Close photography (part 2)

memphis said:
rereading this thread reminds me of why I frequent here... It's chock full of knowledge, nuts, and fiber... I always learn something --- honestly, someone can learn more about the process and history of photography just by reading thru these threads than they ever would at an art school
Click to expand...

Really? I learnt quite a bit at art school. Far more than I have learnt here.
 
Krosya said:
In my personal experience I find that I crop a lot more if I use rectangular format, like 35mm - Leicas, Canons, etc. I tried some in MF, and find that when I do 6x6 - I almost never crop. Maybe I frame better with a square format, or not good enough with rectangular - don't know. But I shot same things, just to test this, with Leica and MF 6x6 and I like it much better in 6x6 for some reson. Just looks more natural to me. Even croping 35mm frame to make it square often makes for a better composition for me.
Anyone else notice this sort of thing?
Click to expand...


It is more difficult to compose with a square frame than with a 2:3 one. The 2:3 frame simplifies reality to a certain extent, as it corresponds more closely to our field of vision. The square frame has its own 'rules' and it takes much greater effort to make it second nature for the mind and eye. But this results in a more powerful image.

colin
 
payasam said:
The 2:3 format is a historical coincidence which "caught on". I do not think that all subjects should be or can be constrained to those proportions. One thing which probably is not a coincidence is paper sizes, in which 2:3 is rare.
Click to expand...

With regards to the aspect ratio of the 35m frame, does it not have its origin in the Greek "golden mean"?

It would be interesting to do a survey of frame aspect ratios used by painters, as they have the freedom to make/select blank canvasses that are square or rectangular. I think there are far more horizontal rectangular frame shapes used by painters. Wonder why?

Personally I think it has to do with how humans see. Our eyes are placed horizontally with resulting greater peripheral vision to the left and right, than up and down.
 
Krosya said:
colinh said:
PS Next I will try close up candid street photography with the 500c
Click to expand...
Having a large-ish, loud-ish Hassy "candid" might be difficult. ;) But I'll look forward to your results.
Click to expand...

OK, I tried it today.

Large? Yes, but not overly so, also one can hold it comfortably in one hand (thumb on top of winder, index finger on shutter).

Loud? Bloody hell. Yes, but doesn't make a big difference, it turns out :)

The major problem was that I only had the 80 mm Planar on it. The 35mm lens on the Leica is pretty much ideal (= 56 mm for MF). Also I was having problems focussing. Sigh. I was trying to focus at f/16. :bang:

Ooooh. Nearly forgot! After having taken several sneaky Hassy shots, I actually went up and asked this girl:

"Excuse me, could I take a photo of you?"

"A photo? Why?"

"Because your pretty?"

"Oh. OK"

:)

Since this was the first time ever, I had to go and have an espresso afterwards to steady my nerves.

So, I'm also looking forward to the results.

colin

PS Next, I think I'll have to try close up candid street photography with the Sinar 4x5. This, I think, will be a challenge :D
 
I uploaded another photo to the library, and am off to develop two rolls of 120 and two of 35mm...


colin


PS. This is the somewhat less cropped version of The Writer. Completely different picture, no?

DELETED
 
Last edited:
Very much so a different image- and I like this wider version much more. Look how the lines of her legs play against the forms of body and that line of the other womans arm- Beautiful! Even the lunch wrapper or bag down in the corner and the water bottle fit into the jumble. Nicely seen Colin!
 
Pah! I said the legs would be distracting. :)

I prefer the first one because the two girls are better balanced. One dark haired and dark dress, the other lighter, but larger. Also, the hair, the glasses and the writing element are more prominent in the first - as is the sense of easy companionship.

But that's one thing I like about cropping - you can make several pictures out of one shot.

Anyway, I'm glad you liked it. Thanks for the comments.


Finally, my initial impression, from the wet 120 negatives, is, sadly, that the shot of the girl where I asked first is not as good as the sneaky ones. She posed, and I was nervous. :eek:

colin
 
colinh said:
I uploaded another photo to the library, and am off to develop two rolls of 120 and two of 35mm...


colin


PS. This is the somewhat less cropped version of The Writer. Completely different picture, no?

attachment.php
Click to expand...

I like this one better too. Just seems more natural, I guess.
Waiting to see your shots from the Hassy.
 
"But that's one thing I like about cropping - you can make several pictures out of one shot."

How true. Here the greater area of the 120 negative is a distinct advantage.

Krosya, if I remember right, the Tessina 35 mm TLR gave square negatives.
 
Oh no! I've been found out :( I think the guys in the background know :eek:

colin

DELETD

colin
DELETED
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom