no words


Status
Not open for further replies.

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,784
0
36
Singapore, Bedok
Heavy vignetting, flare, no eye contact, slanted horizon, blown sky, dirty negative, ... sorry, i don't quite get this one... pinhole camera???
 

khairi

Senior Member
Apr 6, 2004
2,526
0
36
44
yishun
inbloomblog.multiply.com
ST1100 said:
Heavy vignetting, flare, no eye contact, slanted horizon, blown sky, dirty negative, ... sorry, i don't quite get this one... pinhole camera???
this is a lomo cam...it has all the defects to make a pict look old.
 

patch17

New Member
Jun 30, 2003
723
0
0
here and there
ST1100 said:
Heavy vignetting, flare, no eye contact, slanted horizon, blown sky, dirty negative, ... sorry, i don't quite get this one... pinhole camera???
holga 120S.

shot from the slope, was losing my footing and starting to slide down.
 

Clown

Moderator
Staff member
Mar 24, 2003
3,779
1
38
Singapore
no offence, but this thread gave me an idea to toy with..

i'm gonna try to create the most technically wrong photo that i can come up with...
 

clive

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2002
2,536
0
0
Visit site
Clown said:
no offence, but this thread gave me an idea to toy with..

i'm gonna try to create the most technically wrong photo that i can come up with...
which is quite easy..dont mount lens, dont load film...but that will give u a blank picture only..hehe =)
 

patch17

New Member
Jun 30, 2003
723
0
0
here and there
Clown said:
no offence, but this thread gave me an idea to toy with..

i'm gonna try to create the most technically wrong photo that i can come up with...
no worries. :D

feel free to try. in my book, technically wrong doesn't necessarily mean a bad photo.
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,784
0
36
Singapore, Bedok
Oh, i just noticed that it's the negative that's slanted, not the picture. The horizontal wall in the background is actually quite parallel to the negative's top and bottom edges.

And that the 'flare spot' in the picture is possibly not a flare spot but a scanning artifect, bcoz the flare spot actually extends outside the picture area in the negative.

But technicals aside, i'm still don't quite 'understand' the pic.
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,784
0
36
Singapore, Bedok
Clown said:
no offence, but this thread gave me an idea to toy with..

i'm gonna try to create the most technically wrong photo that i can come up with...
It's very easy to take 'technically wrong' photos. It's very hard to take technically wrong photos that turn out very good.
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
47
singapore
www.larryloh.com
ST1100 said:
And that the 'flare spot' in the picture is possibly not a flare spot but a scanning artifect, bcoz the flare spot actually extends outside the picture area in the negative.
if it's a Holga, it's probably not a flare spot or scanning artifect. it's more likely a light leak from the camera, which exposes part of the film. ;)
 

patch17

New Member
Jun 30, 2003
723
0
0
here and there
Larry said:
if it's a Holga, it's probably not a flare spot or scanning artifect. it's more likely a light leak from the camera, which exposes part of the film. ;)
yup, that's correct. this light leak is in every picture from the roll.
 

LiOnElLiN

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2004
818
0
16
www.zelesjen.com
i like your idea of using parts of the film to actually frame up the picture!
it gives it a different touch...
nothing right or wrong about this picture, but definitely stands out :thumbsup:
 

patch17

New Member
Jun 30, 2003
723
0
0
here and there
here's another one where i scanned the negative and inverted it with PS. the picture in the contact print for this negative came out way under exposed, it was practically all black, as the guy was sleeping in the shade.



but by using this method, i'm able to get a picture that's interesting and printable, in my humble opinion. :D
 

TRiShnDaisy

New Member
Sep 19, 2003
264
0
0
Cool. Just cool. :thumbsup:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.