Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

B&W for C&C

  • 26-06-2007 5:01pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 92 ✭✭


    Two from a recent trip to Vancouver Island.

    Praktica BCA with a Zeiss 2.8/28mm and 02 orange filter, on Ilford Pan F developed for 6 minutes in Rodinal 1:25. Scanned and levels corrected in Photoshop. I'll be printing these in the darkroom later in the week, it'll be interesting to compare scanned neg to scanned print.

    Tofino Floatplane:

    627228845_87292f858f.jpg

    Amphitrite Lighthouse:

    627228733_febf54aa4f.jpg


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Quite near to some friends there.

    I love that plane, great shot - My da took something similar last time he was over. The mooring leads the eye into the plane quite well.

    Not gone in the second shot. There's nothing much there to interest me.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 92 ✭✭prox


    Perhaps I should have used a more expensive camera.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,624 ✭✭✭✭Fajitas!


    Perhaps you should have taken something else.

    You may keep your smart comments to yourself, you asked for C&C and I gave it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,764 ✭✭✭Valentia


    Very difficult to comment on quality at this size I'm afraid. The processing is fine though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,332 ✭✭✭311


    The second one is smelly.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 92 ✭✭prox


    Finally, some honesty.

    Larger sizes are here, but they're a bit softer than the originals [flickr resize job]:

    http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1091/627228845_87292f858f_b.jpg
    http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1254/627228733_febf54aa4f_b.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,764 ✭✭✭Valentia


    I like the tones a lot and the composition and drama of the first one. I'm not sure the softness is totally down to Flickr. They are particularly fluffy and lacking definition and sharpness. Particularly the second one. Must be the equipment that you used. A new 5D with L lenses would sort that out fairly quickly though. ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 92 ✭✭prox


    Doubtless. I'm printing them in the darkroom tonight, will scan the results for comparison. I'm not looking forward to the lighthouse one, there's a lighter band across part of the image due [in all likelihood] to amatuerishness in the developing. Trivial to get rid of it in PS, pain in the ass with an enlarger.

    The negs look pretty sharp, so I'm willing to blame the scanner [Canoscan 8400f] for the fluffiness for the moment. I tend not to let it apply an unsharp mask while scanning.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 51,182 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    there's little to hold interest in the bottom right of the lighthouse shot. i'd lighten it a bit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 92 ✭✭prox


    The whole image can lighten quite a bit - I rescanned it last night using Vuescan instead of the Canon driver and it did a much better job in the shadows.

    I don't think I mind the darkness against the whiteness of the lighthouse, but there needs to be a lot more detail in it for sure.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,263 ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    First shot is great.


Advertisement