PhotoArt Appreciation

I had been following some threads at a photo.site so I posted this B&W of a colour negative scan.
I see a nice b&w but it is not a true b&w: an attribute of B&W emulsion is that it reproduces *8 stops of Light *values; color neg. film has *4 stops of Light *values.
The B&W films sees *2 stops of light beyond the oversaturation point of the color negative, also the B&W would still reproduce distinction in shadow detail *2 stops of (Darkness) Light?

I noted that to some film seems obsolute, so they might not be aware of these distinctions. That B&W emulsion is light sensitive over a broader range:
+4 stops => middle grey<=-4 stops [ie. 8 stops total] but color neg. has: +2 stops=>middle grey<=-2 stops [ie. 4stops total] then slide or Color positive has: +1/2 stops =>mid<=-1/2 stops. [ie. One stop lattitude total]

Note Shadow has slight tint from reflected (green) tree in shadows?

I have been working on a pet project -- Recycle of a (4x5) large format rail camera . . . I am trying to make it out of used, broken or mainly out of waste products from other processes. I don't have a shop, just a few tools in my garage so it will be a very basic camera that could be easily constructed. I got a wood 5x7 back plate from EBay so some things are purchased items in that extent. I want to use the 4x5 format so one thing I need to do is construct an adapter holder to make the transition to the 4x5 format.

I happen to have a old tripod with one leg that was broken so I decided to use it as the base of the camera.

The thread is about PhotoArt Appreciation . . . so is photography really an art form? I mean I am a member at a large format photograph site but sometimes I wonder about things (attitudes) that prevails @ the LF forum?

An on going debate in the bussiness section seems to revolve about "what form to use as the vehicle of their artistic expression" (work) in comparison to other mediums such as painting or drawings, etc. After all, anybody with a good camera are photographers . . . right?

quote:

---

Note that the previous scan Is terrible . . . the original slide shows the grass (in focus) as well as the mulched flower bed in the foreground (small red & lite blue (white) objects at the bottom edge.

---

I had set up to shoot the sunrise on Vinoy Basin but as I waited I decided to shoot the previous scene so that by the time I got back to this one, it had passed it's dramatic moment.

Well to be candid, there was a little more it than that which I previously mentioned. the upper sunrise was shot with a Nikon N90s 35mm which 'the thru the lens' metering system can adjust exposure automatically while shooting & like most 35's uses a wide open aperture for viewing thru the view finder but automatically goes to the correct aperture before exposing the film.
Anyway after I had shot the lights in the tree, I turned around & saw a perfect setting.St. Pete was & still is to an extent a retirement remove the community so an elderly couple sitting on the bench made a very representative aspect of the area. I turned the camera (Cambo 4x5) around, set up (focused the scene on the ground glass) & flipping to film holder in the back. Looking up I noted a trash can in the foreground so I ran across the street & checked the can . . . good it wasn't bolted or chained in position but before I moved I wanted to reassure the couple about my intentions. I told them that I was getting ready to take a picture & needed to move the can, but I quickly added that I was wondering if I could photograph them in the scene. Which I briefly described as them in the silhouetted in the foreground with the sunrise as a backdrop. They agreed so I moved the can & returned to remove the film holder slide & snap the shutter. Replacing the slide & removing the holder , I started to leave. As I packed up I realized I had not reset the aperture! eek=>err . . . As I started back, I stopped to take the above sunrise.

Old joke: 10,000 comedians out of work & I am trying to be funny . . . I want to shoot some 35mm shots to for web use & as a primer for large format shots so I call a local vendor.
Now, I have gotten film from them before & generally they carry a pretty good stock. The girl on the phone responds to my question that they are running low & only have some tungsten bias film. Hmm . . . what I was looking for was daylight film.
well, I was going to do some night shots so maybe I can use it.
So I ask what is the ASA of the film? Thinking about it , I realize that I need to know the film manufacturer designation so I ask what film is in stock. She says just a minute & comes back on the line saying they have Provia & Velvia & . . . at this point I interrupt her by asking well what ASA is the Velvia? At this point, she checks & replies "100 ASA - Daylight film. Ah good just what I was looking for so I will drive over & get a roll.
Later I am shooting the Kapok blossoms. I put up the tripod & have the 35mm on it when this guy shows up. He has this digital camera with a APO lens mounted on it.

