Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > OPF Welcome Hall > Layback Cafe

Layback Cafe Let's chat!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old May 4th, 2008, 07:34 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erie Patsellis View Post
Asher,
I have a tendency to shoot tightly, in fact, from time to time (when the composition benefits from it) I even let a subject fall off the edge of the frame.
I am munching on grapes that fell off the monitor on to my keyboard, they are so real!

The point is that you did not screw up. So that's O.K. I know a lot of people who's images are near perfect except for slight cropping differences which can be awkward when the proportions don't work for the size of page. I'm addressing enthusiasts, pretty skilled in the use of Photoshop who can develop RAW from 4 different programs yet shoot so tight that they are stuck. Shooting in portrait and horizontal allows fro a double page spread. But when the copy is going to be added and that might be used bleeding into 1/4 of a page, let the designer have some room to move in.

Pros know their job and do the right thing or they don't eat!

However, for artistic work, I think it can be a big mistake not to have wiggle room.




Though in all fairness, I sometimes take a broader view,


I happened to be driving in the country and saw a field of sunflowers, after shooting way too many frame filling sunflowers, I threw the 17mm on the F3 and while framing, noticed just how wide the sucker is, exaggerating the near far juxtaposition nicely. Of the 2 rolls I shot there, this is the only picture I'm truly happy with.[/quote]

This is a remarkable use of ultrawide angle. Fields of flowers are more of a challenge that a lot of people recognize and yours is a good solution and came out well. Have you printed it yet? What size will it be?
Did you select the flower and leaf to selectively sharpen them and then blur the b.g.? Maybe you might share the lens details. Is this film/diigital?

Thanks for sharing!

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old May 4th, 2008, 09:09 PM
Erie Patsellis Erie Patsellis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post

Pros know their job and do the right thing or they don't eat!

However, for artistic work, I think it can be a big mistake not to have wiggle room.




Though in all fairness, I sometimes take a broader view,

This is a remarkable use of ultrawide angle. Fields of flowers are more of a challenge that a lot of people recognize and yours is a good solution and came out well. Have you printed it yet? What size will it be?
Did you select the flower and leaf to selectively sharpen them and then blur the b.g.? Maybe you might share the lens details. Is this film/diigital?

Thanks for sharing!

Asher
I've only printed some working proofs off the Frontier at the studio and my HP 8750 here. I'm going to be sending it off be printed around 20x30 or 24x26, the lab I use for anything over 10" wide has a 30" chromira, so I'll probably get some 20x and 10x prints made. The only post was correcting levels, I'm a firm believer in truth in photography (per the other thread) and am first and foremost a film shooter. No gimmicks for me, there's a reason why the DOF preview button is on the camera.

Lens was a 17 3.5 Tokina ATX (older, MF all metal version) I picked up years ago for little money (<$25, IIRC) (Not that I'm a cheapskate, well OK, not only a cheapskate, but typically pretty broke too) aperture would have been no smaller than 5.6 and probably f3.5 or 4. Camera was one of the F3/MD4's, tripod would have likely been an older 5 Series Gitzo, Film is NPS. (does that cover all the gearheads? )

Most of my film shooting of late has been for personal enjoyment, as well as helping nail my C41 processing (as well as cross processing and film acceleration techniques) down as the nearest lab that does 120/220 processing is about 2 hours away, and they're pokey as hell, even for a Dev Only/Do Not Print order.

100% of my digital work has been paying work, and I just picked up a product client that is reshooting their annual catalog, should keep me busy for a few months working evenings. (for the time being I have to keep the regular job running a printing press and graphic design) As I keep telling my wife, if you shake enough trees something will fall out, just need to make sure to wear a hat, just in case it's bird $hit.


erie

As an aside, the wine photo was shot with my wife's S2IS, here's a wider shot of the "set"
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old May 5th, 2008, 01:35 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,790
Default

Erie,

The film being NPS was the most telling fact for me. I like the way the film shows the color and texture of the grapes. I do have a question about using an apparently empty bottle on this fine shot!!! I am now looking in my refrigerator to see if I have some NPS and then I need some grapes!

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old May 5th, 2008, 05:20 AM
Erie Patsellis Erie Patsellis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 91
Default

Asher, the sunflower shot was NPS, the Grapes were done with the Canon S2IS.


erie
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old August 31st, 2018, 08:12 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,790
Default

Bump!

Just to stimulate discussion on framing and the aphorism to “frame tight and crop closer”!

