Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
St Johns Hill 3 by ash St Johns Hill 3 by ash
St John's Hill, Clapham, London, November 2002
Canon EOS 300, Fuji Neopan 400 rated 250, orange filter, scanned neg
Add a Comment:
 
:iconmisteriddles:
misteriddles Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2002   Photographer
Yes, it's the geometry and brick textures that do it for me.
Reply
:iconkalhuskee:
kalhuskee Featured By Owner Nov 7, 2002
Nice work. I think the technical goodness has been gone over already. :) (Smile) Personally, the composition and perspective is what catches my eye on this. It's this perfect 3/4th view. Nice work.
Reply
:iconravid:
ravid Featured By Owner Nov 6, 2002
nice shot , the bricks are what i like about it.
Reply
:iconnarang2001:
narang2001 Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2002
eh, how much Fuju film dose your camera eat? he he, there stock must be going up, he he
Very nice photograph, your getting to good! stop it!This sounds quite sad, but i like a photograph of a bulding, i love the bricks,it's a raly good one
Reply
:iconash:
ash Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2002
"I see you're going for an isometric look again, though I forgot how you are accomplishing that"

In this case I was shooting with a long lens (75-300mm probably at around 250mm), which has the effect of minimizing perspective. A couple of previous images I've whipped into photoshop and used Edit|Transform|Perspective or whatever to remove the perspective, but not this time. I'll generally shout up if I do something weird like that :) (Smile) In this case the verticals weren't quite vertical so I rotated the image slightly, which I forgot/didn't bother to mention.
Reply
:iconakasleep:
akasleep Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2002  Hobbyist Photographer
Wonderful shapes and composition. The depth of this picture is interesting.
By the way, I love the grain that high speed films give
Reply
:iconash:
ash Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2002
'So...what exactly is this building used for?'

Good question :) (Smile) I'm not sure, I wish I had paid more attention to the details, like finding out its name. I do know that there are signs on it to the effect that the club that was there has been forced to close down due to "unforseen circumstances", and that any members who had booked for the christmas party and want compensation should contact the erstwhile management, or something like that. So I imagine it's an old theater or something like that, although it looks more like a power station or a factory. Presumably that seemed like a good idea at the time, which must have been many decades ago. I like the art deco vibes, with the porthole like windows and the round front. I'm always a sucker for that kind of thing. And a good bit of brickwork doesn't hurt either, as I'm sure you'll agree.
Reply
:iconash:
ash Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2002
Oooh questions :) (Smile) First off, thanks, I like this one too.

The right side is kind of one-third-grey on my monitor. ie. between black and mid-grey but closer to mid-grey. It would be interesting to hear what it looks like for other people :) (Smile)

The main reason I use 400 so much is a pretty stupid one; I like Fuji Neopan (almost religiously I admit) and over here you can only easily get the stuff in 400 and 1600. They've recently released a 100 Neopan called Acros, but it's currently only available in 120 format here in the UK, ie. no 35mm rolls, for some reason best known to the wise men on Mt. Fuji. Which is a real bummer if you ask me, because the single roll of 35mm Acros I managed to track down was absolutely wonderful (eg. my richmond park shots of the deer and trees). Everything I've read and seen suggests that it's a top notch ultra fine grain b&w film with extremely good sharpness that'll give anything from Kodak and Ilford a run for its money (and win, from what I've seen).

The other reason is not as stupid -- in London the light generally varies between crap and extremely crap, with rapid changes and little warning, so 400 makes a good all-rounder for handheld street photography. I wouldn't like to get stuck with only 100 in London on the average weekend, god knows 400 is enough of a struggle half the time when you're poking around in dirty alleyways. For this kind of architectural shot I should have taken my tripod, in which case I could have used any speed film I liked. But the tripod's a pain in the ass and largely useless for street photography, so I usually leave it at home.

I suspect the grain I see in my skies is actually genuine film grain, but I could be wrong. I could test it I guess by scanning at a different resolution and seeing if the grain resolution changes as well.

I always scan in the highest colour depth possible, which is 14-bit in b&w mode on the Canoscan FS4000US. And I use the import method, but that's purely because the crappy FilmGet software that comes with the 4000 doesn't have a save to file feature. In general I expect it should be the same, as long as the file format supports the high colour depths. If you save in an inherently 8-bit format then you'd be better off using Import so it can keep it hi-depth internally. Relatedly, I work with the images in 16-bit mode in Photoshop (which is how they come in, in 14-bit mode), only changing down to 8-bit for the final save to jpeg. Photoshop tools like levels and curves all work much better in 16-bit mode.

I should probably get some sleep... :) (Smile)
Reply
:iconmovie-wizard:
movie-wizard Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2002   Photographer
Wonderfull Detail! Great job! :) (Smile)
Reply
:iconacrophile:
acrophile Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2002   Photographer
OK, time from another silly question from acro... ;) (Wink)

First off, I like this pic the most out of the 3 that I've seen so far from you today. The geometry of each section on the building compliments the others well. I see you're going for an isometric look again, though I forgot how you are accomplishing that. Those bricks give it a nice sense of scale and I love how multi-toned the whole building is thanks to the punchy contrast. The right side of the building is under heavy shade which is pretty cool, but I think that's my monitors contrast problems showing up again, lol.

So my question is pretty simple and not really related to this shot. Is there a reason you use 400 ISO film so much outdoors? I guess my minimal training and experience always push me to grab the 100's... hehe... oh, and I guess I have two questions... I know we've beaten the scanning thing to death, but someone recently told me that the digital grain that we often see in our skies comes from a low color depth on the scanner. Are you scanning in 24-bit mode or 42-bit mode? Also, I'm not sure on this, but I think it is better to scan using the Import feature in photoshop instead of having the scanning software write to a file and then opening it in photoshop. Do you know any difference in those two methods?

Anyway, again, great pic. :) (Smile)
Reply
:iconopen-your-eyes:
open-your-eyes Featured By Owner Nov 4, 2002   Writer
This one is pretty....I like the shadows cast...and the door...the door is great. :) (Smile)

So...what exactly is this buildign used for?
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×



Details

Submitted on
November 4, 2002
Image Size
161 KB
Resolution
637×930
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
189
Favourites
1 (who?)
Comments
11
Downloads
33
×