 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)recycle big ...and 163 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614124 Today 3 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
about 5 years ago, when i was in grade 10, i visited nunavut. i stayed in a small town with i think a population of 300. i got to go there because there was a conference held here in victoria, and i attended and also had someone stay with me who was coming from out of town. the person that i paired with was from nunavut. as part of the thing, that summer, i got to go stay with the person that stayed with me. it was a very neat place to visit. the landscape is so strange. the big picture above is the entire town. here are some other photographs i hope you like them |
||||||||
| Attached picture | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think the second picture would make a good album cover. No where around here looks like that. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i have lots more from the trip. i am just going through the negatives scanning. i will put a section up on my website or something at some point |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
nice.. what camera do you have? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that was an old yashica which i dont use any more. i use an olympus slr these days, or any of an assortment of older, small, cheap rangefinders. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yashica's are very good... ive just bought a 1975 olympus om-2 off ebay with the 1.4 zuiko lens. apparantly the best lenses olympus ever made. the quality looks wonderful. my 300d got me into advanced photography and helped me understand it, so now i want an even better quality camera (om-2 equates to approx 21 megapixels.. as opposed to the 300d's 6!).. theres an adapter ring too that i can get from the us for £100 that will allow me to put the zuiko lenses on my 300d! ace! ive seen the results and they look good (i'll link if u want).. sorry to go on..just really into it all at the mo.. you should setup a devart account (its free) to get some proper feedback on your work.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hey i am hunting around for an om-2! (i probably saw the one on ebay that you bought) i have an om-10 which is the more 'consumer' of all the om line. but it works very well. the om-2 is pretty much ideal. did you get just the om-2 or the om-2s? i want to get an om-2s yeah all the zuiko lenses are very nice. i just got (on ebay) a 35-70mm zuiko which isnt all that much bigger then the 'stock' 50mm. its great but a bit slow at f/3.5. fine for anything outside though. i also got a 28mm zuiko for 35$ the other day at a camera fair thing. its pretty neat too. how much did you end up paying for the om-2 (if you dont mind me asking??) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i dont mind at all.. its an om-2, and i got it for £44 from the US, it came with a shed load of gear too - external falsh units, bag, manual, etc. which is very good, however the p&p is another £40-odd but i dont mind this cos they usually go for a good £120-odd. i put this steal down to the fact that they had misspelt olympus as 'olymus' (try searching this a few times, it paid off for me). i just hope it works all well and good. theres some outstanding literature on the model at pir.com (i think) so i have prepared for its arrival! im really looking forward to experimenting with different films and the anticipation of seeing the results. im also in for the 28mm hoping to get that off ebay today for about £30 so youve done well there! i think ideally i would like the more recent om-4ti but they are few and far between and yield a much higher value. im also in the hunt for a 21mm zuiko but they are dear too! so do you shoot much? ive been studying a lot of ansel adams' literature at the moment.. he was a terrific genius i think; his prints go for $100,000 now! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
cool man, that does sound like an excellent deal. interesting about the misspelling, i have thought about things like that in the past but never bothered to try. yes the om-4ti, i was actually planning on seeking one of those out a little bit ago, but as you say they are much less common, and very much more expensive when you can find them. thats actually why ive set my sights on the om-2s, from what i understand, that model is more closly related to the 4(ti) than to the 2. although the om-2 itself is undoubtedly a great camera. my dad has had an om-1 ever since they began selling it, and aside from it using the hard to find mercury batteries (the only om that does), it is an excellent camera. i do go through quite a lot of film. but i hardly take myself seriously. i dont know if you saw the pictures i have on my site, but i mostly take pictures of my kitty cat, the sunshine, and other pretty things. i recently bought 100 rolls of 100 speed film off ebay for 30usd. its expired but it seems perfectly fine to me. last year i also bought 100 rolls but it was actually 'law enforcement film' with places to write the date and case number on the canister, but it worked great too. a while ago i purchased a film scanner, so i am going through all my negatives rescanning whereas i had scanned from prints before. the neg scans are absolutly a million times better then the print scans. i cant beleive the difference. so now i dont even get prints done when i get the roll develeoped, because they are really useless for anything , they dont give a good sense of how the picture was taken either. so now i just pay 2$ per roll for developing only and then scan the negs. and ive been getting prints made up of the ones i want. also ive been getting large 20-inch prints done up that are just amazing too. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thats such a good idea with the film; i'll have to try that so thanks for letting me know. i may have to get a negative scanner too then; i was planning on just getting a cd with my prints but i guess its £££s and quality. i havent seen your site, do u have a link? or is there one in your profile? that panorama is lovely.. how did you manage to line it up so well, and on film? i assume you carefully used a tripod and kept the same settings? i find such shots very difficult. you sound like you take it pretty seriously, for me devart's just a bit of fun really, although i must say, i have seen some of the most remarkable photos there and gathered much inspiration.. but too much is unhealthy i think now. ive boxed off a gallery on there that i now deem as my first portfolio, and i would call those shots 'cartoons' cos thats how i see them now, and i want to move away from all that - that style that i seem to have. i'd rather study the 'masters' - adams, bresson, muench, etc.. now and produce much more meaningful, emotive work. probably because i increasingly believe its the ideal medium for me to express what creativity i have. i also find it particularly challenging both technically and aesthetically, and because im so impatient! i think going film will help my discipline... i get annoyed when i start to 'shotgun'!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
btw an e.g. of a 'cartoon' is my avatar, taken in manchester. the rest are if you fancy a look. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
These aren't digital, right? They look more organic. analogue, ooh. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
