Helpful Posts Helpful Posts:  0
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Judy B. number 2

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Thornhill, a suburb of Toronto, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    970
    Real Name
    Robert

    Judy B. number 2

    Another forgotten shot mined from my slide albums while researching a photo essay.
    This is another portrait of Judy B., the oldest daughter of old friends taken many years ago.
    Beautiful child, and lovely light.
    motorized Nikon FE
    Nikkor 105 2.5 AI manual focus
    Ektachrome 100 ISO colour slide
    probably f4 @ 1/500
    Judy B. number 2

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    northern Virginia suburb of Washington, DC
    Posts
    19,064

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    There's something throwing me off that I don't understand: the light is very warm on everything except the white tones, when I would expect those tones to also be very warm. I see a little bit of the warmth on the top part of her right sleeve but nowhere else.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Thornhill, a suburb of Toronto, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    970
    Real Name
    Robert

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Buckley View Post
    There's something throwing me off that I don't understand: the light is very warm on everything except the white tones, when I would expect those tones to also be very warm. I see a little bit of the warmth on the top part of her right sleeve but nowhere else.
    Mike, I honestly can't answer that, as the circumstances of the location are long forgotten.
    I can tell you that I did nothing to alter the colour on her sleeves. All my post processing (Smart Sharpen /Levels /Brightness & Contrast/ Auto Colour / Crop) was conducted over the entire image, with the exception of two large circles with the Dodge Tool to slightly brighten her eyes only.
    Robert

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    northern Virginia suburb of Washington, DC
    Posts
    19,064

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Ektrachrome is not as stable as Kodachrome (no color slide is as stable as Kodacrhome), so I wonder if one of the layers of emulsion that affected the white tones changed.

    Consider warming up the white tones to make the image appear more realistic.

    My only other question: It's clear that she was thinking about the world's most complex problems. Did she solve all of them? Wonderful portrait!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Thornhill, a suburb of Toronto, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    970
    Real Name
    Robert

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Buckley View Post
    Ektrachrome is not as stable as Kodachrome (no color slide is as stable as Kodacrhome), so I wonder if one of the layers of emulsion that affected the white tones changed.

    Consider warming up the white tones to make the image appear more realistic.

    My only other question: It's clear that she was thinking about the world's most complex problems. Did she solve all of them? Wonderful portrait!
    Thanks mike,
    In all likelihood she was wondering "Do we at least get to go for ice cream after he stops making me pose?"
    And the answer was yes.
    Robert

  6. #6
    Tord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    26
    Real Name
    Tord S Eriksson

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Quote Originally Posted by RBSinTo View Post
    Another forgotten shot mined from my slide albums while researching a photo essay.
    This is another portrait of Judy B., the oldest daughter of old friends taken many years ago.
    Beautiful child, and lovely light.
    motorized Nikon FE
    Nikkor 105 2.5 AI manual focus
    Ektachrome 100 ISO colour slide
    probably f4 @ 1/500
    Judy B. number 2
    Delightful shot, but maybe you should decrease the colour cast a bit, by changing the white balance, so that the T-shirt meshes better with the rest?!

    Just a suggestion, mind you!

  7. #7
    Shadowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    36,716
    Real Name
    John

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Nice shot.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Thornhill, a suburb of Toronto, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    970
    Real Name
    Robert

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Mike /Todd /John,
    Thanks for commenting.
    I took this shot to my Evaluation group last night, and the suggestion was made to forget about the colour and convert it to Black and White. This was crudely done at the meeting and I liked the look so I'll be making the change to simplify to image.
    Robert

  9. #9
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    22,161
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Quote Originally Posted by RBSinTo View Post
    I took this shot to my Evaluation group last night, and the suggestion was made to forget about the colour and convert it to Black and White.
    I think that was an excellent suggestion. I generally tend to be quite picky and need a good reason to throw away all the colour data, but a bad colour cast that cannot be corrected in PP is one of them. I suspect that this image falls into that category.

  10. #10
    bje07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Lorient France
    Posts
    2,382
    Real Name
    Jean

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Wonderful shot, nice pose

  11. #11
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    22,161
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Rob - by changing the original image, rather than adding an update, you have thrown all of the people who are reading this thread for the first time for a bit of a loop, as a number of the comments made applied to the original and do not make any sense when looking at the B&W conversion.

    I also get a bit of a chuckle out of some of the comments, probably from people that have not shot film, regarding white balance / colour casts. For those folks a bit of a "history lesson". Films only came in daylight or tungsten colour balance. Once a particular type of film was put in the camera, we were "stuck" with that film until the end of the roll. There were color correction filters available that would let one shoot daylight films under tungsten and tungsten films under daylight, so in theory there was an option, but frankly I only knew one person who owned these filters. Bottom line is that those of us that shot daylight film using ambient light would get shots like Rob's original posting - a heavy yellow colour cast. Shooting tungsten rated film outdoors gave the image a heavy blue colour cast.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    northern Virginia suburb of Washington, DC
    Posts
    19,064

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver View Post
    There were color correction filters available that would let one shoot daylight films under tungsten and tungsten films under daylight
    Tungsten films were also used under daylight to create the effect of a nighttime mood.

    Bottom line is that those of us that shot daylight film using ambient light would get shots like Rob's original posting - a heavy yellow colour cast.
    I disagree, as already explained in my earlier post. I never got a shot like's Rob's original post because the heavy color cast doesn't affect the white shirt overall, only the skin tones. I think it was caused by something else, either the age of the slide or the post-processing.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Thornhill, a suburb of Toronto, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    970
    Real Name
    Robert

    Re: Judy B. number 2

    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver View Post
    Rob - by changing the original image, rather than adding an update, you have thrown all of the people who are reading this thread for the first time for a bit of a loop, as a number of the comments made applied to the original and do not make any sense when looking at the B&W conversion.

    I also get a bit of a chuckle out of some of the comments, probably from people that have not shot film, regarding white balance / colour casts. For those folks a bit of a "history lesson". Films only came in daylight or tungsten colour balance. Once a particular type of film was put in the camera, we were "stuck" with that film until the end of the roll. There were color correction filters available that would let one shoot daylight films under tungsten and tungsten films under daylight, so in theory there was an option, but frankly I only knew one person who owned these filters. Bottom line is that those of us that shot daylight film using ambient light would get shots like Rob's original posting - a heavy yellow colour cast. Shooting tungsten rated film outdoors gave the image a heavy blue colour cast.
    Manfred,
    Sorry for the confusion, but any subsequent readers will just have to figure it out unless Donald wants to add an explanation somewhere or other.
    I was never "stuck" with a particular film in my camera until it was finished because very early on I was taught how to do mid-roll rewinds in cameras with and without motors or stop-backs, and I do it all the time.
    And I too own the colour correction filters for daylight and tungsten films.
    Robert

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •