OMG, film shots?

I've been lurking here for some time, with little reason to participate.
Don't do humming birds, don't do digital, don't do personal attacks.
So, the recent postings of film shots pried me loose.
Here are some recent shots at Boston's MFA.

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...0/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg

Leica M7, 50mm Elmar-M , f/11 @ ~ 1 sec; XP2 @ 320. You'll have to take
my word for it: no EXIF data.

HFL

In article
,
Draco wrote:

On Aug 25, 8:26*am, Harry Lockwood wrote:
I've been lurking here for some time, with little reason to participate. *
Don't do humming birds, don't do digital, don't do personal attacks.
So, the recent postings of film shots pried me loose.
Here are some recent shots at Boston's MFA.

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...://www.pbase.c
om/hlockwood/image/100749740/original.jpghttp://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/imag
e/100518941/original.jpg

Leica M7, 50mm Elmar-M , f/11 @ ~ 1 sec; XP2 @ 320. *You'll have to take
my word for it: no EXIF data.

HFL

Didn't know that Boston's MFA allowed tripods. Cool.

Nice work. Tone and contrast looks good. Brightness of wall behind
person at railing in the first image draws my eye to it a bit to much.
A little distracting.
If you had moved a bit more to the right you would have had the full
frame of the painting and not as much the empty hall on the right.
The second and third images are good space images. Showing
where you are and what may be going on there. The third one I felt
that if you had paned a bit more to the left and gotten in the rise of
the
escalader it would allowed your eye to roam around the image better.

But then again it is my two cents worth.

Keep up the good work.

Draco

Thanks for the comments, Draco. No tripods allowed, so I had to find a
flat surface for the camera. That limited the FOV somewhat.

HFL

Harry Lockwood wrote,on my timestamp of 25/08/2008 10:26 PM:

So, the recent postings of film shots pried me loose.

Good for you! Better late than never!

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...0/original.jpg

nup, so-so. sorry.

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg

this one definitely rings my bell!
XP2 is simply phenomenal for these difficult
lighting situations. I presume you used XP2 Super?


Leica M7, 50mm Elmar-M , f/11 @ ~ 1 sec; XP2 @ 320. You'll have to take
my word for it: no EXIF data.

Happens in the best families!

Just spent the evening slapping exif info back
into my scanned images...

In article
,
Annika1980 wrote:

On Aug 25, 8:26*am, Harry Lockwood wrote:

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...0/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg

Leica M7, 50mm Elmar-M , f/11 @ ~ 1 sec; XP2 @ 320. *You'll have to take
my word for it: no EXIF data.

Nice enough shots, especially given the limitations of the equipment
you were forced to use.
But is it just me or does the color seem just a bit off on these?

Limitations, limitations. Life is such a struggle.

(Edit: of course, only the first two shots were at ~ 1 sec exposure.)

HFL

In article ,
Noons wrote:

Harry Lockwood wrote,on my timestamp of 25/08/2008 10:26 PM:

So, the recent postings of film shots pried me loose.

Good for you! Better late than never!

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...0/original.jpg

nup, so-so. sorry.

No problem.

http://www.pbase.com/hlockwood/image...1/original.jpg

this one definitely rings my bell!
XP2 is simply phenomenal for these difficult
lighting situations. I presume you used XP2 Super?

Yes, XP2 Super, ISO 400, rated at 320; great exposure latitude.


Leica M7, 50mm Elmar-M , f/11 @ ~ 1 sec; XP2 @ 320. You'll have to take
my word for it: no EXIF data.

Happens in the best families!

Just spent the evening slapping exif info back
into my scanned images...

In article
,
Annika1980 wrote:

On Aug 25, 8:26*am, Harry Lockwood wrote:
I've been lurking here for some time, with little reason to participate. *
Don't do humming birds, don't do digital, don't do personal attacks.
So, the recent postings of film shots pried me loose.

I can raise the dead.

Who Rules ???

Like film, I've been around for a long time, and neither of us is giving
up the ghost soon.

HFL

Annika1980 wrote:


I can raise the dead.

..and yet you can't raise your own moral values to the point of not
needing to steal the work of others.

You are a thief, Bret Douglas.




mike (of broken record fame)



--
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /
/ /\ \ /'Think Tanks Cleaned Cheap'/ /\ \/ /
/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/

Densa International©
For the OTHER two percent.



Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage,
I block all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail,
Google Groups or HOTMAIL address.
I also filter everything from a .cn server.


For solutions which may work for you, please check:
http://improve-usenet.org/

Annika1980 wrote:

On Aug 25, 8:26 am, Harry Lockwood wrote:
I've been lurking here for some time, with little reason to participate.
Don't do humming birds, don't do digital, don't do personal attacks.
So, the recent postings of film shots pried me loose.

I can raise the dead.

Who Rules ???

Sure as hell not you!
When's the last time you actually contributed something of merit around
here? (No, the all-too-common fluffing of your insatiable ego does NOT
count.) If you can't/won't participate in a positive manner, kindly STFU.

Greg Campbell wrote,on my timestamp of 27/08/2008 12:48 PM:
Annika1980 wrote:

I can raise the dead.

If you can't/won't participate in a positive manner, kindly STFU.

that would be a first for this moron...