Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
I had a crush on the Rollei 35 for a long time, but never shot with one. I'm carrying my dad's old Leica II that I had reconditioned. Yesterday I stopped several times on my commute to shoot interesting-looking things, so we'll see how that turns out when the roll is done. I'll scan and post a couple, whether good or bad (or leave that for y'all to decide). Thanks all for the input and image-sharing! Philip Santa Rosa, CA On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 11:26:00 PM UTC-7, Statrixbob wrote: > > I've had good luck with my little Rollei 35 SE. It's zone focus so with a > reasonable estimate of distance, f/8, and sunny 16, I'm pretty safe. I > attached a digital (X100F) shot earlier and then realized I had my Rollei > with me that day as well. This is more or less the same image shot with the > Rollei 35 SE using T-Max 100 through an orange filter. I'm also including a > picture of that camera so you can see how nice and small it is. > > [image: Half_Dome_TMAX100_Orange_Filter.jpg] > > And here's the camera that took it... > > [image: IMG_7245.jpeg] > > It's my go-to film camera for travel (though, as I said, generally > digital). > > Aloha, > > Bob > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 5:38 PM William deRosset > wrote: > >> That Leica will strongly encourage an "f/8 and be there" approach. I find >> I do a far better job framing a photo with a viewfinder, and my eyes have >> gotten bad enough that the RF spot is far more accurate than a ground >> glass. If you wear corrective lenses, the iiic is far friendlier to them >> than an M2 or M3, which have a metal surround for the viewfinder. >> >> The iiic is also about the right size for a handlebar bag camera. I may >> actually supplement mine with an XA if I can find one in decent >> condition >> >> Enjoy. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Will >> William M deRosset >> Fort Collins CO USA >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > -- > Robert Harrison > Honolulu, HI > rfhar...@gmail.com > statrix.com > Wu Name: Tha Eurythmic King of Nowhere > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
That Leica will strongly encourage an "f/8 and be there" approach. I find I do a far better job framing a photo with a viewfinder, and my eyes have gotten bad enough that the RF spot is far more accurate than a ground glass. If you wear corrective lenses, the iiic is far friendlier to them than an M2 or M3, which have a metal surround for the viewfinder. The iiic is also about the right size for a handlebar bag camera. I may actually supplement mine with an XA if I can find one in decent condition Enjoy. Cheers, Will William M deRosset Fort Collins CO USA -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
A little late to this thread, but ... I recently purchased a fully manual 35mm camera (Leica, made in 1950, with a lens from 1940) to sample film photography again. I started shooting film way back in high school, developing and printing black and white photos in the family bathroom. Kept on shooting film when I went to work as a newspaper reporter in the early 80s, and finally gave it up for digital in the late 90s. I love digital, and I'm heavily invested in equipment for that type of photography, but for now it's fun to take photos and then wait, wait, wait while the lab develops and either prints or scans the images. Very nostalgic for me. Here's a sample from the first roll of Triple-X: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bn4eOfEn_pR/ I plan to carry the Leica on a 200-mile ride this weekend, where the plan is to set the exposure, turn the focus to infinity, and snap pics of the scenery and fellow riders. I'll let you all know how the images turn out. --Eric "New Luddite" Norris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
I didn't understand a word of your filosofikal musings, but that fountain photo is -- let me grudgingly say, if not "wonderful," at least, "very nice*." * "Nice, adj. Generic term of approbation." Seriously, I think I see what you say. I am sure that there are serious theological lessons to be learned from all this, but I will refrain. But in all seriousness, these and the earlier photos are very good ones, as far as I can tell, and thanks for posting. That fountain photo is a very good one. On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 3:39 PM, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > On 09/24/2018 05:09 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: > > Steve: With a dumb phone, yet! Kudos, very nice. > > > Thanks! > > > Speaking of photgraphic-aesthetic-theory, something I've devoted exactly > 30 seconds of mental activity to, it would be fun to hear descriptions of > the "photograph" in such cases. Far, far from being a simple > "representation of reality" I guess it would be much like a painting: a > combination of "what is out there" and the artist's (even Steve) > manipulation, all tied together by the artist's (even Steve) interpretation > of what he/she is seeing. [Or not.] > > > I'm down with Ansel Adams: the photograph only begins inside the camera. > I'll go further: my eyes are very sensitive to light, and any time it gets > up to what the film boxes used to call "cloudy bright" I have to put my sun > glasses on. And my sunglasses have a dark amber tint. So essentially > everything I see outdoors is more contrasty than a camera would see it, and > the tones are shifted as well. > > And then let's add to that, human vision doesn't work like a camera *at > all.