|
|
|
-
How does she do it?
I have just had the good fortune to stumble across the work of Narelle Autio (http://www.in-public.com/NarelleAutio/gallery/75). It has absolutely made my day... what beautiful photographs.
Can anyone shed any light on how she would go about achieving such wonderful imagery?
Adam
-
Looks to me like she shoots chromes, and makes sure in her exposures that everything is held back, and to hell with the shadows. I used to get a similar look using this technique with the old reversal motion picture films. There may some other way besides this. From her bio it doesn't sound like she is a digihed.
-
She takes risks. Not afraid to get her feet wet. Pays attention to details. Mindful of light and beach culture in her native Australia. Celebrates life and enjoys people.
She won a top prize a few years ago from Leica. For underwater she uses a Nikonos. Shoots transparency film. But the technical mumbo jumbo isn't important.
What's important is she gets out there with a camera and uses it.
http://www.walterpcalahan.com/
Last edited by Pinholemaster; 09-24-2006 at 07:13 PM. Click to view previous post history.
-
 Originally Posted by Pinholemaster
She takes risks. Not afraid to get her feet wet. Pays attention to details. Mindful of light and beach culture in her native Australia. Celebrates life and enjoys people.
She won a top prize a few years ago from Leica. For underwater she uses a Nikonos. Shoots transparency film. But the technical mumbo jumbo isn't important.
What's important is she gets out their with a camera and uses it.
I'd bet you are right! Shucks, I should try it myself sometime and see what happens. 
-
Besides what JBrunner said, there's no "trick" to her photography. I think she just studied a subject she was passionate about and spent a lot of time working on it. Her lens, her film, pretty much all of this is irrelevant; it's about her eye.
Using film since before it was hip.
"One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11
My APUG Portfolio
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
Originally Posted by mhv
Her lens, her film, pretty much all of this is irrelevant; it's about her eye.
I wish more people thought like this. I try to think like this and I try to do this--use my eye--it is a lifelong challenge but I feel up to it. A roller coaster ride to be sure!
Wesmore Digital
www.wesmoredigital.ca
-
Yes!-me too. In not thinking you think. When you walk, walk, when digging, dig....above all don't wobble.
"He took to writing poetry and visiting the elves: and though many shook their heads and touched their foreheads and said 'Poor old Baggins!' and though few believed any of his tales, he remained very happy till the end of his days, and those were extraordinarily long "- JRR Tolkien, ' The Hobbit '.
-
Spectacular photos of the Oz beach culture. Makes me want to hop on a plane and head back down there. An afternoon at Manley would sure beat a one here at the desk!
Others noted she uses chromes. From those blues and greens, I'm guessing Velvia?
-
Hi all.
Thanks for taking the time to respond, but I have to disagree that the 'technical mumbo jumbo' isn't important. I think everyone agrees that the difference between a snapshot and a compelling photograph is the photographer's eye. If you are using film (as we all are on this forum), then the camera isn't important either. However, the choice of film and how you process it, whether you shoot chromes and expose for the highlights and 'to hell with the shadows' (thanks JBrunner), shoot B&W for the greater exposure latitude afforded you, use filters, or push/pull your film, is important. It is part of the craft of photography, it predetermines the palette you are using, and *is* largely technical.
Personally, I am just getting into developing my own film and have a lot to learn. Emulating somebodyelse's photo technique is a very instructive pathway (for me) which includes learning about what you can do with particular film-and-chemical combinations. I have shot a lot of Velvia on the beach here in Barcelona, but there looks to be a colour shift in Narelle's photos, almost as if they were shot using street lamps at night time using daylight film!
Do chromes suffer from a colour shift if you push the film?
Any ideas?
Thanks again,
Adam
-
Agree that copying other shooters is helpful in finding your own road. It is oddly looked down upon in photography, where is in something like creative writting emmulation is a common pedagogical tool.
As for the case at hand, I have no idea. But I'd start by taking Kodak E200 and shoot it at 1600 and push 3. See what comes up. You'll probably only get 1200 out of it and the extended push will just alter dmax, but see, and you can always put some black back in in post. Work from there to shoot with a light amber or sepia filter. Beats me really. Maybe take EPN and push it 2 or 3 stops, and make sure to tell me how that goes; I'd be interested.
|
|
Adv Reply
