Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Photography with Film
Page <<first <prev 5 of 6 next>
Jun 20, 2015 13:02:13   #
Vlux
 
I've made the same mistake -- when I didn't visualize the image whole. The whole is, after all, a congregation of arranged details.
Your image is so well composed and lit that there's nothing "rookie" about it. The shot has a nice feel.
May I suggest that you check the hands first. Keep them as natural as possible. I know. I know. Actors hate to be told, "Be yourself. Act natural." That is one of the hardest things to do on stage or in front of a camera. What it means is "learn to act as if you're being natural. ( In movies, Spencer Tracy was best at it. ) Keep hands off cocked hips. Good fashion models don't do that unless instructed. ( Or anything too "modelly," for that matter.) Maybe chat a bit with the model and watch the hands. They very well could land in a comfortable place.
Pretty, experienced models still like to be directed if it's done right. They're used to it. I've been asked. "What should I do with my hands?" That's where visualization comes in. Know what mood you want to project, and use hands to contribute to it.
You obviously have talent and a great attitude. I've had private students who fought me all the way. I think, "Why am I here? Why are you here?"
For B/W headshots, I use Plus-X rated at 80 or Tri-X rated at 250. It used to be said that such relatively small increments don't make any difference in B/W. But they do if you use a good lab and tell them to run the film normal.
For color headshots, I use Portra 400 rated at 250. The skin tones are sublime.
Keep shooting.

Reply
Jun 20, 2015 13:02:21   #
Vlux
 
I've made the same mistake -- when I didn't visualize the image whole. The whole is, after all, a congregation of arranged details.
Your image is so well composed and lit that there's nothing "rookie" about it. The shot has a nice feel.
May I suggest that you check the hands first. Keep them as natural as possible. I know. I know. Actors hate to be told, "Be yourself. Act natural." That is one of the hardest things to do on stage or in front of a camera. What it means is "learn to act as if you're being natural. ( In movies, Spencer Tracy was best at it. ) Keep hands off cocked hips. Good fashion models don't do that unless instructed. ( Or anything too "modelly," for that matter.) Maybe chat a bit with the model and watch the hands. They very well could land in a comfortable place.
Pretty, experienced models still like to be directed if it's done right. They're used to it. I've been asked. "What should I do with my hands?" That's where visualization comes in. Know what mood you want to project, and use hands to contribute to it.
You obviously have talent and a great attitude. I've had private students who fought me all the way. I think, "Why am I here? Why are you here?"
For B/W headshots, I use Plus-X rated at 80 or Tri-X rated at 250. It used to be said that such relatively small increments don't make any difference in B/W. But they do if you use a good lab and tell them to run the film normal.
For color headshots, I use Portra 400 rated at 250. The skin tones are sublime.
Keep shooting.

Reply
Jun 20, 2015 20:29:37   #
DJO
 
amfoto1 wrote:
You need to be aware that traditional, easily home-processed, silver-halide B&W film DOES NOT SCAN WELL.

The problem is that on a micro scale the silver halide crystals that make up the image block light completely. Thus when scanned there are no "gray tones", just full black or full white... so images end up very contrasty and there's a lot of loss of fine detail both in shadows and in highlights.

The best way to make digital files from silver halide-based B&W film is to first make an enlargement in the traditional, darkroom/chemical way... then scan that with a flatbed (that's done reflectively) to make the digital image.

Chromogenic B&W negatives that require C41 processing scan much better, though they look low contrast in their native state and are not as "sharp" (digital files can be sharpened). While chromogenic C41 B&W films start out using silver halides, too... those are replaced during processing with dye layers that allow for a much more completer range of tonalities (grays) in between full light transmission (blackest area of the image) and fully blocking light transmission (whitest are of an image).

However, it really is not generally practical to home-process C41 (requires too careful temperature and chemistry controls). This means you can't oversee the processing yourself, are relying upon and putting trust in the quality control and capabilities of a lab (which can range from excellent to some pimply 16 year old who's too busy texting with his girlfriend to worry about your film).

This also makes impossible using Zone System and other advanced B&W methods that require custom film processing. OTOH, C41 processing (which is what most color neg films use) is still widely available many places.

There isn't much choice of chromogenic/C41 B&W films: Ilford XP2 and Kodak BW400CN are the only two I'm aware of now... Both are ISO 400 films and AFAIK they're only available in 35mm size. Still, if you can live within those limitations and are wanting to directly scan B&W negs digitally, these are what I'd recommend.

If you were to get an enlarger rig and set up a darkroom so you could make traditional silver prints first, then scan those reflectively using a flatbed scanner... you have much more selection of B&W silver halide films. Fuji Neopan Acros 100 is one of my favorites... it's a very rich B&W negative with super fine grain. There are also ISO 50, 400, 1600 and even 3200 B&W silver-based films, many of them available in 35mm, medium format (mostly just 120 these days) and sheet film sizes (most commonly 4x5, 5x7, 8x10). There are even some long-ago-orphaned sizes such as 110, 127, 620 available.

I've seen a lot of interest in film photography, too. There's a definite "cult" of film shooters here in Silicon Valley, perhaps because almost everything else in techies' lives is digital and they already spend so much time sitting at a computer.... and enjoy "going analog" for some relief.

Personally I have a number of film cameras and enjoy using some of them from time to time. I'm currently putting together a Koni-Omegaflex TLR medium format rig... still looking for a good deal on a 58mm wide angle lens set and some macro spacers for it. No rush though... I don't have anyplace to set up my darkroom right now, anyway. In 35mm format I've got several relatively modern Canon EF cameras, vintage Canon FD/FL, Konica, Leica, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Zeiss Contaflex and Zenit systems I like to shoot with occasionally. I've got some medium format, larger format sheet film and glass plate cameras too. Some of those date back to 1930s and earlier.
You need to be aware that traditional, easily home... (show quote)


What type of scanner are you using to scan your negatives? A flatbed or drum scanner? Never trust a flatbed. And if it is something you attach to your own computer at home, of course your scans are awful. How many megabytes are each of your scans? Five? Fifty? If you want a decent scan, have it done professionally (i.e., don't try this at home kids) on a drum scanner, and be prepared to pay $5.00- $10.00 per megabyte. To make an 11x14 print, you should have at least a 40 megabyte scan. Also, since I am not a physicist, please explain to me how something can be both opaque (your scanner) and transparent (a darkroom) at the same time. And how can you think a B&W print would give a better scan than a negative? The tonal range of B&W printing paper is a ridiculously small fraction of the amount of
information a silver gelatin negative can contain. Have you ever made a living as a B&W photographer? I have, a very good living.

Reply
 
 
Jun 20, 2015 22:46:36   #
adamsg Loc: Chubbuck, ID
 
Every once in a while, I get an urge to shoot some film with my former standby cameras - a Nikon F and my Rolliflex 120. I still have some 120 film in the refrigerator but have to send it to Salt Lake City for processing and the nearest place I trust to process 335mm in fifty miles down I- 15. Both are great cameras but in a city of 60,000, processing is darn near impossible to find.

I may shoot some film this summer. Many fine photos were taken with them over the decades. But my DSLR (Nikon) has become my standby.

Reply
Jun 22, 2015 02:52:22   #
Kuzano
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Helge, I'm not exactly a very nostalgic guy. I actually miss very little about shooting film and certainly don't hoard old film cameras just to remind me of just how old I'm getting. Film is a slow process that I just have a hard time finding the time for. And as for the smells, I don't miss them at all. I'd much rather be smelling Chanel Coco than all those old chemicals!! :lol: And I never watch my prints appear, I keep them face down since the paper is actually still reactive to the safe lights while in the developer.
All that said I DO shoot film! I learn more about contrast shooting and printing film that Digi and color just can't teach you. But I Don't subscribe that one needs to that one needs to learn with film.
In four weeks last month and in April I shot 8 models in a special B&W project that I did. I shot just after or before the golden hours to get very harsh light to try and create a harsh, funky, glamour film noir look that involved a car.
The shot I'm posting is NOT scanned film, its a wet print and then I photographed the print to create the digital file. So what your seeing is pic of the actual print. The background is a gas station, adding to the funk!!
I hope you like her!! :lol:
Helge, I'm not exactly a very nostalgic guy. I act... (show quote)


Funk, Grunge, call it what you like.... I think it's a phenomenal shot....