* You're basically seeing a stored image in your brain based on > memory, updated with fresh information that gets added incrementally and > heavily focused by your interest. "Out of focus" / bokeh is replaced by > "not noticing, didn't pay it any attention". You rely on context to get > size, and often see it the way you expect it to be. "Reality" as you see > it is in your mind. > > So manipulating the *ell out of an image to get it to look like what you > think you saw, or what you wish you saw, or what you think that image wants > to be when it grows up, is all perfectly in scope as far as I'm concerned. > > > > When I was looking at the fountain in Point State Park (at the Pittsburgh > terminus of the Great Allegheny Passage) I actually could see the texture, > the pulses and streams in the fountain, and the buildings behind. But in > the original photo, it was all lost in an indistinguishable mass of light > blue, devoid of contrast. The image -- at first -- didn't show what I'd > seen in person at all. It took a lot of effort and manipulation to enhance > the tonal range to bring out the texture. > > I also think nothing whatever about removing incongruous junk from an > image, provided I can do it easily enough. Here's a fine example: > > > > There was some plastic litter on the side of the trail when I took this - > with a real camera, years ago now - that I didn't notice at the time, > something like a blue sand pail or plastic bottle or some such thing. I > cloned some of the leaves and removed the blue garbage from the photo. > Perfectly legitimate, as far as I'm concerned: I wasn't trying to do a > documentary on trailside litter, I was trying to capture the feeling of the > Dyke Marsh Trail. > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. Other professional writing services. http://www.resumespecialties.com/ Patrick Moore Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique ** ** *Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
On 09/24/2018 05:09 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: Steve: With a dumb phone, yet! Kudos, very nice. Thanks! Speaking of photgraphic-aesthetic-theory, something I've devoted exactly 30 seconds of mental activity to, it would be fun to hear descriptions of the "photograph" in such cases. Far, far from being a simple "representation of reality" I guess it would be much like a painting: a combination of "what is out there" and the artist's (even Steve) manipulation, all tied together by the artist's (even Steve) interpretation of what he/she is seeing. [Or not.] I'm down with Ansel Adams: the photograph only begins inside the camera. I'll go further: my eyes are very sensitive to light, and any time it gets up to what the film boxes used to call "cloudy bright" I have to put my sun glasses on. And my sunglasses have a dark amber tint. So essentially everything I see outdoors is more contrasty than a camera would see it, and the tones are shifted as well. And then let's add to that, human vision doesn't work like a camera /at all./ You're basically seeing a stored image in your brain based on memory, updated with fresh information that gets added incrementally and heavily focused by your interest. "Out of focus" / bokeh is replaced by "not noticing, didn't pay it any attention". You rely on context to get size, and often see it the way you expect it to be. "Reality" as you see it is in your mind. So manipulating the *ell out of an image to get it to look like what you think you saw, or what you wish you saw, or what you think that image wants to be when it grows up, is all perfectly in scope as far as I'm concerned. When I was looking at the fountain in Point State Park (at the Pittsburgh terminus of the Great Allegheny Passage) I actually could see the texture, the pulses and streams in the fountain, and the buildings behind. But in the original photo, it was all lost in an indistinguishable mass of light blue, devoid of contrast. The image -- at first -- didn't show what I'd seen in person at all. It took a lot of effort and manipulation to enhance the tonal range to bring out the texture. I also think nothing whatever about removing incongruous junk from an image, provided I can do it easily enough. Here's a fine example: There was some plastic litter on the side of the trail when I took this - with a real camera, years ago now - that I didn't notice at the time, something like a blue sand pail or plastic bottle or some such thing. I cloned some of the leaves and removed the blue garbage from the photo. Perfectly legitimate, as far as I'm concerned: I wasn't trying to do a documentary on trailside litter, I was trying to capture the feeling of the Dyke Marsh Trail. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
