Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,765   Posts: 1,484,090   Online: 993
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,122
    Images
    2
    The latest version is definitely an improvement. Since you are asking for "advice". I would try dodging the rock wall in the foreground a little. Along with that I would increase the contrast of the buildings on the left and the rock wall. The image is pretty much divided in half with the upper half (sky) pulling my eye toward it. I think these changes will add more balance to the image. Worth a try?

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaggysk8 View Post
    Ok well, the first one was grade 2, 33 secs and 30 secs of burning on the sky. The second one is grade 2.5 45 secs on the sky then 33 secs all over then 25 secs on the lower grass and 25 secs on the tree to the right.
    Now the 3rd one is grade 2.5 for 60 secs on the sky and top part of trees then grade 3.5 for 33 secs all over then burning in the trees and grass for another 45 secs.

    And yes it is lower Hardingstone, i didn't think anyone would know!
    Thanks for that. Hardingstone isn't that far from me and there a nice short circular walk there which I enjoy and I thought that I recognised it.

    Back to what you did. In summary it sounds as if you dodged everything below the top part of the trees while you gave the sky 60 sec at G2.5. Then you gave the whole print 33secs at G3.5 so the sky had a total of 93 secs of which 60 was G2.5 and 33 was G3.5. I may have got this wrong as the sky in version 3 looks much as it did in version 2. I had assumed that the sky was given only G2.5 in version 3 and not an additional exposure of 33 secs at G3.5

    Finally you shaded the sky and burned in the trees and grass at G3.5 for an additional 45 secs

    So the sky had two different exposures at two different grades of G2.5 and G3.5. The houses section had one exposure of 33 secs at one grade G3.5 and the grass and trees were additionally burned in for 45 secs at G3.5, giving them about 1,5 times the exposure for the house.


    The next point is somewhat irrelevant to your print dodging and burning as it has worked well for you but I was surprised at two things.

    1. The total exposure time required unless this was a very big print.

    2. The relatively subtle effect of what seem to quite long burns


    Just as a matter of interest what aperture did you use and what was the print size?

    My Durst M605 with only a 75W bulb would turn my prints almost black at these exposures even at 8x10

    Thanks

    pentaxuser

  3. #23
    Shaggysk8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    465
    Images
    65
    Yes that is all correct, I am not sure what bulb I have in my enlarger I have never looked, I use f11 I like long exposures I am never in a rush and it gives me time to sit, although this is my first bit of the dodge and burn and they are only 8x10 prints so not to big, when i also do some of the added exposure i move about a lot just in a nice slow motion rather than a consistant burn so that might be the reason for not a massive difference.

  4. #24
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,989
    Images
    280
    Much better! The picture is more three dimensional now, and feels more natural to look at.

    Continue to think about what you do critically, experiment, try new things, go crazy and push the limits and go beyond to see what happens.

    With the long exposure times you have, you may be entering the realm of reciprocity failure of your paper, which is why you don't see much difference. Try opening up to f/8. Your print will still be sharp.

    You are well on your way.

    - Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaggysk8 View Post
    Ok I had another go!

    Now please remember I have not made any proper masks yet although I will at the weekend.

    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  5. #25
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    11,588
    Images
    59
    You may already be doing this, but in case you didn't know, a test print trimmed along the top of the trees makes an excellent dodging tool when you are trying to burn in sky.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  6. #26
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    689
    I think you've done quite nicely in progressing the print to the point you have, given the seemingly flat contrast in the scene.

    You may want to take a look at Making a Proof or Making a Fine Art Print in the Darkroom Techniques section of my blog.

  7. #27
    Shaggysk8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    465
    Images
    65
    ROL, good blog and good plug thank you

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin