Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > Photography Discussions > Film, Platinum, Polaroid & other Analog media

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 10:55 PM
Maris Rusis Maris Rusis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 378
Default Red Filter Landscape

View of Mount Cooroy, Weyba Creek, Hawk.

Gelatin-silver photograph on Agfa Classic MCC 111 VC FB photographic paper, image size 21.3cm X 16.5cm, from a Tmax 100 negative exposed in a Mamiya RB67 rollfilm single lens reflex camera fitted with a 50mm f4.5 lens and #25 red filter.
Titled and signed recto, stamped verso.

A riverine landscape with glorious afternoon clouds can be enhanced by the use of a #25 red filter on panchromatic film. Nothing in this scene included a strong blue, even the sky between the clouds was muted, so the effect of the filter would not be so aggressive as to coarsen the sense of luminosity. The filter also worked nicely on the clouds reflected in the water and it also eliminated some atmospheric haze to show the distant mountain better.

Technical precautions included:

Confirming the filter factor. The particular #25 filter used here requires exactly +3 stops of compensation for neutral subjects. This was confirmed in advance by actual exposure and development tests.

Calibrating the light meter. The meter used, a Sekonic L758D, has a light sensor overly sensitive for red and "thinks" there is more red light than actually exists. The error is pretty exactly 1 stop, not great for an expensive meter, but it can be allowed for. Meter readings were directly from the scene not through the filter.

The white part of the clouds was measured and +3 stops more exposure was given to allow for the filter factor. Then another +3 stops was added on top of that to make sure that the white cloud fell on Zone VIII, a white tone with just perceptible density and texture.

Lastly the shaded area of mangroves on the far side of the creek was metered. The Sekonic L758D indicated that after allowing for the red filter this area would fall on Zone V, a mid grey tone. But since shadows are filled with blue light the #25 red filter delivered a stronger effect and the result was Zone IV, a dark grey detailed tone. Nice!

After that there is nothing to do except routine camera work and faithfull processing of light-sensitive materials.
__________________
"Photography or the application of the chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation...". Photography, the word, coined and first uttered by Sir John Herschel at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London; 14 March, 1839.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old November 22nd, 2012, 11:49 PM
Murray Foote Murray Foote is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 394
Default

When I saw this I thought "looks like Queensland" which it turns out it is. I'm not sure whether that's a randomly accurate comment or an accurate observation. The hint of mangroves, the wide estuary, something about the scrub, the volcanic cone. It invokes a great sense of being there. But what I think makes it work is the bird (bit hard to tell what bird it might be in mono). Otherwise, your eye would just go straight out to the distance and not find as much of interest.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old November 23rd, 2012, 12:44 AM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is offline
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 33,121
Default

Maris,

In digital, one would have to a series of bracketed shots and then fuse them in some HDR program. Photoshop CS5 degrades the images that way into sRGB, throwing away most of the data in the process. ?but one could use other software and then assign those colors to B&W tonalities. Instead here, there's one filter in front of the lens, the compensating exposure to account for the loss of light in that process and and to keep whites, white and then pretty straightforward processing. So using film is actually a more direct and likely finer process, allowing the natural beauty to more readily appear without a lot of steps.



View of Mount Cooroy, Weyba Creek, Hawk.




Impressive!

I am grateful for the bird, just as Murray is, but even without it, find the scene compelling enough to distract me, draw me in and let me to daydream!

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
  #4  
Old November 23rd, 2012, 02:30 PM
Andy brown Andy brown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,095
Default

Lovely image Maris.

The lower fork in the dead branch creates a nice geometric tension.
My strange thought processes want to bend it down and see if I can't capture the mountain for a bit ( I now, that probably doesn't mae much sense).

The hawk is Brahminy kite (pretty sure of that). They represent a strong symbol for me, when I start seeing them it means I'm heading into the warmth ( probably doing a sabbatical from the frozen south).
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old November 23rd, 2012, 07:27 PM
Maris Rusis Maris Rusis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 378
Default

Thank you Murray, Asher, and Andy for your kind comments.

This photograph contains all the usual compositional obsessions I fall into instead of just looking at things and enjoying what I see.

The leaves up the left side conceal some ugly creek-side junk.
The taller mangrove on the right supports an otherwise weak edge.
The lower fork of the dead branch is an obvious "pointing finger" that connects the distant mountain to the foreground. Optically lowering that dead branch towards the mountain involved putting the Mamiya RB67 camera more than six feet off the ground on a high tripod. Then the waist-level viewing camera had to be flipped over so that I, standing on tip toes, could look into the viewfinder from the side. The viewfinder image is then upside down and back to front but still focus-able and frame-able.