Roland Michaud: photography, but also bike. I didn't glom onto this until just now: En 1950, en récompense de sa réussite au baccalauréat, ses parents lui offrent un vélo de randonnée et lui permettent d’entreprendre son premier vrai voyage : un périple à bicyclette de 85 jours en Europe du Nord qui le mène jusqu’en Laponie ; il y réalise ses premières photos en noir et blanc avec un appareil Kodak de 1894 ayant appartenu à son grand-père. Après un séjour d’études en Angleterre, il entreprend en 1955 avec son frère cadet Jean-Claude un vaste périple en auto stop au Moyen-Orient où Roland prend ses premières photos couleurs. Ils décrivent leur aventure dans un récit resté inédit : *École buissonnière en Perse*. In 1950, as a reward for passing his baccalaureate, his parents gave him a touring bicycle and allowed him to go on his first real tour: an 85-day bicycle trip across northern Europe which took him as far as Lapland; it was during this trip that he took his first black and white photos with a 1894 Kodak apparatus that had belonged to his grandfather. After a period of study in England, with his younger brother Jean-Claude he began a huge hitchhiking trip across the Middle Easts where Roland took his first color photos. They described their adventures in an unpublished story, *Playing Hooky in Persia.* On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: > I am not familiar with Roland Barth; sorry. Doubt I'd have much patience > with "philosophy of aesthetics;" me, I like to see the pikchurs. I named > Roland Michaud: > > https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_et_Sabrina_Michaud > > And I meant the cheap digital pen cameras, or stick cameras if you like -- > $5 or $10 and often given away as promotions. Fun to use, in part because > they were so damned primitive, and getting even minimally decent results > required you to think a bit (no software to compensate for your > hamfistedness). > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Zed Martinez > wrote: > >> Patrick, I have some complicated thoughts that lean often negatively >> about Roland Barthe (because, my, he could come across quite pompous), but >> he has this notion when he discusses what he likes about photography called >> the 'punctum' that I find to be a very useful term, and an interesting >> read. Either via the long slug in 'Camera Lucida' itself, or readily >> discussed online. The broad stroke, though, is that in some photos for >> every person there is an element that sometimes occurs that sticks out, >> that 'pricks' the viewer, and which dominates the photo for them (in the >> way that draws them in and makes the image last). Barthes opinion if I >> remember is that the punctum has to be an accident, planned elements are >> contrived or flat. it's the accident of a detail that resonates for the >> viewer which the artist could not have known about that's what really >> drives great photography. Not quite the same as what makes a photo 'good,' >> but, I think perhaps it's a concept you'd enjoy. >> >> Also, were those the older film Pens popular on the iBOB? I gather as >> much from the context of the thread, but Olympus loose usage of that term >> in both film and digital means I usually find it safer to ask than assume. >> >> On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 4:23:25 PM UTC-4, Patrick Moore wrote: >>> >>> Forgot to add that, what, 10 years ago? -- there were recurring threads >>> on the iBoblist about on-bike photography using those extremely primitive >>> and extremely cheap pen cameras, and uploading to the cloud via some very >>> primitive transfer software. Some Bobs got some very surprisingly good >>> results, given the indecently primitive nature of the cameras -- I briefly >>> owned one and got some shots uploaded to the proto-cloud with mine. Kent >>> Petersen was notable for his good results with this minimalist technology. >>> This may be an instance; at any rate, it is Kent's (he gave me permission >>> to use it for my website, which I never did). >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Patrick Moore >>> wrote: >>> This request added by a very definitely non-photographer: Respondents, please post some of your sample or typical photos per Philip's questions, be these bike-related or not. I have not taken the trouble to learn anything of the art beyond the grossest rudiments, but I do enjoy seeing good photography. [What elements make a good photograph? Subject, treatment, technicalities. Append sample. I seriously would like to see others' ideas of what is good. Me, conventional choices, no doubt: Ansel Adams, Roland and Sabrina Michaud (I still have their Afghan book), and Mirella Ricciardi (I still have her "Vanishing Africa" book), and Dorothea Lange (have it too). Back to regular programming.] On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Philip Williamson < philip.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > I marked this OT, but changed my mind, since Grant
