Photo sites

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Fri Feb 18, 2011 10:39 am

Does anyone know of a good place to put up photos on the web? I want to be able to "drag and drop" a whole bunch at once, not one at a time...


Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: Photo sites

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Fri Feb 18, 2011 12:31 pm

I don't know of any in particular. Some photo sites charge an annual subscription fee for using their gallery section.
Flickr might be suitable and you could provide a link if you wanted to discuss any of your images. Foolscape (Gary) who post here has some of his images on Flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: Photo sites

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:59 am

An even better option would be to build your own website. Mr. Site is popular in the UK. Just a suggestion.
http://www.mrsite.co.uk/

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:39 am

Thanks

foolscape
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:01 am
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Photo sites

Postby foolscape » Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:42 pm

I use Flickr. They have uploaders that can be used for batches. It's $25.00 per year for a Pro account.

--Gary

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:02 pm

I put a few on, from last year's Comfest and some zoo shots:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: Photo sites

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:14 pm

Ornello wrote:I put a few on, from last year's Comfest and some zoo shots:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/
Just a suggestion, you would likely get more hits on your images if you add tags to each photo such as the subject, location, camera used, lens used and film type.
For example, if someone was searching Flickr for Leica SL2, then your images would be highlighted for viewing along with other users of the same camera.
The more tags that you add, the more likely it will be that your images are seen. Adding them to an album is another option if you are shooting a particular theme.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Mon Mar 07, 2011 4:32 pm

Thanks. All taken with Leicaflex SL2, 180mm Elmarit-R and 350mm Telyt-R on Fuji NPH.

dfbldwn
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:49 am
Location: NE rural Georgia

Re: Photo sites

Postby dfbldwn » Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:38 pm

Ornello wrote:Thanks. All taken with Leicaflex SL2, 180mm Elmarit-R and 350mm Telyt-R on Fuji NPH.
I liked especially the infant's eyes in photo 0606039-R1-043-20. All the shots were a treat to view.

What is "Fuji NPH"? Is it the same as the Fuji 400H that B&H has? Or is it some well preserved stock you've kept, like Kodachrome 25?

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:37 am

Thank you!

The film is 400 speed Fuji pro color neg.

http://www.ephotocraft.com/itemdesc.asp ... 2520125316

This enormously tall girl was a sight to behold! She must have been 6' 2" at least. Look at her arms, how long they are compared to the width.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

And this girl has such delicate features (eyes, nose, lips) and figure (note her "ram's horn" earrings!):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

And this lad has such "sad puppy" eyes:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

But my favorite is this one:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

dfbldwn
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:49 am
Location: NE rural Georgia

Re: Photo sites

Postby dfbldwn » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:01 am

Ornello wrote:Thank you!
But my favorite is this one:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/
Hah! This one had so much right going for it I couldn't even bring myself to feel resentment about its success as an image.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

Were you using tripod? Leaning against a solid object, or any other kind of support?

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:16 am

dfbldwn wrote:
Ornello wrote:Thank you!
But my favorite is this one:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/
Hah! This one had so much right going for it I couldn't even bring myself to feel resentment about its success as an image.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

Were you using tripod? Leaning against a solid object, or any other kind of support?
Tripod? I loathe tripods, and hardly ever use one. This was taken with a Leicaflex SL2 w/350mm Leitz Tely-R probably at about f/6.3. I would say. Most of the time I was shooting between 5.6 and 8. The 350mm Telyt-R f/4.8 is intended for hand-held use.

http://www.fonooni.com/Leica_350_mm_f_4 ... lyt-R.html

What do you like about that shot? It is just a girl laughing with her friend.
Last edited by Ornello on Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

dfbldwn
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:49 am
Location: NE rural Georgia

Re: Photo sites

Postby dfbldwn » Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:13 pm

Ornello wrote: What do you like about that shot? It is just a girl laughing with her friend.
I know nothing of correct terminology in photographic criticism. Certainly every observation you made for the specific shots you listed is true. All the shots you posted were worth viewing, the image I referenced just grabbed me more than the others. My second favorite was the shot of what turned out to be a 6'2" amazon. I'd had no suspicion of her height until reading your comment.

1) Capture. I think you nailed the moment with a precision that snipers might envy. One impression is that she's holding in a bigger laugh. Another is she's about to spit all the beverage outta her mouth in a huge guffaw. Third is that she's got enough control (note perfect position of gargantua mug, not sloppily held at any angle) to restrain any spew.

2) Composition. Clearly she is the main point of interest, but there's enough of the companion to establish context. Your explanation set me straight, I thought she was laughing at hijinks on the playing field. If her smile is due to a comment from her companion (he's still talking, in my opinion) she is independent enough not to let her companion distract her from what she's watching.

