Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
Canary Wharf from Rotherhithe by ash Canary Wharf from Rotherhithe by ash
Canary Wharf viewed from Rotherhithe, Docklands, London, January 2003
Canon EOS 300, tripod, Acros 100, scanned neg
Add a Comment:
 
:iconnasigoreng:
nasigoreng Featured By Owner Mar 18, 2003
this is a very very cool shot.. i like the contrast. Really deep. And yeah the building looks on fire or something.

One thing that i dont like bout this pic:
... i couldnt take such pic as good as this one... hehehehe

well done ash
Reply
:iconcomplex-a:
complex-a Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2003
Really sweet shot. The way the city lights up the clouds above is just awesome.
Reply
:icongestik:
gestik Featured By Owner Jan 22, 2003
very nice shot great definitton and feel
especially the clouds
Reply
:icondeirdre:
deirdre Featured By Owner Jan 19, 2003
brilliant ! i love the textures and b&w grainy feeling to it, it makes the sky even more beautiful. The contrast with the lights is superb as well.
i'm in awe. :) (Smile)
Reply
:iconxokolatecake:
xokolatecake Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2003   Photographer
it really looks like the building is on fire, very cool!
nice choice for the place but i think it was a little bit overexposed, as we can see by the glow on the windows...
Reply
:icondoornumber13:
doornumber13 Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2003  Hobbyist General Artist
wow thats gorgeous ash... a top notch night shot.. very gorgeous.
Reply
:iconspoco2:
spoco2 Featured By Owner Jan 13, 2003
Great atmosphere here, really great... as for narang99... I didn't know those techniques would work well for photographing a man in a metal suit... get it... knight... he said knight photography... so... he...

Oh nevermind.
Reply
:iconnarang99:
narang99 Featured By Owner Jan 13, 2003
hmm, well here is a tip, i asked a friend of mine, how to take knight shoots, he said to use an aperture of f5.6 @ 7seconds, then bracket up one stop and down. Well, i dont think apertuer, effect shaprness, at infinty focal lenth, U should get a light metter. Sekonic L-308BII, it's 120Pounds, worth ever penny, good to use for knight photography, or a spot metter, if you want fantastic shoot, what you do is, you take a spot mettering from the sky and the bulding, or water, and when they both are the same then you shoot. Thats why they say, you have to be wait to get a photograph. ALso a medium format, with give you 1,000 times more dof.....i think, that and a slow film, and you got a porfolla photo, One day i'm gonna do knight photography. When takeing photos, i dont ever underate and overate film. I just leave it on spot metter, Take the reading, and lock the reading, or bracket. Thats the best thing to do, Materix mettering is good, but it's not good for subject that are backlighted, and when there is alot of light.




Hope i help But, still this is one of your best, very good image
Reply
:iconkatya:
katya Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2003   Traditional Artist
This is amazing! Absolutely amazing. I love the night shots like this, where the light shows up perfectly... you must be very proud of yourself:) (Smile)
Reply
:icondade3933:
dade3933 Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2003  Professional Photographer
Outstanding work. Do you have the exact exposure settings? Thanks. :D (Big Grin) +fav
Reply
:iconhesitation:
hesitation Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2003  Hobbyist Photographer
The fact that it's b/w really does give it a different feel. Nod
Very well done.
Reply
:iconpwca:
pwca Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2003
yez, blade-runner... that's x-actly what it made me think of!!
i just love the whole feeling it gives.. the grainyness... the strong contrast.. yet intensity!!!

i've sOOOOooo much to learn!!!
Reply
:iconfauxgravity:
fauxgravity Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2003

The contrast and greater exposure given to the scene here depicts a much greater focus on the 'natural phenomenon' of the way that the buildings interact visually with the sky and the water. The scene grabbed me as soon as I saw it - beautiful.
Reply
:iconpixiegal:
pixiegal Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2003  Professional General Artist
very nice. seem your exposure make the building burning. :) (Smile) well done!!!
Reply
:iconsix-something:
six-something Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003   Photographer
Looks like the cloud is sucking up soem of the buildings. cool.
Reply
:iconstevesm:
stevesm Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003
Another top shot, (I looked at the next one first!). I love the Docklands but its grown up a bit since the last time I visited. :-) (Smile)
Reply
:iconlumpie:
lumpie Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003   Photographer
Woah!!. take the commnt from the last photo :p (Lick) aste: heh. This is a great piece. +fav
Reply
:iconlightningbolt:
lightningbolt Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003   Photographer
That is fantastic, the softness in the sky is great, and that building!! London's Burning anyone...

:-) (Smile)
Reply
:iconacrophile:
acrophile Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003   Photographer
Acrophile has suggested before that it might be scanner noise, and I think he might be right. The noise does lessen if I scan at higher resolutions and scale down, but scanning at 4000dpi is a pain in the ass. The noise in the original scan is also made much worse by the unsharp mask filter

Hey ash, I'm not sure about your canon, but my minolta scanner has the ability to "multisample" the scan... i.e. it scans the same frame multiple times... I can do it 2x, 4x, or 8x... the higher the multisample, the less noise I get in a scan... it does take considerably longer to scan though... same problem with scanning at the maximum dpi... personally, I think it's worth it though... I get all my negs cut at 6 frames per strip so I can batch scan 6 at a time so it's not that tedious... I just wish my scanner lamp wasn't so hot, I worry that I'm exposing my negatives to too much heat. :( (Sad)

Personally, I'd scan at the highest dpi possible and scale down... I disable pretty much all the other "features" like software dust removal, etc, etc and it speeds up the scan considerably...

Also, the question of sharpening... I abandoned the USM for the high pass filter... I duplicate the image layer, apply the high pass filter (usually use about 10 pixels), then adjust the transparency of that layer (between 20 and 50 percent usually) to suit the required sharpening... I've found it doesn't add nearly as much noise as the unsharp mask...

Lastly, I'm in the middle of Adams' "camera" book and it's kinda funny cuz I just read the part about the lenses and depth of field etc that you describe above... I'm finding it all very interesting... anyway, ramble over, and yes, it's the damn coffee. ;) (Wink)

p.s. where the hell is your sub? these admins are so slow, they charged my account weeks ago... grrrr.
Reply
:iconback2mine:
back2mine Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003
superb atmosphere :) (Smile)

p.s. jessops in oxford street stock acros, but it's in high demand and not always readily available.

Reply
:iconash:
ash Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003
Woohoo! questions :) (Smile)

Trying out the Acros eh?
I've never encountered this film before.

Yes! I managed to track some down at last, ordering it on the web. More recently I've seen it in at least one shop, as well, but I suspect they're special ordering it and it still isn't generally available. Not many people here use fuji b&w films anyway (purely because Kodak and Ilford have a more high-profile history in that area, I suspect) so there probably isn't much market for it.

I shot a roll of this scene on new year's day and the entire roll came out overexposed, so I had to go back and reshoot it. I think the reason for the overexposure was partly because I was doing my usual trick of underrating the film by 2/3 of a stop in the belief that my camera habitually underexposes, and partly because I was intentionally overexposing by 1/2 a stop in an effort to account for reciprocity failure (I was shooting at shutter speeds of 20s-30s). For this second roll I rated the film at 100 and just let the camera do its own thing, and it came out fine. So that makes me think that the need to underrate Neopan 400 by 2/3 of a stop on my camera is a property of the Neopan 400 if anything, rather than my camera. But who knows.

Do you remember what aperature you used? I want to avoid the "star effect" I get in my night shots... seems like a higher f-stop would do that

I actually used a pretty wide aperture for these shots in the end, mostly f4.0. I figured that (a) the subject was all far enough away to be "at infinity" so wouldn't require much depth of field, and (b) most of the shots were taken with a really short lens length (probably 28mm here) so would naturally have a deep depth of field even at wide apertures.

When I was shooting skaters once, I spoke to a guy who was shooting from the hip at 28mm and didn't even bother to focus; he pointed out that at wide angles there's little need to focus because the depth of field is so great. That idea has kind of stuck with me.

In this case I wanted shortish shutter speeds because the clouds were moving really fast -- at f4.0 I ended up with about 10s, which was still enough to blur the clouds more than I would have liked.