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
Steve: With a dumb phone, yet! Kudos, very nice. Speaking of photgraphic-aesthetic-theory, something I've devoted exactly 30 seconds of mental activity to, it would be fun to hear descriptions of the "photograph" in such cases. Far, far from being a simple "representation of reality" I guess it would be much like a painting: a combination of "what is out there" and the artist's (even Steve) manipulation, all tied together by the artist's (even Steve) interpretation of what he/she is seeing. [Or not.] On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Steve Palincsar wrote: > This is digital, not film, but it's not far from what you're talking about. > > I recently got a new phone - an Alcatel Go Flip with a 2 mpx camera. The > camera on that phone is little better than a Brownie, and bright sunlight > totally blows the color balance rendering everything excessively blue. But > every now and then, often with a heavy helping of corrective editing, I've > come up with some pretty interesting photos I wouldn't have had otherwise. > It's been an interesting challenge. > > For example, late in August I was out painting the road markings for our > club's annual Century and came upon this: > > I've ridden by that spot hundreds of times over the years, but never saw > anything: it's at the bottom of a moderately steep downhill, with a > corresponding uphill on the other side, typical of what passes for "hills" > in Southern Maryland. I was parked there so that we could mark the > potholes on the downhill, some of which have been there for several years. > It's no wonder I never noticed: coming down that grade at 30 mph steering > through the potholes you have other things on your mind than peering off > into the woods! > > This is a stitched multi-shot hand-held panorama taken a couple of weeks > ago during the high water that left parts of the Mount Vernon Trail and Old > Town Alexandria under water. Color balance was entirely hopeless, beyond > any correction, but as a B conversion it didn't turn out too badly and it > did capture the hazy, swampy feeling of the day. > > It took an hour to do something with the blue cast on this. The resulting > color isn't anywhere near what I saw, but I thought it had a certain charm > - a harbinger of autumn, perhaps. > > On 09/24/2018 04:23 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: > > Forgot to add that, what, 10 years ago? -- there were recurring threads on > the iBoblist about on-bike photography using those extremely primitive and > extremely cheap pen cameras, and uploading to the cloud via some very > primitive transfer software. Some Bobs got some very surprisingly good > results, given the indecently primitive nature of the cameras -- I briefly > owned one and got some shots uploaded to the proto-cloud with mine. Kent > Petersen was notable for his good results with this minimalist technology. > This may be an instance; at any rate, it is Kent's (he gave me permission > to use it for my website, which I never did). > > > -- > Steve Palincsar > Alexandria, Virginia > USA > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. Other professional writing services. http://www.resumespecialties.com/ Patrick Moore Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique ** ** *Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
I am not familiar with Roland Barth; sorry. Doubt I'd have much patience with "philosophy of aesthetics;" me, I like to see the pikchurs. I named Roland Michaud: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_et_Sabrina_Michaud And I meant the cheap digital pen cameras, or stick cameras if you like -- $5 or $10 and often given away as promotions. Fun to use, in part because they were so damned primitive, and getting even minimally decent results required you to think a bit (no software to compensate for your hamfistedness). On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Zed Martinez wrote: > Patrick, I have some complicated thoughts that lean often negatively about > Roland Barthe (because, my, he could come across quite pompous), but he has > this notion when he discusses what he likes about photography called the > 'punctum' that I find to be a very useful term, and an interesting read. > Either via the long slug in 'Camera Lucida' itself, or readily discussed > online. The broad stroke, though, is that in some photos for every person > there is an element that sometimes occurs that sticks out, that 'pricks' > the viewer, and which dominates the photo for them (in the way that draws > them in and makes the image last). Barthes opinion if I remember is that > the punctum has to be an accident, planned elements are contrived or flat. > it's the accident of a detail that resonates