Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] ( OM ) Indecent exposure

Subject: Re: [OM] ( OM ) Indecent exposure
From: "Jim Nichols" <jhnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:15:34 -0600
Brian,

I do encounter sky occasionally.

Kodachrome slide from 1964, scanned with Dimage Scan Dual II:
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Presidential+Fleet+at+Andrews+AFB+1964.jpg.html

Oly E-510 with Leica lens, 2009:
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Power.tif.html

Unfortunately, these skies don't contain much useful detail.

E-510 and ZD 14-54, 2008:
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/Clouds.tif.html

I still like your landscapes.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Swale" <bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 4:46 PM
Subject: [OM] ( OM ) Indecent exposure


> On thinking about discussion of my landscapes, it strikes me that the 
> heart
> of the matter (problem, if there is one) lies with the inability of OM 
> digital to
> cope with a wide range of illumination.
>
> Thinks of Ansel Adams who pioneered and rationalised thought on this
> topic. Hence his Zone System.      Zone 10??
>
> Allied with this is the clever or not so clever computer programming 
> inside
> the E-3 and E-510.  The E-1 is a camera I relate to more; pity Olympus
> didn't offer an option for 10+ megapixels inside the E-1 body ...
>
> Take for example, Nathan, CH Ling, Jim Nichols, Marc, and often Wayne
> Harridge; their photos frequently exclude sky. They are of concrete, 
> tarseal,
> buildings, people, indoors, closeup flowers.  There is not a wide range of
> illumination where the viewer might expect good detail in all parts - dark 
> and
> light.
> And their images have good exposure in part (I suggest) because there is
> no or little sky.
> Ansel Adams managed this with B&W which generally has far greater
> latitude than digital or colour transparency, but even he developed a 
> system
> to get the most out of the range..
> And incidentally, the wider range that colour print film copes with is the 
> main
> reason I shoot so much print film rather than transparency film.
>
> For my sins and preference, I shoot mainly landscape; though my g/f 
> prefers
> my flower shots and a set I took of male-female flowers (see this lot on
> facebook)
> http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=9275&id=1027725807&l=cc7871c
> adf
>
> so for landscapes I have to do better with managing the cameras which
> have the most pixies.
> Among the options I am considering currently, I include: (a) the Ambico
> system of graduated filters to darken the sky. I have found all the 
> filters and
> holders but can't find the shade box. There are some on eBay. This will
> lessen the "range of illumination" emanating from the bright sky problem.
>
> (b) Using something like the OM4 to set exposure as I already do for my
> manual film cameras - if I have an interesting scene where I will want to 
> try a
> range of compositions (and I know that the E-3 will alter the exposure for
> every composition even though the illumination of the scene has not
> changed one iota), I will want to set one reliable combination of speed 
> and
> aperture on manual and leave that constant through the set of shots.
>
> (c) avoid including sky -  but there are many times when I might want to
> have 80% sky but still require to see detail on the ground.
>
> (d) and having stabilised exposure, I also have to simultaneously find a 
> way
> to cause the camera to focus on a spot I decide upon - be it near or far -
> while I move the frame to get the composition I want. Easy with film - but
> digital ?
>
> As an aside, if you wondered why I spent two hours photographing Mt Cook
> et al; here's a shot in the exact same area, under very different weather
> conditions. A good view is NOT guaranteed.
> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=186819&l=be8beb2d85&id=10277
> 25807
>
> I guess I am feeling grumpy this morning about several sets of issues 
> where
> computers are at the core; this Windows machine- the other day it said I 
> had
> just 900MB free -  and now it has 3.3 Gb free. What has it deleted??
> Digital cameras and their computer management, and last but not least, I
> have just taken my 4x4 to hospital because at least in part one or more of 
> its
> durned computers is/are misbehaving - AGAIN !! I bought that thing to
> reliably take me to where the scenes are.  Rant over.
>
> Brian Swale.
> -- 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
> 


-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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