weekly ChrisR's first go at a (digital or film) 52: week 37-42 added (to Reflection)

Hi, Process #2 for me, mainly due to the guys being on the lower right third.

Rock, I like this. The composition and pose of the B&G work well.

Cheers
 
Brian_of_Bozeat said:
Hi Chris, I really like the new crop on the flowers. I'm looking forward to seeing your new shots when the film comes back. I'm curious about shooting film in the modern age... How do you get them into the computer? Is it a normal scanner or something special for photo's? and do you PP them once they are in? if so what's the point?
Click to expand...

Shooting film? Well, the first answer is, just try it! Second answer might be: visit the Film & Conventional forum here and see the camaraderie between the contributors, and how we support one another. Thirsd answer might be, ther's a tremendous satisfaction in taking a piece of kit made 20, 50, 70 or 100 years ago and using it today for its original purpose, and making images to challenge today's best into the bargain. Fourth, well, you get the picture!

I'm still using the Pentax ME I bought in 1976 with its original 50mm f/1.7 lens (full frame, donchaknow!), plus a bunch of stuff bought from charity shops, from folk here and occasionally off the fleabay, generally for tens of pounds rather than hundreds.

There are still plenty of places to get film developed, ranging from (a shrinking number of) Asda, Boots and Tesco, High St labs like Snappy Snaps and Max Spielmann through to specialist labs (there's a sticky on the F&C forum). You can get it scanned by the processor, or scan it your self. You generally need a cut above the average all-in-one scanner, either something like the Epson 500 (which does medium format very well, not quite so super for 35mm) to dedicated 35mm scanners for negatives and transparencies.

Yes, I do apply some post-processing on the computer. Partly this is to compensate for issues in scanning, partly it replaces the work that film photographers used to do in the darkroom. If you've ever seen documentaires about Adams for example, you'll know the pains he went to ensuring each print (each print!) was just right. Some people still do the whole darkroom business, but I never got into it in the first place.

What's the point? Maybe, if you have to ask I can't tell you! But there's just something seductive about the whole thing. People say, it slows you down. In theory it makes you think about each frame; after all, it's going to cost you a pound or more (less than a fag still?). The delayed satisfaction is both frustrating and rewarding.

I don't know. Just try it!
 
Had me stumped for a while, but on the basis that the theme is a peg to hang a photo on, I'm going with this:



Taken with the X10, heavily cropped.
 
Lovely shaped leaves, and a dragonfly (damselfly?) to boot! Taken with the X10, uncropped.



So, that's me back only having this week's to do (plus a huge amount of commenting, sorry folks I'll get there!)
 
Pair of ducks, can't get any simpler than that. The ducks are ever so slightly under exposed? But it's difficult to get exposure right when the stuff around the subject is so bright.

Nice and sharp shapes of leaves. I would personally crop out the half leaves to the left/top/right. Other than that, it's on theme and very well exposed.
 
Thanks Wuyan. You may be right on the ducks, but it remains the best of that set (I've just gone back and checked), and with Aperture that's the best I can get from it. If I get Elements I might be able to adjust the exposure on the ducks a bit.

I should have cropped the leaves top and right. I was going to crop the part leaf on the left as well... but oddly, the composition didn't work as well! I think that leaf acts as a sort of anchor making a line from the bottom leaf and the up via the weed to the top leaves, and around. Plus, without cropping off parts of the other leaves, the image was a strange aspect ratio! So I decided against it, and it's not worth displaying the slightly improved version without the top and right leaf fragments. Thanks for the comments, though!
 
Hi Chris :)

Pair - Simple image but I really like the colour/reflection of the water :)

Shape - Shame the flying thing (can't help with identification) is so central, but good clear image and nice detail (y)

ChrisR said:
So, that's me back only having this week's to do
Click to expand...
That's a good feeling isnt it :)
(plus a huge amount of commenting, sorry folks I'll get there!)
Click to expand...
No worries mate... when you get time (y)
 
In awe that your shooting film, I'm struggling to keep up using digital :) love the processing of Edinburgh castle (y)
 
Thanks Mark; although I started out planning to do all film, I'm now probably doing more digital than film, and trying to mark out the differences a bit better.

For the castle, processing was mainly trying to recover from a poorly exposed image: drop in brightness, and a lift to shadows and pull back on highlights to get something in the sky!
 
Hi Chris

Love the water in pair don't know whats reflecting in it but the colour of it adds to the picture
shape i can see why you used the leaves they are a nice shape but more of a crop might work better losing the bottom third:thinking:
 
ChrisR said:
Shooting film? Well, the first answer is, just try it!

I don't know. Just try it!
Click to expand...

Hi Chris, U have tried it, just not in the modern era!

I used to shoot film on a cheap SLR way back in the 80's. It always frustrated me that I could only afford to shoot a film a week and the results were nearly always disappointing (eg. if I tried a bracketed a shot I got 3 identical prints back from boots as the print machine compensated everything back to middle) and I found that I made very little progress, add the cost factor and I ended up shooting on Auto and in the end gave it up as a complete waste of time.

Each to their own and I like to see your pics on here, I just wondered what motivated you to do it all the "hard way". :)
 
"pair" I'm not sure about, the reflections and movement of water all seems a bit weird to me. the more I stare at it the more odd it looks and I am starting to convince myself there is some slight "oil painting" effect going on!.

I like the idea for shape and the fact you can see clearly the plant and leaves under the water too
 
Thanks guys. Pair is taken in Abbey Feilds in Kenilworth, that's the sunlit wall of the swimming pool reflecting in the lake. I was trying to catch pairs of ducks that looked to be together, at the places where the reflections were really mixed up! I guess "painterly effect" is a fair description of what I was trying for, although I wouldn't have descrobed it as that at the time. This was the best, although the beak of the top left bird somehow lacks definition with the reflections!

Allan, someone else suggested a crop and I've thought about it, but apart from perhaps trimming off the small parts of leaves top and right, I'd leave (sorry) it as it is. I like those two making a heart shape bottom left!

Thanks for the comments, this is really helping me think about things more.
 
Pair, nice, on theme just a little dark around the face but as they're on water I'll let you off :)

Shape, just a little trim as has been mentioned and it would be great.
 
Don't know why themes like this seem so hard! There are some shots on a film I might get back next Wednesday, but to avoid falling further behind, here's a shot from a barbecue, plenty cooking here:



Shot with the X10...
 
Last edited:
Again I might just have a panning shot on a film due back next week, but meanwhile, here's something from a roll of Agfa Vista Poundland film, taken on my Olympus mju II. Built for speed, not comfort:

 
Plenty I think perhaps would have been better if you could have asked the bloke in the background to move to one side. Nice idea, I actually bought this was someone getting in early for "season"

Speed, nice car and I like the beading of the water on it actually, but again I find the background a bit distracting. Maybe a shallower DoF on this one?
 
Thanks Chris. To be honest, neither were deliberate shots for the 52 challenge, so both a bit of a cheat (although both are deliberate crops). You're absolutely right on the first, and I deliberated not putting it in, but until next week I don't even have another candidate for "Plenty", so I went with it. You're right about DoF for "Speed", but the mju II is an entirely automatic film P&S, so you don't get an option!
 
BBQ....yeah!! Gimme, gimme, gimme. Nice colours and on theme. Looks a tad OOF and as said, the guy in the bg distracts a tad.

Speed, lovely red and cracking motor. Might have been tempted to go for a low angle front take.

Cheers.
 
Hi Chris, not much to add I'm afraid - I'm looking forward to seeing your film shots too. (y)
 
Hi Chris
Plenty I think you could have taken a step to the left to get the grill straight on and lose the person in the BG
Speed it needs to be isolated the BG is not doing it any favours
 
Hi Chris


Speed ....lovely car but really needed a lower more frontish on angle for me

Shape....good choice in the water lilly's ,nice colors but I too would have cropped out the lower leaf....or maybe just used that one for the theme ?

Plenty.......someone else mentioned it's seems a little oof but on theme & looks very tasty

Pair......like the muted tones & the darker reflection on the water...again I'd be tempted to crop a little from the bottom ?
 