White whites... black black and great tonal range and contrast. SUPER picture. Thanks and that's a FILM B&W.

If you look real close, you will see that the best part of that picture is the young lady's reflection in the glass of the rear door she is standing next to... just wonderful.

:shock: 8-) :shock:

Reply
Jun 22, 2015 04:07:49   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
Kuzano wrote:
Funk, Grunge, call it what you like.... I think it's a phenomenal shot....

White whites... black black and great tonal range and contrast. SUPER picture. Thanks and that's a FILM B&W.

If you look real close, you will see that the best part of that picture is the young lady's reflection in the glass of the rear door she is standing next to... just wonderful.
:shock: 8-) :shock:

Thanks Kuzano!
Since it sounds like you can appreciate a good looking girl, I'll show you another from that same series.
I will say, the hardest part of that whole project was corralling up 8 models!! Good thing I'm so darned good looking!!! :lol: :lol:
SS

more funk/grunge!!!
more funk/grunge!!!...
(Download)

Reply
Jun 22, 2015 12:18:25   #
DJO
 
SharpShooter wrote:
:lol: :lol: Vlux, thanks, yes, I too would have like to have seen her hand a little different. I think there are 3 things going on her......
1, I'm such a rookie!
2, like most here, get me in the presence of a good looking girl, and I barely know how to act. :lol:
3, just one small detail...., it IS film(Ilford 400), and until I examine the contact sheet with a loupe, I really don't have any idea what I actually shot!!!
I'll admit, I do look at the back of the camera after every shot, but just not much going on there. New habits just die hard!! :lol:
Vlux, thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts! ;-)
SS
:lol: :lol: Vlux, thanks, yes, I too would have ... (show quote)


Hello SharpShooter-
Since you are just starting out, I will share something with you that will improve every figurative image you will ever make: treat famous people like they're not, treat people who aren't famous like they are. Models and rock stars are just people. Make a soccer mom feel like she's the most beautiful woman in the world. Take the time to learn the difference between a beautiful woman and a beautiful photograph, and reread the first sentence- learn the difference between taking a picture and making a picture.

Reply
 
 
Jun 22, 2015 12:35:34   #
Kuzano
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Thanks Kuzano!
Since it sounds like you can appreciate a good looking girl, I'll show you another from that same series.
I will say, the hardest part of that whole project was corralling up 8 models!! Good thing I'm so darned good looking!!! :lol: :lol:
SS


Again, another lovely image that does justice to B&W.

Also, somebody knows lighting... the catchlight in both eyes, the sharply defined upper lip and the cheek shadow... very well done.

Thanks for the post.

Reply
Jun 23, 2015 11:00:45   #
mohawk51 Loc: Texas
 
Helge wrote:
I would like to know how many of you still use film. My primary interest is Black and White photography with film. It appears that there is a resurgence on the use of film. Of course I do the majority of my photography with digital cameras, but I have taken an interest in getting back to using film and processing B&W film. Of course at this time I will be scanning the negatives, although I may consider advancing to an Enlarger to do the printing.

Here is a link to explain a bit about what I'm saying.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32337778
I would like to know how many of you still use fil... (show quote)


I've been shooting film since the late '60's to present day. Although it's not B&W film, it's Fujichrome. Never got in to digital. Film is my much preferred way to go. It makes for some very nice prints. I'll shoot film until they don't make it anymore.

Reply
Jun 24, 2015 17:51:21   #
Kuzano
 
mohawk51 wrote:
I've been shooting film since the late '60's to present day. Although it's not B&W film, it's Fujichrome. Never got in to digital. Film is my much preferred way to go. It makes for some very nice prints. I'll shoot film until they don't make it anymore.


"They" are not going to stop making it.

In fact, more companies are coming on line to make film as we post here.

Also, newer emulsions are being rolled out, and some older ones are being re visited.

There will be film long after many of us here are gone, or can no longer lift a camera.

