MWGL Photography thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
dmn23 said:
I used a neutral density filter to allow me to slow the shutter speed to blur the water over the rocks, but it basically does the same thing to plain blue skies that a polarizer does.
Click to expand...

yea....i have several ND filters also.......and i've used them WITH a polarizer in the past......for the same reason.....longer exposure and not washed out.:thu:
 
One more from the Colorado trip this past weekend.

DSC_0068.jpg
 
nuke_diver said:
Such is the old problem with film cameras and why I think they won't be anything but a curiosity. When I went on my big UW photography trip I shot ~42 rolls of film in 14 days. I probably kept 1/2 and some of those were not good but where of things that I only got 1 shot of so I kept. Now I have a closet full of 35mm slides that I never look at any more :(

BTW anyone interested in a good used 8008 with a fully functional housing? :idea:
Click to expand...

yeah, of course that is why digital is such a cool thing. Back when I was a student, and had unlimited access to black and white "stock" Tri-X, and a dark room, I could shoot B/W properly. Never could do that with color. The cost of processing, and inability to do editing, cropping and printing in my own dark room limited me. Now I can finally shoot like I was always taught a pro does. With at least 75% ending up on the floor during first edit, and much more before that one shot is found. Still, the lessons regarding lighting, composing, and working with film are still useful today I believe. And, it is just plain fun to shoot some film. Especially black and white, good old grainy Tri-X if possible.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
I just sent a roll of black and white into The Darkroom in California. https://thedarkroom.com (anyone have a favorite lab BTW?) The local place I used to use a few years ago no longer processes black and white. The Darkroom will send me back some super scans from which I can order prints if I like them. I will post if anything good turns out. I was shooting mostly action of my son's cross country running district championships. I shot ASA 400 TMax (I wanted Tri-X as I like the grain but they had none). I was using this old camera and that old 70-150 zoom. I closed the aperture down to between 8 and 16 as light allowed for depth of field and reasonable speed. Hopefully some of it turned out. We shall see.

adad9381f42bd4e9f6dcb6b14912d70f.jpg
Click to expand...
Ok, here we go. I can do some more editing, but here is a first peek.


969882859.jpg
969920056.jpg
969920023.jpg

Giving it to the pain cave.
969884231.jpg

Proud Mom
969884681.jpg

Enjoying his success at making the state team as a freshman with his friends.
969884794.jpg
 
the_huge said:
Darkroom scratched the negative? :shrug:
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was wondering that too. I can't see what else could have happened there. I will email them about it. Still a good shot. I could probably fill it in digitally and fix it. Overall I am pretty happy with the roll of shots. I have not used that camera in a long time, and certainly have not shot much action in a long time. There are some other decent shots too. It was fun to try and have a few work out! Makes me want to get myself a decent digital camera body, and still use that old lens if I can't afford a new automatic one, seeing that I can still focus. I will need to learn how to adjust depth of field on a DSLR. Is it still the same principle, shut the aperture down for more depth of field, open it up to fuzz out the background? I would think so.
 
Last edited:
sunvalleylaw said:
Is it still the same principle, shut the aperture down for more depth of field, open it up to fuzz out the background? I would think so.
Click to expand...
Everything optical is essentially the same as it ever was; all that has changed is the medium upon which the image is recorded. :)
FWIW, whilst being an enthusiastic convert to the economics and convenience of digital processing, I am a grumpy old Luddite when it comes to the shooting aspects. Everything on my camera (with the exception of white balance) is set to 'manual' and it stays that way. To do otherwise would be to devalue the countless hours that I invested in learning to use a camera in the pre-digital age. oh... and... I use a camera with an 8Mpx sensor that will soon qualify as 'vintage'. :wink:
 
the_huge said:
Everything optical is essentially the same as it ever was; all that has changed is the medium upon which the image is recorded. :)
FWIW, whilst being an enthusiastic convert to the economics and convenience of digital processing, I am a grumpy old Luddite when it comes to the shooting aspects. Everything on my camera (with the exception of white balance) is set to 'manual' and it stays that way. To do otherwise would be to devalue the countless hours that I invested in learning to use a camera in the pre-digital age. oh... and... I use a camera with an 8Mpx sensor that will soon qualify as 'vintage'. :wink:
Click to expand...

Cool! I feel the same way, though I learned using aperture oriented auto exposure, and like to shoot that way rather than purely manual exposure. I plan on getting a body, and using my old lenses, and maybe getting an additional old manual Nikkor lens or two that you can now pick up for next to nothing. And maybe one mid range auto zoom lens (someday when i can afford a good one) for general use and for video.

But using the camera and lenses like I was taught back in the day by an old Dutchman named Maarten Claringbould, but being able to use the new medium, and afford to shoot way more frames to get what I want, sounds really fun.

I still will shoot some film once in a while. Because being motivated to make those frames count keeps one sharp and not lazy, I would think.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
Cool! I feel the same way, though I learned using aperture oriented auto exposure, and like to shoot that way rather than purely manual exposure. I plan on getting a body, and using my old lenses, and maybe getting an additional old manual Nikkor lens or two that you can now pick up for next to nothing. And maybe one mid range auto zoom lens (someday when i can afford a good one) for general use and for video.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you've caught the fever. Welcome to the world of photo GAS.

But using the camera and lenses like I was taught back in the day by an old Dutchman named Maarten Claringbould, but being able to use the new medium, and afford to shoot way more frames to get what I want, sounds really fun.

I still will shoot some film once in a while. Because being motivated to make those frames count keeps one sharp and not lazy, I would think.
Click to expand...
It is fun. Digital really opens up the possibilities a lot. As far as film goes, I don't miss it for a moment. I'm interested to see how your attitude changes once you get accustomed to the workflow of digital.
 
Photography buffs' quiztime:

Although it actually looks nothing like it, the fourth shot in @sunvalleylaw's post above instantly made me think of a hugely famous historical photo. First to guess correctly wins t'internet.
 
Found a great deal on the Canon 85mm f/1.2L ii, so I got myself a Chanukah present. Didn't have the energy to try much tonight. Tomorrow will be the day. But check out this depth of field! That background blur!

These are just JPEGs straight out of the camera.

c2a685b5162a346ab40ac6298f3e8ea6.jpg


ecce6a6fdf92bcd32c5f54841aa086ba.jpg


My only issue so far is that the minimum focus distance is a little far. It's tough to fill the frame sometimes. But I can live with that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top