More Portraits

Need help with a process of wetshaving? Wanna see pics or videos? Here is your Mecca!
Post Reply
User avatar
drmoss_ca
Admin
Posts: 10459
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:39 pm

More Portraits

Post by drmoss_ca »

But with variations in negative size....

This one is 8.3 times larger than the next (it's a 6x6cm negative):
Image

and this one about one eighth the size of the one above, but is stii 4.15 times larger than the next (it's a 24x36mm negative):
Image

and this one is the tiniest (being a 24x18mm negative and half the size of the one above):
Image

This one is 60 times the area of the last (a 4x5" negative):
Image

All of which are dwarfed by a 10x8" negative, which is four times larger than the last picture (or 120 times bigger than the smallest here):
Image

Having been under house arrest (no ankle bracelet, just no immunity during a pandemic) I have to keep on bothering the same subjects. I seem to be settling on 6x6cm for quality, and half-frame (24x18mm) for fun.
"Je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypothèse."
Pierre-Simon de Laplace
CMur12
Posts: 7316
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:41 pm
Location: Moses Lake, Washington, USA

Re: More Portraits

Post by CMur12 »

Great portraits, Chris! (I have been following your family portraits for some time.)

My favorite format is also 6x6, though I am amazed at the image quality in your half-frame photo of Pippa.

- Murray
User avatar
fallingwickets
Clive the Thumb
Posts: 8736
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:59 am

Re: More Portraits

Post by fallingwickets »

19 thumbs up on the pictures, especially the one of you....from this side of the screen you look to be in tip top shape

clive
de gustibus non est disputandum
brothers
Posts: 21192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:18 am
Location: Oklahoma City USA

Re: More Portraits

Post by brothers »

fallingwickets wrote: Wed Nov 10, 2021 6:16 am . . . . you look to be in tip top shape
😃👍 Considering all you've endured, you look like a mllion bucks!
Gary

SOTD 99%: Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, soaps & creams, synthetic / boar / badger brushes, Colonial General razor, Kai & Schick blades, straight razors any time, Superior 70 aftershave splash + menthol + 444
Rufus
Posts: 2325
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Greater Toronto Area

Re: More Portraits

Post by Rufus »

Great pictures, Chris. You look amazing; must be the clean air in Tatamagouche. =D>
Bryan
User avatar
drmoss_ca
Admin
Posts: 10459
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:39 pm

Re: More Portraits

Post by drmoss_ca »

Ah, that was me when I first had the 4x5. Me this week looks like this:

Image
"Je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypothèse."
Pierre-Simon de Laplace
brothers
Posts: 21192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:18 am
Location: Oklahoma City USA

Re: More Portraits

Post by brothers »

Well, OK. How about bright eyed and bushy tailed! :lol:
Gary

SOTD 99%: Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, soaps & creams, synthetic / boar / badger brushes, Colonial General razor, Kai & Schick blades, straight razors any time, Superior 70 aftershave splash + menthol + 444
User avatar
drmoss_ca
Admin
Posts: 10459
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:39 pm

Re: More Portraits

Post by drmoss_ca »

I'm strongly considering buzzing off all the remaining hair on my head, so I don't know if bushy-tailed is an epithet that might even begin to apply. I always had a thick head of hair, but the first six months of chemo in 2014-2015 made it pretty thin on top. The rather stronger chemo this year means that I look like an idiot with a combover now (need not mention any orange-y examples, I'm sure). Probably better to be rid of it and done with it.

Less time wasted on top of head hair means more time shaving and in the darkroom, right? How could that be bad?
"Je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypothèse."
Pierre-Simon de Laplace
User avatar
TRBeck
Soapgeek
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:59 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: More Portraits

Post by TRBeck »

Chris, one way or another, I'm glad to see you. The portraits are wonderful, as is knowing that you took them and are not merely alive but living, pursuing your hobbies and interests and spending your time with loved ones.

