Tree Skeleton in Waves - Hungry Head, NSW

[Greenspeed]

Camera - 8 x 10 field camera; exposed 75 seconds. F22
Film - Ilford FP4 rated at iso 80
Developed in Rodinal 1:50 dilution
Scanner - Epson V700

[seaslug]

Pleasant image but I can't see that there are waves there.. more like fog.

[P Plates]

Being a diver Greg never likes the long exposure ocean shots. I however do. I think this would look very ordinary with wave action, the long exposure suits the subject and enhances it IMO. Nicely composed also.

[seaslug]

Being a diver Greg never likes the long exposure ocean shots. I however do. I think this would look very ordinary with wave action, the long exposure suits the subject and enhances it IMO. Nicely composed also.

I won't apologise for the comment but I realise a lot of others think milky water is a preferred method of illustrating the sea. From an artistic point of view it can and does soften an image and give an impression of mist which can be very pleasing to look at but unrealistic in truth.

This is a very nice overall image, however the title suggests there are waves around the tree. I don't believe this type of treatment shows that.

Skeleton in the mist might describe it better.

[P Plates]

I don't have a problem with you not liking long exp oceans - would be a boring world if we all liked the same thing and certainly didn't expect you to apologise for your preference.

[wacko-ocker]

Hi Greenspeed
thank you for posting
there is some thing about film processing that digital camera's just can not reproduce.
Hungry Head is a great place to shot or any where on the Mid North Coast

[Greenspeed]

Thanks all. Appreciate all comments.

Maybe this would suit the title more. I called this "Last stand"



The little ball on the top left is the moon. Unfortunately time exposure just turn it into a very hot ball.

There's so many places to photograph along the coast. Hungry Head is a magic place when the lighting is right.

Rod, I do agree with you on the film. I like working with film 'cos I feel that I am making the image rather than just merely taking it. Manual exposure, getting the chemistry right and developing the negative to the right density etc. Just love the process of this image making. It is rather expensive though. Each sheet of 8 x 10 Ilford FP4 is now costing $6.80. Fortunately I do everything myself after a negative been exposed.

PS. No disrespect intended for digital medium. I still use my Sony A850 alongside my large format.

[seaslug]

This one appeals to me much more. The water movement is realistic and the composition balances very well to my eyes. Black and white treatment of the scene suits, and if I was to offer any criticism at all I'd crop out half of the sky. I'd have no problem in hanging this one on my wall. Thanks for posting!

I applaud you for still processing film. I gave that away 25 years ago and I've got to say I don't miss it now I have digital to learn and play with. (still have heaps to learn with that but I'm enjoying the challenge.)

Cheers Greg C.

[Phoenix]

I like what you are doing Greenspeed.
Taking shots of what you are seeing here and now can be great, but creating art on film, like you are, I think is pretty special.
I like the tortured looking trunk against the misty ocean, quite surreal and mystical.
Think I would prefer the bottom branch cropped out.