Yes, that is a Brahminy kite watching me doing camera gymnastics. Normally the bird patrols up and down the creek but there is something about setting up a fancy camera on a conspicuous tripod that draws a crowd. At least it didn't ask me what I was photographing or if I can still get film for those old cameras!
__________________
"Photography or the application of the chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation...". Photography, the word, coined and first uttered by Sir John Herschel at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London; 14 March, 1839.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old November 23rd, 2012, 11:10 PM
Maggie Terlecki Maggie Terlecki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Province of Quebec, Canada
Posts: 1,684
Default

Maris, I think this is a very lovely landscape, and it was done with a film camera which is admirable but the fact that the horizon is slanted is driving me nuts. I don't think it is necessary for every image to be spot on straight, but since water should be level, it just nags at me and think it should be corrected and re-cropped.
__________________
there's a crack in everything; that's how the light gets in ~Leonard Cohen
my personal website
my website with articles,interviews etc.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old November 24th, 2012, 12:44 PM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,144
Default

Maris, thank you for posting a lovely landscape. What I enjoyed most, besides the image, was the process. I savored the details you mentioned of exposure measurement. I could almost see myself standing there next to you, taking light meter readings. And the very instructive info on filter factors.

To me the process of making an image is as important as the image itself. The tactile feel of film, the seeing of the end result..simple joy.

Thanks for sharing with us.

p.s is the horizon really tilted? So much for my eyesight!!
How could water flow in a stream or river if it is level?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old November 24th, 2012, 02:38 PM
Maggie Terlecki Maggie Terlecki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Province of Quebec, Canada
Posts: 1,684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fahim mohammed View Post

p.s is the horizon really tilted? So much for my eyesight!!
How could water flow in a stream or river if it is level?
Yes, Fahim, I actually pulled it into photoshop to straighten it and it is off. It is easy to correct using the ruler tool in PS, just place the line of the horizon, pull the ruler and place it at the other edge and then in Image/Iimage rotation, arbitrary, it will not only give you the actually degree it is off, (approx 1.00 degrees) that is quite a bit, actually, but if you click okay, it will straighten it. You do have to crop after though.

The way that I learned this is,
if water is dropping off a cliff into nothingness, it will surely not be, but if you take a glass and make it diagonal, it will move the water but keep the level of the water. So, water will flow because of the incline or because of disturbance because it is always seeking to be level, but if the water is flat, it will be level. The reason they put water in a little see through window of a level tool to make sure buildings are straight etc.,
__________________
there's a crack in everything; that's how the light gets in ~Leonard Cohen
my personal website
my website with articles,interviews etc.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old November 24th, 2012, 02:57 PM
fahim mohammed fahim mohammed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,144
Default

Maggie, water ( in a stream or river ) can only flow ( towards the sea for example ) if there is an incline.
Or if there is a force pushing the water over a level surface. There is no other way.

For a river to flow, there has to be an incline. That's all I meant. And an incline is not at 0 degrees to the horizontal.

p.s what I think you mean in the example provided is the movement of a bubble inside a slightly curved
glass vial. Like used on construction sites. That is the bubble moving away or towards the center of the vial. Not water flowing towards the sea.

And horizons are always curved. They have to be.
It is the distance away to and from the horizon that might give us the impression of a straight horizon.
Similarly with flowing streams and rivers. The gradient might be imperceptible to the human eye unless
one is looking at the Niagara water falls, which of course is an incline of immense proportions!!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old November 24th, 2012, 04:31 PM
Maris Rusis Maris Rusis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggie Terlecki View Post
Maris, I think this is a very lovely landscape, and it was done with a film camera which is admirable but the fact that the horizon is slanted is driving me nuts. I don't think it is necessary for every image to be spot on straight, but since water should be level, it just nags at me and think it should be corrected and re-cropped.
Maggie, you are right. There is a tilt. Now that you have pointed it out I can't look away from it either!

But I have excuses:

The camera was on a Manfrotto 229 Super Pro 3D tripod head which has elaborate spirit levels but I disabled them by flipping the top (nearly) 90 degrees sideways.
There is no unambiguous water against sky horizon in the picture.
The water in the foreground looks level while the far creek bank actually recedes obliquely into the distance.
The mistake is too small to attract the attention of casual viewers.
The physical photograph scanned to produce the electronic file (displayed as a monitor image) has the error in it. Merely rotating the electronic file does not discharge me from fallibility.
The bird distracted me.

Now I should face the challenge whether it is a greater virtue to make good photographs or good excuses. I vehemently claim the former even if I fail rather than embrace the latter even if I succeed.
__________________
"Photography or the application of the chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation...". Photography, the word, coined and first uttered by Sir John Herschel at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London; 14 March, 1839.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old November 24th, 2012, 06:08 PM
Maggie Terlecki Maggie Terlecki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Province of Quebec, Canada
Posts: 1,684
Default

Maris, I seriously did not want to offend you for it not being level, but to me, and maybe only me in the entire world, it was a distraction as I kept wanting to straighten it. The image is still beautiful and still of great quality. I apologize if you felt that I was being disrespectful.
Maggie
__________________
there's a crack in everything; that's how the light gets in ~Leonard Cohen
my personal website
my website with articles,interviews etc.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old November 24th, 2012, 08:36 PM
Bart_van_der_Wolf Bart_van_der_Wolf is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maris Rusis View Post
Maggie, you are right. There is a tilt. Now that you have pointed it out I can't look away from it either!
Hi Maris,

Not so fast. Are you sure there is a tilt?

