The Photography Thread

[Ginger Tosser]

By the power of Paint Shop Pro - Now in Black and White

Sorry if i'm hijacking your thread Pete

By the way Stroppa do you recognise it ?

[stroppa]

It sort of looks like one of the famous alleys off the royal mile in edinburgh, but I suppose it could be anywhere.

Does look better in black and white

[Ginger Tosser]

Anchor Close just down from the Royal Mile, bloody cold as well !

[stroppa]

It's always cold in edinburgh

Good photo though, it makes a change from the generic pictures of the castle that the tourists always take.

[Faded]

I dig the nightshot. Though I prefer the coloured version. Blown out lights really bug me in b+w. In general I love the colours in long exposure night shots because most of the time it's something you won't ever eally see with your eyes.

I've been meaning to go out and do some night shots around edinburgh on some velvia sometime this month in the early am but im exceptionally lazy and my tripod is **** and I can't remember where i put my cable release and and etc. Mostly the laziness. (and a general dislike of traipsing around the city center after dark by my lonesome with all my gear on me.

I also need to get around to buying me one of those el cheapo zenitar fisheyes from ebay.

[MartyG]

That pic works better in colour, there's not really enough variation in contrast and texture for it to work well in B&W. Also the stars on the lights - are you using a star filter or is it purely exposure length? They can quite often give a nice light patterns. Primary colour filters can have an interesting affect on B&W prints too.

I like B&W stuff as it gives you the opportunity to develop it yourself. You can kit yourself out with a B&W enlarger fairly cheaply. It's a lot more fun than sending off prints - and quite often you get better results, especially if you like pushing B&W film to get that grainy effect. Developers are terrible for getting this right on the negatives even when you explicity state it needs taking into account.

Regards
Marty

[bangaio]

It's uncanny how many people here have similar hobbies. I have been into photography for years. I mostly use slide film and have an oldish eos 100 with a 28-135 usm is and sigma 70-300 lenses.

TBH I can see the point of digital in the profesional domain and on compacts but the images you can get with a cheap 35mm slr and a couple of good lenses is amazing, it's all about the glass and film is dirt cheap now, yuo can get fuji sensia, process paid for a fiver on line.

I must get a scanner though and have been looking at some models recently, then i'll get some pictures online.

The sad thing about digital is that asd has been said, it takes away some of the effort needed to focus on the composition and exposure, now you just bracket and shoot at high speed until the buffer is full. The fnny thing is you see all the camera geeks arguing about nikon vs canon, arguing about different lenses, it is hilarious. The best thing is there is loads of old 35mm kit going at stupid prices second hand, and I always fancied an eos 3 or 1 8)

[MartyG]

Talking about film it's definitely taking the time to have a look at the professional films. They really aren't much more expensive, but have better quality chemicals producing finer and richer negatives. The only thing you need to watch out for is shelf life, as it's a lot shorter than over the counter film.

Try out a few different brands with different ISO ratings, you may be surprised at the results.

I disagree with the digital aspect - in fact I'd love a digital SLR, they're just so expensive. Anyone can still take the time to compose decent shots if they're so inclined, and I always take mine with me on a shoot, it's just most are used casually. The format is perfectly sound. Bracketing and high speed frame usage isn't just a product of the digital age.

I really need to put my US trip web site back up, some of the older board members may remember that one as I was updating it daily whilst in NYC.

Regards
Marty

[powerslide]

I liked the close-up one of the flowers. I'm no expert, but I've always wondered how photographers can get so 'close to the action' while retaining all the detail. I suppose it's just down to the camera. I'm also fascinated by the stuff that car photographers do - especially the up-close moving shots of the car, and sometimes the tremendous contrast between the foreground and background. Very impressive.

example:

[MartyG]

There are two methods, and really depends on what you're shooting. Long, long lenses with lots of glass (and very expensive) that need a tripod all to themselves: these give you super zooms, extended even more by using mirror zooms (at the expense of light quality). The second is macro photography, here you're using a lens with a really short focal length.

