Malibu Noir RevisitedMonday, July 08, 2013
|Pentax MX, 20mm Fuji Superia 800|
Of late, perhaps this last year I have developed a technique that few of my contemporaries seem to understand.
I first had inkling three years ago when I was at the north rim of the Grand Canyon. The light was fading quickly and in my possession I had:
1. Pentax MX with a 20mm wide angle and colour slide film.
2. A Nikon FM-2 with Slide film and various lenses including a fisheye.
3. A Nikon FM-2 with b+w film and various lenses.
4. One Mamiya RB-67 Pro-SD with two backs, one loaded with b+w film and the other with colour slide.
5. A Noblex swivel panoramic camera I which I had to decide if I wanted to load it with b+w or colour slide.
Next to me was a photographer with one very expensive Canon DSLR.
I felt silly and I almost believe that the man with the Canon thought I was a fool.
|Nikon FM-2 24mm lens, Fuji Superia 800|
My argument, one that I cannot seem to explain to anybody is that even though a shot taken with a digital camera can be interpreted later as colour or b+w, it can be cropped, it can be given more contrast plus there are all kinds of other option, the photographer is still working on one image.
In my case I have many similar shots but no identical ones. Is this good or bad? I think this is good. I am not sure that in any shooting situation there has to be a definitive one.
To illustrate my side of the story I am going to reproduce here three different shots of Bronwen Marsden in my Chevrolet Malibu.
|Nikon FM-2 Kodak T-Max 400 pushed to 800 ISO|
One was taken with a Pentax MX for which I have a beautifully corrected 20mm wide angle. The film was Fuji Superia 800 ISO colour negative film.
The second picture was with one of my Nikon FM-2s, a 24mm wide angle and the same Fuji Superia 800.
The third shot I took with a Nikon FM-2, the 22mm lens and Kodak T-Max 400 ISO film pushed to 800.
This last shot I reinterpreted with the shadow/highlight tool of Photoshop. I can do the same thing with the negative in the darkroom.