quote:

---

APO .. what I call a specialty lens. It is designed like those large telescopes, light enters a large tube & is reflected back to a small mirror in the middle of the large tube then to the eye piece or in this case the digital sensors. The nice thing about them is they have higher magnification without the longer length of a standard telephoto lens. The other side of them is that they have only one aperture setting. Generally pretty wide open . . . this had 2 impacts on photography. Large apertures mean a shallow depth of field & have a set aperture, only adjustment for exposure is by the shutter speed.

---

Now the lens itself is high dollar professional type lens attached to digital body, Standing behind me, he points his camera up into the tree saying he was a bird watcher & had bought the set up to photograph birds, his hobby.
Now, I never owned one of those lens myself but I sure would have like too. This is the type of lens you see sports photographers using to get those close up shots of the players up field while they stand along the sidelines. Then he says "why does his camera keep blinking & showing a "ee"?
Taking a shot , I ponder the statement . . . so I tell him that I shoot film, I am not familar with digital.

Long story I know but there is a point that may be worth trudging through it? So I looked at the lens when he had first arrived on the scene. It appeared to be an older lens (Minolta) that was designed for film . . . I looked at the camera body, it wasn't a Minolta but now I pondered if these 2 separate pieces were even compatible? He makes the same statement again as I move the tripod for another shot (flower) . . . I am shooting chrome using a low angle with the subject above silhouetted against the bright sky. Which is the probable reason for his camera's behavior? So I casually mention what I am doing.

quote:

---

The Why: I had gone up to the museum, picking up a brochure as I entered the building. The cover is a close up of a flower which is the reason ( the information) I was seeking when I entered the building. Taking the brochure, I had glanced at the flower, ah . . yes the brochure cover is the flower but when You unfold it, I will find that it had been superimposed in the main entrance to the museum. In the discussion, I mention the shot of the kapok flower on the brochure . . . Oh! that isn't the kapok flower? Taking a second look at the flower . . ya, she is absolutely right.

---

So I told the man that I was shooting chrome which because of the sky being overexposed will become clear which will make it easier to cut from the scene (background) in photo shop & paste into a shot of the building.

quote:

---

At first I tried to use a single flower pasted into the scene but when I felt it needed more I tried painting in some but I am not really much of a painter ( not even digitally) So I added a second copy, inverting it then reworked the area around the entrance so they appear to be inside the alcove &painted in where the 2 copies came together.

---

Now before I had changed position, the gentleman had been patiently waiting for a response to his question. So I had asked "You don't have a grey card with you, do ya? Iwant to check my exposure. (hint #2). Finslly, he loking at some people shooting a digital point & shoot of the tree said I guess I should have bought something easier to shoot like what they have . . . I thought > no, you would be satisfied with that camera for photographing birds. You have the camera body / lens you want for your purposes, what you need is the understanding necessary to use them effectively. I felt bad about not telling why he wasn't getting a reading . . . the background of sky was producng such a false reading of the subject (a bird in the tree) that the shutter speed was beyond the range of the camera body he was using. But after talking with him a few minutes, I knew that that answer would not suffice.

Sorry but I have been busy & building a camera.
As you can see it is a bit of non normal configuration, I guess you could say a special purpose design.

Anyway, it is a 5x7 with a 4x5 reducing back. I am still working the bugs out but I wanted to try some test shots. Which is a good thing because I have found I needed to make some changes. Actually the camera fell off the tripod twice, once because of mounting failure & the second failure to mount correctly

Funny thing is I was shooting the passion vine in my neighbor's yard & he came out to help when he saw the camera falling off the tripod. [I had made a great save by grasping the rear frame as it slid off] His comment about being lucky was true as the lens could have been damaged but what drew my ere was the usual comment about going digital.
Yes, I could probably get the same shot but something about holding the negative (slide) the size of most prints in my hand seems to be more satisfying? I guess somethings are more important than others . . . so yes, I do have to work at photograph more so I receive more from the doing!