The car type shots are done by longer exposure times to blur the background, whilst keeping the car stationary in the frame - these can be quite tricky to do, but you can practice them by panning with a car as it drives past, best done where the vehicles are travelling 20 mph ish. The effect can be especially nice as sunsets, then you get nice light trails. That one is most likely shot from the back of following car.

Regards
Marty

[Ginger Tosser]

Marty,

The night shot was taken without filters using a ?40 Lubitel Medium Format camera

Some more night shots Here and Here and another Here

I've just brought a Film Scanner so i'll be able to improve the scans.

[MartyG]

Night shots are a tricky thing to get right - I've never manage to get a satisfactory fireworks shot. That one is really nice. Pin sharp.
Regards
Marty

[bangaio]

OK, I may have jumped the gun, say if I could afford a full frame digital SLR like an EOS 1Ds that would be great and the image quality is getting there, but I dont have 5k kicking around and that is a lot of film or some very nice lenses. If you are a pro they are great but they do help some sloppier photographers rattle through frames, whereas an amateur with a finite supply of film would have to take a bit more time, not saying they'd get better results becuase they took their time but there is a lot of people who are moving up do DSLRs like the d70 or eos 300d who are expecting great results becuase it is an slr and they are using it like a point and shoot, trying to mess around with settings and not focusing on the getting that one image, one killer exposure.

The other issue I have with digital is that you are spending thousands of pounds on what is basically a sensor and os. the os can be changed or updated but you are stuck with the sensor and the technology is changing at such a rate that your camera will be supersceded at some point. If fuji brought out a high speed film with the grain of velvia next week, that will work merrily in the second hand body i paid ?150 for, and i dont have to worry about aberations, or any other problems assosciated with digital sensors.

I do have a point and shoot s50 digital but use it very infrequently. At the moment i am caning provia 100f and ilford hp5 b&w film and need a scanner.

[Ginger Tosser]

Out of 8 firework shots that was the best, i've been wanting to try to do some more but haven't got round to it yet. I've got some more pics on my photo website Here. I need to rescan a couple of pics and change the site to enable you to select images via thumb nails, but i need time to learn that bit of javascript/html.

[PeteJ]

I'm glad this topic has taken off Thanks for all your comments by the way.

Excellent night shots above, and your shots on the beach are fantastic. I'd love to take some like that...

Night shots I really struggle with and my results have been very poor so far. I think only one shot has come out OK, the rest are far too dark. One looks like the moon is falling out of the sky because I moved the camera so much during a long exposure - that made me buy a tripod

My best night shot. And it isn't even at night We get some amazing sunsets outside of our house, but getting a clear shot is almost impossible, hence half the shot is a tree and building. I didn't use a tripod either, so it isn't the most focused of shots. I suck at dark pictures.

I have a Canon scanner which is quite good quality, but I scanned them all in at a massive resolution. Each picture was well over 50mb to begin with and they have been degraded slightly when I altered them for uploading. I also use ?2.99 Jessops film (200iso) which is alright, but isn't very crisp. Any recommendations on what film to get? I need quite a few rolls before I goto America next month...

However I have tried an expensive Black and White film and I was very pleased with the results. I shall scan in a couple later. I found using b&w was a very interesting experience, since without practice you can't be sure how things will turn out, but the results are almost otherworldly. Details really stick out and you can make the most uninteresting object look rather majestic without any difficulty. I was using a red filter most of the time for B&W, which helps make the picture more dramatic (it says here).

Speaking of filters, I also own a Polarising filter, which is intersting to use. Set it right and it is possible to remove all reflections from windows etc. It's so very strange looking at a car through the lens and turning the filter to remove all reflections. Makes such a difference. I find it hard to use though...

I own two lenes at the moment, a 20-90 and a 80-200 both from Canon. I like the idea of having a 30-300 lens for sure...probably extremely expensive though.

Where is a good place to buy photography stuff online? I have quite a few local shops but I've found them all to be very pretentious and elitest.

Ohhh have some more photos:
Water
Water2