Interesting photographic technique

[Bonegavel]

hxxp://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/tiltshift/

tiltshift photography creates an amazing toy-miniature effect.

[Raiders Army]

That's cool. Is it something in photoshop?

[Bonegavel]

A special lens is used called a tiltshift. Some of the pictures were further photoshop'd, but the miniature effect is from the lens.

[Raiders Army]

Really weird to see how they got that effect. Pretty interesting and there wasn't anything on wikipedia on it.

[Bonegavel]

there is dash in the wiki entry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilt-shift

[Buccaneer]

That is funny. Back when I was a photography using a large-format camera, I did this a few times because I really messed up. It was a challenge for me to get the depth of field just right by using essentially 19th-century technology and the ones that I screwed up on, I tossed. I didn't realize now it has a name (and can be made to look cool).

[NoMyths]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

That is funny. Back when I was a photography using a large-format camera, I did this a few times because I really messed up. It was a challenge for me to get the depth of field just right by using essentially 19th-century technology and the ones that I screwed up on, I tossed. I didn't realize now it has a name (and can be made to look cool).

Plus, kids, he invented the internet. Five dollahs!

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

That is funny. Back when I was a photography using a large-format camera, I did this a few times because I really messed up. It was a challenge for me to get the depth of field just right by using essentially 19th-century technology and the ones that I screwed up on, I tossed. I didn't realize now it has a name (and can be made to look cool).

Ah, but large format can take such beautiful pictures when you get the hang of it.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Ah, but large format can take such beautiful pictures when you get the hang of it.

I did manage to get about 5-6 great looking photos in that format. With each taking so long to set up and the cost of each sheet plus developing, it did get to be a bit much. I know a few years back when I mentioned these photo, a few wanted me to show them here. I still haven't found the Photo CD yet and if I do, I'll show them.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I did manage to get about 5-6 great looking photos in that format. With each taking so long to set up and the cost of each sheet plus developing, it did get to be a bit much. I know a few years back when I mentioned these photo, a few wanted me to show them here. I still haven't found the Photo CD yet and if I do, I'll show them.

I REALLY need to get back into photographing...

My mother turned my old bedroom into a darkroom when I left the house, which was GREAT... but now she is selling the house, and it hasn't been a dark room for a year or two because of that... I don't have a digital SLR camera yet, and taking photos in color often just doesn't do it for me.... and I just don't feel the control of the dark room yet in digital...

Blah.. maybe i'll fight to get back into it by making a dynasty, might give me some motivation... I felt like I was getting pretty good at it when I was doing it pretty regularly...

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I REALLY need to get back into photographing...

My mother turned my old bedroom into a darkroom when I left the house, which was GREAT... but now she is selling the house, and it hasn't been a dark room for a year or two because of that... I don't have a digital SLR camera yet, and taking photos in color often just doesn't do it for me.... and I just don't feel the control of the dark room yet in digital...

Blah.. maybe i'll fight to get back into it by making a dynasty, might give me some motivation... I felt like I was getting pretty good at it when I was doing it pretty regularly...

I took photography several years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it. As we unpacked Antmeister found some old black and white photos while I attended and they're not so bad. As a matter-of-fact, I noticed that I took better pictures while attending school than I do now with a nifty digital SLR. There's something about the developing process that is so... well... pure. I much prefer to dodge and burn with a wand in a dark room than in Photoshop, even though the latter seems easier, but I haven't totally grasped it yet.

If you create a dynasty, PM me and I'll follow it. I'll be going to school for photography in the very near future and following your dyanasty will really keep me going.

[Lorena]

dola,

and you're right Wade, the more pictures you take, the better you get. Practice makes perfect right?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Dodgerchick

I took photography several years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it. As we unpacked Antmeister found some old black and white photos while I attended and they're not so bad. As a matter-of-fact, I noticed that I took better pictures while attending school than I do now with a nifty digital SLR. There's something about the developing process that is so... well... pure. I much prefer to dodge and burn with a wand in a dark room than in Photoshop, even though the latter seems easier, but I haven't totally grasped it yet.

If you create a dynasty, PM me and I'll follow it. I'll be going to school for photography in the very near future and following your dyanasty will really keep me going.

Totally agree on dodging/burning vs. Photoshop... I imagine if I practiced it enough that I would change my mind, but for now it's just not as "pure" like you said...

Blah, guess I need to break-down and buy a negative scanner.... or a digital SLR *drool*...

[Bonegavel]

I never developed my own film when I had a decent Canon EOS ELAN II, but I love my Nikon D70s and if you use the NEF format ( nikon's raw format ) and use Nikon's Capture software it is what I imagine a dark room to be. I have control over every aspect of the image. I love it.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Bonegavel

I never developed my own film when I had a decent Canon EOS ELAN II, but I love my Nikon D70s and if you use the NEF format ( nikon's raw format ) and use Nikon's Capture software it is what I imagine a dark room to be. I have control over every aspect of the image. I love it.

Not to be picky, but I would say it's "as close to a dark room as you can possibly get"...

It's not bad, you can make pictures that are just as nice i'm sure, but it's just not the same...

[wade moore]

Dola: And I feel like bucc reading this thread... I really do love my little point and click digital, but for the art of Photography there's a part of me that is pained to realize that dark rooms are a dying breed...

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Not to be picky, but I would say it's "as close to a dark room as you can possibly get"...

