Tanks for posting those, Eolake! I'm loving that toy, even though I did send off and email to its papa, about that shutter problem, left side of the frame, every time I use 250th of a second. Will see what the answer will be. Either way, even if the problem must stay, LOVE this toy! :-)
Nice to see real 'public street' photography without listing 100 features of the camera used to create them.
Refreshing to see that someone knows that 'photography' means 'painting with light' instead of something like "this lens uses high under-distortion stabilization between the second and third element - yada-yada"...
Interesting images. And the apparent thinking behind them.
I'm joining the queue: very good photography! My compliments. I also love to do street/candid photography, and I'm getting good results for this purpose with simple mobile built-in cams. And yes, I'm considering a pink camera body: it'll take away the seriousness of the shooting and ought to make people more relaxed,
Thank you All for your lovely comments! And Robb, I fully intend to continue making photos with this camera. When it's time, I hope to do a Blurb book, as I did in the past:
Last night in an email, Eolake asked how people respond to the camera. I replied: I think people like the fact that it's film, and film type (120) most of them have never considered. There is a "Oh, WOW" factor involved here, with a smile. They ask if I am a pro, because the camera is so huge, but when I tell them it's film and I'm doing it just for fun, they melt. Only one person refused, thus far. A homeless woman who asked for some money, got it, and then I asked her if I may make a portrait of her. She said, "No, you may not! You don't know how to photograph on an island surrounded by water." As Eolake said, can't argue with that! So I didn't. Especially since she added, "The last one who tried, I put a cures on 'em. Never recovered." That was that. I did even try. :-)
"This is why analog film gear is so cool -- even defects look interesting."
I have to admit, that is true.
I still can't face the bother of analogue, though, so I'm thinking of ways to introduce errors in Digital! I know some will laugh at that, but it can't be helped.
Michal: "...became photographer after seeing my first 4×5 neg come up in the developer..."
That's pretty much how my photography bug bit me, too. Very nice book list - I have a couple in the works myself; will share when I get there...
Eolake: I laughed. Thought your comment about wanting to introduce 'defects' into digital is both funny - and logical. Shooting digital and making it look like conventional process photography is a challenge.
:-) 'Tis the digital age and all. Plus, our annual hosts during the end of the year holidays - B. J. and John French - deserve a thank you present! Since I was making one for them, why not make it for All! LOVE Blurb!!! :-)))
Yup. Masking tape, to be exact. Ripped and applied by hand, in the FOMA (FOTO MATERIAL) factory, fifteen years ago. That is the expiration of my Fomapan, anyway. Obviously, I did not advance the first frame far enough, thereby exposing half of it over the tape. Still, I loved the result, so kept it. Nothing like film only artifacts interfering and making for better pictures! :-)
Michal: Love the spontaneous journalism look of the book images! I happen to love B&W images too (even digital ones). Also always loved 120 film - easy to get on the reel and proof sheets were fun to drop on an editor's desk.
Some of the images look like Tri-X pushed to 800 - or maybe you even got 1600 out of them by using HC-110.
Eolake: See? That's what I meant all this time with my rather coarse and sometimes nasty comments. We should (all) do real photography, rather than just complain about the lack of stabilization - we used to solve the problem with exposure and developing - but the intended VISUAL power of the image came through.
My own 2010 portfolio series is next - will share it for critique here, of course.
I was a project manager for a number of years, and in that field, we were always wondering what to do, determining if it was right, or wrong, or would lead to political discord...
We used the term "analysis/paralysis" to manifest the feeling of hesitation and over thinking everything we did.
Same goes for photography - don't worry about what might work or if your action will be right and on target - or dead wrong and become a flop - the key is:
Do Something! Failure or success will show themselves. And then go on from there.
... don't worry about what might work or if your action will be ... dead wrong ...
I often worry about the opposite: that my action will too dead right. ;-) ... which would be embarrassing. But you have a point, we shouldn't worry about that either.
Thanks Robb! The sixteen rolls I ran through the ARAX camera up to now were all Fomapan 400. Fifteen years out of date. Long story. Once upon a time I was the exclusive distributor of Fomapan in the US. Kodak stepped on that. Patent dispute between Kodak and Foma. Bottom line, I ended up with six thousand rolls of Fomapan in my basement. Been giving it away to students for years, but still have a few hundred 120 rolls left, so that is what I used. Exposed it at 200, and pushed it a tad in Sprint. But, surprise surprise, that was WAY too little to get the image perfect for printing. Everything was massively underexposed, and the push didn't help. Simply put, my fifteen year old Fomapan 400 is now ISO 50 at best, has MAJOR base fog, and therefore is unfriendly to pushing. But, most of that got fixed in Photoshop. Nothing like analog meets digital and they have a bouncing baby. :-)
As you said, "Do Something! Failure or success will show themselves. And then go on from there."
Thanks TC [Girl]! No more pelicans, for now, since the ARAX will be flying back to the Ukraine instead, to get fixed. Apparently the fix is easy, but must be performed there. Wonder how much shipping will cost...
As for movies of theatre, my buddy Bill Ulrich made an exceptional one, from my stills:
"No, you may not! You don't know how to photograph on an island surrounded by water." Why? Is water the only thing she drinks? Fat chance. ;-) "The last one who tried, I put a curse on 'em. Never recovered." Uh-oh! I know that one: it's the bogey-bat hex. Whatever you do, don't let her hang a crow's foot around your neck if you're wearing a polyester tuxedo and hair gel! (Just... trust me on that one. Don't ask.)
TC [Girl] thought she spotted Superman... "I LOVE that pelican! Got anymore of those "lying around"?! :-)" Don't you mean... "FLYING around"?
Haha, Pascal - Monsieur t'aime!! {:->) I'm seriously considering to revive my KODAK Instamatic50. There might be a problem with the supply of cassette films though.
"If you look like your ... picture, that should already be innocent-looking enough"
I'm not sure if you're serious. It's a funny thing: on the one hand I often seem to gain instant and total trust from people. On the other hand I'm 6.4 and 230 pounds, and when I'm not smiling, have a pretty severe face. I guess it depends on the eye that beholds.
Oh is it. Thank you kindly for the information. An instamatic50 was one of my first cameras when I was young, but I was also allowed to use the Voigtlander Vito BL of my father, which is also still in my possession, still working after fifty years...
Monsieur Beep!, glad to hear of tools still working after all these years! One thing to add. The 126 film I referenced processes exactly the same way as ISO 200 35mm film by any other manufacturer. Make sure to tell that to the lab, as the employees may never have seen 126 film before, and may not know this fact. Printing will be another matter. Most labs these days do not have equipment to print the square, perforated only on one side 126 film. You many have to scan it yourself instead, and print it digitally. Best!
Thank you so much Michal. I recall develloping my own first roll of 126 vividly, man what an experience that was, when I was 16 or so... I also have the fitting flash. What will people say (and think) when I turn up with this equipment??? It'll literally smell of photography. No, I don't believe film is dead.
"No, I don't believe film is dead." - Monsieur Beep!
RIght your are, Sir. :-)
In fact, there is not a single photographic process invented, that is dead, Daguerrotypes included, with earth friendlier, less deadly variations.
Can't see film ever truly dying. It's too simple too get the chemicals, mix the ingredients, coat the backing, expose, process and distribute. Always will be. :-)
Yeah, ]{ (_) ]_) /\ ]{ ain't bad. (That there was a sneaky advertising emoticon, in case you hadn't noticed)
Eolake reassuringly smiled... "I'm not sure if you're serious." Hey, I hadn't considered THAT option! YET. :-) But let's be honest: would you get paranoid if Peter Parker (the baby-faced one from the films) aimed and told you "Smile!"? Only if he's careless enough to reveal: "For the Daily Bugle"!!!
"On the other hand I'm 6.4 and 230 pounds, and when I'm not smiling, have a pretty severe face." What's the difference between a poodle and a rottweiler? When the rottweiler wants to take a "pic" on... of your leg ;-) you let it finish! I'm sure you don't get mugged very often, Captain, sir. It's nice to inspire immediate trust. Immediate respect is surely a welcome bonus, though. :-)
"No, I don't believe film is dead." And neither is disco. Good music might be old music, but it's lasting! Nowadays, a style that's "5 minutes ago" is usually buried in a zombie-proof, vampire-resistant watery grave. Aah-aah-aah-aah! Stayin' alive... Stayin' alive... And Boney M's Rasputin... timeless! "Ooowh, those Russians..." Unh! Thank you, thank you very much for listening.
Just heard about that Elvis quote yesterday: "I don't know a blasted thing about music. And for what I'm doing, I don't need it."
I bet people will still be kneading clay long after 3-D printers make sculpture immediately available to just any moron. :-)
On the other hand I'm 6.4 and 230 pounds, and when I'm not smiling, have a pretty severe face.
Being tall doesn't really mean much. Oscar de la Hoya is 5'10" and 140-150 lbs. but he held his own against the 7'1" 350 lbs. (admittedly minimally trained and minimally talented (at boxing)) Shaq.
Suzie, But do you have any idea just how much a 6.4 teddy bear COSTS? My little niece has a bunny wabbit half that size. She woves it and hugs it and squeezes it and presses it and... "but my bunny wabbit don't move no more". Such a sad story... ;-)
Said the animated cartoon, going all noddy. °<:·|x
36 comments:
Tanks for posting those, Eolake! I'm loving that toy, even though I did send off and email to its papa, about that shutter problem, left side of the frame, every time I use 250th of a second. Will see what the answer will be. Either way, even if the problem must stay, LOVE this toy! :-)
I can think of a title for that Haagen-Dazs picture - "No Fat Chicks!"
Nice to see real 'public street' photography without listing 100 features of the camera used to create them.
Refreshing to see that someone knows that 'photography' means 'painting with light' instead of something like "this lens uses high under-distortion stabilization between the second and third element - yada-yada"...
Interesting images.
And the apparent thinking behind them.
Thanks. Shoot more, do a book!
I'm joining the queue: very good photography! My compliments. I also love to do street/candid photography, and I'm getting good results for this purpose with simple mobile built-in cams.
And yes, I'm considering a pink camera body: it'll take away the seriousness of the shooting and ought to make people more relaxed,
Deep and soulful.
problem, left side of the frame, every time I use 250th of a second
This is why analog film gear is so cool -- even defects look interesting. There are no accidents.
Thank you All for your lovely comments! And Robb, I fully intend to continue making photos with this camera. When it's time, I hope to do a Blurb book, as I did in the past:
http://www.blurb.com/search/site_search?search=michal+daniel
Last night in an email, Eolake asked how people respond to the camera. I replied: I think people like the fact that it's film, and film type (120) most of
them have never considered. There is a "Oh, WOW" factor involved here, with a smile. They ask if I am a pro, because the camera is so huge, but when I tell them it's film and I'm doing it just for fun, they melt. Only one person refused, thus far. A homeless woman who asked for some money, got it, and then I asked her if I may make a portrait of her. She said, "No, you may not! You don't know how to photograph on an island surrounded by water." As Eolake said, can't argue with that! So I didn't. Especially since she added, "The last one who tried, I put a cures on 'em. Never recovered." That was that. I did even try. :-)
"This is why analog film gear is so cool -- even defects look interesting."
I have to admit, that is true.
I still can't face the bother of analogue, though, so I'm thinking of ways to introduce errors in Digital!
I know some will laugh at that, but it can't be helped.
"I'm thinking of ways to introduce errors in Digital!"
That's one of the reasons I like the Eyemodule2. For example, its scanner is so slow, introduction of error is nearly inevitable:
http://www.640x480.net/album.php?posn=05_26_06_10_46_28am&size=large
http://www.640x480.net/album.php?posn=06_28_04_06_05_18pm&size=large
Then there are times for truly rare treats, like this gem - no idea how that happened, as I made only one snap of the guy:
http://www.640x480.net/album.php?posn=04_16_05_03_17_50pm&size=large
Michal: "...became photographer after seeing my first 4×5 neg come up in the developer..."
That's pretty much how my photography bug bit me, too. Very nice book list - I have a couple in the works myself; will share when I get there...
Eolake: I laughed. Thought your comment about wanting to introduce 'defects' into digital is both funny - and logical. Shooting digital and making it look like conventional process photography is a challenge.
Yes.
But I'd be even happier if I could introduced variations/"accidents" which are *not* imitations of silver technology.
Robb put the bug in my head. Figured, why wait? Here is the book:
http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/1146718
Woa, dude!
(post updated)
:-) 'Tis the digital age and all. Plus, our annual hosts during the end of the year holidays - B. J. and John French - deserve a thank you present! Since I was making one for them, why not make it for All! LOVE Blurb!!! :-)))
Mike, the excellent pelican shot here, what's the artefact on the left side? It does not look like the shutter issue. Is it tape?
"Is it tape?"
Yup. Masking tape, to be exact. Ripped and applied by hand, in the FOMA (FOTO MATERIAL) factory, fifteen years ago. That is the expiration of my Fomapan, anyway. Obviously, I did not advance the first frame far enough, thereby exposing half of it over the tape. Still, I loved the result, so kept it. Nothing like film only artifacts interfering and making for better pictures! :-)
Michal:
Love the spontaneous journalism look of the book images! I happen to love B&W images too (even digital ones). Also always loved 120 film - easy to get on the reel and proof sheets were fun to drop on an editor's desk.
Some of the images look like Tri-X pushed to 800 - or maybe you even got 1600 out of them by using HC-110.
Eolake: See? That's what I meant all this time with my rather coarse and sometimes nasty comments. We should (all) do real photography, rather than just complain about the lack of stabilization - we used to solve the problem with exposure and developing - but the intended VISUAL power of the image came through.
My own 2010 portfolio series is next - will share it for critique here, of course.
Also...
I was a project manager for a number of years, and in that field, we were always wondering what to do, determining if it was right, or wrong, or would lead to political discord...
We used the term "analysis/paralysis" to manifest the feeling of hesitation and over thinking everything we did.
Same goes for photography - don't worry about what might work or if your action will be right and on target - or dead wrong and become a flop - the key is:
Do Something! Failure or success will show themselves. And then go on from there.
We used the term "analysis/paralysis" ...
Wikipedia: Analysis paralysis
... don't worry about what might work or if your action will be ... dead wrong ...
I often worry about the opposite: that my action will too dead right. ;-) ... which would be embarrassing. But you have a point, we shouldn't worry about that either.
Do Something!
Excellent advice.
Here is Shine (YouTube).
Thanks Robb! The sixteen rolls I ran through the ARAX camera up to now were all Fomapan 400. Fifteen years out of date. Long story. Once upon a time I was the exclusive distributor of Fomapan in the US. Kodak stepped on that. Patent dispute between Kodak and Foma. Bottom line, I ended up with six thousand rolls of Fomapan in my basement. Been giving it away to students for years, but still have a few hundred 120 rolls left, so that is what I used. Exposed it at 200, and pushed it a tad in Sprint. But, surprise surprise, that was WAY too little to get the image perfect for printing. Everything was massively underexposed, and the push didn't help. Simply put, my fifteen year old Fomapan 400 is now ISO 50 at best, has MAJOR base fog, and therefore is unfriendly to pushing. But, most of that got fixed in Photoshop. Nothing like analog meets digital and they have a bouncing baby. :-)
As you said, "Do Something! Failure or success will show themselves. And then go on from there."
Yup, most excellent advice. I live by it!!! :-)
Really neat process - and digital technology was kind enough to help.
Thanks for sharing your info and your images!
I LOVE that pelican! Got anymore of those "lying around"?! :-)
COOL theater pics, too! Would have been FUN were they ALL video'd, too! LOVE theater! :-)
(Good song, ttl!)
Thanks TC [Girl]! No more pelicans, for now, since the ARAX will be flying back to the Ukraine instead, to get fixed. Apparently the fix is easy, but must be performed there. Wonder how much shipping will cost...
As for movies of theatre, my buddy Bill Ulrich made an exceptional one, from my stills:
http://www.magneticdiary.com/motion01.html
Monsieur Beep! took out his crayons...
"I'm considering a pink camera body: it'll take away the seriousness of the shooting and ought to make people more relaxed"
If you look like your Avatar(© James Cameron) picture, that should already be innocent-looking enough. :-)
"No, you may not! You don't know how to photograph on an island surrounded by water."
Why? Is water the only thing she drinks? Fat chance. ;-)
"The last one who tried, I put a curse on 'em. Never recovered."
Uh-oh! I know that one: it's the bogey-bat hex. Whatever you do, don't let her hang a crow's foot around your neck if you're wearing a polyester tuxedo and hair gel! (Just... trust me on that one. Don't ask.)
TC [Girl] thought she spotted Superman...
"I LOVE that pelican! Got anymore of those "lying around"?! :-)"
Don't you mean... "FLYING around"?
"Thought your comment about wanting to introduce 'defects' into digital is both funny - and logical."
I second that, Captain. Perfectly logical, to try and add digital Kirks to your images.
Haha, Pascal - Monsieur t'aime!! {:->)
I'm seriously considering to revive my KODAK Instamatic50. There might be a problem with the supply of cassette films though.
Monsieur Beep!, 126 film is still available:
http://www.frugalphotographer.com/cat126.htm
"If you look like your ... picture, that should already be innocent-looking enough"
I'm not sure if you're serious.
It's a funny thing: on the one hand I often seem to gain instant and total trust from people.
On the other hand I'm 6.4 and 230 pounds, and when I'm not smiling, have a pretty severe face.
I guess it depends on the eye that beholds.
Oh is it. Thank you kindly for the information. An instamatic50 was one of my first cameras when I was young, but I was also allowed to use the Voigtlander Vito BL of my father, which is also still in my possession, still working after fifty years...
Monsieur Beep!, glad to hear of tools still working after all these years! One thing to add. The 126 film I referenced processes exactly the same way as ISO 200 35mm film by any other manufacturer. Make sure to tell that to the lab, as the employees may never have seen 126 film before, and may not know this fact. Printing will be another matter. Most labs these days do not have equipment to print the square, perforated only on one side 126 film. You many have to scan it yourself instead, and print it digitally. Best!
Thank you so much Michal. I recall develloping my own first roll of 126 vividly, man what an experience that was, when I was 16 or so...
I also have the fitting flash.
What will people say (and think) when I turn up with this equipment??? It'll literally smell of photography.
No, I don't believe film is dead.
"No, I don't believe film is dead." - Monsieur Beep!
RIght your are, Sir. :-)
In fact, there is not a single photographic process invented, that is dead, Daguerrotypes included, with earth friendlier, less deadly variations.
Can't see film ever truly dying. It's too simple too get the chemicals, mix the ingredients, coat the backing, expose, process and distribute. Always will be. :-)
Yeah, ]{ (_) ]_) /\ ]{ ain't bad.
(That there was a sneaky advertising emoticon, in case you hadn't noticed)
Eolake reassuringly smiled...
"I'm not sure if you're serious."
Hey, I hadn't considered THAT option! YET. :-)
But let's be honest: would you get paranoid if Peter Parker (the baby-faced one from the films) aimed and told you "Smile!"?
Only if he's careless enough to reveal: "For the Daily Bugle"!!!
"On the other hand I'm 6.4 and 230 pounds, and when I'm not smiling, have a pretty severe face."
What's the difference between a poodle and a rottweiler?
When the rottweiler wants to take a "pic" on... of your leg ;-) you let it finish!
I'm sure you don't get mugged very often, Captain, sir.
It's nice to inspire immediate trust. Immediate respect is surely a welcome bonus, though. :-)
"No, I don't believe film is dead."
And neither is disco. Good music might be old music, but it's lasting!
Nowadays, a style that's "5 minutes ago" is usually buried in a zombie-proof, vampire-resistant watery grave.
Aah-aah-aah-aah! Stayin' alive... Stayin' alive...
And Boney M's Rasputin... timeless! "Ooowh, those Russians..."
Unh! Thank you, thank you very much for listening.
Just heard about that Elvis quote yesterday: "I don't know a blasted thing about music. And for what I'm doing, I don't need it."
I bet people will still be kneading clay long after 3-D printers make sculpture immediately available to just any moron. :-)
On the other hand I'm 6.4 and 230 pounds, and when I'm not smiling, have a pretty severe face.
Being tall doesn't really mean much. Oscar de la Hoya is 5'10" and 140-150 lbs. but he held his own against the 7'1" 350 lbs. (admittedly minimally trained and minimally talented (at boxing)) Shaq.
I don't know about the "severe" face...you look like a cuddly teddy bear.
Thanks, doll.
But I only post the better pictures.
Suzie,
But do you have any idea just how much a 6.4 teddy bear COSTS?
My little niece has a bunny wabbit half that size.
She woves it and hugs it and squeezes it and presses it and... "but my bunny wabbit don't move no more".
Such a sad story... ;-)
Said the animated cartoon, going all noddy. °<:·|x
Post a Comment