WeeklyShots

You are not logged in | Login

Browse Responses
‹ Newer | Up | Older ›

Response to Monochrome (Response #144)

Uploaded 996 Days Ago by King - Featured Image - 29 comments


Photo © King (Nice When I Wanna Be) - www.kingdouglas.com/
Unauthorized reproduction not permitted.

User Comments

groen65 said 996 days ago:

alien & summer is nearly over ;-( I quite like the processing, but am not sure where the focus lies.

groen65 said 996 days ago:

it looks like you have a couple of things to teach me about processing as well, King!

wings said 996 days ago:

55555

Beamer said 996 days ago:

Mono for sure but it's a dead genre!! Would have also worked nicely in Details. Great tones and yes, a lot of detail!

King said 996 days ago:

@Nynke...you know I am a big fan of your work. It is possible, and probably usual, for any work of art to have multiple points of focus. What is the largest, most dominant shape in this image? Focus there for a while.

In this case, I am demonstrating one of the fine qualities of the view camera--the ability to control the plane of focus along with dof to bring more detail to the viewer, as opposed to the trendy bokeh effect, having one sharp pint of focus and leaving the majority of the scene out of focus.

King said 996 days ago:

@Beamer...are you making puns at my expense?

I don't think this is a dead genre. I think it is a dead sunflower.

King said 996 days ago:

@wings...thanks, dude!

groen65 said 996 days ago:

okay King. I have focussed and see the point. have you post-processed this at all? I guess this is not a digital image? and you're right - one's just not used to seeing everything pin-sharp anymore ;-)

MaggieMac said 996 days ago:

wonderful crisp detail in this shot .. the beaded water and the dying sunflowers are an interesting composition - life and death in the same shot .. and a feast for birds to boot - nicely done.

King said 996 days ago:

@Nynke...this is reproduced from a scan of a 4"x5" b/w negative that I processed myself. It is a *very* good negative, which means that it was not at all difficult to get the tones I wanted without additional processing. The edges and corners are darkened, but that's about it.

Thanks again!

King said 996 days ago:

@MaggieMac. Thanks very much.

This was shot on a tree stump near my house. The sunflowers were collected nearby and kept in my house for a few days until they reached the look I wanted.

I knew that the stump would be both beautiful and much darker (the flowers would stand out naturally) if it were wet, so I wet it thoroughly before arranging the flowers. I had to occasionally spritz the stump to keep the tonal values I was looking for. The water drops on the flower in the foreground were accidental, as I recall.

Lange said 996 days ago:

Tonally, very attractive. There is a depth here that is very appealing.

lbimaging said 995 days ago:

Great detail. Great processing. Very visually appealing.

Ana said 995 days ago:

I adore this.

LaurenA1 said 995 days ago:

Makes me think of death and decay. Effective.

Jem said 995 days ago:

This would have been great for the 'details' challenge also.. Wonderful shot. Congratulations King

Ana said 995 days ago:

I had no doubt about this one.

King said 995 days ago:

@Lange, Dennis, Ana, LaujrenA1, Jem, Nynke, Wings, Beamer, MaggieMac and others who commented or were generous with their ratings,

THANK YOU!

George said 995 days ago:

Beautiful image King. I'd love to see a larger version, to soak up all that detail.

King said 995 days ago:

Hey, George, thanks very much for your comment.

A slightly larger (950 px wide rather than 750px here) can be found at http://king.1x.com

This image suffers a bit from multiple down-sizing. As this is scanned from a 4"x5" b/w negative, it could easily be enlarged to a 7 foot by 9 foot print at 300 dpi, so lots of information is missing here.

George said 995 days ago:

So what's stopping you from printing a 7x9 foot ;)

Nice to see the larger version. The dew drops are a delicious "touch".

King said 995 days ago:

@George...where would I put the print?

BTW, reproduced on a "standard" computer monitor, the full-size image would be about 16 times larger in area than the print, i.e., 28 feet by 36 feet. You'd get a nice view of one of those dew drops.

Thanks for the chat.

George said 995 days ago:

Yes thanks. Nice way to start the day :)

lbimaging said 995 days ago:

King - Congrats. This is one I would hang on my wall - as I think it would be at least a decade before I got even remotely tired of looking at it. It's an inspiring image. I love that *everything* is in sharp detail, the square format, that the original is 4x5 film, that you thought it out so meticulously, your choice in tones, just all of it. Thanks for sharing!

ursula said 995 days ago:

Wow, King, I like this one. You do some cool stuff!

King said 995 days ago:

@Dennis...thanks for the high praise in detail.
@ursula...thanks and back atcha.

wings said 994 days ago:

just end you a message on your normal e mail

wings said 994 days ago:

@king I wonder what you see in this picture. Is there any reflection of you to be found. Wy talk technical. Talk art and the creative thoughts

King said 994 days ago:

@wings...thank you for your question. I enjoy talking art and creative thoughts as much as I enjoy shop talk.

There was a dead tree stump near my house that I passed every day. One day, after a rain, I noticed that the stump was particularly beautiful and wanted to photograph it.

There were some sunflowers near my house that I passed every day. I thought they might contrast well and look pretty if scattered on the old, wet stump, especially if I allowed them to dry for a day or two.

This image is just a test and a reflection of my visual imagination. I think it's pretty. That's all.

It was also carefully planned, carefully arranged, carefully lit (using diffused early morning sunlight), carefully focused, carefully exposed, carefully processed and carefully scanned if you'd like to know.

You could comment on this photo if you were logged in.