for the viewer which the > artist could not have known about that's what really drives great > photography. Not quite the same as what makes a photo 'good,' but, I think > perhaps it's a concept you'd enjoy. > > Also, were those the older film Pens popular on the iBOB? I gather as much > from the context of the thread, but Olympus loose usage of that term in > both film and digital means I usually find it safer to ask than assume. > > On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 4:23:25 PM UTC-4, Patrick Moore wrote: >> >> Forgot to add that, what, 10 years ago? -- there were recurring threads >> on the iBoblist about on-bike photography using those extremely primitive >> and extremely cheap pen cameras, and uploading to the cloud via some very >> primitive transfer software. Some Bobs got some very surprisingly good >> results, given the indecently primitive nature of the cameras -- I briefly >> owned one and got some shots uploaded to the proto-cloud with mine. Kent >> Petersen was notable for his good results with this minimalist technology. >> This may be an instance; at any rate, it is Kent's (he gave me permission >> to use it for my website, which I never did). >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: >> >>> This request added by a very definitely non-photographer: Respondents, >>> please post some of your sample or typical photos per Philip's questions, >>> be these bike-related or not. I have not taken the trouble to learn >>> anything of the art beyond the grossest rudiments, but I do enjoy seeing >>> good photography. >>> >>> [What elements make a good photograph? Subject, treatment, >>> technicalities. Append sample. I seriously would like to see others' ideas >>> of what is good. Me, conventional choices, no doubt: Ansel Adams, Roland >>> and Sabrina Michaud (I still have their Afghan book), and Mirella Ricciardi >>> (I still have her "Vanishing Africa" book), and Dorothea Lange (have it >>> too). Back to regular programming.] >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Philip Williamson < >>> philip.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I marked this OT, but changed my mind, since Grant writes about and shoots analog film. My question isn't about gear (no surprise if it goes there, though), it's about subject matter. I have cameras, and film, and some okay ways to carry them on the bike (suggestions there couldn't hurt). What I'm looking for is inspiration as I build myself a rule-set for a film photography project. On my morning commutes, I've been keeping my eye out for "what would I shoot if I were shooting film" moments. 1. What do you film photographers shoot when you shoot film? Do you approach it differently than phone camera or digital shooting? 2. Do you cycle to shoot, or is it a wholly unrelated hobby? 3. Anybody shoot color? I want to do this now, since a friend develops color at home using a sous vide (cooking) setup to control temps. Please link to your images, if you care to share. I'd really like to see what the film folk are doing. Philip Santa Rosa, CA -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
This is digital, not film, but it's not far from what you're talking about. I recently got a new phone - an Alcatel Go Flip with a 2 mpx camera. The camera on that phone is little better than a Brownie, and bright sunlight totally blows the color balance rendering everything excessively blue. But every now and then, often with a heavy helping of corrective editing, I've come up with some pretty interesting photos I wouldn't have had otherwise. It's been an interesting challenge. For example, late in August I was out painting the road markings for our club's annual Century and came upon this: I've ridden by that spot hundreds of times over the years, but never saw anything: it's at the bottom of a moderately steep downhill, with a corresponding uphill on the other side, typical of what passes for "hills" in Southern Maryland. I was parked there so that we could mark the potholes on the downhill, some of which have been there for several years. It's no wonder I never noticed: coming down that grade at 30 mph steering through the potholes you have other things on your mind than peering off into the woods! This is a stitched multi-shot hand-held panorama taken a couple of weeks ago during the high water that left parts of the Mount Vernon Trail and Old Town Alexandria under water. Color balance was entirely hopeless, beyond any correction, but as a B conversion it didn't turn out too badly and it did capture the hazy, swampy feeling of the day. It took an hour to do something with the blue cast on this. The resulting color isn't anywhere near what I saw, but I thought it had a certain charm - a harbinger of autumn, perhaps. On 09/24/2018 04:23 PM, Patrick Moore wrote: Forgot to add that, what, 10 years ago? -- there were recurring threads on the iBoblist about on-bike photography using those extremely primitive and extremely cheap pen cameras, and uploading to the cloud via some very primitive transfer software. Some Bobs got some very surprisingly good results, given the indecently primitive nature of the cameras -- I briefly owned one and got some shots uploaded to the proto-cloud with mine. Kent Petersen was notable for his good results with this minimalist technology. This may be an instance; at any rate, it is Kent's (he gave me permission to use it for my website, which I never did). -- Steve Palincsar Alexandria, Virginia USA -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
