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.

Don Libby

Well-known member
Don, Thanks for the advice re the lens choice for the Phase 1 macro.

We have some really good Canon Macro gear, however when we travel with our motocycle and trailer, I have to limit what we take for reasons of weight.
Also I just love working with the IQ files - it feels wothwhile to spend a lot of time on a large file where as with the smaller Canon files I spend just as much time and end up with a lesser result.

I will start looking around for a lens -

Do you use a macro rail and focus stack your images?


mal
Mal, glad to be of service. I'm a little uncomfortable going into depth here as I fear we're going too far astray from the "Fun with MF images" concept.

I remember using a 100mm macro when using a 1DsII years ago and find this usage to be superior; of course it might be having 60 megapixels to pay with.

Regarding tools - I have and use a macro rail (I actually use it more with the WRS) as well as image stacking. I've used a plastic water bottle cut in half to hold the model and reciently picked up a fly-tying vise to try a better way of posing.

The great thing about this type of photography is that you're limited only by your imagination. I didn't actually see the bug in the previous image until I had it on the monitor.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I use the Phase One 120mm macro. No rail. Stunningly great lens, and it competes with my Nikon 105mm macro on a regular basis.

I have built a nice collection of the Mamiya and Phase One lenses.

45mm Probably gets the most use these days...
80mm Nice but not my go to.
120mm Very nice, used sparingly
105-210mm Can't remember the last time I used it.
300mm Sometimes, but sparingly.
Interesting collection.

I've been using SK 35, 72 and 120mm lenses with my WRS for years and decided that I would try not to duplicate those when the DF so have the 80, 150 and 300. All was going to plan until I picked up the 120 macro. Of all the lens I think my less used is the 35mm. I wouldn't trade any of them.

Don
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member


Echo Lake, Mount Evans. Idaho Springs, CO
It was a very dark cloudy day. The clouds were moving very fast. I anticipated extremely long exposure would make a nice effect. The wind blew like crazy I had to hold my tripod with both hands the whole time during a 2-minute exposure.

Hasselblad H4D-40
Hasselblad HCD 35-90mm at 35mm
Lee 0.9GND and Lee Big Stopper (10-stop ND)
ISO 100
f/8
Exposure 128 sec

Cheers,
Pramote
 
Last edited:

Don Libby

Well-known member
Echo Lake, Mount Evans. Idaho Springs, CO
It was a very dark cloudy day. The clouds were moving very fast. I anticipated extremely long exposure would make a nice effect. The wind blew like crazy I had to hold my tripod with both hands the whole time during a 2-minute exposure.

Hasselblad H4D-40
Hasselblad HCD 35-90mm at 35mm
Lee 0.9GND and Lee Big Stopper (10-stop ND)
ISO 100
f/8
Exposure 128 sec

Cheers,
Pramote
Very nice :thumbs:
 
Echo Lake, Mount Evans. Idaho Springs, CO
It was a very dark cloudy day. The clouds were moving very fast. I anticipated extremely long exposure would make a nice effect. The wind blew like crazy I had to hold my tripod with both hands the whole time during a 2-minute exposure.

Hasselblad H4D-40
Hasselblad HCD 35-90mm at 35mm
Lee 0.9GND and Lee Big Stopper (10-stop ND)
ISO 100
f/8
Exposure 128 sec

Cheers,
Pramote
Well seen and executed. Even though you shot from the road, that's not an easy picture to get.
 

tsjanik

Well-known member
I'd like some advice on processing images for the web from the collective wisdom of this group. I see images from others that appear to maintain the subtle variation in tone expected in a good print. Here are two examples of images that produce marvelous prints, yet become blah when I post them. The pine trees print has a 3D quality that is striking. When I took a 17x22 print to my framer, he immediately ordered one for himself! The Canada geese on a calm lake has a beautiful smooth transition from pale blue in the sky to the pastel yellow haze of the lake; the geese are beautifully delineated in the print. I know that the small size of the jpeg impacts the geese, but the colors have suffered as well

My normal process: convert to sRGB, 16 to 8 bit, image size 1200 pixels @72 ppi, save as jpeg. Thanks

Tom

PS If nothing else I'm convinced that it will be a long time before electronic displays replace prints!



 

Shashin

Well-known member
My normal process: convert to sRGB, 16 to 8 bit, image size 1200 pixels @72 ppi, save as jpeg. Thanks

Tom
First, the 72dpi is meaningless. The web displays at pixel resolution only.

I have found the biggest problem is the conversion to sRGB. The color gamut of the file and web just will not match and when you go from a larger gamut to a smaller one, the images is just screwed up. You can try different rendering intents--perceptual, relative colormetric, etc.--but it is always a compromise.

If you are using ProPhoto RGB, it just has a hard time at 8-bit as the coordinate difference is too large to render subtle color difference and so effects like banding is common. ProPhoto gives you a large color gamut, but the downside is each color is further apart (a greater step between each color coordinate) and so it needs 16-bit to preserve subtle color changes.

I really like that second image.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top