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old August 31st, 2018, 10:25 PM
Erie Patsellis Erie Patsellis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 91
Default

wow, a blast from the past...

sometimes tight works really, really well, for example:


This is a perfect example of a metagraphic, as discussed (very, very) earlier:


The brain sees a round french horn, despite what the image shows.

and sometimes in retrospect, a little looser would have been preferable to allow for a better crop (though I still feel a reasonably strong image):


Though to be honest, sometimes it's pure luck that you get a reasonably decent framing:



All of these are mined from my flicker archive, I've had some health issues the last year and a half, and now that I'm past all of that, working like a dog to get caught up on bills.I've made it a personal goal to get out shooting again, it's probably been 3+ years since I've done any serious work, other than the gratuitous birthdays and such.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old August 31st, 2018, 11:41 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,790
Default

Super to have you back, Erie!

We are so grateful you overcame this detour in your path and are now back on track!

A friend of mine suddenly took ill and was found to have multiple myeloma. Being inquisitive, I discovered there was the originator of the most advanced treatment in Boston and got him to join me there for a consult. Being a cancer physician myself made this a personal challenge. Well the fellow is now into treatment for over 6 months and ready for a stem cell transplant and will do well. However, so far the costs were about $500,000!

So imagine that for someone with no insurance and several kids and a wife to feed and clothe!

Life can be really tough. We have to be grateful to our loved ones and for each new day and opportunity we get. Unlike time shared vacations, in life we can’t simply can’t have unlimited enjoyment Rights on planet earth. Our pass here comes with an expiry date!

With the passing of John McCain and Aretha Franklin, this last week, we suddenly are forced to see how for some there are no possible replacements. We also get to be, at least for a while, especially appreciative of our opportunities to enjoy the company and creative achievements and progress of loved ones and those we cherish and respect.

So thank you for returning!

..... happened at the right time.

Thanks!

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old September 1st, 2018, 07:43 AM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,567
Default

Hi, Asher,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
Bump!

Just to stimulate discussion on framing and the aphorism to “frame tight and crop closer”!
"Frame tight" is questionable. It limits our choices in post.

"Crop closer" is neither good nor bad advice. I have seen many very effective images that were cropped closer than my traditional, telephone engineer's background would have led me to do. It is all a matter of the "style" the editor wants to achieve.

As to "enthusiasts" (per the original indictment), I find that I have less enthusiasm as time goes by.

Best regard.

Doug
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old September 1st, 2018, 07:57 AM
Peter Dexter Peter Dexter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Colombia
Posts: 749
Default

On the subject of carefully choosing your frame, many years ago I took a photography course and at that time students were always required to use a twin lens reflex which produced 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 negatives. The idea being they would be easier for new students to work with. There was a big limitation however. There were only 12 shots to a roll so of course you would deliberate very carefully before using one up. But just as I was about to begin the course a new instructor had been hired who had a radically different approach. He made us all go out and buy a little Olympus half frame 35 mm. With this of course you got 72 pictures to a roll and he told us to go out and shoot "everything!" then choose what to keep from the contact sheet. I liked his approach though those little negatives where a bit of a challenge. Anticipated digital photography in a way.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old September 1st, 2018, 10:57 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Dexter View Post
On the subject of carefully choosing your frame, many years ago I took a photography course and at that time students were always required to use a twin lens reflex which produced 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 negatives. The idea being they would be easier for new students to work with. There was a big limitation however. There were only 12 shots to a roll so of course you would deliberate very carefully before using one up. But just as I was about to begin the course a new instructor had been hired who had a radically different approach. He made us all go out and buy a little Olympus half frame 35 mm. With this of course you got 72 pictures to a roll and he told us to go out and shoot "everything!" then choose what to keep from the contact sheet. I liked his approach though those little negatives where a bit of a challenge. Anticipated digital photography in a way.
So now, Peter, we are here with terabytes of data!

The challenge is to rapidly delete those that don't make the grade. However that uses up time. So we easily end up delaying culling the pictures one does not really value. The problem is thatca nearly wonderful image persuades us to keep it, as we could, “somehow”, correct the flaws, “sometime”, when we are less busy!

Now if one simply has perfect discipline and frames exactly as one must print, we would be so efficient.

One distinguished early film photographer had a commission to shoot a landscape a long distance away. So he built an 11x14 camera and four 11x14 film holders and loaded one sheet of film in each. He schlepped everything to the site and exposed the 4 plates identically and then returned and processed the film in the first cassette. It came out perfectly so he simply threw away the other exposed negatives.

That sort of discipline is pretty well unheard of today.

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old September 1st, 2018, 10:59 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,790
Default

If one can be efficient, I commend you!

I believe, for example, that Nicolas Claris has so much experience that he is able to pretty well frame as he needs to print.

I always try to grab much more, as for me, the real work begins when that wider scene is brought home. Then one discovers far more than one noticed in the time of the actual shoot itself.

Also, in my small studio, I easily can end up with unwanted light stands or background missing and this is corrected in Photoshop.

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:21 PM.


Posting images or text grants license to OPF, yet © of such remain with its creator. Still, all assembled discussion © 2006-2017 Asher Kelman (all rights reserved) Posts with new theme or unusual image might be moved/copied to a new thread!