You have a hobby, or pastime forever. :P

Reply
Jun 24, 2015 20:24:33   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
DJO wrote:
Hello SharpShooter-
Since you are just starting out, I will share something with you that will improve every figurative image you will ever make: treat famous people like they're not, treat people who aren't famous like they are. Models and rock stars are just people. Make a soccer mom feel like she's the most beautiful woman in the world. Take the time to learn the difference between a beautiful woman and a beautiful photograph, and reread the first sentence- learn the difference between taking a picture and making a picture.
Hello SharpShooter- br Since you are just starting... (show quote)


DJO, thanks for all the great advice! Good advice is usually SOOO expensive!
So, are you saying...., that if I'm shooting a really hot, nude girl....., I shoudnt drool(on myself that is)?!?! :lol:
SS

Reply
 
 
Jun 24, 2015 21:40:35   #
DJO
 
SharpShooter wrote:
DJO, thanks for all the great advice! Good advice is usually SOOO expensive!
So, are you saying...., that if I'm shooting a really hot, nude girl....., I shoudnt drool(on myself that is)?!?! :lol:
SS


1, I'm such a rookie!
2, like most here, get me in the presence of a good looking girl, and I barely know how to act.


Hey SharpShooter-
Why so upset? You are the one who said that you were a beginner and uncomfortable photographing an attractive woman. If that was some sort inside joke with one of your buddies, how am I to know that? Regardless, my reply was not critical of you or anyone else in any way. It was a general statement about things I learned during a long career. I learn something new on this website everyday, because other members share what they have learned. I am grateful that I have access to such a wide variety of invaluable information. Many people pay tuition for type of knowledge our members generously give without cost.

Reply
Jun 25, 2015 12:59:01   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
DJO wrote:
1, I'm such a rookie!
2, like most here, get me in the presence of a good looking girl, and I barely know how to act.

Hey SharpShooter-
Why so upset? You are the one who said that you were a beginner and uncomfortable photographing an attractive woman. If that was some sort inside joke with one of your buddies, how am I to know that? Regardless, my reply was not critical of you or anyone else in any way. It was a general statement about things I learned during a long career. I learn something new on this website everyday, because other members share what they have learned. I am grateful that I have access to such a wide variety of invaluable information. Many people pay tuition for type of knowledge our members generously give without cost.
1, I'm such a rookie! br 2, like most here, get me... (show quote)


DJO, if you feel I was being disrespectful, I apologize. It was not meant to sound that way. You may have confused my poor attempts at humor as such, so that's understandable.
Upset? I don't get upset, I just get even!!(again, more bad humor). :lol:
I appreciate any advice I can get, any way I can get it! A mini-critique from Kuzano or philosophical from you, it's always appreciated.
And yes, I myself pay tuition every semester to gain more knowledge. I've also only been shooting models for a couple of years and learn more on every shoot, both from doing and from the models as well. With every shoot I refine my lighting and my technique, so any help I can get is always appreciated.
And CJO, let's not forget that a picture is worth a 1000 words, do post some examples to show what you are trying to say. I like nothing more than seeing the work of experienced photogs, especially those that have had long careers.
Thanks for the help!! ;-)
SS

PS, you're kind of new here, so you aren't used to my bad attempts at humor. With lots of practice, maybe my humor will get better too, or maybe it will just stay as bad as my photography!! :lol:

Reply
Jun 25, 2015 17:28:28   #
smith934 Loc: Huntsville, Alabama
 
SharpShooter wrote:

PS, you're kind of new here, so you aren't used to my bad attempts at humor. With lots of practice, maybe my humor will get better too, or maybe it will just stay as bad as my photography!! :lol:
Thought it was excellent humor myself

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Jun 29, 2015 16:36:34   #
jaddottart Loc: Florida
 
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAh,film,an enlarger,chemicals,lens for the enlarger,tanks.A darkroom every photogs dream,fifty years ago..........Been there done that,loved it,fingers swelled up,allergic to certain chems in the mix.Not going there again.Heheeeeeeeeeeeee.You have fun tho......Good Luck with that.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 6 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.