She

Hands are a bit too clear, due to scanner i suppose...



Yashica Electro 35 GTN, Tri-X 400, direct film scan

Bonjour Cedric!

I'm so happy to wake up to see this picture. It's important in that it has an immediate charm and captures attention. The girl appears in a moment of special being. Maybe you posed her, it doesn't matter. What you have shown is a personal presence.

I do not need more technical details. This is a picture that has no barriers to enjoyment. It's ready for showing. Still as a photographer returning to film, I'd like to know how this was processed and scanned. Also do you happen to know the lens and shot details as I'm not familiar with this camera?

Thanks for sharing!

Asher

Hi Asher,

I gave you informations in a long e-mail but, for others, i can give some technical details here : this picture has been shot with a Yashica Electro 35, a nice and very good rangefinder with a 45mm fixed-lens. I remember that aperture was set to f1.7 or f2, and focus was on the hands of my wife (yes, this charming person is my beloved wife).

Hi,
I like the feel of the picture.
However:
Focuspoint is on the sleeve and not on the glass or eyes where it should have been.
The hands are a bit hot indeed, but nothing photoshop can't fix

Focus - and arguably light/contrast - is exactly where and how it should be for this image. Otherwise it would just be another photo conforming to arbitrary rules.

Luckily Cedric shows here a vision of his own, not what others with lesser creativity made into rules once.

To cite Thoreau [man, should he be read more]: Any fool can make a rule - and every fool can mind it.

Dierk Haasis said:

Focus - and arguably light/contrast - is exactly where and how it should be for this image. Otherwise it would just be another photo conforming to arbitrary rules.

Luckily Cedric shows here a vision of his own, not what others with lesser creativity made into rules once.

To cite Thoreau [man, should he be read more]: Any fool can make a rule - and every fool can mind it.

Click to expand...

Dierk,

You are absolutely correct. This is a delicately executed personal portrait. Here the light and focus are on her hands! We are seeing a rather modest women. The photographer, therefore has responded to an aura he is sensing in her. So we do not penetrate her private sphere with a focus plane reaching to her face. That would be intrusive here and would alter what Cedric observed in this transient moment. Rather Cedric is parsimoniously sampling the scene, trying not to remake from something indefinite, a woman more sharply defined and clearly rendered. That's a temptation we, with our great lenses could easily succumb to.

Note that we are seeing lovely hands lit and focused gently as if painted by a brush of Michelangelo. Why? Why not her face lit so? The woman is not the subject. Her nature and mind, what is behind her hands and what you do not see, are the subject. Having her eyes shown in focus might break that creative magic spell that Cedric has cast on his subject. Being able to show what one cannot see is a great quality separating photographic art from photographic imaging.

I wrote more earlier but didn't post it pending other comments.

"So why is it so inviting? She is secure. Here arms support her with no awkwardness. Her hands are lit well with gentle light that renders her hands in an angelic way. The glass and plate before her,
appearing to float away, adding to the impression of her moving away from the present time. She might be far off, thinking or reminiscing or hoping. That range of possibilities allows us travel with her as she ponders time. That's what art can do. That's part of the function of art."

Asher

Thank you very much for all these comments.

Don't be offended when I post a critique, I never mean it harsch or bad

The focus is on the sleeve and not on the hand, or at least so it is shown here on my monitor and as far as I know the monitor I use doesn't shift focus points (just a joke of course).

When posting something, critique can be posted, if the critique is positive this is nice, if it's negative don't take that the wrong way, or people will simply stop commenting.
I always try to set aside my personal TASTE in my critique, but here I can't help to comment on the focus.
If it was on the hand the sleeve should be less sharp seeing the focus plane.
Look at the hair on the hand were according to you the focus should be and you see that the hair is out of focus, while the sleeve is 100% sharp.

Again sorry if I said something you don't agree upon, but it's simply my advise.

The feel of the photo is great, so I did not comment on that.

Frank Doorhof said:

Don't be offended when I post a critique, I never mean it harsch or bad

The focus is on the sleeve and not on the hand, or at least so it is shown here on my monitor and as far as I know the monitor I use doesn't shift focus points (just a joke of course).

When posting something, critique can be posted, if the critique is positive this is nice, if it's negative don't take that the wrong way, or people will simply stop commenting.
I always try to set aside my personal TASTE in my critique, but here I can't help to comment on the focus.
If it was on the hand the sleeve should be less sharp seeing the focus plane.
Look at the hair on the hand were according to you the focus should be and you see that the hair is out of focus, while the sleeve is 100% sharp.

Again sorry if I said something you don't agree upon, but it's simply my advise.

The feel of the photo is great, so I did not comment on that.

Click to expand...

Well, personnally i accept all type of comments, negative or positive...

I tried to focus on the hands, your analyze is true but don't neglect the effect of digital sharpening in Photoshop : sleeve seems much sharper than the hands because it contains regular grounds that are easily and well sharpened with an appropriate filter, when smooth texture of the skin is not. Maybe focus is not so precise (rangefinder of my Yashica has a quite small basis), but i am sure than sharpness differences between sleeve and hands are not so clear on original analog film and original TIFF file.

Normally the focus should not shift during downconversion.
You could solve this by slightly blurring the sleeve to the same ammount as the hair.

I agree with you that there is a little focus shift but, what i wanted to say is that shift is reinforced by digital sharpening i made in Photoshop : original sleeve doesn't appear so sharp.

By the way, i like thic picture as it is, it gives the emotion i wanted it to give

Quand même, c'est bien. Il faut sentir cette photo! Ca suffis ici ! Mais Frank a raison aussi. Peut-être qu'on peut essayer comme il dit et vous pouvez décider si c'est mieux oui or non !

In English, perhaps try Frank's ideas, he's good!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Also do you happen to know the lens and shot details as I'm not familiar with this camera?
Asher

Click to expand...

A very similar camera id described here (Yashica Electro 35 GSN). Oh - the reviewer is Ken Rockwell; those who can't stand him can just not follow the link but in this case he does seem to have used what he is reviewing.

A charming and intimate portrayal.

(By 'clear' do you mean clair, ie too light?)

(By 'clear' do you mean clair, ie too light?)

Click to expand...

Yes, it is that