recent prints; square portraits; even more pics 2/21

[ksmattfish]

Maisy in the slide

HP5 400
Rolleiflex 3.5E planar


Maisy at the wetlands

HP5 400
Ansco Titan


Travis and his truck

HP5 400
Rolleiflex 3.5E planar
Vivitar 285HV flash

 

[Tammy]

enjoyed all of these - but the first one is precious!

 

[vonnagy]

I love your shots because you capture 'everyday' moments so well. the kid shots are of course fab, but there is a certain dignity that you've capture with travis and his truck too.

your camera that you've used here, HP5 400 Rolleiflex 3.5E planar, is this the one depicted in your avatar? Seems like you would need to have a lot of patience to photograph kids with that

 

[Osmer_Toby]

:::bows to ksmattfish:::

man, #1 and # 2 rock! i'm not spendin' much time looking at #3, too absorbed with the first 2.

#2 is just fantastic. capturing this kind of image is to what i aspire...

i'll have to come back later & check out #3; gotta go cleanse my palate first!

 

[ksmattfish]

The camera in my avatar is the Ansco Titan, which was used on "Maisy at the Wetlands." It's a difficult camera to use if you compare it to a modern 35mm AF SLR. I've been using it for about a year, and it's now my point-n-shoot. It folds up smaller than a 35mm SLR and shoots 6x6cm negs.

I did a review on it in the equipment review section. It has a simpler anastigmat lens design and "guestimation" focusing (meaning no actual focusing aid or indicator). It does have a DOF scale and I use ISO 400 film with it so I can keep the aperture up at f/8, f/11, or f/16, which helps counter my poor distance judging skills. You might notice that "Maisy in the Wetlands" is not as sharp as the others. I have gotten razor sharp images from it, so I know it can do it. I think that the softness comes part from the lack of focus assist and I haven't worked out what the min hand held shutter speed is. Anyway, even with a smidge of softness the 6x6 neg still prints nicer than a 35mm neg (IMHO).

The Rollei is a TLR and is razor sharp, and easy to shoot handheld at slow shutter speeds (still razor sharp at 1/30th). It has a planar style lens design, and it is amazing. Right now my Rollei is jammed up waiting repair, but in the six months that it was working it quickly became my favorite camera.

The Rollei has a waist level finder ground glass that shows you almost exactly what you are getting, and assists in focusing. It encouraged me to get a waist level finder for my Pentax 67II. I like the WL finders, especially for shooting kids; it makes it easy to get down to their eye level or below.

All three of these portraits were taken "on the go". I prefer environmental portraits to studio set-ups. I just find them much more interesting to print and to look at. I like to shoot people doing their thing, or posing with their stuff (vehicles, work, hobbies, home, etc...)

Here's a pic of the Rollei

 

[Osmer_Toby]

ya, the larger neg really makes a difference. i have been wondering about medium format and conversion to digital files- do you scan the negs or are these prints scanned on a flatbed? seems the best of both worlds would be to have a digital medium format camera. is there such a thing to your knowledge? are they even possible?

regardless, i do have in mind to purchase a medium format, someday when i'm not spending so much on diapers and valium.

i really do like the work you did with this...

 

[ksmattfish]

I scan from prints that I print myself. Someday I would love to have a good neg scanner, but it seems like I'll need one that does 35mm and a seperate one for my 4x5s. One or the other would have to pick up the MF negs.

A Titan in good shape usually goes for $70 to $90 on Ebay, although I saw one go for $36 last week.

A Rollei with a Xenar or Tessar lens goes for $200 or less. A Rollei with a Planar or Xenotar lens goes for $300 to $600, although I got mine for $150 at a garage sale!!! Of course now it's going to need $200+ in repairs. Oh well, it's worth it. I'll probably get another one too.

They are making MF digital backs. They are expensive ($10,000+), have huge battery packs, and image quality wise aren't anywhere near what you can get with a 6x6 or bigger frame of ISO 100 film. Obviously they will get better. I think most pros are sticking with the standard DSLRs when going digital.

My buddy has worked with a 4x5 digital scanning back that he says is as good or better than 4x5 film. Unfortunately it require 2 car battery sized battery/transformer packs, and the fastest shutter speed is about 20 minutes. Oh, and it requires two exposures that are put together in the computer; one shot for the highlights and one for the shadows. Great for museums, not so great in the field.

 

[voodoocat]

That first shot is outstanding. It is inspiring to want to shoot more with my Yashica. Thanks for sharing those.

 

[craig]

It's all about the anastigmat lens design The square format alone, lends itself to a whole other way of "seeing" not to mention the "waist level" viewfinder. For the record: digi has a long way to go before it touches 120 transparency film.

More importantly, the shots are revealing some proud AND tender moments. Those moments are really what photography is all about.

(jokingly!) Someone should start a thread: Would you spend 20,000 on a digi back for you 4x5?

 

[ksmattfish]

Would you spend 20,000 on a digi back for you 4x5?

I'd spend it on a nicer 4x5 field camera and lenses. Use the left over cash to buy lot's of film, chems, and paper. And then take what's still left over and go on vacation somewhere photogenic.

 

[ksmattfish]

More pics from the Titan. These are on HP5. f/22 1/400th. These were taken at the beach in Oceanside, Oregon, USA in August 2003.

Jason painting the ocean.

Michelle painting the ocean.

Jason and Michelle painting the ocean.

 

[Osmer_Toby]

great composition in the new #3- and contrast is outstanding. the more of this format you show, the less satisfied i become with digital. how do you convert these prints to digital files? is it possible to have medium format negs scanned at hi res when you send them to lab for developing? any idea how much this would cost?

 

[MDowdey]

i read something in a magazine recently about nikon introducing a scanner that will do 35 mm up to 6x7. its the coolscan 9000. kinda pricey but what the heck you know?



md

 

[Osmer_Toby]

md- over $1k?

 

[ksmattfish]

Since I'm a darkroom geek I like to scan from my prints, which I do with a cheapo flatbed scanner. I then tweak in PS to try and get it to look like the original print. The scans NEVER do the prints justice, although they are better than I imagined they would be.

A neg scanner would be nice, but my only reason for digital files is to show you folks and others far away. I only sell my hand prints. Besides the prohibitive cost of one neg scanner, I would need at least two; one for 35mm and MF, and one for my 4x5" negs. The few film scanners I've seen that'll do 35mm through 4x5 are way expensive.