Patrick, I have some complicated thoughts that lean often negatively about Roland Barthe (because, my, he could come across quite pompous), but he has this notion when he discusses what he likes about photography called the 'punctum' that I find to be a very useful term, and an interesting read. Either via the long slug in 'Camera Lucida' itself, or readily discussed online. The broad stroke, though, is that in some photos for every person there is an element that sometimes occurs that sticks out, that 'pricks' the viewer, and which dominates the photo for them (in the way that draws them in and makes the image last). Barthes opinion if I remember is that the punctum has to be an accident, planned elements are contrived or flat. it's the accident of a detail that resonates for the viewer which the artist could not have known about that's what really drives great photography. Not quite the same as what makes a photo 'good,' but, I think perhaps it's a concept you'd enjoy. Also, were those the older film Pens popular on the iBOB? I gather as much from the context of the thread, but Olympus loose usage of that term in both film and digital means I usually find it safer to ask than assume. On Monday, September 24, 2018 at 4:23:25 PM UTC-4, Patrick Moore wrote: > > Forgot to add that, what, 10 years ago? -- there were recurring threads on > the iBoblist about on-bike photography using those extremely primitive and > extremely cheap pen cameras, and uploading to the cloud via some very > primitive transfer software. Some Bobs got some very surprisingly good > results, given the indecently primitive nature of the cameras -- I briefly > owned one and got some shots uploaded to the proto-cloud with mine. Kent > Petersen was notable for his good results with this minimalist technology. > This may be an instance; at any rate, it is Kent's (he gave me permission > to use it for my website, which I never did). > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Patrick Moore > wrote: > >> This request added by a very definitely non-photographer: Respondents, >> please post some of your sample or typical photos per Philip's questions, >> be these bike-related or not. I have not taken the trouble to learn >> anything of the art beyond the grossest rudiments, but I do enjoy seeing >> good photography. >> >> [What elements make a good photograph? Subject, treatment, >> technicalities. Append sample. I seriously would like to see others' ideas >> of what is good. Me, conventional choices, no doubt: Ansel Adams, Roland >> and Sabrina Michaud (I still have their Afghan book), and Mirella Ricciardi >> (I still have her "Vanishing Africa" book), and Dorothea Lange (have it >> too). Back to regular programming.] >> >> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Philip Williamson < >> philip.w...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >>> I marked this OT, but changed my mind, since Grant writes about and >>> shoots analog film. >>> My question isn't about gear (no surprise if it goes there, though), >>> it's about subject matter. I have cameras, and film, and some okay ways to >>> carry them on the bike (suggestions there couldn't hurt). >>> >>> What I'm looking for is inspiration as I build myself a rule-set for a >>> film photography project. On my morning commutes, I've been keeping my eye >>> out for "what would I shoot if I were shooting film" moments. >>> >>> 1. What do you film photographers shoot when you shoot film? Do you >>> approach it differently than phone camera or digital shooting? >>> 2. Do you cycle to shoot, or is it a wholly unrelated hobby? >>> 3. Anybody shoot color? I want to do this now, since a friend develops >>> color at home using a sous vide (cooking) setup to control temps. >>> >>> Please link to your images, if you care to share. I'd really like to see >>> what the film folk are doing. >>> >>> Philip >>> Santa Rosa, CA >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com . >>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com >>> . >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. >> By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. >> Other professional writing services. >> http://www.resumespecialties.com/ >> Patrick Moore >> Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique >> * >> *** >> *Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?* >> > > > > -- > Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. > By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. > Other professional writing services. > http://www.resumespecialties.com/ >
