I need a clearer explanation! When I tried what I thought you said, I
hit my finger in the dark while adjusting the negatives, and now I'm
looking for a new light table too.
Gregg
Dave Bulger wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, January 19, 2000 10:19 AM, Barry B. Bean
> [SMTP:bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Jan 2000 18:24:46 -0600, Dave Bulger wrote:
> >
> > >Whether I manipulate camera, film,
> > >subject, lighting, processing, printing, Photoshop, hitting the negs
> with a
> > >hammer, etc., is strictly my choice and within my area of
> responsibility.
> >
> > Could you explain your hammer technique? I've been trying a 7 lb
> > maul, but perhaps a more subtle operation is in order.
> >
>
> Barry,
>
> I've gotten my best results with a small rock hammer, striking at a 37.5
> degree angle on the base side of the neg in and around the background
> images. This distorts the film base & emulsion and gives you greater depth
> of field that is normally possible. Note that you'll have to hit the
> emulsion side if it's a transparency because everything's backwards. On
> trannies you might want to decrease your angle of attack to ensure that the
> hammer goes through all three layers of emulsion.
>
> I'd suggest tailoring your hammer selection to the format of the neg or
> tranny you're working with. I don't generally use the 7 pounder on formats
> less than 4x5 unless I'm attempting to fool the viewer into thinking I shot
> it with a pinhole camera and really need the extra DOF that such a heavy
> hammer produces.
>
> Damn! Should have started an expensive workshop to convey that secret...
> <G>
>
> Dave
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|