Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] IMG: Ten new film images from the Netherlands
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 04:13:48 -0400

I'm very found of using both a dark green filter or red.  Both really go for
the gusto especially the red. I like my images as dramatic as possible. I'm
not much on subtlety for landscapes or city scapes.
Yes red and green are opposites but both for me are most useful.
The red when there are no greenery to go eerily black like maybe shrubs way
far away and when there are skies which can stand to be separated out the
most they can. You'll see wisps of clouds where there were none before. It
cuts the uv out right through its own ozone hole to outer space. I like
that.
But the green does great cutting into to the sky but lightening the
vegetation seems to work well with most shots.  The lightening  of the
greens look more natural not less. And if a humanoid creeps into the pic
they wont be turned into a Martian. A red filter does that. White lips white
cheeps. That's a Martian.  Maybe Venus I'm no expert. Not from Earth that's
all I know.
For minimal filtration I used the yellow-green. I used that  filter hand
held sometimes.
I never ever with landscapes use no filter when shooting black and white
film.
And I never use yellow. Which some people think as close to no filter. They
think of it as a UV filter.
Oh and I find an orange filter useless. It just seems to make everything
render terribly.
That's what I do.

Polarizers can be fun.



Mark William Rabiner



> From: Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 08:41:06 +0200
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Ten new film images from the Netherlands
> 
> Given the limited amount of post-processing I do, the characteristics of 
> the
> film are preserved in the images I post, I think. I shot some images on 
> Delta
> 100 with tripod, but later I got tired lugging the tripod around and 
> switched
> to Tri-X. Still later I put the red filter on and the tripod came out 
> again.
> That was on Texel. The ones of the windmill etc. are all handheld, no 
> filter.
> 
> The lab I use uses XTOL, which happens to be what I used when I did my own
> developing, so that's another good thing.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nathan
> 
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
> 
> YNWA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 4, 2011, at 12:09 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Nowadays with the control we get in scanning I wonder  how much is left 
>> over
>> in a film/ developer/ dilution choice. How much "look" is left over from
>> that choice that we see on your monitors 1000 pixels across? As I think in
>> scanning and post balancing we can make anything balance out to look like
>> anything with out even the use of that third party software where we can
>> just  hit that "tri ix in Rodinal 1:100" button and it would not matter 
>> that
>> it was shot in Neopan Across 100 in Xtol 1:3.
>> 
>> I think the look these shots from the Netherlands have are not so much 
>> based
>> on their film and soup choice. Unless we were looking at darkroom prints 
>> in
>> person.  
>> And I'm sure they'd look just fine.
>> 
>> I don't think once we scan them and turn them into a screen sized jpeg we
>> know what we are  looking at in that sense. Which is one reason I have
>> trouble going out  and buying a brick of film.
>> 
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




In reply to: Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] IMG: Ten new film images from the Netherlands)