Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] 5 images, and some technical observations regarding ye olde technol

Subject: [OM] 5 images, and some technical observations regarding ye olde technologies
From: Dawid Loubser <dawidl@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:08:06 +0200
Hello fellow OM-oholics

I have posted a couple of (rather old, but recently scanned) works,  
and every time I do this I am
also able to draw some more technical conclusions around the OM gear I  
have come to use and love.
I would also appreciate your comments around any aspects of these.  
Most of these images were made
end last year, when I just stared with the system, so be gentle :-)

Here they are, together with some technical comments (all made with my  
two favourite lenses, 24/2.0 and 90/2.0M).
I share these comments, because I personally love reading a bit more  
about the image-making process (and this list
is all about sharing information, no?). Elsewhere, I typically prefer  
to just take images at their own merit,
regardless of technicalities.


"Proud Truck Driver"
At a long delay caused by road works in the middle of the Karoo (Cape  
Province, South Africa) this truck driver noticed me with my camera  
and wanted me to take his photograph.
http://fc02.deviantart.com/fs51/f/2009/260/6/c/Proud_Truck_Driver_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Capture: OM-1n, 24/2.0 at f/5.6, PanF at ISO32, hand-held
Print: 8x10 split-grade wet print, partially toned in Thiocarbamide
Digitisation: Print scaned to ~35MP with V700
Comments: My hand dodging/burning still needs a lot of practice (halo  
around the truck, etc) as well as my
partial toning (stain marks)! Still, the resolution and dynamic range  
(even of PanF) is truly amazing, every
rivet on the truck is clearly rendered, and this scene has extreme DR.  
I'm sending the driver (who actually lives
in a undeveloped township about 1000km away from me) this print.


"Grainy Decay"
This is one of the first ever images I made through the OM system. The  
angelic serenity of the gracefully decaying leaves caught my eye.
http://fc09.deviantart.com/fs51/f/2009/260/f/4/Grainy_Decay_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Capture: OM-1n, 90/2.0 Macro at f/16, Ilford Delta3200, hand-held
Print: 5x7in "straight" print (grade 3 or so) in the darkroom through  
a busted 50-year-old Agfa condenser enlarger, extremely emphasising  
the grain (I have later come to prefer the softer look of my current  
diffuser enlarger, it makes a HUGE difference)
Digitisation: Print scaned to ~6MP with V700


"Apparition of Evil"
Alone in the dark I saw this evil creature sitting on the wall. For  
the first time in ages, I felt fear of the dark. I know it's just a  
bunch of dead leaves, but it stirred something inside of me. I felt  
it... watching... me.
http://fc07.deviantart.com/fs51/f/2009/260/6/5/Apparition_of_Evil_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Capture: OM-1n, 90/2.0 Macro at f/2.0 (45s exposure, it was PITCH  
dark), Ilford HP5 @ ISO400, tripod
Digitisation: Directly scanned from film (evil!!) on V700


"Montecasino Rearranged"
A scene outside of Montecasino, Fourways.
http://fc02.deviantart.com/fs50/f/2009/261/5/4/Montecasino_Rearranged_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Capture: OM-1n, 24/2.0 at f/2.0, Kodak TMZ P3200 @ ISO3200, around  
1/8s shutter speed, hand-held
Print: 5x7in split-grade wet print (Omega diffuser enlarger),  
partially toned in Thiocarbamide
Digitisation: Print scaned to ~6MP with V700
Comments: I know ISO3200 film has low resolution, but even so, there  
cannot be many 24mm lenses in the world that look this good at f/2.0.  
Also, see the amazing depth of field even at f/2.0 if you focus on a  
subject 5m+ away from the camera. Yet, focus close and the 24mm can  
render extremely shallow DOF. Such a versatile lens. Like ken loves  
his 100/2.8, somebody will pry this (dinged, beat-up, silvernosed)  
24/2.0 from my cold dead hands :-)


"Playing Field"
A very fast-running and vividly-coloured beetle on the beach. It was  
quite a task to sneak up on the little guy without him darting off. In  
this photograph, I wanted to emphasize the empty space available to  
this creature, which surely must be something amazing at this scale.
http://fc05.deviantart.com/fs50/f/2009/261/7/c/Playing_Field_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Capture: OM-1n, 90/2.0 Macro at f/11, FP4 at ISO125, hand-held
Print: 8x10in "straight" print (grade 1.5) in the darkroom through a  
busted 50-year-old Agfa condenser enlarger
Digitisation: Print scanned to ~35MP with V700
Comments: The field size of this photograph is around 35cm wide, so  
here we are precisely at the published optimim magnification of the  
Zuiko 90mm f/2.0 Lens. The resolution at 35 Megpixels is spectacular,  
I am quite sure it's beyond any current DSLR. I wish I captured this  
image on PanF.


"Starry Eyed"
Just a snapshot of my wife in one of our favourite restaurants, and  
extremely dark restaurant lit only by candlelight (to hide the bad  
decor, I imagine :-) The diagonal was an experiment, it makes the shot  
feel a bit "uneasy" yes, but I felt I wanted to capture "more" than  
what was in a level frame.
http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs51/f/2009/261/3/3/Starry_Eyed_by_philosomatographer.jpg
Capture: OM-1n, 24/2.0 at f/2.0, Ilford HP5+ at ISO400, hand-held,  
around 1/4s
Digitisation: Directly scanned from film (evil!!) on V700, to around  
~4MP
Comments: Why does anybody need ISO 25,600 again? This is the darkest  
restaurant I know, yet a 24mm f/2.0 lens and ISO 400 is enough to  
capture an impromptu snapshot.


Thanks for watching :-) Some general observations:

GRAIN
Wow, scanning 35mm film directly sucks (compared to making a darkroom  
print and scanning the print). A print from ISO3200 film, made via a  
diffusion enlarger, has about the same grain (a tad more) than  
directly-scanned ISO400 film. Yet, the optical print also has better  
detail, and much better image quality on the whole (dynamic range,  
tonal separation, etc). Bottom-line: If you are into doing film (in  
this day and age) don't ever bother with scanning film directly, it's  
exceptionally poor compared to making analogue prints.
The second grain-related observation, is the massive difference  
between a diffusion and a condenser enlarger. yes, I've always known  
this, but in my images above it's vividly seen (compare "Grainy Decay"  
to "Montecasino Rearranged"). For the moment, I prefer the softer  
grain of a diffuser (although I do like grain, it has a different  
'character'). Your taste may vary :-)

RESOLUTION
With higher-ISO film, who cares about resolution? It's all about the  
look. I love that my one camera (OM-1n) can capture either a grainy,  
atmospheric, 3MP or less images at ISO3200, or a smooth, superbly- 
detailed 35MP image. The fun is in taking the "right" kinds of images  
suited to the film currently loaded. Yes, it's all about Fun. For  
general work, I'd be very frustrated with the limitations.

Also, I often YEARN for colour! (It's spring... Macro/Flowers time!)  
But I promised myself, for at least a year, it's nothing but B&W.

kind regards to you all,
Dawid

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz