[rollei_list] Re: Ford motor and Rolleiflex
- From: Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 22:41:54 +0000 (GMT)
Slobodan, if you are talking about me, I handle the PS
colors controls from the earlier PS versions for Mac;
as I commented in one of my posts, I had a version
with less blue and I preferred the version with more
blue, I did not perceive the blue like excess, I liked
the photographs that way, with more blue.
You considered there was a blue excess and you did a
different adjustment that I also liked, it was
different but it does not mean I don't like my
original adjustment, those five photographs with the
original adjustment are receiving a lot of visits in
Flickr.
All the best
Carlos
--- Slobodan Dimitrov <s.dimitrov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
escribió:
> I would agree up to up to a point. Contravening
> reality is what
> photography can be about. But in this case, since we
> drifted this
> far, it only shows a lack of knowledge of mechanical
> controls over
> the emulsion.
>
> Slobodan Dimitrov
> http://www.sdimitrovphoto.com/
>
>
>
> On Dec 6, 2006, at 11:19 AM, Eric Goldstein wrote:
>
> > I think these comments don't deal with the
> fundamental roll of the
> > photographer. It is irrelevant what the original
> light in the scene
> > was. If the photographer wants to depict a scene
> as reality, then any
> > light he presents that is plausible will work for
> the reasons Jim
> > describe. If the photographer wants to present a
> more dramatic
> > depiction which aesthetically departs from
> reality, then he can go
> > blue or orange or violet or yellow, as long is it
> works. Yes, the
> > image must stand on its own, but plausibility is
> not necessarily the
> > point...
> >
> > Take a look at the racing series recently
> published in Studio
> > Photography:
> >
> >
>
http://www.imaginginfo.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=3&id=2113
> >
> > I am not holding this series up as a paragon of
> excellence, but merely
> > as an example of a clear departure from reality
> and plausibility which
> > works creatively.
> >
> > As for Jim's statement that the shots are way too
> blue, that they must
> > be corrected, and that all observers will agree
> with his
> > pronouncement, I say Jim, I and some others on
> this list are living
> > proof that you are wrong! This is a matter of
> taste and opinion, not
> > absolute judgment.
> >
> >
> > Eric Goldstein
> >
> > --
> >
> > On 12/6/06, Slobodan Dimitrov
> <s.dimitrov@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Yep, I have to agree with that. Living in South
> Cal. is a bear on
> >> contrast control. If onbe has to be there to
> explain the image, for
> >> quality or content, then that image has failed. A
> successful print is
> >> a stand alone print. Unless it's an essay, and
> even then....
> >>
> >> Slobodan Dimitrov
> >> http://www.sdimitrovphoto.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Dec 6, 2006, at 9:49 AM, Jim Brick wrote:
> >>
> >> > At 07:33 PM 12/5/2006 -0300, Carlos Manuel
> Freaza wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> but the things were blue that afternoon
> really.-
> >> >>
> >> >> Carlos
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Carlos,
> >> >
> >> > As a photographer, you have to realize that the
> people looking at
> >> > your photographs were not/are not at the place
> and time that the
> >> > photograph was made. People are simply looking
> at your photographic
> >> > result. You cannot, therefore, always exhibit
> photographs in the
> >> > same 'light' that they were taken. While in a
> situation, such as
> >> > deep shade, one's brain does a marvelous job of
> correcting colors
> >> > and densities so that things look reasonably
> normal. Take a
> >> > photograph under these circumstances, using
> color film, will result
> >> > in photographs with a bluish cast. When you
> look at the resulting
> >> > photographs, your brain may see it as you took
> it. Show it to some
> >> > who was not there, thus having no frame of
> reference, that person
> >> > will say "the photographs are way too blue."
> >> >
> >> > Take photographs of sunrises, sunsets, night
> street scenes,
> >> > interiors, people have -in their mind- what
> color these photographs
> >> > should be and therefore everything is pretty
> much OK.
> >> >
> >> > Your originals are way too blue Carlos.
> Correction is absolutely
> >> > necessary before showing your Ford motor
> photographs to people
> >> > other than yourself. Slobodan is correct.
> >> >
> >> > Eighty percent of my photography is color
> transparency. And nearly
> >> > 100% of that I print on Cibachrome. Living on
> the coast of
> >> > California, much of my photography is along the
> ocean (many times
> >> > overcast or foggy) and in the deep redwood
> forest. Often very cool
> >> > in color temperature. Rather than correcting in
> my enlarger, I
> >> > correct on the film by using filters ranging
> from KR1.5 to KR6. I
> >> > also teach photography (one-on-one private
> students and workshops)
> >> > therefore the transparencies that I project
> must be corrected.
> >> >
> >> > I started serious photography in 1950. My first
> 'real' camera was a
> >> > Rolleicord III (I now know that thanks to you
> Carlos.) Ektachrome
> >> > was the E3 process then and I processed all of
> my Ektachrome in our
> >> > home kitchen sink. Talk about blue... living
> along the CA coast and
> >> > photographing with Ektachrome. I learned early
> how to warm-up my
> >> in-
> >> > camera originals with filters. I tried all of
> the Wratten warming
> >> > filters and found that I like the KR... series
> much better.
> >> >
> >> > IMHO,
> >> >
> >> > :-)
> >> >
> >> > Jim
> > ---
> > Rollei List
> >
> > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with 'subscribe'
> > in the subject field OR by logging into
> www.freelists.org
> >
> > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with
> > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging
> into
> > www.freelists.org
> >
> > - Online, searchable archives are available at
> > //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> >
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into
> www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging
> into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis!
¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
