If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
In article , PeterN
wrote: Itls digital remmeber either a 1 or a 0 unlike film. a silver halide crystal on film is 1 or 0, depending if light hit it or not. No it is not it has levels the individual molecules do. it's exposed or it's not. 1 or 0. Ansel Adams might not agree with you. actually, he would. Most of us, who take other than line prints, end up with shades of gray in there images. which is the result of individual silver halide crystals being exposed or not exposed. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Jan 18, 2019, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 1/15/2019 10:03 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 15, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/14/2019 2:53 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 14, 2019, Carlos E.R. wrote (in article ): On 13/01/2019 17.15, David B. wrote: FYI (copy/paste) "In-camera double exposures are wonderfully creative and work very well for portraits. I love creating these in the summertime to take advantage of flowers in bloom. However, Autumn is a great time of year for double exposures as well. Fall leaves, pine trees, and holiday decor work really well with this style and the opportunities to experiment are endless. In order to create double exposures in-camera, you need to have a camera with this feature built-in. I’m using a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV but there are a number of cameras with the feature available. You can also create a double exposure look using an editing program like Photoshop but I find that creating these in camera is a lot more fun and can yield unexpected results." https://s3.amazonaws.com/viewbug_com...leExposure.pdf Double exposure in film, I can understand. But a digital camera would just add the pixel values from two files, thus being no different from postprocessing on the computer. To be valid, the sensor would have to be exposed, and then, without reading it, exposing it again. Are they really doing it? Nikon, Canon, and Fujifilm (and probably others) have a multi-exposure feature/mode which allows for two separate exposures, on two frames, which are blended into a single file. It is a bit of a novelty and nothing that cannot be done in post. Not true. What is not true? There are images that I take using ME that cannot be duplicated in post. I gave an example. Multiple exposure, one image, walking around the tree. The effects and color were added in post. https://www.dropbox.com/s/2c7cul49u4jgo9b/tree1024.jpg?dl=0 There is only one question which comes to mind. Why? Because I want to. I know, I know. ;-) I know that type of image is not your thing, Well the two of us have known that for years. but that's why Ford is now making cars in different colors, including black. ....but first you would have to choose to buy a Ford over other manufacturers offerings, also available in a variety of colors including black. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:15:42 -0500, nospam
wrote: In article , PeterN wrote: Itls digital remmeber either a 1 or a 0 unlike film. a silver halide crystal on film is 1 or 0, depending if light hit it or not. No it is not it has levels the individual molecules do. it's exposed or it's not. 1 or 0. Ansel Adams might not agree with you. actually, he would. Most of us, who take other than line prints, end up with shades of gray in there images. which is the result of individual silver halide crystals being exposed or not exposed. The size of the developed silver crystal depends upon the number of atoms which were originally sensitised. Normally it takes at least 4 but it can be many more. Image density depends upon both the number of crystals developed/sq mm and the size of the crystals. Don't bother ... -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: Itls digital remmeber either a 1 or a 0 unlike film. a silver halide crystal on film is 1 or 0, depending if light hit it or not. No it is not it has levels the individual molecules do. it's exposed or it's not. 1 or 0. Ansel Adams might not agree with you. actually, he would. Most of us, who take other than line prints, end up with shades of gray in there images. which is the result of individual silver halide crystals being exposed or not exposed. The size of the developed silver crystal depends upon the number of atoms which were originally sensitised. Normally it takes at least 4 but it can be many more. Image density depends upon both the number of crystals developed/sq mm and the size of the crystals. otherwise known as film grain. faster film has larger crystals, resulting in grainier images. Don't bother ... i will anyway. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:00:17 -0500, PeterN
wrote: On 1/17/2019 9:23 AM, Savageduck wrote: snip I can remember some view cameras in the past which had the shutter, and shutter release on the lens with a cable release (before that they used a squeeze bulb). In that case the shutter had to be set in much the same way as the hammer on a single action firearm. With those deliberate, double, or multi exposures on a single plate, or sheet of film would be possible without worry of moving film out of frame register. I thought a lot of the later 4x5 view cameras of the type used by the press, had the shutter on the lens. Some that were used for portraits, architecture, & landscape, with slower film used a light protecting slide to expose the film. Most press view cameras were Speed Graphics. While they had shutters on the lens most also had the old wind-up blind focal plane shutter as well. See the images below where you can see focal plane shutters on the side behind the range finder. https://farm2.static.flickr.com/1218...e0499ab3_z.jpg http://momentscapture.com/ImageTemp/...all-Camera.jpg and a real oldie http://piercevaubel.com/cam/imagesno...y-4x5b-750.jpg The light-protecting slide was to protect the film/sheets/plates from light when the back was being changed. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 17:43:37 -0800, Savageduck
