Like I may have already mentioned in the Adapted lens talk part of the forum, I really love this shot. Excellent use of that device. The tones and smooth transitions are a pure joy to behold and create a nostalgic feel, very fitting of the subject.
When I was learning photography in the late 1950s and 1960s, one of the interesting assignments was to "Photograph Eggs." No other guidelines. It was quite a challenge. We photographed single eggs, multiple eggs, back-lit, side-lit, from above, from below. With dramatic shadows, high-key, low-key. How many ways can you photograph an egg? You learn lighting!
Some time in the '60s, while I was also learning offset lithography, which was the coming art form of fine printing, and all commercial printing, I chanced upon a magazine printed in Switzerland, I believe, devoted to Large Format photography and high-end printing. No expense was spared in the production of that masterpiece. It was a showcase of LF photography and offset lithography. I don't think there was anything smaller than 8x10 original images. Many were 11x14 and larger, printed on 9x12 heavy-stock pages. Glossy, full color images, cover to cover. Color reproduction and printing were not then what it is now. That magazine, in contrast predicted what the future of color reproduction was going to provide.
There were architecture shots, advertising, portraits, landscapes, product photography. It was my introduction to the modern view camera with all its swings, tilts, superb lenses, control of focus and DOF and composition. I was dumbstruck. And seriously in love. In every image, the scene was more life-like than the real thing.
One of the images was similar to this. But of course, much much better, taken with an 8x10 camera, a Schneider lens, multiple strobes. It was just drop-dead Gorgeous.
Over the years, I tried to replicate that LF shot with 35mm equipment and 6x6 MF cameras. I eventually got some pretty good results on 4x5, both color negative material and Velvia.
In 2001 I got my first digital camera, a Canon Power Shot G2, 4MP model with a 1/1.8" sensor. This shot is from that camera. This is the full image, processed today in the latest version of ACR and Photoshop and sharpened in Topaz Sharpen.
I hated that camera. At close range, the 7-21mm zoom lens performed pretty well as you can see here. But at mid and long range, there was some terrible distortion, which Canon refused to acknowledge. I put it up for auction on eBay after a month. The eBay environment was so crazy then and the demand for digital cameras so high, that it sold at auction for $100 more than the retail I had paid and which was still in effect.
We must be about the same age Rich. Maybe I'm a couple of years younger. I remember exactly the same egg challenge and in due course, I used it as a class assignment as well. I never got beyond 2 1/4 format though. At a much later time I also had an early Canon Powershot. Mine definitely didn't sell at a profit. I kept it for years because the tech moved so fast at that time that I couldn't find a buyer at any price.
Good to hear from you again Lou. That's a lot of ops. With all that practice I'm sure the medical team will soon get it right.
Meanwhile, I'm very pleased that you have found us in the new home and I hope you will continue to enjoy the posts.
Pete has explained where we are at. Hopefully we can eventually get a format that makes discussion easier to follow, meanwhile we are trying to work with what we have and are extremely appreciative of the assistance coming from DPRevival.
While we are working out how to work with this format, I have posted a couple of older shots to experiment with. You will be having trouble getting about and therefore you might consider posting some older photos as well.
Take care.
Repeat to self. Go right through looking at all the posts. I very nearly missed these shots. From your introduction, I'm not what I am looking at here. Are these really Winnie images on a wall or are these random marks and the photographer saw Winnie in them? I suspect the latter. I'm also curious about my own response. Same images but my feeling about them depends on the circumstances. If the photographer saw the markings and then saw Winnie in them, I'll applauide the photographer for the vision. If this is a Winnie portrait, the photo doesn't interest me nearly as much. It is probably saying something about me rather than MikePDX's photos.
Whatever, I prefer the more muted tones of the first, probably because in this version it looks, to me, more likely to be an accidental Winnie.
What else? It's food. Not, like, a work of art, or anything. 🙄
All this focusing is hungry work, and this photography nonsense isn't payin' any bills . . . 😉
Interesting and thanks for sharing. I'll keep pondering on a purchase because it really does look interesting, especially the old car. (My camera is m43).
I absolutely am in love with this oldtimer car image.
It is the kind of image that you can only achieve with an ultra fast lens.
I own a Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 that I have used mainly in dimly lit documentary circumstances (backstage of a circus etc).
The lens is so fast that it is nearly TOO fast to use wide open in broad daylight.
It needs ND filters in those circumstances and I hardly bother with that kind of accessories.
You've given me some ideas for extended use: upclose portrait-type images of objects that have a painterly quality.
In other words : your image has sparked my desire to go out and shoot some images myself.
What more could we ask for?
The Spark 2.0 with more control, lol. Like I said before, I am shocked at how this reminds me of the Mikaton 50mm at f0.95. It's got such a close "feeling" to that, and this lens is a fixed f5.6.
Interesting experiment, the vivid colors are immediately noticeable.
The color transitions are also extraordinary.
I would better preserve the facial contours of the subjects.