidays in France. In Munich, none of my friends have access. All we get is an Apache test page.Really ? Why is this about CI not visible from Germany ??
Must have been an interesting trip.I took this picture on my trip in January this year.
You just changed the H3D-39 for the H3DII-39? I think that the only difference is that you get is a bigger screen?I sold two years ago my H3D-39 for the H3DII-39.
That's it but the screen was so... awful... ! And I got the H3DII-39 a lot cheaper than the H3D-39 with 6 month warranty !I don't know. CI does not answer my mails. I have access when on holidays in France. In Munich, none of my friends have access. All we get is an Apache test page.
Tell the people on the forum I say hello, but I don't think I will come back.
Must have been an interesting trip.
You just changed the H3D-39 for the H3DII-39? I think that the only difference is that you get is a bigger screen?
It is the same boat, but is not quite the same picture. There are some changes in the sand, for example the three clumps on the left of the rope become two. The round bit at the rear of the boat is not there.I found the negative that was used on the August 1937 cover of Zeiss Magazine. It is posted along with a scan of the magazine cover.
You are probably thinking about the 60 mpix sensor, but it is not much bigger actually.That's it but the screen was so... awful... ! And I got the H3DII-39 a lot cheaper than the H3D-39 with 6 month warranty !
I love this camera. The only better for me would be a bigger sensor.
Thanks for pointing that out...very strange. I have only found one negative so far. If there are two negs, they must have been taken close to the same time, as the sky is the same (the burning & dodging original darkroom vs my digital approximation not withstanding). The round bit missing is strange. Had it been missing in my print, one could say I eliminated it digitally (I didn't).It is the same boat, but is not quite the same picture. There are some changes in the sand, for example the three clumps on the left of the rope become two. The round bit at the rear of the boat is not there.