Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Some lith prints, thank you!  (Read 1373 times)
LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« on: October 02, 2012, 09:04:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello and thank you for attention!

Lith-printing 30x30 cm by Valery Samarin, photo by Sergey Chubarov (me)...

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.


11.


12.


13.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6196



WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2012, 10:14:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Lizard, and welcome. But it looks as if your camera badly needs a CLR.
Logged

LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2012, 10:27:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Russ,

you must be joking... -)
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6196



WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2012, 10:47:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Yep.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1942


Editing Allowed


« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2012, 11:00:38 AM »
ReplyReply

These almost appear to have been made from contact printing paper negatives. Are you using Tim Rudmann's formulas?
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
amolitor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 801


WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2012, 11:05:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting effect, this isn't something I'd run across before.

I sort of like the softness, a sort of pictorialist look, perhaps? It works very well for some of these images.

Several of the images look quite good, and several look like pretty much nothing photographs you're trying to salvage by applying a whacky printing process to them.

I really really really dislike the repeated patterns of blotchiness that appear in some of there, though. That's just ugly.
Logged

- Andrew

My awesome blog about photography: http://photothunk.blogspot.com
LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2012, 11:11:06 AM »
ReplyReply

These almost appear to have been made from contact printing paper negatives. Are you using Tim Rudmann's formulas?
Sorry, but I knows nothing about Tim Rudmann's formulas to my shame...
Logged
LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2012, 11:15:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting effect, this isn't something I'd run across before.

I sort of like the softness, a sort of pictorialist look, perhaps? It works very well for some of these images.

Several of the images look quite good, and several look like pretty much nothing photographs you're trying to salvage by applying a whacky printing process to them.

I really really really dislike the repeated patterns of blotchiness that appear in some of there, though. That's just ugly.


I think there are no any repeated patterns, analog printing process itself does not involve any regularity...
Thank you all for your attention and feedback!
Logged
amolitor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 801


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2012, 11:17:40 AM »
ReplyReply

They're not really strictly repeated, what I mean is, for instance, the pattern of darker spots on #11. Sure, they're analog and randomly placed, etc. They're still quite unattractive.
Logged

- Andrew

My awesome blog about photography: http://photothunk.blogspot.com
LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2012, 11:24:55 AM »
ReplyReply

They're not really strictly repeated, what I mean is, for instance, the pattern of darker spots on #11. Sure, they're analog and randomly placed, etc. They're still quite unattractive.
OK, thank you, I can understand you... -)
Logged
shutterpup
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 489


« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2012, 12:27:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmmm. Some look like infrared conversion; don't care for that. The only one that really caught my eye as one I liked was the wooden plank bridge, walkway/not sure what to call it.
Logged
LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2012, 12:36:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmmm. Some look like infrared conversion; don't care for that. The only one that really caught my eye as one I liked was the wooden plank bridge, walkway/not sure what to call it.
Most of pictures was shooted on IR film, yes... -)
Logged
WalterEG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1155


« Reply #12 on: October 02, 2012, 01:51:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Lizard King,

Thank you for kicking my day off with something well worth looking at.  I doubt that digital delivery really does justice to the beauty of the prints themselves.

Keep on keeping on with your adventure.

Walter
Logged
Bruce Cox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 672



WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 02, 2012, 04:59:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I am spell bound by #6, though I find none of the other pictures nearly as effecting.  For me, #6 is frontal, but deep.  The others are more flat.  I see the printing more and think more about the printing in the others.

Bruce
« Last Edit: October 02, 2012, 06:00:40 PM by Bruce Cox » Logged
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1942


Editing Allowed


« Reply #14 on: October 02, 2012, 08:26:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Having shot with IR film answers the question as to why the images had a paper negative feel to them.

As to Tim Rudman: The Master Lithographer's Lith Printing Course ISBN 1-902538-02-1 This is the book I used with my advanced photo students who wanted to really get into some different stuff. It's a great book and easy to follow.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
LizardKing
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2012, 12:08:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Having shot with IR film answers the question as to why the images had a paper negative feel to them.

As to Tim Rudman: The Master Lithographer's Lith Printing Course ISBN 1-902538-02-1 This is the book I used with my advanced photo students who wanted to really get into some different stuff. It's a great book and easy to follow.

OK, thank you!
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad