Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,546   Posts: 1,572,887   Online: 1011
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by roy
    One of the types of multiple exposure that interests me, is the effect created by UK photographer and teacher John Blakemore, who achieved a 'transparent' look where he was building up images rather in the form of layers. Looking at a still life for example, you would realise that there were other images underneath, not strikingly obvious at first glance. That, I would like to try but am not sure how to go about it. He also made some images in a 'windscape' series, where the foliage on trees took on the appearance of cotton wool and I assume that was by using the technique outlined by Les.
    Roy

    John's still life images are photographed at various stages as he arranges them so that those elements that were in the frame as he started to construct it receive full exposure and those placed in the set up part the way through receive only partial exposure hence the ghost like appearance.

    The wind series that you mention were a mix of multiple and long single exposures in very windy conditions. As I write I'm looking at two of his multiple exposure water images and one of the trees in Ambergate Derbyshire where he shot the "Leila" series. They have been a constant source of inspiration and pleasure in the 20 years that I have had them.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,990
    Images
    1
    I've used Les's method (multiple short exposures to make one long exposure) for some seascapes although I have used mental gymnastics to work out how many exposures to make! The method Les has suggested above looks much easier for my brain assuming I've got a calculator handy! Why I chose to use this method rather than the usual one long exposure is, in some circumstances (eg. waves flowing around a rock) in one 8sec exposure you might get 1 or 2 significant movements, where with the multiple exposures you can pick you slices of time and incorporate more movement in your shot. You can even time the shots so that other elements (like people, birds) aren't in any of the shots. The end result is definetly different, and something that needs to be experimented with.

  3. #13
    roy
    roy is offline
    roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    West Sussex
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Les McLean
    Roy
    John's still life images are photographed at various stages as he arranges them so that those elements that were in the frame as he started to construct it receive full exposure and those placed in the set up part the way through receive only partial exposure hence the ghost like appearance.
    I suppose this would lead to dense negatives if the picture were to be made too complicated.

    The wind series that you mention were a mix of multiple and long single exposures in very windy conditions. As I write I'm looking at two of his multiple exposure water images and one of the trees in Ambergate Derbyshire where he shot the "Leila" series. They have been a constant source of inspiration and pleasure in the 20 years that I have had them.
    One of C.W.'s first lecture workshops under the 'Quest' banner was with John Blakemore where he talked about his tulip obsession. Although we did not see any of his other subject matter, the photographs we were shown were excellent. While I have participated in several of your practical workshops and learnt a lot I might say, John's lecture was not so much about technical aspects of photography but the reasons for it all and although we did have technical question and answer later, he was certainly an inspitation to us.
    Roy Groombridge.

    Cogito, ergo sum.
    (Descartes)

  4. #14
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    [QUOTE=roy]I suppose this would lead to dense negatives if the picture were to be made too complicated.

    Roy,

    The negatives you would produce would be just normal densities, if such a thing exists. Dense negatives are the result of overexposure and/or over development but adding elements into a still life subject part the way through the exposure cycle will not result in over exposure for you do not change the exposure that you had decided on at the start.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    25
    I saw some interesting multiple exposure prints last year by Lucien Clergue at the John Stevenson Gallery in NYC (http://www.johnstevenson-gallery.com...e_2002_tn.html). Apparently, Clergue takes daylight rated film, makes exposures indoors, and then lets the film sit for about a year, then goes out and exposures outdoors over the same negatives. The prints are very interesting. ....lyle

  6. #16
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    I wrote a long essay for this thread giving my experience. My browser crashed and it disappeared into nothingness. I don't have it in me to re type the whole thing.

    This discussion appears to be all B/W related. I will throw my 2p in about colour.

    Unlike b/w colour can stand over exposure. When I do multi-exposure shots of varying subject I never expose under 2/3 of stop (anything less produces insignificant noise) and try not to exceed a cumulative exposure of 0 1 stop over. I am careful about my set up and film. Fuji colour print film does not suffer over exposure as well as Kodak's portra film. When setting up if one of the exposures is to have greater significance I give it more exposure at the expense of others.

    I tend to add time for each exposure as follows:
    1st 2/3 under
    2nd 1/2 under
    3rd 1/3 under
    4th on the mark or 1/4 under

    Examples (please excuse the crap cc and the fact one of the images is flopped. I did these scans in a rush the night before a show and have never returned to fix them.):

    Last edited by mrcallow; 08-06-2004 at 11:36 AM. Click to view previous post history.

    *

  7. #17
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by lallan
    I saw some interesting multiple exposure prints last year by Lucien Clergue at the John Stevenson Gallery in NYC (http://www.johnstevenson-gallery.com...e_2002_tn.html). Apparently, Clergue takes daylight rated film, makes exposures indoors, and then lets the film sit for about a year, then goes out and exposures outdoors over the same negatives. The prints are very interesting. ....lyle
    VERY LARGE THANKS for leading me to this web site!!!

    There is some truly brilliant work here.... One of the most interesting series I've seen in a long time is the "Box" series by David Halliday.

    Again, THANKS!!
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  8. #18
    roy
    roy is offline
    roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    West Sussex
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,305
    [QUOTE=Les McLean][QUOTE=roy]I suppose this would lead to dense negatives if the picture were to be made too complicated.

    Roy,
    The negatives you would produce would be just normal densities, if such a thing exists. Dense negatives are the result of overexposure and/or over development but adding elements into a still life subject part the way through the exposure cycle will not result in over exposure for you do not change the exposure that you had decided on at the start.
    Sorry Les, I am with you now ! Thanks.
    Roy Groombridge.

    Cogito, ergo sum.
    (Descartes)

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Jungleland, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    87
    Images
    2
    This guy has an interesting multiple exposure technique. Looks like it might be fun to try.
    http://www.garryblack.com/multitips.htm

  10. #20
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    I sometimes shoot upward of 10 or more images pers negative. Here are a couple of examples, and when the darn scanner quits having a hissy I can show 3 more. It was a series I was doing to experiment with the Button on my Mamiya's. The first one was a pure accident. I didn't know I had it depressed. That negative has about 35 images on it. Yet it is the least dense of the bunch.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails multiimage 3.jpg   multimage 4.jpg  

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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