film is awsome. i can understand people moving to digital. but really i like having the physical object of film/prints. i highly recomend a negative scanner. i have the canoscan fs4000us which i am constantly impressed with. its came out a few years ago and only usb1.0/scsi rather then usb2.0/firewire, but its fast enough for me (and ive scanned over 1300 negs in the last month or so). max res is 4000dpi which is absolutly crazy (150mb scans). so i scan at 1000dpi unless i want to crop a detail or something. my site is all the photos in the main photo section are print scans, so they will all be updated someday soon with the glorious neg scans. but there are random things thrown in including a 'neg scans' section where im just throwing up a few scans as i do them to show my friends, etc. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nice photos! I like 1305, 0011 & 1308 the most. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
also just aside from the tangability of film over digital. as you said in your early message, you need a really high end dslr to get nice photos as compared to even a half decent film camera. using my film scanner i can scan up to 5888x4000px which = ~23megapixels. even using a small 60's rangefinder purchased for 20 dollars i can get shots that are amazingly crisp and sharp even when scanned at that highest resolution. so like i would never want to carry around a 2000 dollar dslr , when i can carry around an old film camera and it doesnt matter TOO much if i when i fall off my bike |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah, i think your neg scans are sweet. I particularly like your lanscape shots (esp. 1313). The tonal reproduction is definately unique imo. 150mb scans sound nearly bearable, its just a neetmare to backup all of them innit?! so how much would such a scanner set me back? i take it its a better option than getting a cd with your prints? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I totally agree.. that's some dent! They really can take their beats! - the OM-2 is 30 years old! And without the worry of paying $1500-odd. A major advantage, oft overlooked! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thanks for the link. i like some of your photos a lot. i dont know. my taste and aesthetic is a strange one i think. for example, applying it to films, i tend to disregard plot, character, etc, in favor for the general feel of the film. the way something looks/feels is very important to me. i really dont like a lot of photography that people consider great. which is why i can never get enough of the pictures of my cat. people seem to be put off by them because 'they are just pictures of a cat'. i dont know. but i really like the subway one. oh and regarding how i did the panorama, no i didnt have any tripod or anything, i just tried to have the shots similarly vertical. i just overlaid them in photoshop with a bit of feathering, no color correction or anything, thats why you can see some dont match well (although the last two are perfect). there is some fanncy (and free) software out there that is great at correcting lens distrotion and stuff, but this didnt really require it.i can put up a full res version which is about twice as big. still just the 1000dpi scan though. i should do it at 4000 dpi. it would be insane. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Thank you. I commend you for remaining somewhat uninfluenced; that's very difficult to achieve, and i do think it resonates through your shots to a certain degree. It's important to remain true to yourself and shoot things that you can emote with, I think. This way you can convey that feeling through the lens, and if that means cats then so be it; it's a great subject. Well done again with that panorama, no tripod!!! Insane. You could get a crazy blow up of that for your wall at 4000dpi no doubt?! I still think you may like Ansel Adams though. Maybe have a search for his stuff. Bearing in mind too that his work is all black and white and all from 1920-1980 odd. Amazing attention to detail he had. He was a 'purist' born out of learning the piano. And his literature is both insightful and helpful, even essential. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
my inital plan was to scan everything at 4000dpi. i thought 'well if i am going to scan everything, i may aswell scan it once, and at best quality. so i scanned 400 something images at 4000dpi 42bit and had like 60gb of data. yeah! how the fuck was i going to back that up?. the scans are actually 138mb at 4000dpi/42bit psd files. you can also scan at 24 bit, but if you want to do any sort of adjustment (which i actually dont like the idea of) its better to gather as much info as you can. (it actuallycan make a huge difference, see ) i also was compressing the scans to lossless pngs and getting them down to about 100mb. still . its crazy. if i had scanned my 1300 negs so far at 4000 dpi id have 160gb of data to deal with and back up. then i was like 'what do i want these huge scans for? im never going to print from my scans.... so.... its pointless. now i just have 11gb for 1300 1000dpi scans. thats easily managable. i got my scanner new off ebay forr 400 something. they are farily common on there. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh btw relating to that link 24bit = 3 channels x 8bit 42bit = 3 channels x14bit so my canon refers to the full bits per pixels, rather then other ones which refer to the bits per channel per pixel. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sheet! - i need to free some room to prepare! i guess its a minor issue, you just have to be prepare and organised i suppose. . many thanks for all the information and the links too; it will come in very useful to me soon. i'll let you know how it goes... if i ever recieve my camera! good luck with the hunt. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
very nice, indeed |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Also, Ansel Adams was so good that he predicted digital photography 24 years ago! : "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them". Ansel Adams in The Negative Carmel, California March 1981 - My highlights! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes im sure you'll recieve! ive always had good luck with the ebay, and god knows ive received far too many things that ive purchased without needing. thanks for your comments on ansel adams. i think that having a general sense of people like that and their work is important. yeah if you ever need any info about that particular scanner that i have, just let me know. im off to bed its 3am here :( thanks, night. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thats pretty great :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
No worries. Thanks. Sweet dreams! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
bump for you day people. you dont have to read all the shit, just check my pics in the first post, mostly the neat panorama |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how lovely |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Awesome pictures, that 'scape looks completely alien to me. I saved a big fat bunch to my harddrive. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
:) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this thread is the definition of irony |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
one photograph (that isn't particularly interesting or neat) accompanied by long winded posts and links to cluttered websites containing scores of boring thumbnails |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
why dont you be a jerk about it? the first post is is all i wanted to show the link has now changed. i forgot i put this up and put up something else , dont view it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
scup_bucket was a little angry and in mood for criticizing for last two days at least. (from what i noticed) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
allright, thanks i guess |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
also i would like him to explain to me just how this 'thread is the definition of irony', the literary genious that he is. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
