How to take photos like this? (your favorite photographer's favorite photographer)

There is not really special about that photo, it could have been taken with very basic equipment.
What about it are you specifically interested in?
 
Looks like film shots to me. Also some are high ISO/ASA, you can tell from the grainienss.
 
Certainly not my favorite photographer's favorite photographer, but quite possibly my favorite producer's favorite producer.

Looks like film shots to me. Also some are high ISO/ASA, you can tell from the grainienss.
Might be on film, might not be. Depends mostly on what year it was taken I guess.
There are plugins out there to simulate both the "film look" and grain.
 
Thanks a lot guys. Some other dude mentioned it might be a light bleach bypass as well. By the way, Mike, why'd you remove the photo?
 
Forum policy. Link to photos. Only your own work is to be displayed in a post.

Looks like some form of cross processing to me but not one i'm all that familiar with. Bleeching is part of a normal colour process, so more specifics would help. If this is infact film there are some guys who rarely come out of the darkroom subforum here, it may be worth posting the specific question of what process could be used to get that effect in there. But if you're going digital some curve manipulation would do that quite easily.
 
Might be from a cell phone camera, and being crop and resized.
But who know except for the person who took the shot.
 
This is only a guess, but I'll say a TLR, at least if it came out of the camera looking like this: square format, a smidge wide angle, shallow DOF, and lower than normal angle of view. It reminds me a lot of the flavor of my Rolleiflex.
 
Mike, why'd you remove the photo?
Sorry, I should have mentioned it at the time. Forum rules state that we can only (directly) post our own photos. Other photos must be links.
 
Might be from a cell phone camera, and being crop and resized.
But who know except for the person who took the shot.

It's almost certainly not a cellphone as that's between f/1.4 ~ f/2.8 somewhere and almost no cellphones get that flat. But yeah, besides that it's pretty generic. It could be almost anything. I guess it's between 40mm and 60mm somewhere and that's a very common length across many formats.

His recent stuff is all edited in 16bits at various sizes from 6500w x 8300h to 6700w x 8500h which would indicate MF film scans right?
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top