It's not bad, you can make pictures that are just as nice i'm sure, but it's just not the same...

Originally Posted by wade moore

Dola: And I feel like bucc reading this thread... I really do love my little point and click digital, but for the art of Photography there's a part of me that is pained to realize that dark rooms are a dying breed...

lol, Antmeister and I were just discussing this. Photoshop is a powerful tool, no doubt about it and the stuff you can do is utterly amazing; you can do things that couldn't possibly be done in a dark room. BUT, there's something about going through the manual process that is indescribable. I know exactly where you're coming from and like you said, it's just, not the same.

[Bonegavel]

I'm glad dark rooms are gone ( going away ). Too expensive for me.

[Schmidty]

This thread is BEGGING for a parody.

[Antmeister]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Dola: And I feel like bucc reading this thread... I really do love my little point and click digital, but for the art of Photography there's a part of me that is pained to realize that dark rooms are a dying breed...

Bah! You and my wife can talk about your love with those old school techniques, but I disliked them.

The cost of the materials alone was a huge turnoff since it can get very expensive as you were just in the learning process. On top of that, cross processing, sharpening and dodging/burning were just too time consuming and you really couldn't have as much control as you would on a computer. For example, if I were to burn an image and I made a slight mistake, there is no undo button in the a darkroom, you are stuck with your results.

Anyways I am just messing with you because me and my wife get into small disagreements over the old and new technology. Yet since we moved from a traditional SLR to a digital one, she has taken way more pictures than she ever has in her life. She even improves a number, of what would normally be throw away images, using these new fangled post processing techniques.

If she were to do that with a dark room, we would still have a few dozen canisters of film that needed to be developed and it would take over a year before she would have bothered with it.

[Antmeister]

Originally Posted by Bonegavel

I'm glad dark rooms are gone ( going away ). Too expensive for me.

Agreed, Bonegavel.

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by Bonegavel

I'm glad dark rooms are gone ( going away ). Too expensive for me.

I guess it's too easy nowadays. If you want an image darkened, all you gotta do is click the mouse a few times, but in the dark room, it's a lot of estimating and troubleshooting to get it just about right. Once you get the print you want there's a sense of accomplishment that I just don't get with digital.

It took Antmeister about a week to finally talk me into getting a digital SLR and you're right Bonegavel, the old way is expensive so that I don't miss. I miss developing negatives, figuring out what kind of filter to use on the enlarger, how long the print should be in the chemicals, and finally, getting the print. Ahh... the beloved print that I worked so hard on.

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by Antmeister

Yet since we moved from a traditional SLR to a digital one, she has taken way more pictures than she ever has in her life.

Uhh... yeah, how about several thousand in RAW format? We had to get a separate hard drive for that alone.

Originally Posted by Antmeister

If she were to do that with a dark room, we would still have a few dozen canisters of film that needed to be developed and it would take over a year before she would have bothered with it.

Okay, true. As a matter-of-fact, we found 3 canisters of film that still need to be developed. LOL

Originally Posted by Antmeister

Bah! You and my wife can talk about your love with those old school techniques, but I disliked them.

Ya'll just don't get the lost art... it's alright. When computers and voicemail came around, a lot of people found it hard to adjust. I'm on the same boat when it comes to photography I guess. I'm looking on improving the digital aspect of this art.

[wade moore]

I think this is the midnset of folks like me and Dodgerchick...

You can make great prints with digital, it's easier, faster, probably cheaper over the longhaul...

But printing in the dark room is an EXPERIENCE...

[Bonegavel]

For me, I would probably be into the Dark Room thing for a month or so and then the stuff would just sit there and rot because it took too much time for each. ( Maybe not if digital wasn't around )

As a n00b photographer the DSLR is so awesome I can't even describe it. With my Canon ELAN II 35mm ( which I loved, BTW ), I would snap picture after picture and then when done... I would take them to the photomat and wait a few days. After I picked them up, I notice that most of my pictures were blurry or of the exact same things just from a few different angles.

It was very discouraging from a learning POV that when I bought a crappy little point-and-shoot olympus, I stopped taking pictures with my 35mm even though the 35mm took vastly superior shots. Then, once I got sick of taking picture after picture of my daughter's back ( by the time the crappy digitals shutter snapped, the kids are always 10 feet away ) I broke down and bought a D70s and I LOVE THIS CAMERA.

I can take picture after picture and within mere minutes have them on my screen and adjusting them ( touchy subject, but RAW is so sweet IMHO ) and print them on my decent little canon printer or uploading them to ritzpix.com and picking them up in an hour.

I appreciate the skill/reward that comes from dark room stuff, but I just don't have the time/patience/attention span/money to deal with it.

[Antmeister]

Originally Posted by Bonegavel

...I can take picture after picture and within mere minutes have them on my screen and adjusting them ( touchy subject, but RAW is so sweet IMHO ) ...

Agreed. The amazing thing about using the RAW format is that you can change the exposure setting, fix the white balance and sharpen the picture after the snapshot is taken. We have fixed a number of overexposed photos which would have been trashed if we didn't use that format. And it is also amazing that when shooting in RAW, you don't have to worry about setting the white balance at all.

[Antmeister]

Originally Posted by wade moore

I think this is the midnset of folks like me and Dodgerchick...

You can make great prints with digital, it's easier, faster, probably cheaper over the longhaul...

But printing in the dark room is an EXPERIENCE...

Yep, you guys are gluttons for darkroom punishment.