[EDIT to note: this is NOT the mono entry!]

I took a few shots for Plenty on film, and a couple are perhaps worth sharing here. Taken on Ilford XP2 chromogenic monochrome film (basically black and white film using C41 colour negative processing) with the Pentax MX.

Plenty of Bikes available at Mike Vaughan's bike shop just up the road (only a small fraction of those available):



Plenty of crab apples on this broken branch, fallen down to the path:



When I was at the bike shop, I also took one of a bike in the window with Tour de France banners round it, for Speed. But I rather forgot about the reflections, so it's not worth putting up!
 
Last edited:
I also meant to say, thanks folks for all the comments. I would really like to get a proper shot for Speed, I do keep trying! I tried a panning shot with a Heron flying across the local lake, using the Pentax ME with my massive Tamron zoom lens on it, at maximum zoom, using a tripod as monopod... yes, it was as good as you might imagine. I'm not sure anyone looking at it would know which way the bird was flying!
 
I really should have got this in before the end of the week, as it was shot with plenty of time!

These are in Kenilworth Castle (local residents can get a free pass, since technically the people of Kenilworth own the Castle, and allow English Heritage to manage it). I like the composition of this one, but technically there's flare at the top of the full-sized picture, which I've had to crop out as best I could. I've experimented with several different crops, I think this one works OK...



I also took several shots inside one of the circular staircases in the Gatehouse. I'm not sure this works, but I quite like the way the lines here curve about:



[EDIT: Both taken with the Fuji X10, fully digital!]

Hope you like them...
 
Last edited:
Thanks Alan. Yes, I did shoot with more headroom, but got a problematic flare up there; these old lenses aren't quite so great straight into the sun!

[EDIT: Being an eejit again! This was shot with the X10, not a film camera, so I can't blame "old lenses"! In fact, the X10 is usually pretty good straight into the light; the Fujinon lens is brilliant in many circumstances. 7 Aug 2013]
 
Last edited:
I like steps, I like the slither of sky through the gaps....

Maybe your film head tells you cropping is bad... I crop pretty much every shot I take for one reason or another.

First steps for me, the contrast of the stone and wood, and the angles... (y)
 
Thanks everyone. I agree on the first steps one; I know what I was trying for with the second, but it just doesn't quite come off.

Taking a good hard look at the crop is one of the things I'm learning to do more from this 52. (y)
 
Hi Chris Have to agree with everyone else the 1st step shot just works better.
The bike shot for plenty is excellent, its very busy but I think it works (y)
 
I have got SOOO behind... I managed to get all the shots by earlier this week, but didn't manage to get them up, so ended up yet another week behind. However, here are a few to almost catch up.



[Edited for size] Taken on XP2 with a Pentax MX, almost certainly with the 85mm f/2 lens, on a misty day during the Festival. Looking down the Royal Mile. Slight crop.

The alternative shot was taken a few minutes earlier. A drummer was working with a piper at the bottom of the High Street; the sound was, um, "interesting" but didn't quite gell to my ear. They were standing a bit far apart for decent shots, though I tried, but I liked this crop:



Same film and camera combination...
 
Last edited:


Pentax MX and XP2 again. I wanted to get that intense sense of connection between audience and guitarist that was evident so oftn, but hard to capture. I realise it breaks one of the cardinal rules (out of focus foreground), but I hope it works.

The alternate is more conventional:



Working on a corner of Princes Street, apparently oblivious to the hustle and bustle around, feeding the cable that connects us all! Pentax ME and expired Fuji Reala.
 
This flummoxed me for ages. I tried many shots trying to capture the "beginning of autumn", but in the end picked this X10 shot showing a group about to play near the National Gallery, for its colour.

 
Last edited:
The beach at Joppa on the X10:



I had eralier spent ages trying to capture the morning mist blowing across the beach near Fisherrow harbour. This is the best of those (also X10):

 
This I found a real struggle; I'm not sure this X10 shot really fits the theme, but I liked it (wrapped round a tree in Holyrood Park):

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top