Sunrise

[Barry Kirsten]

My WPPD was a disaster! I spent 5 hours in the morning feeding hay for a farmer who is permanently on crutches and trying to run his 970 acre farm on his own. It was cold and windy and most unsuitable for long exposure photographs outdoors, so when I finally got home for lunch I tried an indoor shot for WPPD. But because I was exhausted I rushed the shot, mucking up the lighting, and wouldn't bother submitting it. Next year...

Yesterday I pointed the new 2x3 at the sunrise and got something decent;
Sunrise676.jpg

0.2 mm ems aperture, 36 mm from film, f/180. 4 sec exposure on Efke 50 film developed in PMK.

[kier]

"something decent"...pff... that's an awesome shot!

[Barry Kirsten]

Thank you. Even that posed problems. My digital imaging technique is crap... the scan came out with colour casts whether I scanned it in greyscale or RGB; I use Pixelmator rather than PS, which is limited when it comes to toning; and inkjet printing, well forget it! I'll have to go back to wet darkroom work - nothing digital comes close.

[blindpig]

Terrific picture Barry,what an amazing shot! You sure must be proud of it.Be sure and print it in your darkroom.Wish we didn't live so far apart I'd really like to see that print.
Don

[kier]

Are you making it a grayscale image in pixelmator? Some scanning software save grayscale photos as a RGB image, allowing color cast. But if you have a color cast on a grayscale image file, then it's likely your monitor needing calibration.

Digital workflow is tough though, just as tough as the darkroom, but it's a skill that can be mastered with time.

[DRC]

I agree with Kier -- "decent" is quite an understatement.

Terrific image!

(What kind of scanner are you using?)

[Ned.Lewis]

I don't know about scanning film but I love that photograph!

[Barry Kirsten]

Thanks all for your nice comments. I guess the reason I'm not overjoyed with the end result is due to the digital aspect. I haven't found the secret of producing acceptable images with the gear I have. Sadly, 12 years ago I parted with my darkroom gear when I returned to Melbourne for study and had neither time nor space for a darkroom. I've now replaced the camera gear, but not the darkroom. I really miss being able to do contacts and enlargements on 'real' paper like Gallerie and Record Rapid, which used to be my favourites. It'll take time to afford the equipment and supplies, which are not cheap. Meanwhile I make do with what I have. Dave, my scanner is an Epson V600 for small formats, and a HP 4890 for 4x5. The HP was given to me, and sadly I can't get good results at all from it - I think it's a cheapie. Kier, I did a monitor calibration only a few days ago, but will re-do it as I agree that it's a possible factor. I've never been happy with the Apple monitor calibration - seems so arbitrary. When I get around to printing this, I'll send you a print, Don, perhaps in this year's print exchange. Thanks again for the kind and helpful comments.

[Barry Kirsten]

Thank you kindly, Ned.

[kier]

I totally get the frustration. I'm in a very similar boat, and couldn't take my darkroom stuff with me when I moved. The digital darkroom is very frustrating until you "get it". I also have an Epson v600. I don't shoot 4x5 film, just paper, until I can afford a v800. Anyways, I won't belabor the point. Send me a private message if you'd like to hear more ramblings of how to get good results.

Still a great photo!