Last edited:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Weekly photo contest, Sep 2-9 2018: Decay
- Thread starter Donka
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can’t complain about those results. The late entries pulled a sneak attack!
Partially a limit of my hardware at the time (iPhone 6s). This home was in an active neighborhood, so I didn’t want to snoop too much. I kinda liked the gloomy vegetation, but oh well!
Partially a limit of my hardware at the time (iPhone 6s). This home was in an active neighborhood, so I didn’t want to snoop too much. I kinda liked the gloomy vegetation, but oh well!
Thanks. The aircraft is in no condition to fly any time soon. Much of engines were missing (you can see through the engine on the left) and random wires may be seen hanging down behind the landing gear. The inside is mostly stripped and rusted out. Admittedly, much of the decay is not obvious in this image.
While the image looks old it was a new photo and was only inverted and had levels adjusted after scanning. I really cant explain some of the look - the sky was clear and the various speckles are not stars. I love the foggy look to it but none of that was expected. Likely a result of sitting in a hot car for a few days.
I took this photo with a pinhole camera and some Ilford B&W paper. I set the camera in the dirt and propped it up with a rock. I had no idea of the framing nor exposure time as it was around sunset. I left it open for 20 or 30 minutes and didn't process the paper until weeks later.
The plane was lit by an ugly sodium vapor lamp so it was washed in an orange/brown light. This is likely why much of the decay is hidden in the B&W image.
Thanks again for taking the time to judge this week's contest.
[doublepost=1536593747][/doublepost]
I didn't want to post during the contest - you know, rules.
I'm not sure where the camera is since I moved. It is around here somewhere and if I ever get around to setting up for film again it might make a comeback.
Currently I'm kicking around how to design a camera / art piece that takes images at least 2 feet x 3 feet. I'm struggling with coming up with a way to develop the images in the field.
Great topic and thanks for the kind words. My problem was too many choices but have always like the one of Stonehenge got the reasons you mentioned. Another obvious one was the Thetford Priory Ruins destroyed during the Reformation and I lived on what was it's outer fields by the Little River Ouse footbridge. Re-visited last year and the continued decay from the 80 - have both film and digital. Also from the 80's was a church in Ireland that showed double decay...but didn't want to do a sky replacement to improve the dreary day. Just walls with roof missing, and while bot unusual having bodies buried in church, full headstones in the church is a different issue as the church was already decaying, and then the headstones were in a state of poor upkeep overgrown by vegetation.
It is a long term goal. First I need to find a cheap but reliable pickup truck to strip down for the platform. Looking at available RC paper it looks like the design will based around 40" roll paper so the imaging area will be 40" x 60". Five foot film holders - yikes!
Running a pinhole wizard that equates to the following:
Focal Length: 72.1"
Pinhole Diameter" 0.071"
F Stop: f-1015
Angle Of View: 53.2 Deg
Since RC paper is around ISO 2 that is going to be some long exposures.
It is a long term goal. First I need to find a cheap but reliable pickup truck to strip down for the platform. Looking at available RC paper it looks like the design will based around 40" roll paper so the imaging area will be 40" x 60". Five foot film holders - yikes!
Running a pinhole wizard that equates to the following:
Focal Length: 72.1"
Pinhole Diameter" 0.071"
F Stop: f-1015
Angle Of View: 53.2 Deg
Since RC paper is around ISO 2 that is going to be some long exposures.
Piece of cake.
Technically yes. Although I'll have to get better at welding.
For the design I'll base it off of my pre-1900 Rochester Optical King camera. It is an 8x10 field camera so it folds up nicely and has all the movements I would want. It will just be a matter of scaling it up from 8x10 to 40x60.
[doublepost=1536872774][/doublepost]Hmm, it seems FB has removed the "mobile" album so I can't find a better picture of the camera. Here's a snap of it out in Death Valley a few years ago.
And the resulting image:
Hmm, looking at that image it seems I missed the focus a bit. The foreground rock looks to be in better focus than the subject rock. I didn't notice that in the full size print. Ah well, we all have our off days.
Technically yes. Although I'll have to get better at welding.
For the design I'll base it off of my pre-1900 Rochester Optical King camera. It is an 8x10 field camera so it folds up nicely and has all the movements I would want. It will just be a matter of scaling it up from 8x10 to 40x60.
[doublepost=1536872774][/doublepost]Hmm, it seems FB has removed the "mobile" album so I can't find a better picture of the camera. Here's a snap of it out in Death Valley a few years ago.
And the resulting image:
Hmm, looking at that image it seems I missed the focus a bit. The foreground rock looks to be in better focus than the subject rock. I didn't notice that in the full size print. Ah well, we all have our off days.
You posted a picture of that camera before. As I recall, it was in the same post in which you were busting my chops because I have a daguerreotype lens. Hmmmmmmmmmm.
I could use a good daguerreotype lens for the monster cam.You posted a picture of that camera before. As I recall, it was in the same post in which you were busting my chops because I have a daguerreotype lens. Hmmmmmmmmmm.
I could use a good daguerreotype lens for the monster cam.
Lomography.com has a sale on their daguerreotype lens.... if you have a spare $400. It is available in Canon EF and Nikon F mounts. It is 64mm and 37 deg FOV on a full frame sensor, so it is not quite to your specs. Regardless, it is a quality lens and a ton of fun. Definitely worth having.