Comments: 20
Dr-Zook [2008-03-05 01:12:22 +0000 UTC]
I like
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
cybrghst [2006-08-24 17:50:26 +0000 UTC]
Excellent Ben, nice warm colors, beautifully composed!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
funygirl38 [2005-08-15 00:30:09 +0000 UTC]
I have a couple questions about warming filters myself as to recommendations. I have a simple polarizer which helps and I am in the market for a warming filter to enhance my shots, pity though it is that I won't be getting one before my vacation next week. I love what it's done to this shot.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AcousticAlchemy In reply to funygirl38 [2005-08-17 05:59:05 +0000 UTC]
Thanks.
I'm afraid I can't offer TOO much help on warming filters. The one I use is an 81B which I got for 5 dollars at my local photography store. It certainly is no Singh-Ray, but it does the job. I think that it is kind of hard to go wrong in this regard.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
funygirl38 In reply to AcousticAlchemy [2005-08-18 01:45:59 +0000 UTC]
Any advice is well appreciated, thanks so much, I'm heading to Maine for my vacation this coming week so maybe I'll look for a camera store up there.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
StarTyger [2005-08-12 00:01:11 +0000 UTC]
This is terrific light. Most photographers don't want to wait for this to happen. (Why? Because often you wait and it DOESN'T happen. Persistence is a great trait for a photographer)
Have you looked at David Muench's images? This is his type of light.
If you haven't looked at his images, by all means do so. His scenics have become the most dominant of any
American landscape photographer (I'm not necessarily saying this is completely good).
Anyway, this is an excellent image of a shot that has been taken many times over. To be able to go so far beyond the common is
a great credit to what you've obtained here.
Cya
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
StarTyger In reply to AcousticAlchemy [2005-08-12 03:29:25 +0000 UTC]
My objection to David Muench is not so much him, but that other photographers feel they have to shoot images like his; that is, scenics with these powerful foregrounds. People feel they have to try to shoot similarly because of his notoriety, rather than any artistic consideration on their part. And shooting the way he does is not easy to master, tho once you have it figured out, you can pretty much repeat it over and over without much variation.
He uses a Linhof Technika 4 (not 5, I think)--a 4x5 view camera. I only have a Technika 2
This allows him to do things that cant be done with a 35 or med. format. A camera with swings and tilts is vital. Especially tilts--look up the Schiempflug Effect. Trying to emulate him using 35mm often results in either out of focus foregrounds or backgrounds; or, a foreground that instead of looking bold, looking simply in-the-way.
Additionally, and I don't know for sure that he's tested his lenses, tho I imagine he knows this about his lenses is that each lens has an fstop that is actually sharper than the others (the optimum place can be between fstops also). Usually this is a small, but not necessarily the smallest fstop either (varying from one lens to the next). Ansel Adams, for example, belonged to what was referred to as the f64 Club. However, I understood that over time, he, himself realized that f64 was not his sharpest aperture.
Regardless, once you figure out this best aperture, just set your lens there everytime you can and you'll be rewarded over and over with exceedingly sharp images.
Just out of curiosity, when do you start school, and how can you get away for a fall trip to Zion?
I'll miss talking to you, but'll be anxious to see your images when you et back.
Cya
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AcousticAlchemy In reply to StarTyger [2005-08-12 04:07:32 +0000 UTC]
I agree with what you say, about many photographers trying to emulate and even copy famous photographers such as Adams or Muench. I actually found that I, subconciously, during my trip, was always kind of looking and hoping to get "that shot" that I saw in the magazines.
I have really been looking into large and medium format lately... Now that my photographic ability is getting to a place where I am happy with almost every shot I take, and that I am beginning to consider selling prints off of a website or at art shows or wherever, the ability to make larger, more brilliant prints will become more and more valuable, plus the fact that I just want the experience... everyone I know that shoots medium or large format far prefers it over any of the other formats.
It is true that the smallest aperture will never give you the full optical performance of your lens. Most lenses have a "sweet spot" between f8 and f13 (for 35mm at least), which unfortunately doesn't give enough DOF for most landscapes with foreground. I usually find f16 and f18 to be my best bet on landscapes for both DOF and optical performance.
I start school September 7, so in reality I would not be able to get away for an Autumn trip to Zion or anywhere in the Southwest until I am totally out of school and college, which is unfortunate, but I guess that there isn't much I can do about it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
StarTyger In reply to AcousticAlchemy [2005-08-12 04:42:56 +0000 UTC]
Imitating is certainly OK, but many try to do it without understanding what they are trying to do, and many never get beyond imitating. One has to get beyond being chained to other artists in this way.
That's where Schiempflug saves the day. It's a way to increase depth of field. There's a book out by Jack Dykinga on large format photography that you might find interesting. He's another top scenic photographer.
My problem with Large Format is that I never felt I was truly able to make it 'an extension of my eye' whereas with 35mm I felt that.
Keep in mind that most of the best scenic photographers seem to be middleaged men. I'm not saying you should be in any rush to get there before your time, but it's something to look forward to.
Well, I gots to get to bed. Cya when you get back.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AcousticAlchemy In reply to StarTyger [2005-08-12 05:06:55 +0000 UTC]
again, Jack Dykinga is another of my favorite photographers.
I'm in no rush... I think photography will be a big part of my life for a long time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1