| Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders. |
 |
Toronto Star goes retro for a shoot. Does it make sense? |
 |
06-02-2012
|
#1
|
|
Photo addict
easyrider is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 380
|
Toronto Star goes retro for a shoot. Does it make sense?
The Toronto Star devoted two pages today to black and white images of couples attending the prom at a local high school. The very talented photog, Lucas Oleniuk, used film in a 4x5 camera. They look nice but one has to wonder whether the same results could not have been achieved with a high end point-and shoot.
Please take a look and post your thoughts.
As he tells it:
"In late April, Star visual editor Taras Slawnych assigned me to produce a series of 4x5 Polaroids that featured a graduating high school class on prom night.
With Polaroid film long discontinued, getting the film itself posed a serious challenge.
I sourced 40 sheets of black and white Polaroid film, which I bought at an exorbitant price and then tested. The film had expired in 2007 and was useless to me. Dry development pods had robbed the endangered prints of their ability to develop after exposure.
It was time for Plan B.
With the objective of producing a classic image, I offered to shoot the 4x5 negatives on location at the Paradise Banquet Hall in Vaughan where Runnymede Collegiate Institute was having its prom. I then processed the film and printed it back in my custom darkroom in Leslieville."
The full story:
http://www.thestar.com/living/articl...digital-photos
The photos:
http://photogallery.thestar.com/1202392
|
|
|
|
 |
06-02-2012
|
#2
|
|
Registered User
stratcat is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 451
|
I think a good photographer can achieve good results artistic results with whatever camera they get.
As to the technical quality, it's hard to judge from those rather small images (and I bet they're low resolution scans too), but I'm pretty sure if we could put our eyes on a contact print from one of those 4x5 negatives we'd be floored.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#3
|
|
Photo addict
easyrider is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 380
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stratcat
I think a good photographer can achieve good results artistic results with whatever camera they get.
As to the technical quality, it's hard to judge from those rather small images (and I bet they're low resolution scans too), but I'm pretty sure if we could put our eyes on a contact print from one of those 4x5 negatives we'd be floored.
|
Excellent point. They are fairly large in the newspaper but they look no different from other shots in the paper. The photog does not mention what lighting he used.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Great White North
Age: 56
Posts: 17,159
|
On the non-technical side, I like the ethnic diversity, the multi-ethnic couples, the tall girl with the shorter guy, the geeky guy, and the guy with 2 girls, shots.
__________________
“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” – quote
I myself am made entirely of faults, stitched together with good intentions. -quote
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
thegf is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 165
|
i always get asked if i am related to this photographer. good to see he's still doing his thing.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#6
|
|
Photo addict
easyrider is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 380
|
Just say "yes." You will get great assignments.  )
Remember the Robert Capa story. He first peddled his pix, saying he was the assistant of Robert Capa.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#7
|
|
Registered User
summar is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
|
Nice reminder that before half-tone reproduction was far enough improved by the late '50s to allow the use of smaller formats on newsprint, 4x5 was the universal format used by newspaper photographers.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
bigeye is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 1,147
|
Wonder why didn't he use Fuji 3000B? It comes in 4x5...
.
__________________
Anything that is very simple is apt to be sloppy. - Elliott Erwitt
I bought a new camera. It's so advanced you don't even need it. - Steven Wright
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Nokton48 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 2,493
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by photomoof
I was surprised that none of the photos were sharp, but of course we are looking at Jpegs put up by the newspaper, and they may be degraded.
|
They don't look sharp to me either, but it's pretty hard to tell from these. Looks like he focused on the wall behind the subjects. Not much DOF with 4x5, I know from experience, I can't tell if I'm sharp on the groundglass, without louping the image. Fuji 3000B would help with the stopping-down part. Or a studio strobe.
|
|
|
|
 |
06-02-2012
|
#10
|
|
packin' light
buzzardkid is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Assen, The Netherlands
Age: 42
Posts: 6,863
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS
On the non-technical side, I like the ethnic diversity, the multi-ethnic couples, the tall girl with the shorter guy, the geeky guy, and the guy with 2 girls, shots.
|
My thoughts exactly. Lots of nice little stories on those youngsters included with the shots which give a real good impression of what life is like for them and what choices they make.
Made me enjoy the pictures even more, and I'd like to see real contacts for detail indeed...
Thanks for posting that link!
__________________
Cheers, Johan
Leica II (1932), Elmars 50 & 135, Heliar 50: the nickel kit
Leica II (1942), Minifinder, Canon 28, W-Nikkor 35, Elmar 90: the chrome kit
Ricoh GXR Monochrom
Visit johanniels.com!
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#11
|
|
Registered User
VictorM. is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto
Age: 66
Posts: 1,580
|
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#12
|
|
Registered User
newsgrunt is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 766
|
He's a friend of mine and has been shooting LF for some time. He's been using it primarily for personal, ongoing projects so it's no surprise he used it here. The Star has a new photo editor (last one was a gatekeeper with no interest in the dept therefore, wouldn't go to bat for them) and he's trying to bring morale back up. Regardless, Lucas is an incredibly talented photographer who I believe could work anywhere but he's happy where he's at and he has that great darkroom as well.
I also had MEM's project in mind when I saw this work.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#13
|
|
Registered User
timor is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 414
|
There is no info which Polaroid camera was used. In most the lenses are rudimentary. Could be it 110 ?
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#14
|
|
Photo addict
easyrider is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 380
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by timor
There is no info which Polaroid camera was used. In most the lenses are rudimentary. Could be it 110 ?
|
If I read the story correctly, he ended up shooting on 4x5 film. He found some Polaroid film but it was no longer usable so he switched to film.
There are no further details posted -- like what camera, or lights.
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#15
|
|
Registered User
Deep Fried is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: CANADA
Posts: 140
|
smaller format and better lighting setup would have produced better results for newsprint. I don't doubt the negs are stunning, but it was the wrong tool for the final output. The lighting was just too flat and putting people up against a wall does not help. The little stories about the kids are what make the project work
__________________
Jeff
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#16
|
|
camera hunter & gatherer
Nikon Bob is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,830
|
I just wonder what's the point of using a 4x5 for a newspaper article? Just seems such a waste of potential that a 4x5 is capable of. If the final output was to be large prints then that would make some sort of sense to me. As for the photos themselves, it show just how much our society has changed and for the better I would add.
Bob
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=557'>My Gallery</a>
|
|
|
|
06-02-2012
|
#17
|
|
May contain traces of nut
rxmd is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Kyrgyzstan
Posts: 6,044
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikon Bob
I just wonder what's the point of using a 4x5 for a newspaper article?
|
The point is being retro. Isn't that what this is all about?
__________________
Bing! You're hypnotized!
|
|
|
|
06-03-2012
|
#18
|
|
camera hunter & gatherer
Nikon Bob is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,830
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rxmd
The point is being retro. Isn't that what this is all about?
|
I suppose so but still was it worth the effort? You could likely get a retro look for a newspaper article with any number of 35mm cameras too. All in all it was a neat idea but...
Bob
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=557'>My Gallery</a>
|
|
|
|
06-03-2012
|
#19
|
|
Registered User
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,988
|
The photos look very poor, at least on the web. I wouldn't expect great sharpness or detail from Polaroids anyway. Why use a 4x5 camera, then dumb down the IQ using instant film? I could see proofing w/ the instant film, letting people see the shots right away, and all that. The newspaper had to run scanned files of the Polaroid positives, so another drop in IQ. It doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
06-03-2012
|
#20
|
|
Registered User
DominikDUK is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 294
|
These look more like poor scans than poor photos. He used neg Film and not polaroid. I like the series.
Dominik
|
|
|
|
06-03-2012
|
#21
|
|
Registered User
newsgrunt is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 766
|
While you get a different look and quality from LF, it's not the only reason to haul out the big boy. Sharp, sharp, sharp is not everything when using 4x5 and up. The way one works and interacts with subjects while using one is very different and can lead to some very honest portraits imo. I use my LF camera on certain assignments as well but those are few and far between and pretty well only for portraits.
|
|
|
|
06-03-2012
|
#22
|
|
film militant
clayne is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
Posts: 450
|
LF will also have a comparitively smaller DOF for the same angle of view and f-stop of a smaller format. Additionally film itself will have a comparatively different response to highlight saturation. There are absolutely valid reasons for him wanting to shoot things this way and it should be celebrated rather than doubted.
|
|
|
|
06-04-2012
|
#23
|
|
Personal Photography
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,579
|
I like it the way it is.
These are prom shots, do you really need to see every skin pores and pimples?
Kudos to the photographer.
Introducing these kids to the way when a consistently-nice set of photographs took some effort to pull off 
|
|
|
|
06-04-2012
|
#24
|
|
Unused film collector
Paddy C is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Too far north for my liking
Posts: 723
|
Images have likely been through the wringer and come out on screen looking soft and rather crappy. So that's not helping.
LF brings tonality, resolution, reproduction size and unique depth of field possibilities. None of these advantages are put to use or evident in the gallery.
As others have mentioned, good prints would be a very different story.
So I'm on the "it doesn't make sense" side of things. But then not everything needs to make sense.
|
|
|
|
06-04-2012
|
#25
|
|
Moderator
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 39
Posts: 11,764
|
They might be "soft" but they still get their point across.
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:12. |
|
|