mtokue
Well-known
Well, a few details to start. As mentioned in another thread
I have recently aquired a Leica IIIc. The initial roll was a revalation
(To me atleast!).
Today I burned through a roll of Kodak BW400CN (C41 B&W)
I also tried my silver Avenon 21mm.
All the shots turned out as expected and the Camera was a Joy to use....
BUT, this one frame has me absolutely purplexed!
The attached is full frame with no manipulation at all.
I was using the 21mm at 1/100, f5.6. Shot was taken from the Hip.
The more I look at it the more I am confused.
how can the plane of focus be a vertical band right of frame?
the IIIc is a solid camera and I can't imagine that I'd flexed the
body to allow for a swing shift type of effect.....
Any Ideas?
Mike.
I have recently aquired a Leica IIIc. The initial roll was a revalation
(To me atleast!).
Today I burned through a roll of Kodak BW400CN (C41 B&W)
I also tried my silver Avenon 21mm.
All the shots turned out as expected and the Camera was a Joy to use....
BUT, this one frame has me absolutely purplexed!
The attached is full frame with no manipulation at all.
I was using the 21mm at 1/100, f5.6. Shot was taken from the Hip.
The more I look at it the more I am confused.
how can the plane of focus be a vertical band right of frame?
the IIIc is a solid camera and I can't imagine that I'd flexed the
body to allow for a swing shift type of effect.....
Any Ideas?
Mike.
hth
Well-known
I think you rotated the camera while taking the picture.
BJ Bignell
Je n'aurai plus peur
Looks like camera movement part way through the exposure. The right-hand side was being exposed while the camera was more still, and the left-hand side was exposed while the camera was jarred... The further left you go, the more motion blur there is.
Just my 2c, maybe someone else will have a better answer?
Just my 2c, maybe someone else will have a better answer?
P
pshinkaw
Guest
Except, that the image is upside-down in the camera. The left side of the photo is actually on the right-side of the camera and gets exposed onto the film first. The motion will be exposed at thew beginning of the exposure and not the end.
At 1/100 of a second I question whether this is what really happened. 1/100 seems a little too fast for that to occur. However, the camera's shutter speeeds could be slower than marked. I think I have seen photos with this effect shot at 1/50 and 1/25 of a second.
Does the negative look evenly exposed across the width? If one side is lighter or darker than the other, the shutter could have slowed down as it travelled.
On the Leica, the shutter dial spins while the shutter curtain moves. I once had a moustache and caught it in the shutter dial on my IIIf. It slowed that particular exposure down quite a bit. But if that happened, you would have know it immediately!
-Paul
At 1/100 of a second I question whether this is what really happened. 1/100 seems a little too fast for that to occur. However, the camera's shutter speeeds could be slower than marked. I think I have seen photos with this effect shot at 1/50 and 1/25 of a second.
Does the negative look evenly exposed across the width? If one side is lighter or darker than the other, the shutter could have slowed down as it travelled.
On the Leica, the shutter dial spins while the shutter curtain moves. I once had a moustache and caught it in the shutter dial on my IIIf. It slowed that particular exposure down quite a bit. But if that happened, you would have know it immediately!
-Paul
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Is the thumbnail a scan of the negative or of a print?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I agree, the camera was jerked,just before the curtain was halfway. It made for an interesting photo imho.
Last edited:
mtokue
Well-known
Thanks for the answers thusfar.... I too am a bit unsure whether this would have been caused by rotation at a hundreth of a sec.....This is a scan of the neg (The neg was flat)
And the neg appears to have even coverage (Even exposure)......
I suppose at the moment that the two most likely explanations would be movement(Rotation) and perhaps my finger causing the "Shutter dial" to slow, although I dont remember either!?
Mike.
And the neg appears to have even coverage (Even exposure)......
I suppose at the moment that the two most likely explanations would be movement(Rotation) and perhaps my finger causing the "Shutter dial" to slow, although I dont remember either!?
Mike.
vladhed
R.I.P. 1997-2006
other possibility
other possibility
you'll get the same effect if you were moving sideways while panning, centred on the trashcan.
other possibility
you'll get the same effect if you were moving sideways while panning, centred on the trashcan.
kai
Member
Whatever you did.... I LIKE it!! It would have been an interesting picture even without the (inadvertant) movement, but with the movement, it becomes really artistic. The best things always happen by accident 
Kai
Kai
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
It definitely looks like camera motion to me. The further left you go the more blur you see, and the same on the right side but less accentuated.