Quote:
But I have excuses:

The camera was on a Manfrotto 229 Super Pro 3D tripod head which has elaborate spirit levels but I disabled them by flipping the top (nearly) 90 degrees sideways.
There is no unambiguous water against sky horizon in the picture.
The water in the foreground looks level while the far creek bank actually recedes obliquely into the distance.
Exacty, which raises an interesting, but entirely different question ...

Should one adhere to reality, which you did, or fudge to please perception.
Common wisdom dictates the latter; a compromise ...

It's similar (although not exactly the same) to what architecture photographers experience. Should one correct for keystoning 100%, or leave some in to prevent perceptual stretching of height?

Again, common wisdom dictates partial correction. In fact, quality Raw converters for digital images like Capture One, by default, (only) corrects for part (80%) of the analytically correct amount ...

Cheers,
Bart
__________________
If you do what you did, you'll get what you got.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old November 25th, 2012, 12:49 AM
Andy brown Andy brown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,095
Default

Interesting discussion regarding the apparent horizon line.
At first glance I didn't pick the 'horizon' line as being out.
After Maggie mentioned it it certainly appears the level at the far bank is dropping to the left yet the nearer bank is drooping the the right. How is this possible?
Is the vegetation creating a false impression?

On another note, horizon lines don't curve. they're flat, dead flat!

Here in Australia, we have a wacky, wonderful and highly intelligent and inquisitive doctor/scientist who does a regular science Q & A slot on radio ( Dr. Karl Kruselnicki). Recently I heard him make the same call- that the horizon curves. It doesn't. It can't, if you're on a boat, out of sight of land, you can do a 360 and see a dead flat line from point A to B. If it dipped, where would it come back up?

I know through a lens it can appear curved but I believe this is due to lens distortion.

I'm really not sure where the horizon line in this image relates to the laws of physics. I don't think we've nutted it out yet.
I
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old November 25th, 2012, 08:17 AM
Bart_van_der_Wolf Bart_van_der_Wolf is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy brown View Post
On another note, horizon lines don't curve. they're flat, dead flat!
Hi Andy,

The higher you get the more apparent the curvature gets. We are a little too close to the ground to really notice the arc with a radius of some 6367.5 km. We can only see some 5 kilometers in the distance when standing on a relatively flat surface without obstructions, which is not far enough to really notice it.

When we look around us on the sea, our viewing distance is limited to the horizon which forms a circle around us, not a straight tangent line. If we were able to compare the two (e.g. with a strong enough leveled laser in moist air, perpendicular to our viewing direction), the earth's radial curvature (close to half a metre at 5 kilometer distance) would only be visible with a very strong telescope.

As for Maris' horizon, there is a shore line that is not at the same distance everywhere, so that creates the illusion that it is warped/rotated.

Cheers,
Bart
__________________
If you do what you did, you'll get what you got.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old November 25th, 2012, 01:22 PM
Andy brown Andy brown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,095
Default

Thanks Bart but I still maintain that the horizon line is dead flat.
If you stand on a shore, you might be aware of the Earth's curvature if a ship goes by whose hull is over the horizon but you can still see its funnels.
If you put a laser level on one end of your visible horizon and again at the other
end then rotated it from one point to the other, what you'd have is a dead straight
flat line and it would exactly trace the visible junction of sky and water, the horizon line.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old December 3rd, 2012, 10:11 PM
Nick Masson Nick Masson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Posts: 74
Default

Hi Maris --
Thank you for taking notice of my previous inquiries regarding the use of red filters w/ BW film. I appreciate the example and description of your process...
Cheers,
-Nick
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 Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Topaz Labs InFocus, a new deconvolution based sharpening plugin Bart_van_der_Wolf Breaking News 68 September 17th, 2012 10:46 AM
Leakage in Reflected UV Photography Dr Klaus Schmitt UV/IR Thermal or Xray Photography 3 August 8th, 2012 03:11 PM
The antialiasing filter Doug Kerr Imaging Technology: Theory, Alternatives, Practice and Advances. 27 November 15th, 2011 10:49 AM
Aliasing and demosaicing Doug Kerr Imaging Technology: Theory, Alternatives, Practice and Advances. 2 November 12th, 2011 10:51 AM
The antialiasing filter - how does it work? Doug Kerr Imaging Technology: Theory, Alternatives, Practice and Advances. 6 June 17th, 2011 05:45 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:27 AM.


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!