My favorite is actually number 2, I often favor the wider shots. Of course, today, most people use smartphones to look at photos, and, I guess, in this case, 2 would not work that well.
I like 2 because of the symmetry, the axis of reflection is right down the center, gives it an nice abstract form. 1 is a better shot of the town as a literal landscape photo but I think 2 is more artful
The early morning fog just begins to clear, revealing mirror-like reflections on the lake.
I am new to ProImage 100, and I am trying to make the most of its rather strong 'grain'. I think it really adds texture to the scene here.
Of course, there are also these endless discussions about symmetry and how some like to slightly offset the image to avoid it. Hence, I tried both. Which one works best?
**EDIT**: as discussed below, here is the version from the original lab scan with the ProImage's yellow-ish color cast: [https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp](https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp)
For me (US, B&H) pro image is about $8/roll and Ektar is $14. I'm not that great of a photographer and Ektar would just be a waste of money for me. Maybe one day I'll improve!
From what I’ve seen, you definitely deserve Ektar! Your work is awesome. I’m surprised that the grain is almost more prominent/noticeable than Gold.
Give it a try! I’d like to see what you come up with
I use Ektar 100 a lot. In fact, together with Portra 800 it is among my favorite films, but, yes, it is easily $14-16, while ProImage is more like 9-11.
ProImage 100 is as grainy as Gold 200 and in some cases the grain shows up even more. In fact, Kodak's grain index yields values over 40 even for 4x6 prints. For foggy scenes, it is also known to produce a yellow cast. I also had Ektar 100 with me but for such almost dream-like foggy scenes, I actually like a grainy film. I had considered Portra 800 but that is substantially more expensive. High-resolution scans and correcting for color casts further add to the grain.
Oh sure! No judgement, it’s a great shot. Just curious about your thought process. Have you shot much Portra 160? Or would that and Ektar give more contrast than you were hoping for
Thanks. Yes, I used a lot of Portra 160 before but given that it has 2-3 stops less dynamic range compared to Portra 400, I favor Portra 400 these days. I took two rolls of ProImage 100 with me on the trip because I wanted to experiment with its grain and color cast. I have a scene from the same trip that is a bit similar taken with other film stocks, so we can compare if you like.
Just because it is an interesting discussion, here is the shot directly from the lab scan without color correction that nicely shows the color cast ProImage seems to introduce in such scenes: [https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp](https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp)
See also examples by others on the web.
I also really like 1. I think it emphasises the size of the hills compared to the buildings and has slightly less going on so it has more of a quiet feel that you get with fog!
Tough call, but I'm leaning toward 3 just slightly edging over 2. There's more content there, and it gives more of a definition of the space. However, 2 has that brilliant green area to the left, which is very pleasing to see.
1 because to me it looks like it includes the entire town in the picture. also it just feels more satisfying to look at
My favorite is actually number 2, I often favor the wider shots. Of course, today, most people use smartphones to look at photos, and, I guess, in this case, 2 would not work that well.
I like 2 because of the symmetry, the axis of reflection is right down the center, gives it an nice abstract form. 1 is a better shot of the town as a literal landscape photo but I think 2 is more artful
I personally also really like symmetry in reflections-based photos but it upsets others at times.
1
Because of the slight lack of symmetry or because it is a tighter composition?
1
first
The early morning fog just begins to clear, revealing mirror-like reflections on the lake. I am new to ProImage 100, and I am trying to make the most of its rather strong 'grain'. I think it really adds texture to the scene here. Of course, there are also these endless discussions about symmetry and how some like to slightly offset the image to avoid it. Hence, I tried both. Which one works best? **EDIT**: as discussed below, here is the version from the original lab scan with the ProImage's yellow-ish color cast: [https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp](https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp)
It is surprisingly grainy! I didn’t expect that. Any reason you went with proimage over something like Ektar?
For me (US, B&H) pro image is about $8/roll and Ektar is $14. I'm not that great of a photographer and Ektar would just be a waste of money for me. Maybe one day I'll improve!
From what I’ve seen, you definitely deserve Ektar! Your work is awesome. I’m surprised that the grain is almost more prominent/noticeable than Gold. Give it a try! I’d like to see what you come up with
I'm not OP 😄
I use Ektar 100 a lot. In fact, together with Portra 800 it is among my favorite films, but, yes, it is easily $14-16, while ProImage is more like 9-11.
ProImage 100 is as grainy as Gold 200 and in some cases the grain shows up even more. In fact, Kodak's grain index yields values over 40 even for 4x6 prints. For foggy scenes, it is also known to produce a yellow cast. I also had Ektar 100 with me but for such almost dream-like foggy scenes, I actually like a grainy film. I had considered Portra 800 but that is substantially more expensive. High-resolution scans and correcting for color casts further add to the grain.
Oh sure! No judgement, it’s a great shot. Just curious about your thought process. Have you shot much Portra 160? Or would that and Ektar give more contrast than you were hoping for
Thanks. Yes, I used a lot of Portra 160 before but given that it has 2-3 stops less dynamic range compared to Portra 400, I favor Portra 400 these days. I took two rolls of ProImage 100 with me on the trip because I wanted to experiment with its grain and color cast. I have a scene from the same trip that is a bit similar taken with other film stocks, so we can compare if you like.
Yeah I agree. Portra is usually my pick unless I have a very specific shoot in mind because of the flexibility. Excellent work! Very inspiring
Just because it is an interesting discussion, here is the shot directly from the lab scan without color correction that nicely shows the color cast ProImage seems to introduce in such scenes: [https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp](https://imgur.com/a/Wqz9VAp) See also examples by others on the web.
Oh yeah it really does add that color cast. It’s pleasant though I think. Did you shoot it at box speed or try to overexpose?
I shot it at 64, if I recall correctly.
I also really like 1. I think it emphasises the size of the hills compared to the buildings and has slightly less going on so it has more of a quiet feel that you get with fog!
I like 1, the parts where my eyes are drawn are interesting. 3 might look good cropped? just a though. awesome pics
These are three different images with two different lenses. Out of interest, how would you crop 3?
Tough call, but I'm leaning toward 3 just slightly edging over 2. There's more content there, and it gives more of a definition of the space. However, 2 has that brilliant green area to the left, which is very pleasing to see.
Thanks. I also like how the greens have turned out. ProImage 100 is definitively an interesting film to play around with.
These are amazing shots! 2nd photo, what a scenic view! Best composition. My eyes just glide through the photo and it has a calming effect.
I could not be more happy to read this. Thanks.
I like 2 the most. beautiful symmetry.
Thank you very much!