Concert photos w. 75 'cron

icebear

icebear

Veteran
Local time
7:36 PM
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
3,121
Location
back in the woods
View My Gallery
Hi folks,

some concert photos Leica M6 w. 75'cron on Fuji 400H. Scanned with Nikon Coolscan V [Vuescan]. 1/30 to 1/60s , f 2 to f4. How do you like 'em ?
 

Attachments

  • CLloyd-07movem.jpg
    CLloyd-07movem.jpg
    275.4 KB · Views: 0
  • CLloyd-07neg5.jpg
    CLloyd-07neg5.jpg
    272.1 KB · Views: 0
  • CLloyd-07neg13.jpg
    CLloyd-07neg13.jpg
    299.6 KB · Views: 0
You sure did catch an energetic sax player! Maybe you should have moved in closer, to get a tighter (and less cluttered) framing? I don't think any of them are "very good". I also see ugly coloured grains especially in the background / darker parts, probably a scanning artefact.
Since you asked for comments, I hope you can handle a bit of criticism ;-)
Keep it up!
 
Maybe I should have stated my reasoning better. I don't think the sax player being OOF conveys anything to me other than it being OOF. If it was a racecar, perhaps I'd feel differently since they "are supposed to" convey motion. I also agree that the other two could use less exposure to show a dimly-lit concert venue. This well lit stage may be correct for the particular concert, but it looks more to me like a rehearsal. I knew it before but couldn't put my finger on it that is, until Trius pointed it out...
 
George S. said:
Maybe I should have stated my reasoning better. I don't think the sax player being OOF conveys anything to me other than it being OOF. If it was a racecar, perhaps I'd feel differently since they "are supposed to" convey motion. I also agree that the other two could use less exposure to show a dimly-lit concert venue. This well lit stage may be correct for the particular concert, but it looks more to me like a rehearsal. I knew it before but couldn't put my finger on it that is, until Trius pointed it out...
Click to expand...

Hi George,
thanks for the comments, the first shot was ment to convey the motion ( I think it might have been 1/15). It's not OOF but motion blur and I think it for a guy way into his 70ties, he was definatly energetic - I tried to capture that. Lucky me it was not dimly lit but changing light , different colors and spots on/off. I'm thankful for every bit of light I can can my hands on - ehh film exposed 😀 .
 
wsriii said:
Charles Lloyd! You definitely captured him. Love it. Who was on drums? 🙂
Bill
Click to expand...
Yes I'm a fan of this genius since I saw him back in '91 as final act of the Jazz Festival Leipzig (Germany). I'll check to find out his buddies on this particular set.
 
amoz said:
You sure did catch an energetic sax player! Maybe you should have moved in closer, to get a tighter (and less cluttered) framing? I don't think any of them are "very good". I also see ugly coloured grains especially in the background / darker parts, probably a scanning artefact.
Since you asked for comments, I hope you can handle a bit of criticism ;-)
Keep it up!
Click to expand...

Hi Amoz, thanks for your comments, I don't mind at all. If you like the subject, you're not objective anyway...but you're right none of them are very good.

Moving tighter is not easy when it's not really allowed to take pictures and you sit already in first row. If it had been in a small Jazz Club somewhere w/o seating and folks roaming around and no one minding some private guy taking pictures - yes, I agree - getting even closer would have been nice😉 .

As for the grain, yes it's film, it's not a M8 but I'm also a bloddy beginner in terms of scanning and PS. For sure there is something 'you' can do better. The scans are already cropped, I didn't want to get into pure portrait. But also the original 40MB file looks a bit better than the 300k low res. JPG.
 
shutterflower said:
I would agree with Trius and George S. initial comments. The second two are the best, but taking the exposure down a bit (pull the blacks down to black and boost the color), would do wonders for the punch.
Click to expand...

Hi there,
I'll get back to the PC tonight and see what I can break off...
 
Very odd. I've tried Fuji 400, 800. and 1600. From your shots 400 generates more noise when scanning than 800, and 1600 has less noise and better grain pattern than all of them. This is shot with a Dual 50 Summicron at f2, 1/60th and Fuji 1600. It was scanned with a Minolta Dual Multi at 2800 DPI.
 

Attachments

  • Tacuba0013_mod.jpg
    Tacuba0013_mod.jpg
    107.7 KB · Views: 0
I like all 3 shots, the 2nd the best. Your first shot, motion, was well executed as there was only subject and no camera motion. I would strongly suggesat to convert to B+W. Color is a distraction and B+W Jazz is very dramatic. Good job under very difficult circumstances.
 
Hi folks,

here some more, with better processing - I hope. The crops are about 25 to 25 % of the whole neg. It was a 75 not a 200mm lens 😉. Waiting for more comments - keep'em coming. Thanks for pushing - I hate processing files - love to take pictures.
 

Attachments

  • CLloyd-07neg04.jpg
    CLloyd-07neg04.jpg
    244.3 KB · Views: 0
  • CLloyd-07neg30.jpg
    CLloyd-07neg30.jpg
    292.6 KB · Views: 0
  • CLloyd-07neg01.jpg
    CLloyd-07neg01.jpg
    279.4 KB · Views: 0
Dektol Dan said:
Very odd. I've tried Fuji 400, 800. and 1600. From your shots 400 generates more noise when scanning than 800, and 1600 has less noise and better grain pattern than all of them. This is shot with a Dual 50 Summicron at f2, 1/60th and Fuji 1600. It was scanned with a Minolta Dual Multi at 2800 DPI.
Click to expand...

Hi Dan,
yeah I agree doesn't look perfect. As I mentioned I'm a dummy in terms of processing/scanning. I realized that the resolutions was set on "auto", so I changed to 4000dpi. Looks better ... someday I'll get there 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom