Anne and the M2 [Archive] - Rangefinderforum.com

Ronald_H

10-19-2008, 08:45

As so many times before, I have been photographing my friend Anne this weekend. However, this time I used film exclusively. Mostly the M2. Hope you like 'em.

http://members.chello.nl/~r.hogenboom/temp/anne/Image1200.jpg

http://members.chello.nl/~r.hogenboom/temp/anne/Image1201.jpg

http://members.chello.nl/~r.hogenboom/temp/anne/Image1181.jpg

http://members.chello.nl/~r.hogenboom/temp/anne/Image1190.jpg

http://members.chello.nl/~r.hogenboom/temp/anne/Image1196.jpg

totifoto

10-19-2008, 08:49

These are good! Fantastic tones ;)

What film and dev. did you use?

DwF

10-19-2008, 08:51

Ronald,

I like these! Nice the way she works with the space in each. My favorite is probably the 4th one. I like the contrast to OOF area and texture/light in the hair, the twist in torso adds some tension and her face engages too :)

Cheers,
David

charjohncarter

10-19-2008, 09:00

Lucky man a model with patiences and looks. I like your images, keep posting them.

Bingley

10-19-2008, 09:09

I like these! I agree w/ totifoto about the beautiful tones (the third one is really striking!). Compositions are very good, too.

lubitel

10-19-2008, 09:23

wonderful looking shots. what lens is this and what scanner?

Ron (Netherlands)

10-19-2008, 09:56

heel mooi, ga zo door!
graag info over film en belichting

Ronald_H

10-19-2008, 10:19

Thanks guys!

1,2 and 4 were taken with the Summicron DR

3 is taken with the VC 25mm f4 Snapshot Skopar

5 is taken with the VC 35mm f1.7 Ultron

The indoor shots are taken with a tripod and a cable release. The last shot is a 3 second exposure.

Film was good 'ole Ilford FP4+ developed in Kodak HC-110, dil B. for 8 min.

It took quite a bit of digital dodging and burning to get them the way I like, and I tamed the grain a bit too. I'm quite pleased with the results, but the negs are quite dense, much denser than I'm used to with Diafine. Consequently I had to dial down the gain of my scanner (Nikon Coolscan V) a bit.

I have plenty more, and shot a bit of color too, those will be ready next week.

ocean7

10-19-2008, 14:07

Fantastic! They are all excellent and my favourite would be #4. Thanks a lot for sharing.

steelydam

10-19-2008, 14:38

I dig the wallpaper and architectural details too. Excellent location.

LeicaTom

10-19-2008, 15:45

Yes, I was going to say too......great wallpaper and nice location, cute gal, she makes for a interesting subject - she reminds me of 1970`s American actress Susan Saint James.....I`m sure folks here in the USA will remember the TV show "McMillan & Wife"

I like the Summicron pics the best, they have a 1970`s feel to them! :)

Tom

PS; Sounds like I have to break out my tripod and cable again soon too with my Leica`s......

amateriat

10-19-2008, 16:05

Awfully nice work. And I can't imagine her not liking these a lot.

- Barrett

cmogi10

10-19-2008, 16:41

I love these for so many reasons, the model's beautiful and the tonality/"printing" is great.

Very well done.

Trius

10-19-2008, 18:06

Overall I like these, but I do have two suggetions:

You noted the negs are quite dense. At 8 min in Dil. B, I think they're over-developed. Dil. H would probably have worked better, or something like XTol 1:1
She's a lovely young lady. I would love to see photos of her without the glasses!

fdigital

10-19-2008, 18:26

She's a great model, really pretty and unique. I especially like the staircase shots.

Nando

10-19-2008, 18:41

Nice photographs. I like the boots.

cmogi10

10-19-2008, 18:46

Nice photographs. I like the boots.

Jeebus my mind is in the gutter. I had to read that one twice...

ijohnnyz

10-19-2008, 19:26

Sassy girl and pretty too. Love the smooth tonal transition. I like them all, but 3 and 4 really does it for me.

oscroft

10-19-2008, 19:51

Film was good 'ole Ilford FP4+ developed in Kodak HC-110, dil B. for 8 min.
That's about a minute longer than I give FP4 in HC-110 dil B (at 20C)

Ronald_H

10-20-2008, 00:58

That's about a minute longer than I give FP4 in HC-110 dil B (at 20C)

Ilford themselves give 9 minutes, Massive development chart gives 7-9 minutes.

I accidently gave FP4+ 6 min (recommended Delta 100 time) a while back, negs came out nice. So especially for scanning I think 7 minutes would be about right.

I don't know if it's me, but usually the recommended dev times for HC-110 I encountered so far are all a bit on the long side. It's not the M2, I see the same with my Nikons and FED5 as well. Maybe it's the difference between negs for wet printing (which I don't do yet) and scanning.

Ronald_H

10-20-2008, 00:59

She's a lovely young lady. I would love to see photos of her without the glasses!

Ah well, she really LIKES the glasses ;) She needs them too, she can't see a thing without them.

oscroft

10-20-2008, 01:22

Ilford themselves give 9 minutes, Massive development chart gives 7-9 minutes
Yeah, the Ilford time sounds crazy to me - but then manufacturers do occasionally seem to have some weird ideas that don't fit with most people's experience.

I generally find Massive Dev chart timings to be good, but where they have conflicting sources they will often include both. So I suspect the "7-9 min" recommendation is because they are including the Ilford time as one of their sources, and that other sources suggest 7 mins.

Tuolumne

10-20-2008, 06:27

She's a lovely young lady. I would love to see photos of her without the glasses!

Without the what? :cool:

/T

pesphoto

10-20-2008, 06:47

nice use of the available light in the indoor photos.

...i like the boots also......

George S.

10-20-2008, 07:28

They're ALL very good, I'd agree with everyone's positive comments already posted.

The piece of wall hanging in the upper left of #2 was very distracting for me. Try cropping that bit out is the only 'criticism' I'd have for you. Very nice work.

Ronald_H

10-20-2008, 11:57

Ok, one without the glasses, from last year. Just before my film revival ;-)

Nikon D200 with el-cheapo, el-distorto 18-135 DX

http://members.chello.nl/~r.hogenboom/temp/DSC_0289.jpg

regularchickens

10-20-2008, 12:27

Thanks for posting these. The model, wardrobe, textures, tones, setting are all great. I like the way the vintage-ish/modern-ish clothing and the lived-in building interact. You've given me something new to aspire to! :)

amateriat

10-21-2008, 20:25

Ronald_H

10-22-2008, 02:50

Ronald:

It took me a while to respond to this last one.

Yep, it's digital. (Don't ask how I could tell...I can't always).

True, that lens is far from top-notch.

But, with those glasses off, and at that one moment, this woman goes from awfully-cute, to...almost-frightening, ethereal beauty. (Right, the low-cut dress doesn't hurt, but, believe it or not, that's not what I'm getting at.) I could look at this photo all damn day; good thing I've got other pressing matters. ;)

As far as I'm concerned, you caught the moment just right. How did she respond to this picture?

Hi Barret,

It might surprise you, but she doesn't really like it. She feels she looks a bit slumped. Furthermore she thinks it makes her look a bit exposed and vulnerable, not 'tough' enough. She will never be of course, but that's how she feels about it without the glasses and with the bathing suit on. No it's not a dress, it's a bathing suit she's wearing here under her 'normal' clothes (it was a very warm day).

HOWEVER, her mum absolutely adores it. She printed it on her cr*ppy printer and framed it. Doesn't really do it justice ;) So I gave her a 75x50cm print of it as a surprise gift. But Anne doesn't want to look at it when she visits her parents, and the print is really too big to hang elsewhere than in the living room.

You can't please 'em all... but I'll pass her the compliments ;-)