wrote: On Jan 18, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/15/2019 10:03 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 15, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/14/2019 2:53 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 14, 2019, Carlos E.R. wrote (in article ): On 13/01/2019 17.15, David B. wrote: FYI (copy/paste) "In-camera double exposures are wonderfully creative and work very well for portraits. I love creating these in the summertime to take advantage of flowers in bloom. However, Autumn is a great time of year for double exposures as well. Fall leaves, pine trees, and holiday decor work really well with this style and the opportunities to experiment are endless. In order to create double exposures in-camera, you need to have a camera with this feature built-in. I’m using a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV but there are a number of cameras with the feature available. You can also create a double exposure look using an editing program like Photoshop but I find that creating these in camera is a lot more fun and can yield unexpected results." https://s3.amazonaws.com/viewbug_com...leExposure.pdf Double exposure in film, I can understand. But a digital camera would just add the pixel values from two files, thus being no different from postprocessing on the computer. To be valid, the sensor would have to be exposed, and then, without reading it, exposing it again. Are they really doing it? Nikon, Canon, and Fujifilm (and probably others) have a multi-exposure feature/mode which allows for two separate exposures, on two frames, which are blended into a single file. It is a bit of a novelty and nothing that cannot be done in post. Not true. What is not true? There are images that I take using ME that cannot be duplicated in post. I gave an example. Multiple exposure, one image, walking around the tree. The effects and color were added in post. https://www.dropbox.com/s/2c7cul49u4jgo9b/tree1024.jpg?dl=0 There is only one question which comes to mind. Why? Because I want to. I know, I know. ;-) I know that type of image is not your thing, Well the two of us have known that for years. but that's why Ford is now making cars in different colors, including black. ...but first you would have to choose to buy a Ford over other manufacturers offerings, also available in a variety of colors including black. And then they invented DUCO. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Jan 18, 2019, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ): On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 17:43:37 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 18, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/15/2019 10:03 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 15, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/14/2019 2:53 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 14, 2019, Carlos E.R. wrote (in article ): On 13/01/2019 17.15, David B. wrote: FYI (copy/paste) "In-camera double exposures are wonderfully creative and work very well for portraits. I love creating these in the summertime to take advantage of flowers in bloom. However, Autumn is a great time of year for double exposures as well. Fall leaves, pine trees, and holiday decor work really well with this style and the opportunities to experiment are endless. In order to create double exposures in-camera, you need to have a camera with this feature built-in. I’m using a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV but there are a number of cameras with the feature available. You can also create a double exposure look using an editing program like Photoshop but I find that creating these in camera is a lot more fun and can yield unexpected results." https://s3.amazonaws.com/viewbug_com...leExposure.pdf Double exposure in film, I can understand. But a digital camera would just add the pixel values from two files, thus being no different from postprocessing on the computer. To be valid, the sensor would have to be exposed, and then, without reading it, exposing it again. Are they really doing it? Nikon, Canon, and Fujifilm (and probably others) have a multi-exposure feature/mode which allows for two separate exposures, on two frames, which are blended into a single file. It is a bit of a novelty and nothing that cannot be done in post. Not true. What is not true? There are images that I take using ME that cannot be duplicated in post. I gave an example. Multiple exposure, one image, walking around the tree. The effects and color were added in post. https://www.dropbox.com/s/2c7cul49u4jgo9b/tree1024.jpg?dl=0 There is only one question which comes to mind. Why? Because I want to. I know, I know. ;-) I know that type of image is not your thing, Well the two of us have known that for years. but that's why Ford is now making cars in different colors, including black. ...but first you would have to choose to buy a Ford over other manufacturers offerings, also available in a variety of colors including black. And then they invented DUCO. I believe that auto paints have moved on since the days of DUCO (hard to find today) with acrylic polyurethane enamels. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 22:06:25 -0500, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: Itls digital remmeber either a 1 or a 0 unlike film. a silver halide crystal on film is 1 or 0, depending if light hit it or not. No it is not it has levels the individual molecules do. it's exposed or it's not. 1 or 0. Ansel Adams might not agree with you. actually, he would. Most of us, who take other than line prints, end up with shades of gray in there images. which is the result of individual silver halide crystals being exposed or not exposed. The size of the developed silver crystal depends upon the number of atoms which were originally sensitised. Normally it takes at least 4 but it can be many more. Image density depends upon both the number of crystals developed/sq mm and the size of the crystals. otherwise known as film grain. faster film has larger crystals, resulting in grainier images. Don't bother ... i will anyway. To your regret. See http://www.tmax100.com/photo/pdf/film.pdf "The purpose of this complex essay is to demonstrate the following: •Fundamental film particles (silver particles) are distinct from film grain •Silver particles are an order-of-magnitude smaller than common film grain •Film grain is a perceived property; due to visual clumping of smaller particles through emulsion •Resolution of film is related to the size and distribution of fundamental particles in the emulsion •Film grain limits the ability of the smaller “fundamental particles” to resolve image detail •Imaging film grain is an inadequate method of determining the resolution of a film." Film grain and crystals are not synonymous. But then you always knew that ... or else it's wrong. Don't bother. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 19:45:37 -0800, Savageduck