Re: [RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
This request added by a very definitely non-photographer: Respondents, please post some of your sample or typical photos per Philip's questions, be these bike-related or not. I have not taken the trouble to learn anything of the art beyond the grossest rudiments, but I do enjoy seeing good photography. [What elements make a good photograph? Subject, treatment, technicalities. Append sample. I seriously would like to see others' ideas of what is good. Me, conventional choices, no doubt: Ansel Adams, Roland and Sabrina Michaud (I still have their Afghan book), and Mirella Ricciardi (I still have her "Vanishing Africa" book), and Dorothea Lange (have it too). Back to regular programming.] On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Philip Williamson < philip.william...@gmail.com> wrote: > I marked this OT, but changed my mind, since Grant writes about and shoots > analog film. > My question isn't about gear (no surprise if it goes there, though), it's > about subject matter. I have cameras, and film, and some okay ways to carry > them on the bike (suggestions there couldn't hurt). > > What I'm looking for is inspiration as I build myself a rule-set for a > film photography project. On my morning commutes, I've been keeping my eye > out for "what would I shoot if I were shooting film" moments. > > 1. What do you film photographers shoot when you shoot film? Do you > approach it differently than phone camera or digital shooting? > 2. Do you cycle to shoot, or is it a wholly unrelated hobby? > 3. Anybody shoot color? I want to do this now, since a friend develops > color at home using a sous vide (cooking) setup to control temps. > > Please link to your images, if you care to share. I'd really like to see > what the film folk are doing. > > Philip > Santa Rosa, CA > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews. By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching. Other professional writing services. http://www.resumespecialties.com/ Patrick Moore Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique ** ** *Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
Oh, and I forgot to mention that where film does very well is focus of field. Play with that. A lot. The iPhone’s portrait mode gives a semblance of it, but still far from film and looks different to me in digital. With abandon, Patrick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
Phil, What a great adventure to add to your adventures! I grew up shooting black and white and developing it myself, as well as the standard color film. I transitioned to digital when it reached a point of visual parity (in terms of clarity and pixels), and for me, the simplicity of an iPhone that is with me anyway and can do 93.2% of what I want to do with an SLR and/or film camera is really hard to beat. There remains an ascetic aesthetic to film that I miss, and I find delight in others delving into it. Grain. Feel. Light sensitivity. Mystery of outcome. Tweeking of outcome in the darkroom. Etc. The number one rule is shoot and learn, and the time between shooting and learning is the time it takes to develop rather than instantly. Grin. To your questions on subject matter, which in my experience is the same for film as digital, I find I tend to be drawn to similar genres and focus on them for a while, learning as I go. It may be macros of floura, abstracts, lighting studies, action shots, landscapes, portraits, etc. Bottom line for me is I shoot what interests me. Explore and learn even as you explore and learn on the bike. Enjoy, and please, share some of your ride/photo reports with us! With abandon, Patrick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
Portraits do it for me. (Due to the personal nature of most of them, I don’t share widely.) - Max “occasionally going with the (halide) grain” in A2 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[RBW] Film photography - subject matter?
I marked this OT, but changed my mind, since Grant writes about and shoots analog film. My question isn't about gear (no surprise if it goes there, though), it's about subject matter. I have cameras, and film, and some okay ways to carry them on the bike (suggestions there couldn't hurt). What I'm looking for is inspiration as I build myself a rule-set for a film photography project. On my morning commutes, I've been keeping my eye out for "what would I shoot if I were shooting film" moments. 1. What do you film photographers shoot when you shoot film? Do you approach it differently than phone camera or digital shooting? 2. Do you cycle to shoot, or is it a wholly unrelated hobby? 3. Anybody shoot color? I want to do this now, since a friend develops color at home using a sous vide (cooking) setup to control temps. Please link to your images, if you care to share. I'd really like to see what the film folk are doing. Philip Santa Rosa, CA -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
