PDA

View Full Version : Infrared:Flooded Forest.


Maris Rusis
August 23rd, 2012, 07:17 PM
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8021/7356316778_47e8ec3ea7_b.jpg
Flooded Forest, number 1

Gelatin-silver photograph, image size 24.4cm X 19.6cm, from a Efke IR820 8x10 negative exposed on Freestyle Private Reserve VC FB photographic paper in a divided back contact frame. Camera was a 8x10 Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Nikkor-W 210mm f5.6 lens and an IR680 filter.

A flooded forest is a fortuitous bit of subject matter that just happens to exploit the peculiar properties of Efke IR820 infrared film. The water is rendered black in infrared but because it is absolutely still it becomes a perfect mirror of "black glass". The reflection doubles the amount of luminous detail because it replaces an otherwise schmutzy foreground; an old trick that works every time!

Film exposure was 15 minutes at f16 at an effective film EI = 0.15. That's slow. What wasn't slow was me. I'm jumping about slapping mosquitos while not bumping the camera. Suffering for art takes many forms.

Bart_van_der_Wolf
August 24th, 2012, 12:04 AM
Gelatin-silver photograph, image size 24.4cm X 19.6cm, from a Efke IR820 8x10 negative exposed on Freestyle Private Reserve VC FB photographic paper in a divided back contact frame. Camera was a 8x10 Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Nikkor-W 210mm f5.6 lens and an IR680 filter.

A flooded forest is a fortuitous bit of subject matter that just happens to exploit the peculiar properties of Efke IR820 infrared film. The water is rendered black in infrared but because it is absolutely still it becomes a perfect mirror of "black glass". The reflection doubles the amount of luminous detail because it replaces an otherwise schmutzy foreground; an old trick that works every time!

Film exposure was 15 minutes at f16 at an effective film EI = 0.15. That's slow. What wasn't slow was me. I'm jumping about slapping mosquitos while not bumping the camera. Suffering for art takes many forms.

Hi Maris,

It was worth the suffering, the result is a very impressive image. I hope that f/16 was enough for some DOF, because this image deserves to be output at 40 inch or more.

Cheers,
Bart

Maggie Terlecki
August 24th, 2012, 07:35 AM
Maris,

What an outstanding image. I would love to see it up close and personal as there seems to be just so much detail to marvel about.
:-)
Maggie

Maris Rusis
August 26th, 2012, 06:14 PM
Hi Maris,

It was worth the suffering, the result is a very impressive image. I hope that f/16 was enough for some DOF, because this image deserves to be output at 40 inch or more.

Cheers,
Bart

Thanks Bart. There is a shortfall in the depth of field and it is visible in the lower left hand corner. I made this area dark so it does not intrude on the general impression.

If this was an image it could maybe go to 40 inches but unfortunately (fortunately?) it is a physical photograph 253.5mm x 204.0mm, weighing 16.03 grammes, and 0.3mm thick. It's the object I set out to produce as an endpoint to the chain of production that started with a camera trek into the forest. Making a 40 inch photograph is possible but it is enormously difficult. Just picking up a wet 40 inch wide piece of gelatin-silver photographic paper is a finely coordinated two man job if bends and creases are to be avoided.

Curiously, even though I have an 8x10 enlarger, it sees little use. Collectors seem to prefer contacts over enlargements.

Maris Rusis
August 26th, 2012, 06:24 PM
Maris,

What an outstanding image. I would love to see it up close and personal as there seems to be just so much detail to marvel about.
:-)
Maggie

Thanks Maggie. This photograph went on my $49 flat bed scanner to generate the electronic file that you are looking at. If you have a 20 inch monitor like the one I have in front of me the visual impression delivered is close to what you would see if you had the actual photograph in hand, no more no less..... sort of.

Maggie Terlecki
August 26th, 2012, 08:58 PM
Thanks Maggie. This photograph went on my $49 flat bed scanner to generate the electronic file that you are looking at. If you have a 20 inch monitor like the one I have in front of me the visual impression delivered is close to what you would see if you had the actual photograph in hand, no more no less..... sort of.

I have a 22 inch so pretty close. I am sure I will come back and stare at this again in the future, so beautiful. Thanks for sharing it.
:-)
Maggie

Asher Kelman
August 26th, 2012, 10:29 PM
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8021/7356316778_47e8ec3ea7_b.jpg
Flooded Forest, number 1


Superbly made, Maris! I really enjoy the range of shadings and your mastery of the light. I love such views of nature and am surprised that this is from IR film!

Asher

Bart_van_der_Wolf
August 27th, 2012, 12:29 AM
Thanks Bart. There is a shortfall in the depth of field and it is visible in the lower left hand corner. I made this area dark so it does not intrude on the general impression.

If this was an image it could maybe go to 40 inches but unfortunately (fortunately?) it is a physical photograph 253.5mm x 204.0mm, weighing 16.03 grammes, and 0.3mm thick. It's the object I set out to produce as an endpoint to the chain of production that started with a camera trek into the forest. Making a 40 inch photograph is possible but it is enormously difficult. Just picking up a wet 40 inch wide piece of gelatin-silver photographic paper is a finely coordinated two man job if bends and creases are to be avoided.

Curiously, even though I have an 8x10 enlarger, it sees little use. Collectors seem to prefer contacts over enlargements.

Hi Maris,

I understand, it's hard to beat a contact print. Nevertheless, a good scan can help for large format output as well.

Cheers,
Bart