Thanks for sharing these lovely photographs.
Regards,
Tim

Why should we not meet, not always as dyspeptics, to tell our bad dreams, but sometimes as eupeptics, to congratulate each other on the ever-glorious morning? - Henry David Thoreau
pausted
Posts: 2374
Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:07 pm
Location: Rio Grande Valley, Texas

Re: More Portraits

Post by pausted »

Ditto on everything Tim said. Great to see your wonderful pictures.
Best regards,

Basil
Rufus
Posts: 2325
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Greater Toronto Area

Re: More Portraits

Post by Rufus »

drmoss_ca wrote: Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:52 am I'm strongly considering buzzing off all the remaining hair on my head, so I don't know if bushy-tailed is an epithet that might even begin to apply. I always had a thick head of hair, but the first six months of chemo in 2014-2015 made it pretty thin on top. The rather stronger chemo this year means that I look like an idiot with a combover now (need not mention any orange-y examples, I'm sure). Probably better to be rid of it and done with it.

Less time wasted on top of head hair means more time shaving and in the darkroom, right? How could that be bad?
Chris, I’ve taken to buzzing my head (with #2) and quite like the look and feel of it not to mention the near zero grooming I have to do other than brushing my scalp in the morning(I like the feel of the brush on my scalp). I became used to having no hair on my head when I had chemo 12 years ago. Even my sister-in-law has complimented me saying it makes me look younger and more modern :mrgreen: . My step-son is a little less complimentary, however, telling me I look intimidating…maybe that’s not so bad. After my chemo I had radiation on the right side of my chest, which totally denuded the hair on that side and it hasn’t grown back; looks a bit weird, but I’m not in the habit of going shirtless.
Bryan
User avatar
drmoss_ca
Admin
Posts: 10459
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:39 pm

Re: More Portraits

Post by drmoss_ca »

There's a book about 'Hollywood Portraits' that looks at the classic studio publicity photos of the 1920's to the 1940's, and assumes they were taken with 10x8 cameras and tries to recreate the lighting used by examining the shadows and their relative depths. Who knew, even if they had ever heard of 'Klieg Lights' that there was a condition known as 'Klieg Eye' that any ER doctor today would call 'welder's flash'?

No matter, there were wonderful portraits, dramatically lit. We'd like to know how. Could be Jimmy Cagney:

Image

or Hedy Lamarr:

Image

There are hundreds of these amazing portraits available. A few years ago, Roger Hicks and Christopher Nisperos published a book of the best known, in which they tried to analyze the lighting used. Where was the key light, the fill light, the kicker, the hair light and so on. Not a book of interest to the masses, but fascinating to those who try to make portraits. I re-read that book every so often, and then I try to re-create what the masters did. Lately, I addressed classic 'Hollywood lighting' in which a strong light from above makes a butterfly-shaped shadow under the nose. SO I took a strong strobe mounted high, and then used a continuous CFT fill light from one side to soften the effect. I got a nice photo, but it was nothing at all like my imagined result (this is no 10x8" negative, but an 18x24mm negative, which is half a 35mm frame):

Image

So today I decided to re-create what the golden age photographers did when they used a Polaroid back on their Hasselblad before committing rolls of film to the result. I placed one high strobe, no fill light (you can accurately call that laziness), and set up a digital camera such that it would use the same ISO as my film (not its rated ISO, but the one that works best for the developer I like), the same f-stop, the same shutter speed, and auto-focus on the subject with use of a remote release), who was only me at home as I am under pandemic house-arrest despite triple vaccination of little value as I have no immune system. This is what I got:

Image

I think I might reasonably commit a whole roll of film to that kind of thing next weekend.
"Je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypothèse."
Pierre-Simon de Laplace
CMur12
Posts: 7316
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:41 pm
Location: Moses Lake, Washington, USA

Re: More Portraits

Post by CMur12 »

Chris, your self-portrait is very impressive.

The lighting is very dramatic, consistent with the classic celebrity portraits displayed above. The shadows accentuate contours, mid-tones and highlights, without interfering with any desired detail. I have to admire what you have accomplished here.

The expression on your face is equally dramatic and well conceived. It successfully portrays one confined to pandemic house-arrest for far too long!

- Murray

PS. I would keep the hair you have. I don't think shaving your head would be an improvement.
EL Alamein
Posts: 3047
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:55 pm

Re: More Portraits

Post by EL Alamein »

I have to agree with what Murray said, I like these portraits especially yours. And I also agree with the suggestion to keep your hair.

I never got the bug to take pictures but I must admit I do like looking at other people's photographs when they share.

Chris
Post Reply