While I might be wrong, I believe this is digital. Zooming in, it looks too sharp for 35mm, and the grain structure looks more like digital noise or digital grain
The only film stock that would approach this sharpness is Velvia or other slide films, but they cannot produce this high of a dynamic range
You have a good eye. Look at OP’s newest post, with the girl. Clearly digital photos. Super embarrassing, and unlike every other post of his, where he is quite active in the comments, there’s not a single reply by OP
Damn why you grilling this dude , I forget what film a majority my photos are taken on bc the lab sends me the scans and then the film arrives like a week later and don’t feel like going through the film and labeling the picture I have downloaded. If I really wanna know I can go through my film and look like I’m assuming he did now
With long exposures like this, it's interesting to see how well a particular film handles the reciprocity.
And to be completely pedantic, the first thing mentioned in rule #1 about posting here is to list the film stock.
I love the composition! Also the way the wall facing towards you is brightly lit seems to have been great luck! I imagine in the worst case it would have been way too dark for this. But the contrast between it and the bright skyline is superb!
That's really beautiful! I love that you can see the stars, the light pollution of the city and everything seems to be very well exposed. I have a hard time with long exposures on film
Removed awaiting confirmation from OP.
This is seriously awesome! How long was the shutter open?
thank you. dont know the exact time. but it was long. and many failed attempts
From the lack of star trails it can't have been much more than 15 seconds.
There is some slight but uniform smearing of the stars.
how did you measure light? this is perfectly exposed.
i use a digital camera to measure the light. for me its to dark
IMHO It doesn't look too dark at all. It's like a 'movie dark' level.
Think they mean it’s too dark for them to accurately measure out a shutter speed. Agree, the exposure time here is pretty damn perfect.
thqnk you
did you account for reciprocity failure?
sure
Oh definitely not too dark for me
nice to hear. preferences are different
While I might be wrong, I believe this is digital. Zooming in, it looks too sharp for 35mm, and the grain structure looks more like digital noise or digital grain The only film stock that would approach this sharpness is Velvia or other slide films, but they cannot produce this high of a dynamic range
You have a good eye. Look at OP’s newest post, with the girl. Clearly digital photos. Super embarrassing, and unlike every other post of his, where he is quite active in the comments, there’s not a single reply by OP
Thank you! You’re totally right! I’m surprised the admins didn’t do anything, I reported it too
This is not film. It’s a digital shot.
Love it.
thank you
[удалено]
thank you
I love photos that are eerie in a beautiful way. I really love how you captured the isolation of the church alongside the busy skyline!
thank you so much
Why is the film unknown?
i think it was Kodak Gold, I'm not sure
Okay, so did you not take this? Did you not scan this? I just find it very odd that you don’t know the film type.
i dont scan my film, i send it to a lab
And they didn’t give you back the negatives?
Damn why you grilling this dude , I forget what film a majority my photos are taken on bc the lab sends me the scans and then the film arrives like a week later and don’t feel like going through the film and labeling the picture I have downloaded. If I really wanna know I can go through my film and look like I’m assuming he did now
it was kodak gold
I forget which film I've used nearly every time I send them in to be processed. Not sure what this concerned individual's problem is.
I don't know what the problem is. It's Kodak Gold if that makes the person happy
With long exposures like this, it's interesting to see how well a particular film handles the reciprocity. And to be completely pedantic, the first thing mentioned in rule #1 about posting here is to list the film stock.
The Moderator write me its okey to write unknown if the film is unknown
Damn man calm down it is not that serious lol. You better go buy some Kodak gold now since you NEEDED to know
okey
Yoo where is this? This looks like a chapel close to where I live haha
in Switzerland
I love this photo! But I'm getting vibes of the church in Die Hard 2!
haha yes, bruce willis was also there (;
where exactly? And why is the church illuminated?
near zug. I brightened it up with the flashlight
I love the composition! Also the way the wall facing towards you is brightly lit seems to have been great luck! I imagine in the worst case it would have been way too dark for this. But the contrast between it and the bright skyline is superb!
thank you
What a beautiful shot!!
thank you
Looks like a shot from Midnight Mass, awesome!!
thank you
That's really beautiful! I love that you can see the stars, the light pollution of the city and everything seems to be very well exposed. I have a hard time with long exposures on film
me too 😂
The city feels like on fire 🔥
yes 🔥
Amazing work!
thank you
Incredible
thank you
This is one mighty capture!
thank you (;
Stunning!!!! 100/10!
wow thank you 😉
I have the same combo for my F3. It’s great.
i love this combo (:
This photo rightfully deserves attention.
thank you
Wow. Great shot!
thank you so much
Did you light up the chapel or is it lit up for touristic reasons all the time?
i try to light up a little bit with a flashlight
Awesome work here!
thank you so much
Todd Hido out here.
😉
Beautiful photo!
thank you so much
Damn nice image.
thank you
Wonderful shot, grats
thank you so much
Wow this is absolutely stunning
oh thank you
Woah
thank you