Of additional interest is how sharply his profile and cap are focused, without distracting from the main subject. In any case it's a very satisfying crop because, unusually, it does not leave me hungering for more image around the main subject.

3) Colors. I've had my doubts about Fuji print films, color or BW. In my test rolls they show an unusually narrow dynamic range between sufficient detail in shadow and sufficient detail in highlights (less than 3 stops total point to point), compared to Kodak's KGT 800-5 which'll give me 5.5 stops. This had none of the blown highlights and irretrievable shadows I've come to expect from commercial processing & scanning of Fuji film. Where did it get processed & scanned?

If the subject was in open shade, then the white of her skirt and incredible flesh tone of her left arm, highlighted chest and portion of neck in shadow make this the film for me. I was originally looking for good examples of Fuji NPH or 400H for hours before taking a break and coming to Digitaltruth. Saw your handle and read this thread. Low & behold, you're using the very film I wanted examples of.

Again I ask: Where did it get processed & scanned?

4) Unlike some of the other telephoto shots you posted, this subject betrays no overt awareness of the photographer, which I personally prefer.

Maybe I found it so successful because I read more into it than the others. I got involved with this one.

I hope you post more pics.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Thu Mar 24, 2011 5:40 pm

dfbldwn wrote:
Ornello wrote: What do you like about that shot? It is just a girl laughing with her friend.
This is the photo we are discussing, right?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

I know nothing of correct terminology in photographic criticism. Certainly every observation you made for the specific shots you listed is true. All the shots you posted were worth viewing, the image I referenced just grabbed me more than the others. My second favorite was the shot of what turned out to be a 6'2" amazon. I'd had no suspicion of her height until reading your comment.

She is amazingly tall. Look at the length of her arms! A stunning woman!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/54 ... /lightbox/

1) Capture. I think you nailed the moment with a precision that snipers might envy. One impression is that she's holding in a bigger laugh. Another is she's about to spit all the beverage outta her mouth in a huge guffaw. Third is that she's got enough control (note perfect position of gargantua mug, not sloppily held at any angle) to restrain any spew.

I have many years of experience and whatever you see is just the natural development that takes place over time. Anybody can do this if he takes thousands of rolls and has no love life. LOL

2) Composition. Clearly she is the main point of interest, but there's enough of the companion to establish context. Your explanation set me straight, I thought she was laughing at hijinks on the playing field. If her smile is due to a comment from her companion (he's still talking, in my opinion) she is independent enough not to let her companion distract her from what she's watching.

These were taken at a 'festival' called Comfest that is basically a small-scale pseudo-Woodstock type of event held in Columbus, Ohio at Goodale Park. Some girls go topless. It is basically a big party that attracts a lot of people, especially young people.

Of additional interest is how sharply his profile and cap are focused, without distracting from the main subject. In any case it's a very satisfying crop because, unusually, it does not leave me hungering for more image around the main subject.

Well I missed the focus just a bit. The lens has very shallow depth of field. I was intending to focus on the girl. The people behind the boy at right are a distracting element but I think it still passes muster. In candids you take what you can get.


3) Colors. I've had my doubts about Fuji print films, color or BW. In my test rolls they show an unusually narrow dynamic range between sufficient detail in shadow and sufficient detail in highlights (less than 3 stops total point to point), compared to Kodak's KGT 800-5 which'll give me 5.5 stops. This had none of the blown highlights and irretrievable shadows I've come to expect from commercial processing & scanning of Fuji film. Where did it get processed & scanned?

I love this film! I bought the film at Cord Camera in Columbus. They processed and scanned. I sometimes have to ask for re-dos though. They tend to come out too light.

If the subject was in open shade, then the white of her skirt and incredible flesh tone of her left arm, highlighted chest and portion of neck in shadow make this the film for me. I was originally looking for good examples of Fuji NPH or 400H for hours before taking a break and coming to Digitaltruth. Saw your handle and read this thread. Low & behold, you're using the very film I wanted examples of.

Again I ask: Where did it get processed & scanned?

4) Unlike some of the other telephoto shots you posted, this subject betrays no overt awareness of the photographer, which I personally prefer.

Well that's why I own and use long lenses. These were taken with the astonishingly light and compact 350mm Telyt-R f/4.8.
http://www.fonooni.com/Leica_350_mm_f_4 ... lyt-R.html

I also took a few (the one girl with the red hair and a few before that one) with the 2nd version of the 180mm Elmarit-R. This lens is spectacular!
http://slrlensreview.com/web/leica-slr- ... eview.html

Maybe I found it so successful because I read more into it than the others. I got involved with this one.

I hope you post more pics.
If I have time I shall.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Photo sites

Postby Ornello » Fri Mar 25, 2011 11:14 am

Does anyone know how to rearrange the order of the photos on this site?


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest