That's just my own minimum standard with 120 film. Handling its cast issues is the first order of business. Everything else after that is just personal preference.
Slobodan Dimitrov http://www.sdimitrovphoto.com/ On Dec 6, 2006, at 4:25 PM, Carlos Manuel Freaza wrote:
Slobodan, I answer you with one of the first comments that I received for these five photographs with my original adjustment (I could quote others too), I have the evidence that the person that wrote the comment is an excellent photographer from all point of view and he read about Ansel Adams very much too, he wrote last Sunday about these five photographs: "...Carlos, Slide film is great - really brings out the character of the lens. I like the light in these Carlos, espcially this one: http:// www.flickr.com/ photos/itarfoto/ 312393395/ You got the metering spot on! Nice shots...." All the best Carlos --- Slobodan Dimitrov <s.dimitrov@xxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:That kind of correction is best handled during the exposure. It's kind of like what Adams said about printing on anything but a grade 2, one must of screwed up somewhere along the way before the neg got to the darkroom. In this case the scanner. Slobodan Dimitrov http://www.sdimitrovphoto.com/ On Dec 6, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Carlos Manuel Freaza wrote:Slobodan, if you are talking about me, I handlethe PScolors controls from the earlier PS versions forMac;as I commented in one of my posts, I had a version with less blue and I preferred the version withmoreblue, I did not perceive the blue like excess, Ilikedthe photographs that way, with more blue. You considered there was a blue excess and you didadifferent adjustment that I also liked, it was different but it does not mean I don't like my original adjustment, those five photographs withtheoriginal adjustment are receiving a lot of visitsinFlickr. 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, sincewedrifted this far, it only shows a lack of knowledge ofmechanicalcontrols over the emulsion. Slobodan Dimitrov http://www.sdimitrovphoto.com/ On Dec 6, 2006, at 11:19 AM, Eric Goldsteinwrote:I think these comments don't deal with thefundamental roll of thephotographer. It is irrelevant what the originallight in the scenewas. If the photographer wants to depict a sceneas reality, then anylight he presents that is plausible will workforthe reasons Jimdescribe. If the photographer wants to present amore dramaticdepiction which aesthetically departs fromreality, then he can goblue or orange or violet or yellow, as long isitworks. Yes, theimage must stand on its own, but plausibility isnot necessarily thepoint... Take a look at the racing series recentlypublished in StudioPhotography:http://www.imaginginfo.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=3&id=2113I am not holding this series up as a paragon ofexcellence, but merelyas an example of a clear departure from realityand plausibility whichworks creatively. As for Jim's statement that the shots are waytooblue, that they mustbe corrected, and that all observers will agreewith hispronouncement, I say Jim, I and some others onthis list are livingproof that you are wrong! This is a matter oftaste and opinion, notabsolute judgment. Eric Goldstein -- On 12/6/06, Slobodan Dimitrov<s.dimitrov@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Yep, I have to agree with that. Living in SouthCal. is a bear oncontrast control. If onbe has to be there toexplain the image, forquality or content, then that image has failed.Asuccessful print isa stand alone print. Unless it's an essay, andeven 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 ManuelFreaza wrote:but the things were blue that afternoonreally.-CarlosCarlos, As a photographer, you have to realize thatthepeople looking atyour photographs were not/are not at the placeand time that thephotograph was made. People are simply lookingat your photographicresult. You cannot, therefore, always exhibitphotographs in thesame 'light' that they were taken. While in asituation, such asdeep shade, one's brain does a marvelous jobofcorrecting colorsand densities so that things look reasonablynormal. Take aphotograph under these circumstances, usingcolor film, will resultin photographs with a bluish cast. When youlook at the resultingphotographs, your brain may see it as you tookit. Show it to somewho was not there, thus having no frame ofreference, that personwill say "the photographs are way too blue." Take photographs of sunrises, sunsets, nightstreet scenes,interiors, people have -in their mind- whatcolor these photographsshould be and therefore everything is prettymuch OK.Your originals are way too blue Carlos.Correction is absolutelynecessary before showing your Ford motorphotographs to peopleother than yourself. Slobodan is correct. Eighty percent of my photography is colortransparency. And nearly100% of that I print on Cibachrome. Living onthe coast ofCalifornia, much of my photography is alongtheocean (many timesovercast or foggy) and in the deep redwoodforest. Often very coolin color temperature. Rather than correctinginmy enlarger, Icorrect on the film by using filters rangingfrom KR1.5 to KR6. Ialso teach photography (one-on-one privatestudents and workshops)therefore the transparencies that I projectmust be corrected.=== 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
--- 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
