- Messages
- 79
- Name
- Arnaud
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Interesting but the quality seems rather poor compared to Ansel Adams's shots taken with a camera of a similar vintage.
Interesting but the quality seems rather poor compared to Ansel Adams's shots taken with a camera of a similar vintage.
Thank You, Stephen! When I first saw the thread title, I was 1/2 expecting to see the sloping wheel "zooming" shots by Lartigue but couldn't remember his name!
Reading the text of the article, it seems that the photographer can be bothered to measure the physical size of the aperture and judges the shutter speeds to be "slow and kinda slow" rather than bothering to find out what either parameter actually is. It's an interesting article but more of a 1st year student experiment than something deserving this kind of exposure IMO.
Mixed feelings about these. Some are good, some just seem poor photographs with little merit to them other than that they were taken with an old camera. It's not about whether they are sharp or blurred, whether vignetted etc, but composition and exposure (printing exposure, since this is B&W film) doesn't always look good.
They reminded me of what happens when we do intentional camera movement shots - most are best suited to the bin, while occasionally there will be the odd gem. *Some* of these have that beckoning for the bin look to them, while some are great.
For me it's akin to owning and driving something like a Bugatti T13 on a best time hill climb event. It might be worth just shy of a million and be 92 years old and made in an era when car building was an engineering exercise rather than an economic one but actually is outperformed by a 2nd hand Citroen Saxo VTS. The nostalgia is great but achieving an end result.....
Quite. It's the doing that's fun, but probably best not to actually look at the results. However as I said, some images were great - just need a little less awe about the camera and a little more photographic sensibility (and I have trouble telling a good shot from a bad one too).
But this is all about the camera? Otherwise he'd be using a 1dx2!
I guess what I meant is the camera itself is central to the exercise being undertaken.I disagree; based on the main caption which is 'Joshua Paul has spent four years using a camera from 1913 to take stunning pics'. As has been mentioned I don't think they are a stunning output. However I would say, and this doesn't seem to be the focus of the article tag line. The technique that he has honed and going back to pre in camera metering, auto timed shutter and all the other things modern DSLRs take the burden from the photographer that are still with Joshua in this project is admirable and stunning.
I guess what I meant is the camera itself is central to the exercise being undertaken.
Thats weird, it shows Arno1405 as the author when it was me??
Thats weird, it shows Arno1405 as the author when it was me??
I went to the local tip with my dad when I was about 14 and found a Kodak Junior from 1904, it was well battered and the shutter didn't work. Being nosey, I took my dad's micro screwdrivers and took it apart only to find a spring had obviously come lose, once reattached, hey presto the shutter worked
So then I bought a 110 B&W film and shot the full roll of our house on a sunny day - it had two indicated shutter speeds 1/25th and 1/50th and 4 apertures (1,2,3 & 4) as I recall. When the prints came back from the lab they all looked exactly the same; which I took to mean the auto lab had managed to easily adjust the prints to be 'nice' regardless of the settings used
And that's what I see here in the F1 story - I doubt the tog is doing anything more than 'sunny' = 1/50 and No:4, 'dull' = 1/25th & No:1 - the film's latitude and the lab is doing the rest
Some are nice, but its a fun (if a little pointless) exercise for me. So what that the camera is 104 years old, its all just glass a hole, a shutter and film, it being 104 probably makes it easier to use than some modern ones with all that metering & focusing stuff to do
Dave