Digital BW, The Print

Lots of us have that disease and Penicillin will not work!


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: markleewebb 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 8:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Clarification - Depth of Field and Landscapes


  My camera is a Nikon D70 converted by LifePixel (normal conversion).

  Actually, if you look at some of Adam's works, you see very bright 
  and white foliage and very drak black skies - very much like an IR 
  image.

  You're right about choice of subject....but that's not just an IR 
  issue. Any landscape where it's not just a wide field all-inclusive 
  shot but you're trying to emphasive a particular subject amidst 
  other competing elements has this challenge.

  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Weaver" 
  <garww@...> wrote:
  >
  > Hi,
  > 
  > I've only a can of Kodak IR under my belt and tried unmodified 
  digital IR.
  > 
  > IR is all over the place, so you don't have the same options as 
  with normal films.
  > 
  > Selective focus with this factor and typical wide FOV is problem 
  prone. To make it effective I think you have to choose the subject 
  placement carefully and maybe consider morning shooting when only 
  some things have warmed-up.
  > 
  > I can't relate ansel stuff to IR stuff in any which way.
  > 
  > And I really don't know about the digital end - you don't indicate 
  what wavelength your sensor can resolve.
  > 
  > gar
  > 
  > *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
  > 
  > On 3/7/08 at 3:43 AM markleewebb wrote:
  > 
  > >But is it done - and done well- with b&w landscapes? 
  > >
  > >Here is why I ask: for landscapes, folks like Ansel Adams taught 
  that 
  > >aperture is the first concern. He and other great landscape 
  artists 
  > >were very concerned about sharpness and capturing a lot of 
  detail. He 
  > >even founded Group f.64 - guess why ! He felt that photography 
  should 
  > >take advantage of the nature of the medium and make photographs 
  with 
  > >as much depth of field as possible. But in some scenes it's hard 
  to 
  > >emphasize a particular tree or group of natural elements because 
  > >they're not well seperated from other distracting elements around 
  > >them. That's why I was asking.
  > >
  > >If someone has some good examples and web sites with samples they 
  > >could point me to where the photographer used selective DOF IN A 
  > >LANDSCAPE - and did it with SUCCESS :) that would help me study 
  other 
  > >works and gain some perspective on an alternative technique that 
  may 
  > >serve me well. 
  > >
  > >Thanks. 
  > >
  > >
  > >--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Watson 
  > ><bwyg@> wrote:
  > >>
  > >> markleewebb wrote:
  > >> > Question - for shots like this where you are stuck with a 
  > >background 
  > >> > of other trees and you have other trees to right and to left 
  and 
  > >> > sometimes in foreground - can you ever use DOF to emphasize 
  your 
  > >main 
  > >> > subject? Nail focus on main subject but go very soft using 
  DOF on, 
  > >> > say, the background? Is this ever done with landscapes?
  > >> > 
  > >> Of course it's "done." Selective focus is just another tool to 
  use 
  > >in 
  > >> expressing one's vision.
  > >> --
  > >> Bruce Watson
  > >>
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
  resources as
  > >they are often being updated.
  > >
  > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
  > >
  > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you 
  wish to
  > >unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
  this same
  > >page.
  > >
  > >Please follow these basic guidelines:
  > >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier 
  messages to keep
  > >them short.
  > >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
  flames.
  > >Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
  > >membership without notice.
  > >- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of 
  digital B&W
  > >printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
  removed from
  > >the membership.
  > >- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules 
  and
  > >guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the 
  group Owner
  > >and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the 
  Files
  > >section:
  > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
  > >
  > >BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, 
  THE PRINT
  > >YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" 
  AND
  > >"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
  LIABLE TO
  > >YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL 
  OR
  > >EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS 
  OF
  > >PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
  THE 
  > >"OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP 
  HAVE BEEN
  > >ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) 
  THE USE
  > >OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; 
  (ii)
  > >UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR 
  DATA; (iii)
  > >STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
  PRINT
  > >YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, 
  THE
  > >PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
  > > 
  > >Yahoo! Groups Links
  > >
  > >
  > >
  >



   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.6/1317 - Release Date: 3/7/2008 8:15 AM


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]