Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 20 Aug 2013 (Tuesday) 22:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

General C&C Please - Experimental

 
KirkS518
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 20, 2013 22:30 |  #1

I'm looking for general feedback on these. They were quick experimental test shots I took this afternoon using a very odd lens. PP was only LR5 'Auto', some boost in vibrance/clarity, and some noise reduction. No sharpening or blur applied. Just want to see if these have an appeal to them.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i486.photobucke​t.com …/IMG_8611_zpsde​b40346.jpg (external link)



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
stanclark
Goldmember
Avatar
1,143 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Windsor,California
     
Aug 21, 2013 01:32 |  #2

as they are...just okay, but I think you could make an abstract painting in post......


So if God made Man & Woman....whats his excuse for Nikon...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PipesInTune
Member
192 posts
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Scranton, PA
     
Aug 21, 2013 11:16 |  #3

I think they're too soft. When you start to see halos around the subject (in this case the flowers) I think you've gone too far. Take some test shots with varying degrees of softness and see which one looks best. Kind of like with portraits...you can make it too soft and it loses detail, too sharp and you see more detail than you'd like. I don't think you can go wrong with sharper flowers...it's the detail that makes them interesting.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 21, 2013 11:35 |  #4

That's the thing - I didn't create the softness, nor did any post work, it's created by the lens. These were taken with an x-ray lens, Rodenstock 95mm f1/6.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Naraly
Member
Avatar
221 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Feb 2012
Location: California
     
Aug 21, 2013 16:17 |  #5

I like the last two. I think this is different and intriguing, maybe something that could be put on the wall in an artsy place. Maybe I'm just saying this because I put a lot of painting on my walls and it reminds me of that :p. I think that's neat that it wasn't done in post, as soon as I saw them I imagined they were over processed.



Cheers,
Nora

-->Facebook (external link)Instagram (external link)<--

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 21, 2013 18:46 |  #6

Thanks Naraly. #3 is my favorite, with #2 as runner up. Getting a print of #3, and it's going on the wall (I think).


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chubbyone
Senior Member
661 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 71
Joined Mar 2013
     
Aug 21, 2013 22:39 |  #7

They don't appeal to me. Just chiming in.

I like the composition of #2, but would prefer the flowers sharp with creamy background.


6D | EF 35 f2 IS | EF 50 f1.4 | EF 85 f1.8 | EF 135 f2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 21, 2013 23:15 |  #8

chubbyone wrote in post #16229137 (external link)
They don't appeal to me. Just chiming in.

I like the composition of #2, but would prefer the flowers sharp with creamy background.

Thanks. I'm trying to get a feel for the general opinion of the result using this (these, I have 7 of them) lens. While I really like 3 & 2, I'm not 100% sure about the whole thing.

I shot all of these by holding the lens unmounted in front of the camera. They were also done in a few minutes after I got home from picking up the lenses. I think with practice, there is potential for these lenses, if I have the patience.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StaticMedia
Senior Member
875 posts
Joined Dec 2011
     
Aug 23, 2013 21:58 |  #9

I really like the soft 1960's feel, but you need more DoF.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 24, 2013 08:29 |  #10

StaticMedia wrote in post #16234971 (external link)
I really like the soft 1960's feel, but you need more DoF.

At a focus distance of 2.5", on a 95mm at f/1.3, this is all the dof you can get. :)


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
navydoc
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,344 posts
Gallery: 203 photos
Likes: 13313
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Inland Empire, So. Cal
     
Aug 24, 2013 12:13 |  #11

KirkS518 wrote in post #16227581 (external link)
That's the thing - I didn't create the softness, nor did any post work, it's created by the lens. These were taken with an x-ray lens, Rodenstock 95mm f1/6.

I worked in the x-ray field for over twenty years so I think the lens is mis-labled. X-rays aren't focused by an optical lens. Typically, the x-ray beam is directed out of the electron tube by the electron beam striking a spinning tungston target set at a 45° angle. The x-rays that get deflected from the target pass through a collumator with lead 'shutters' that can be adjusted to control the size opening that will allow the x-rays to pass through.

X-rays can't be focused onto film or sensor to produce an image like a camera because the x-rays aren't reflected off the object. The film or sensor has to be placed behind the object being struck by the x-rays. The x-ray film is exposed by being struck by x-rays passing through an object rather than being reflected from an object. The image seen on x-ray film is caused by the amount of x-ray able to pass through an object because of its density. The denser the object, the less radiation strikes the film to expose it. It's density that gives an x-ray image the tonal gradation to make it viewable.


Gene - My Photo Gallery || (external link) My USS Oriskany website (external link) || My Flickr (external link)
Take nothing but photos - leave nothing but footprints - break nothing but silence - kill nothing but time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 24, 2013 13:15 |  #12

Hmm. It's a Rodenstock Heligon-XR 95mm f/1.3. The guy I got it from builds x-ray machines like those used at airports. There is (was) a massive flange on it, and from what he was saying (and I wasn't paying full attention), this lens directed the image into a right-angle viewer thing, that then would make it show up on the monitor/TV.

I'll post a pic of the lens later tonight, but basically, this is the lens: (not my image)

http://m1.i.pbase.com …haf.95mmXRHelig​on2635.jpg (external link)


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,405 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 856
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Aug 24, 2013 13:22 |  #13

I like where you're trying to go with it, but it just feels like something you would see on Instagram.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Aug 24, 2013 13:35 |  #14

I wasn't really trying to go anywhere with it. I literally had just gotten home with the lenses, and wanted to see what they produced. These were the most appealing. I hope to experiment with them some more. I may actually weld an adapter to the back of one. These were all done holding the lens in front of the body about 1/2 - 1" away. "Focus" (and I use the term lightly) is achieved by moving the whole lens forward and back, as there is no focus ring. I may try and build some type of adjustable adapter.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,405 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 856
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Aug 24, 2013 13:37 |  #15

KirkS518 wrote in post #16236230 (external link)
I wasn't really trying to go anywhere with it. I literally had just gotten home with the lenses, and wanted to see what they produced. These were the most appealing. I hope to experiment with them some more. I may actually weld an adapter to the back of one. These were all done holding the lens in front of the body about 1/2 - 1" away. "Focus" (and I use the term lightly) is achieved by moving the whole lens forward and back, as there is no focus ring. I may try and build some type of adjustable adapter.

This is the sharpest focus you could achieve? I feel like that lens would frustrate the poo out of me. Even if I was using it just for fun.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,963 views & 0 likes for this thread
General C&C Please - Experimental
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is karozenix
1056 guests, 308 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.