# Unblinking eye



## nealjpage (Nov 16, 2007)

I've never been particularly good at naming artwork, so sorry about the cliche title.

Scan from black and white print.  8x10 enlargement on Arista glossy paper.







Is this ready for critique?  Max, what says you?


----------



## ilyfel (Nov 16, 2007)

I'd love to see the orig


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 16, 2007)

ilyfel said:


> I'd love to see the orig



Thanks, Ily!


----------



## ilyfel (Nov 16, 2007)

*waits for orig*


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 16, 2007)

ilyfel said:


> *waits for orig*



It's hanging on my living room wall.  I'll have to make you a copy.


----------



## Bobby Ironsights (Nov 16, 2007)

I like the photo, it has depth, and I'd like to see the print.

But I'm not so hot on the title. I don't think a title should be so interesting that it takes away from the visual impact of the print. 

That's what the "unblinking eye" does, in this case. 

Also, the "unblinking eye" is a pretty well-known metaphor for a camera lens.

Why not try a title a little more low-key?


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 16, 2007)

Bobby Ironsights said:


> I like the photo, it has depth, and I'd like to see the print.
> 
> But I'm not so hot on the title. I don't think a title should be so interesting that it takes away from the visual impact of the print.
> 
> ...



Thanks, Bobby.

Someone at work suggested "Seen Better Days," which I don't care for, either.  Maybe I should just leave it untitled.  It's the headlight from a 1964 Chevy truck I found along the tracks one day.  Looking back on it I'm lucky I didn't get plugged with lead for trespassing.  There's a lot of mine claims up in them thar parts, and those prospectors get a little edgy! 

Oh, and I didn't know about the unblinking eye/camera lens thing!  I've got that filed away now.


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 16, 2007)

Any other comments on this one?  General are fine.  If not, I'm gonna tread lightly in the Critique forum.  Never been there before..:blushing:


----------



## cameramike (Nov 16, 2007)

i like it but i think a little more of the front clip in the shot woulda looked better. or less of the front so it was more of just the headlight.


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Nov 17, 2007)

I think there's too much middle gray in this shot. I wish it had more contrast.


----------



## Alpha (Nov 18, 2007)

What was your printing workflow?

Most of the highlights are squarely in zone 7, and the shadows are falling off pretty quickly.


----------



## craig (Nov 18, 2007)

I like the texture in this one. I bet the print is amazing. The scan seems muddy.

Love & Bass


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 18, 2007)

MaxBloom said:


> What was your printing workflow?
> 
> Most of the highlights are squarely in zone 7, and the shadows are falling off pretty quickly.



I'm gonna say right off the bat that I have no idea about what you're asking about in reference to my workflow, Max.  Do you mean my technique or something?

I'm reading up on the zone system.  Kinda makes me wish I'd taken a class in this stuff..


----------



## Alpha (Nov 18, 2007)

Well if you made a test strip, you should have seen that the highlights were too dark.


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 18, 2007)

MaxBloom said:


> Well if you made a test strip, you should have seen that the highlights were too dark.



Gottcha.  They don't _seem_ as dark in the print.  Friggin' scanner   I bet it'd be fun throwing it off the roof! 

I'll take it out of the frame and re-scan it, as the comments in the critique forum say it's too dark as well.


----------



## Alpha (Nov 18, 2007)

It's not just that they're too dark. They're flat. And that's a bigger problem.


----------



## doobs (Nov 18, 2007)

Agreed, a contrast bump would make this picture much more appealing.

Perhaps a split-filtered print would also make this print really pop.


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 18, 2007)

I'll have to go back to the darkroom next week, then and give it another shot.  The neg's good, so I should be able to bump the contrast quite a bit.


----------



## NordicWarrior111 (Nov 19, 2007)

Hi, I'm new, but I just wanted to say that I liked it. It's different from a lot of the other "car grill" shots that you find around. I would definitely experiment with the contrast, as others have said. And maybe a tip for another shot if you're interesting in trying it...Maybe move the headlight into the right horizontal third, and slightly at an angle, so the lines of the grill move the eye across to the headlight. Right now I feel almost as though the extra space to the right is a bit dead, and I think that's what makes the contrast look so flat. Yes, I think it could use a bit of contrast anyway (then again, I love high contrast), but the large gray side does accentuate the middle-tones, making it look flatter than it actually is. I hope that wasn't too big of a critique...I do like the shot.  Also, another fun one might be a tight, high angled close-up of just the exposed bulb fixture, fitting it on a third so the dish of the headlight cup really bends the shot. Anyway, old beat up cars always have a lot of character to them. A lot more than newer cars.


----------



## Alpha (Nov 19, 2007)

Yeah I think split-filter could really help here. Lay down a base shadow exposure for the interior of the grill and the light with say, a grade 2, and then go back and expose the highlights with a grade 3.  If you wanna really get into it, you could mask off the background area to the right and print it with just the 3. I'd recommend a cross-hatch test strip of the car with the two grades to proof.


----------



## nealjpage (Nov 19, 2007)

That sounds pretty advanced.  I'm still a relative novice with my Beseler 

However, it sounds exciting to learn.  I'll read up on the split-filter deal and see if I can mimic it.


----------



## Alpha (Nov 19, 2007)

Just google "split-filter printing" or "split-grade printing" and you'll get a lot of info. There's a particularly nice tutorial here (http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DYfT). In principle, it's really a rather simple technique, but gives you an unparalleled level of precision compared to more basic techniques, especially when dodging and burning are necessary.


----------

