Alberta Canada

File: 000080940004.jpg (779KB, 800x788px) Image search: [Google]

779KB, 800x788px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2079
Image Height	2048
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:08 22:42:11
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	788

File: 000080950012.jpg (946KB, 800x788px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 800x788px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2079
Image Height	2048
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:08 22:42:19
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	788

>>3102136
Kys

File: 000080930011.jpg (859KB, 800x788px) Image search: [Google]

859KB, 800x788px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2079
Image Height	2048
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:08 22:41:42
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	788

Based Noritsu Kino.

File: 000080740034.jpg (1MB, 800x1207px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x1207px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2048
Image Height	3089
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:08 22:41:55
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	1207

File: 000025240021.jpg (2MB, 1440x955px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x955px

>>3102142

Srs. Blessed lab scans.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3089
Image Height	2048
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:11 11:52:53
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1440
Image Height	955

>>3102145
top stuff, anon.

File: 000080960011.jpg (2MB, 1080x1064px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x1064px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2079
Image Height	2048
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:27 22:03:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	1064

Jk don't kys. You are better than 100% of the shit fuckers here with there le memepixels digishit cameras

>>3102148
do you have a bigger version of this scan? looks incredibly detailed and tonally smooth too.

File: 000080740032.jpg (4MB, 1717x2591px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1717x2591px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2048
Image Height	3089
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:24 22:13:40
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1717
Image Height	2591

File: 000080960011_hires.jpg (5MB, 1800x1773px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 1800x1773px

>>3102151

Here you are, biggest I can upload before file size error. Gotta love Fuji Pro 400.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2079
Image Height	2048
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:25 20:46:04
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1800
Image Height	1773

>>3102157
thank you anon. holy shit look at all that detail. 400h is incredible.

damn now i want a bronica.

File: 000025240018.jpg (2MB, 1470x2218px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1470x2218px

>>3102150

Hahah thanks KLJG.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2048
Image Height	3089
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:24 22:14:33
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1470
Image Height	2218

Hey fellow Bronica-bro, I checked out the Issuu link. Some thoughts:

The opening photo is probably the weakest of all. Why'd you choose to include it, and why the opening page? You should start any portfolio/publication with a bang to entice the reader to continue. That shot does everything but that.

The house spread is awesome, and the most interesting out of all the photos. A whole book of these shots would be great. This region has been photographed to hell and back, it's nice to see the actual lives of the region represented. I REALLY like how you have the prominent peak peaking out above the house in the right shot. A set of house shots with the various landmarks snuck into the frame would be top notch.

Maligne Lake photos = yawn at this point. The next page is poorly composed as well.

The next spread is quite boring too. I think you could work on your square compositions a bit more. It's tough shooting landscapes on 6x6, but definitely possible. Lots of your square images are heavily weighted to one side, resulting in unbalanced images.

The aerial-esque shot is nice and could work in a more successfully curated publication. That appearing amongst a book of house photos for example would be nice.

I get including people for scale, but the whole 'photo of person's back in the wilderness' is so played out at this point. I know its tough to go to such iconic locations and come back with unique images, but these are so predictable. Aesthetically they are nice, but they lack any additional details to take them above the flood of these images that are produced every week.

Page 19's square landscape is the most successful. The balance is mostly there and the person is small enough to lose their identity and create an air of mystery.

The foggy lake G1 shot is dope. Again, used in a better curated book with a more precise intent would be good.

>>3102159

It indeed is. To bad Fuji is doing a great job at killing off there film.

Bronica's are a steal compared to Hasselblad and Mamiya. Can get a kit for real cheap, and additional lenses don't cost much either. Great way to get into medium format.

>>3102170
cont...

I dig the 24-25 spread. This tells way more about the region than the typical Maligne Lake or Athabasca Falls photo.

The ender photo falls gets the same comments I had about the intro photo. It falls flat, and my last memory of the book is a snapshot of someone's back in the woods. Not too memorable.

All in all, I don't know what your goal is for this. If it's just a curated book for your memories, it's great. If there's suppose to be a deeper meaning or investigation going on it's a very confusing read.

You seem to have 3 narratives happening simultaneously. The house photos and the interior shot from page 24-25 all fall into one story. Then we have the typical landscape + small person stuff that dominates the book but isn't connected the former 'story' in any visual way. Finally we have the random, deadpan-esque photos such as the opener or the photo on page 14-15. I really don't understand why these are here. I imagine YOU had an idea for these and why they are here, but to an unacquainted viewer I don't get it. I spent my time going through the book and went through it a few times looking for connections between pages, and couldn't find a common thread tying this all together.

Not trying to bash your work, just opening up a dialogue and hoping to here some reasons for your choices. Again, if this is just a book for your memories ignore all this crap about 'story' and shit that I'm mentioning.

File: 000080730024.jpg (2MB, 2048x3089px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x3089px

>>3102170

#bronicabros

Really appreciate the feedback. I agree with you on all points. I feel as though some of the shots could work better in a different body of work, and perhaps the collection isn't the most cohesive. I do think I could revisit it and change up the flow and remove some shots.

There are definitely some cliches in here. It's so easy to end up with the same shot as everyone else. They are played out for a reason - the subject looks good at that same angle - but that's no excuse.

I do need to work on square compositions more. I'd say I shoot 35mm 90% of the time, only taking out the MF for vacations or some road trips, but have been making more of an effort to shoot with it.

I would have liked to shoot more shots like the houses. Walking through the town of banff was almost as exciting to me as the wilderness. Especially the older areas, original ski cottages and anything that wasn't a modern build. As someone who's into snowboarding and snowboard towns, it's obvious the role of big money is in pricing out the lower classes. It'll be a shame when every town ends up looking like Whistler with mega mansions.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	EZ Controller 6.11.003 (140225)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2048
Image Height	3089

>>3102173

Again thanks for the feedback. I don't take it as bashing at all.

I would say it leans towards being a book of memories, but I did hope for it to be a little body of work. There is some filler that probably should be removed, but I know at the time I was thinking "more = better". I totally agree there isn't something that connects all images. While traveling there, I did have the intention to shoot more of the house type photos. The older homes, relics from the "glory days", and make a conscious effort to seek out the less common areas. I would like to start shooting more portraits of people as well, to put a face to the area. That's another area I need to develop more. Everyone knows Banff for the mountains, lakes and trees but I don't think the rest of the area gets much credit or views. However I didn't shoot as much of that as I liked, or didn't think they we're worth showcasing.

wew some good shit, op

okay, took a peek at your book thing.

-i like how clean your scans are, the overall palette is consistent and just beautiful, fresh to the eyes.

-i think you should have cut the gf in photo to the minimum, its just distracting, to the point one turns the page trying to guess in what corner of the pic will the girl be located. id clone her out of most.

-there are three sets that interweave not so elegantly: houses, nature and interiors. nature is boring and redundant, could be cut to 1/4 of whats shown. houses is pretty tight, deserves its own book. interiors is very lacking and is the most interesting of all, that tv apparatus shot is gold, very soth. so it needs to decide if its an eyecandy book, or an americana book, or some sort of sociological commentary book.

-some solid shots, editing is ass, because you didnt sort well the subsets, borders incoherence. cover is garbage. could benefit from some text along the photos, but not for describing what youre looking at, but a more general view.

bump you cucks. you people tend to ignore personal photothreads nowadays, doesnt matter if theyre good or bad you simply dont look at them.

Nice stuff, it all looks very good.
I also think the rectangular shots have better composition, but I don't agree with 6x6 Provia anon that square shots being weighted to a side is bad.

But post all the shots in the thread, don't make us have to use the terrible Issuu interface.

>>3102754
That it's *necessarily bad*

>>3102332

Much thanks. Probably over did it with the girlfriend photos. I like to try and have a human element when possible if fitting and unfortunately everyone else around were awkward tourists. Need my friends to travel more.

Agreed with what you and other Anon mentioned about there being three sets throughout the book. I guess in my mind I figured that "they we're all shot in roughly the same area, so it must work together" but obviously that's not the case. I'm definitely interested in shooting similar subjects to the houses/tv so perhaps I can save those shots for a series down the road.

>>3102157
Did you just meter for shadows and fire away? The way the dynamic range is shown is pretty neat. I've never tried shooting film like that.

File: 1495842069217.jpg (78KB, 390x471px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 390x471px

>>3102754

Thanks. Will post some more when I'm on my other computer, but I have posted most of my favourites here.

If you want to see more of my "Work" check my instagram. @sometimeperhaps

>>3102152
Easy daytime Todd hido

File: jerome_miller-2.jpg (185KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1000x667px

>>3102908

Pretty much. With film there's a fairly large dynamic range, so you can meter for the shadows and retain detail, while still keeping detail in the shadows.

These days I'll just rate my 400iso film at 200iso, which is an even lazier way of doing things.

Next time your shooting try a frame metering for shadows and one for highlights/normal.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1D Mark IV
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Andrew Miller
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:18 11:00:36
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/4.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/4.5
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Subject Distance	1.89 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3102913
Wtf does metering for shadows mean. Explain this to me. How do I meter for shadows if I shoot with a cell phone?

File: Araki .jpg (46KB, 736x415px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 736x415px

>>3102915

Someone call me out if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that metering for shadows is not quite the same on a digital device, as it doesn't capture shadow details as well unless it's pro DSLR stuff. Where as film has generally more latitude and can get shadow details, while retaining highlights. You can over expose film by 2/3 stops and still have a useable image, where with digital you start to loose highlight detail really fast when it's overexposed.

I'll do my best to explain, but I'm no expert and only recently started shooting this way.

But basically you have your scene with highlights, midtones and shadows. Generally you'd meter for the midtones/highlights. Your shadows would be kind of on the dark side with less detail. Doing this usually leads to a more "saturated" image imo. If you meter for the shadows, your essentially over exposing the image to some degree. This will lead to a "washed out" look with more muted colours and less saturation. Your shadows will also be lighter, resulting in more detail.

In reality I don't care about shadow detail and all that, I just like a more "washed out" colour palette. Colour negative films are great for this, especially Portra and 400H. All of the above is not possible with slide film.

>>3102915
on your phone, set up the composition of how you want the photo to look and then tap your finger in the shadows to make the phone adjust the exposure.

It's generally not a technique transferable to digital, since you usually expose for midtones/highlights on digital.

Basically what I'm trying to say is if you don't know what it means don't worry about applying it to your photography

>>3102946
But I want to learn senpei

>>3102948
You can learn, but it's a technique only really applicable to shooting colour negative film.

If you tried to do it on your phone you'd get very blown out and super bright photos

>>3102915
When you meter for x, you literally adjust your exposure such that x is properly exposed (say, the zero position on a meter, equivalent to 18% grey).

Consider a typical sunny day's scene, with brightly lit clouds in the sky, a grassy field, and some trees casting a shadow. Consider the highlights as the clouds and other bright objects, the field of grass as the midtones, and the shadows cast by the trees as the scene's shadow area.

Meter for shadows, whatever shadows might be as determined by spot meter/walking into the shadows and pointing your camera at the shadow, means the shadows are now quite bright. Anything that was brighter than that is now extra bright. This is a problem on digital: Digital does not retain highlight data well. Instead, digital retains shadow data well, so we instead meter for highlights and then adjust the exposure of the shadows in post to make them brighter.

>>3102136
like your pics, anon! kudos.

>>3102136
Is this fuji portra? What lens?

>>3104836

Thanks anon.

>>3105003

Mixture of Kodak Portra and Fuji 400h.

Shot on a Bronica SQA with 80mm and 50mm lenses for anything square. Anything 35mm is Contax G1 with 45mm or 28mm lens.