As for the flaring there's some flaring in this shot but to be honest I don't know whether wider or narrower apertures are better -- higher/narrower does sound better. I think flaring might be a property of the lens itself as much as anything.

This is very nice and BladeRunneresque

Totally :) (Smile) Especially the next shot. When I was shooting that one I was getting all these bladerunner flashbacks. There was even this really bizarre mechanical recorded voice drifting across the river from the buildings on the other side, I have no idea what it was but it sure added to the ambience. Sometimes I think I should really get a microphone for my minidisc player and record this shit.

Looks a bit grainy for a 100ASA film (?)

Yes it does doesn't it. Acrophile has suggested before that it might be scanner noise, and I think he might be right. The noise does lessen if I scan at higher resolutions and scale down, but scanning at 4000dpi is a pain in the ass. The noise in the original scan is also made much worse by the unsharp mask filter -- I should probably investigate one of these adaptive filters or something.

Whoa! Looks like London is burning and you, you live the river.

Haha! Nice one.

It looks like the buildings are on fire?!?! I'm curious why the buildings look like that... do you know why?

I'm afraid the reasons are rather banal :) (Smile) They're overexposed at the top because the scene has more contrast than the film can handle (the lights must be thousands of times brighter than the darkest shadows), so is underexposed in the shadows and overexposed in the highlights. And the 'smoke' is actually steam or condensation, I think it's from the air-conditioning systems of the buildings. Canary Wharf, the tallest building on the left, always has a plume of steam rising from it at night. There's a flashing light on the top which conveniently picks out the stream.

That building Canary Wharf, is actually the tallest building in London (unless it's been beaten recently). This area, Docklands, is a real monument to capitalism and the city's commercial and IT sector. Being built on old docklands and hence relatively modern, it's about the only area of London that looks like modern (American) city. Makes for good night shots :) (Smile)

Thanks for all the interesting comments! And sorry about the ramble, it's the coffee you understand :) (Smile)
Reply
:iconciciolina:
ciciolina Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003
It looks like the buildings are on fire?!?! The sky is beautifull and the reflection of the lights in the water too. I'm curious why the buildings look like that... do you know why?
Reply
:icondougbtn:
dougbtn Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2003  Professional Photographer
Beautiful shot Ash. The blitz returns
Reply
:icontalamia:
talamia Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003   Photographer
Yes, bookdiva said it. I love how the sky seems to have taken over the picture letting the city in effect slip away to become a backdrop. The sky has become the main subject matter and it seems to suggest that there is something much greater than our concrete structures above and out there, that our lights and buildings are nothing in comparison to the vast and greatness of nature...

...that's what I felt anyways :) (Smile)
Reply
:iconbookdiva:
bookdiva Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003
Great tone and light contrasts, I like the composition, the water reflections, the architecture and lights, I love this place, been there myself this past May. Nicely done!!
Reply
:iconmisteriddles:
misteriddles Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003   Photographer
Whoa! Looks like London is burning and you, you live the river.

RIP Joe Strummer.
Reply
:iconlobsterclaws:
lobsterclaws Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003
The B&W gives it a whole different feel then it would have in color and I really enjoy it. Great contrast and sky.
Reply
:iconking-pelvis:
king-pelvis Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003
This is very nice and BladeRunneresque. I've never encountered this film before. Looks a bit grainy for a 100ASA film (?) Anyway the photo looks great!
Reply
:iconbraig:
braig Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003   Photographer
beautiful. great contrasts. this photo was exposed perfectly.
Reply
:iconacrophile:
acrophile Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003   Photographer
Trying out the Acros eh? Looks pretty cool! Do you remember what aperature you used? I want to avoid the "star effect" I get in my night shots... seems like a higher f-stop would do that but I figured I'd ask someone who would know for sure. ;) (Wink)
Reply
:iconparanoiz:
paranoiz Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2003
i like the photo and the way u framed it! the building seem to be burning, isn't it? it's really nice in black/white
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×



Details

Submitted on
January 9, 2003
Image Size
120 KB
Resolution
1004×696
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
698
Favourites
6 (who?)
Comments
31
Downloads
88
×