Re: HIE for Weddings

["Willem-Jan Markerink" <w.j.markerink@xxxxx>]

On 15 Aug 96 at 20:03, Stanee Rae Pettit Murray wrote:

> I'm glad the couple liked the pictures!  I'd be surprised if they didn't.  I
> had a beautiful shot in the shade where the negative also turned out very
> overexposed.  The lab who does all my competition prints (Jonathan Penney,
> B&W Darkroom Services, 6 Adelaide Park, Center Moriches, NY, USA, 11934,
> Phone (516)-874-3409) had an explanation.  Mr. Penney said that the built-in
> meter only reads visible light, and would tell the camera to give more
> exposure in the shade.  But just because it's shady doesn't mean the
> infrared is low, too.  

It just struck me that this shade light might also be responsible for
a large amount of HIE's unworldly-ness. I just went over a collection
of IR prints....check the differences between shade of buildings vs
foliage: direct sunlit building-shade shows much darker than shade
under trees. Note that this distinction is most noticeable with 
IR-only shots, ie Wratten #87 and darker filters.


> >Btw, I also shot some of the pic's with fill-in flash, for the
> >backlight compositions (the background scenery was convincing in a
> >few cases): I think this might even save the IR shots on a really
> >dull grey overcast day. 
> >Have you ever used flash for those occasions, Stanee?
> > 
> 
> I've never used flash with HIE.  Since I carried my 35mm camera around my
> neck for quick switches between it and my Bronica, I didn't want to have the
> added bulk of a strobe bracket.  But I don't see any reason why you couldn't
> use flash.  I also told the couples in advance that the HIE was done only on
> a "time and weather permitting" basis.  I didn't want to make any promises I
> couldn't keep if we ended up not taking outdoor photos, or if things were
> running late.

Yep, this wheather dependance frightened me too (it was bright light, 
but not a clear blue sky), but the results were better than I 
expected. But using a flash might even allow good shots on real dull 
days....
 

> So, Willem, have you ever tried hand-coloring your HIE prints?

Christ, I just shot my first wedding, *and* my first wedding with HIE,
and now you want me to start handcoloring them too?....8-))

Serious, I mentioned sepia toning to the married couple, but they
weren't into this. I know handcoloring can be way different than
that, but I guess they went for the basic black and white, nothing
fancy. I also shot 2 rolls of Kodak color neg's along, and I used a
Cokin spot diffuser for those. Also never used that filter before
(bought it for a few bucks on a photo fair), but even those pic's
turned out much nicer than I thought. I briefly considered using
this spot diffuser with HIE as well, but I think that would have
been too much, and it would have taken more frames to get all
variations (I didn't want to change the film in the heat of the
battle!). Will definately try it some time (anyone done that?).


> 
> Stanee
> 
> P.S.--don't forget to enter the contest for a FREE flatbed scanner at
> www.agfahome.com, they give one away each month!  If you go to the winner's
> page, you will see my photo as the May 1996 winner.  (Just so you know who
> you're talking to.)

Ah, must remember that. I had a few extra prints made from these HIE
wedding neg's, so Cor can look forward to some Gallery input....;-))
Also found a series of small prints from previous highlights, once 
made for the purpose of scanning, but never got around it. Even a few 
dazzling beautiful swing lens panorama's.

Got some time to scan a dozen of pic's, Cor?....;-))





--
Bye,

       _/      _/       _/_/_/_/_/       _/_/_/_/_/
     _/  _/  _/               _/       _/  _/  _/
     _/  _/ illem    _/     _/ an    _/  _/  _/ arkerink
                     _/_/_/  


The difference 
between men and boys
is the price of their toys

<w.j.markerink@xxxxx>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]

------------------------------

Topic No. 9