|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 16, 2012 13:42:13 GMT -5
Love all of these! You are making me totally jealous of you!! I so want to take shots of more exciting landscapes. Lol I only get one week out of the year when i'm out on my own to devote completely to photography. It's one week of detox from society, mellow out and get in the zone. I hope can keep it up from year to year. We don't have kids yet... And everything else in my life is totally consuming... Here is the Eagle Harbor lighthouse illuminated by an almost full moon about 1hr and 30 minutes after sunset. These are approximately 5 minute exposures. Next time I think I'm going to really stop down and drag the shutter for about 10-15 minutes so the stars trail a bit further. I wish they didn't have so much of the tower windows covered so we can see more of the light. I understand why they do though. Don't want to blow out all the people in town with that big lens. Edit: It appears I lost a lot of shadow detail in the upload...
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 19, 2012 14:22:26 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 15:10:02 GMT -5
very nice color here! again, jealous. there is just nothing like this around here.
Now, these are daytime shots, obviously not minute long exposures.. but it seems the film you are using has incredible dynamic range. detail in the shadows and blue in the skys. What is your secret!
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 19, 2012 15:50:25 GMT -5
Thnx sir.
Many people think the dynamic range of film is stinky ;D It's a common misconception. People don't really realize it because nobody really displays film shot anymore for people to see. Many people have never even seen a negative or positive!
Kodak Ektar 100 is what I use. Not sure the dynamic range rating... Scanners have a lot to do with pulling out the films dynamic range too. These are very low quality scans and the high quality, high res scans will me so much nicer. And to tell you the truth, a couple of these are underexposed (not on purpose... It's a different meter than I'm used to. Still figuring it out) and I was able to recover much of it in Lightroom. When I'm done getting them all developed, I'll get my choice shots scanned to a high res, high quality. Maybe I'll post those when I'm done... I still have tons more to post... Just need to load them up.
The waterfall was around 3-5 seconds and the colors shots I don't know... As fast as I could because the wind was blowing. I'm sure I could pull some more detail out of those rocks in the falls pic but I just put about 20 seconds of editing in there and threw it up there real quick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 15:54:47 GMT -5
You place those leaves where they are in the waterfall shot?
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 19, 2012 15:58:08 GMT -5
Lol yes... You can make fun of me. This is the only shot I have ever done that with. I used to make fun of people all the time for doing that. We can make fun of me if you like lol ;D
Also for some reason, whenever I post a pic to here or FB, I loose quite a bit of shadow detail. Frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 19, 2012 16:14:39 GMT -5
You asked about detail in the shadows and blue in the sky's..? Polarizer helped
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 19, 2012 17:57:56 GMT -5
Ok, Now I'm in Marquette... The 1st is the old Ore Dock right on the downtown waterfront. Lights from town light up the face of this thing pretty good at night. This thing looks real big in this pic, but its actually MONSTEROUS! An Ore Freighter being loaded at the working Ore Dock farther to the west in town. The followung 2 shots i used a 3 stop neutral density filter conbined with a 2 stop graduated neutral density filter. The Marquette Harbor Lighthouse Sunrise. This is facing south east. The Marquette Harbor Lighthouse Sunset (water was quite a bit choppier and the sun was jsut going below the horizon pretty much on a 90 degrees to the right of me.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 21:10:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I figured the polarizer, I just read how film only gets around 3 to 5 stops of dynamic range and I just see an awful log of DR range. I know I 've noticed i get great blues now that I have a good polarizer.
But hey. a good photographer can make the most out of their shots, you got skillz man!
and I've placed leaves in a shot too, there will be no making fun. As artists, that is completely up to us to decided how we want the shot to look. Adding leaves is no different then bending a distracting branch out of the way.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 19, 2012 23:06:59 GMT -5
Thnx..
I guess for me, it depends on who the photographer sees as the artist and what his or her role is in the photo taking process. Speaking strictly for myself and myself only, I see myself only as an artist with the limited tools that I have to relate the natural world around us. My artistry stops there. I see myself more as a photojournalist with a tool that let's me artisticly relate to viewers the artistry of the guy who is orchestrating the natural world we live in. My priority and enjoyment in being a landscape photographer is to relate to people what the real artist has created. Coming from that train of thought I'm sure you can see why my conscience bothers me a bit about placing leaves in the scene. And of course I never make fun of people that I don't know and have fun messing around with good friends that I know can enjoy the back and forth of it all. I'm never serious... But my enjoyment comes from more of a photo journalistic approach to the natural world with an artistic expression with the tools I use and not the physical minipulation of the real artists work.
I hope that made sense and was readable. I wrote that in a hurry. I'll probably have to come back and fine tune this later when I get out of Canada...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2012 0:09:27 GMT -5
I get it. I'm pickin up what you're puttin down, and I'm not talkin about the leaves.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Wertanen on Nov 27, 2012 18:27:33 GMT -5
I got some more low res scans back and found there was more of the Ore Dock in Marquette. I'm posting this one because its a better exposure and it also has longer star trails (in the 4 minute range). There was also a vertical shot I took that I completely forgot about. Directly behind the Ore Dock in this vertical one is a large marina hence the bright glow. Looks like a halo but it's not, film doesnt halo Just bright lights. After Marquette I went back to Munising to see my buddy who is the local dentist in town. While he was working I went out to Munising falls (the 1st two) then to Wagner Falls. I shot Wagner Falls but I'm not really impressed with them so I'm not showing them. Instead, I'll post these 2 from a side stream that empties into the creek that Wagner Falls is a part of just down stream from the falls. In the morning, the light comes through these trees and through the creek in an amazing luminescent glow. Horseshoe Falls I think I like this one the best of the 2 from the side stream... Side creek at Wagner Falls
|
|
|
Post by Eric on Nov 27, 2012 20:58:09 GMT -5
Very nice Karl. I like everyone. :-)
|
|
|
Post by grandpoobah on Nov 27, 2012 23:16:11 GMT -5
Wow Karl! Wish I was there!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 23:43:32 GMT -5
............. ................... let me guess.. you placed the leaves in this shot too. :-p
|
|