I have been a photography buff for 50 years. I remember the hours spent with my old Durst and Omega enlargers, getting things just the way I wanted. With the digital age, I've had to learn all over again and I'm just starting to get the habg of it. I graduated from JPEG to RAW today.
It's amazing how much data a RAW image contains and the degree of control I have over the image. Of course converting to JPEG and resizing for the internet, knocks a little of the glitter off....but still amazing.
(http://photos.oldva.org/albums/userpics/normal_IMG_2372_j-640x480.jpg)
This is a simple jpeg. I'm taking a duel image (JPEG and RAW)
(http://photos.oldva.org/albums/userpics/normal_IMG_2372_c-640x480.jpg)
This is a RAW image with some subtle enhancements to the data and converted to jpeg
(http://photos.oldva.org/albums/userpics/normal_IMG_2372-640x480.jpg)
This is the same RAW image selected in Monochrome style with subtle enhancements.
It's a little awe inspiring what can be done with a string of data. :-\
Since I cut my teeth on TRI-X, I have a special fondness for Black and white. All the reading I've done tells me It's much better to take the picture in RAW and set the style, than it is to take B&W with the camera. The available tones are just much greater.
Yep, you just need the right camera and software. And more memory cards for the camera plus RAM and hard drive space for the computer. There are definite advantages to those who like to manipulate their digital images.
So you were a Tri-X fan Peter. I went the other direction. I used Ilford PanF and sometimes FP4, and of course a tripod. That was 120/220 roll and sheet.
I still have my Omega B7 in the attic; sold the Linhof Super Technika IV 6x9 years ago though. Still have the Manfrotto tripod too' Bogen in the USA.
I sold my Omega years ago but still have the Durst f30 floating around somewhere.
I just took that image and used a Photoshop technique to sharpen it.
I went to the Unsharp Mask Filter and set it to Amount 85%, Radius 1, Threshold 4 and zapped it twice.
Lord what a difference! I can count every blade of grass, weed and twig. I haven't figured how to save it as a jpeg yet....I'm working on it.
I did get a PM from one of the members here that is a Professional. He sent me one of the most beautiful photo's I've ever seen. Just stunning. If he hadn't told me it was a photograph, I'd have sworn it was a watercolor. ;)
My Gosh Peter you are really making me dig back into the archieves of my brain. When I first started working I was issued a Rolleiflex. Great camera. The only draw back that I had was along with it came alot of trash. Film papers and the disgusting bulbs and fan flash attachment. I couldn't about to tell you how many pictures I shot with that camera. Thousands I would say.
The neet thing I remember and had used several times was nightime photographs. Although the range was relatively short for the flash attachment there was always ways to get what you wanted in pitch black. By taking a rubber band and fixing the shutter open you could use a clipboard to cover the lense and walk around the entire crime scene flashing and removing the clipboard for a daylight photograph of everything there. It took two people to operate in that fashion but it was priceless.
Then later we were issued a 35MM which was more user friendly to the Hillbilly's but IMO didn't give the best picture. Now I guess they are using digital cameras. Boy I wish I had one of those now. Probably traded them for pennies on the dollar.
(https://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd161/redoverfarm/scenes/country%20plans/290_rolleitlr.jpg)
I never had a Rollie twin although I did have one of their spy cameras> I had a Yashica twin and loved it, then came the Nikon F1 (I think it was the F1), then a canon AE1, then I was issued a Canon F...boy was that a camera and a telephoto mirror lens. Years later, I bought a box full of the F's and Canon lenses at a Government auction.
The digital may be a lot more user friendly, but not nearly as fun!
I had two Rollie's. I kept one loaded with B&W and the other color. The most interesting camera I owned was a Leica IIIF built for the Luftwaffe. It had a rubberized shutter that would work at extremely low temperatures. and a collapsible lens. Very handy for winter backpacking.
I'll tell another story on myself John.
I was taking pictures of a house that was being used by some high level drug dealers. One had a UFAP outstanding which was why I was involved. The FBI was going to do an entry later in the week and the pictures were for briefing the entry team.
I got all the pictures I needed but was feeling my oats that night, so I took a couple more rolls of film of all sorts of things....the waitress at Waffle house, hookers, local cops taking a break, some uncomplimentary pictures of the backsides of women on the street, etc.
The next morning I went in and told Steve what to print and what NOT to print. Later that day, I got called into the Supervisors office and chewed out over the pictures, lectured on proper procedure, wasting government money and invading peoples privacy.
Turns out Steve forgot which ones I told him to print and printed twenty copies of everything and distributed them. :-[
Yeah I leearned that leason too. Then adopted the policy of "one roll one subject". They were not any good for telephoto use but just general they were great. I can't remember using color film for the first 5 years or so. Only B&W for all intent and purposes. In fact I used it for family photo's some as I bought the film and had it developed out side the department. Thanks for the memories.
Back when I was 20 I used a camera similar to the Rolloflex - could have been the same, at that time I didn't pay attention... took pix of events around the towns the newspapers covered. I did get to use the boss' 35mm camera one time to take pix of Christmas lights at night for the "best decorated house" contest.
Used to develop all the pix, too.
Yes Sassy I think when we used them we were just one step ahead of the Flash that sit on the pole and ignited. Almost the "tin type" days. ;D
n* rofl