wrote: On Jan 18, 2019, Eric Stevens wrote (in ): On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 17:43:37 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 18, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/15/2019 10:03 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 15, 2019, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 1/14/2019 2:53 PM, Savageduck wrote: On Jan 14, 2019, Carlos E.R. wrote (in article ): On 13/01/2019 17.15, David B. wrote: FYI (copy/paste) "In-camera double exposures are wonderfully creative and work very well for portraits. I love creating these in the summertime to take advantage of flowers in bloom. However, Autumn is a great time of year for double exposures as well. Fall leaves, pine trees, and holiday decor work really well with this style and the opportunities to experiment are endless. In order to create double exposures in-camera, you need to have a camera with this feature built-in. I’m using a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV but there are a number of cameras with the feature available. You can also create a double exposure look using an editing program like Photoshop but I find that creating these in camera is a lot more fun and can yield unexpected results." https://s3.amazonaws.com/viewbug_com...leExposure.pdf Double exposure in film, I can understand. But a digital camera would just add the pixel values from two files, thus being no different from postprocessing on the computer. To be valid, the sensor would have to be exposed, and then, without reading it, exposing it again. Are they really doing it? Nikon, Canon, and Fujifilm (and probably others) have a multi-exposure feature/mode which allows for two separate exposures, on two frames, which are blended into a single file. It is a bit of a novelty and nothing that cannot be done in post. Not true. What is not true? There are images that I take using ME that cannot be duplicated in post. I gave an example. Multiple exposure, one image, walking around the tree. The effects and color were added in post. https://www.dropbox.com/s/2c7cul49u4jgo9b/tree1024.jpg?dl=0 There is only one question which comes to mind. Why? Because I want to. I know, I know. ;-) I know that type of image is not your thing, Well the two of us have known that for years. but that's why Ford is now making cars in different colors, including black. ...but first you would have to choose to buy a Ford over other manufacturers offerings, also available in a variety of colors including black. And then they invented DUCO. I believe that auto paints have moved on since the days of DUCO (hard to find today) with acrylic polyurethane enamels. But in the days of black model Ts they used to paint with a brush. They didn't use paint pots, the paint was fed by gravity through the handle of the brush via a hose. This made changing colors a monumental task which is why they preferred to stick to the standard color (black). But you could order a car with a non-standard color including red and I believe yellow. Sprayable quick-drying DUCO fixed all that and changing colors on the production line eventually became routine. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Tips for Mastering In-Camera,Double Exposure Portraits
On 1/18/19 10:08 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:00:17 -0500, PeterN wrote: On 1/17/2019 9:23 AM, Savageduck wrote: snip I can remember some view cameras in the past which had the shutter, and shutter release on the lens with a cable release (before that they used a squeeze bulb). In that case the shutter had to be set in much the same way as the hammer on a single action firearm. With those deliberate, double, or multi exposures on a single plate, or sheet of film would be possible without worry of moving film out of frame register. I thought a lot of the later 4x5 view cameras of the type used by the press, had the shutter on the lens. Some that were used for portraits, architecture, & landscape, with slower film used a light protecting slide to expose the film. Most press view cameras were Speed Graphics. While they had shutters on the lens most also had the old wind-up blind focal plane shutter as well. See the images below where you can see focal plane shutters on the side behind the range finder. https://farm2.static.flickr.com/1218...e0499ab3_z.jpg http://momentscapture.com/ImageTemp/...all-Camera.jpg and a real oldie http://piercevaubel.com/cam/imagesno...y-4x5b-750.jpg The light-protecting slide was to protect the film/sheets/plates from light when the back was being changed. There were many types of the 4x5 "Press" cameras, each with their own model number/name. I don't know if Mr Stevens is an expert on the various types; what he says above is accurate. His first example photo is similar to the one I used years ago. Generally, a "press" camera folds up to a compact size, and is relatively easy to handhold. "View" cameras usually are designed for tripod mount, had no (or little) ergonomics for hand holding, and had substantial swings on tilts for the lens and the film. I've used a press camera years ago. It had a shutter in the lens and a focal plane shutter. The FP shutter ran vertically, had four slits of different widths, and had 4(?) spring tension settings. There was a chart on the camera showing the shutter speed for each slit and tension combination. You set the tension and wound the shutter until the proper slit was in position. Then you removed the dark-slide, and triggered the shutter. In the very old days, days of very slow film speeds, the film was exposed by removing and replacing a lens cap. The camera would be set up, the film holder inserted, lens cap put in place, darkslide removed. Then the film was exposed by removing the lens cap. Using the dark slide as a shutter would work, but have two problems: First, possible camera movement. Second, the one end of the film would receive more exposure than the other end. -- Ken Hart |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WANTED TO BUY: Revere 3M model 154 double 8mm magazine loaded movie camera | Dwight D. Eisenhower | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 0 | November 2nd 07 10:32 PM |
RAW vs tif vs jpg (was Double Exposure) | Robert Peirce | Digital SLR Cameras | 65 | March 2nd 07 05:34 PM |
Double Exposure | Robert Peirce | Digital SLR Cameras | 45 | February 25th 07 04:24 PM |
Why no cameras with double exposure ? | Alan Meyer | Digital Photography | 1 | October 14th 05 09:38 AM |
Double exposure with Cannon D10 How ? | sfts | Digital Photography | 4 | October 26th 04 12:54 AM |