Post your architectural photos here

[MattKing]

I'm comforted.

 

[Jman13]

These two are with my Fujifilm X100V. I also took a shot this morning in different light with my C330 and Fuji 400H, but I'll have to wait until that roll is finished to see that shot.

X100V:

 

[Philippe-Georges]

They say that in the second house from the right Vincent Van Hog stayed (seen from the amphitheater), Arles, Bouches-di-Rhône, PACA, France.

Hasselblad SWC, Tri-X in Pyrocat-HD

 

[bags27]

Williamsburg Bridge from the Brooklyn side. Mamiya 7 43mm orange filter Tri-X in Pyrocat HD (divided 10+)

 

[Donald Qualls]

Vincent Van Hog

Famous and deeply troubled Dutch artist/breakfast?

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Famous and deeply troubled Dutch artist/breakfast?

I might be missing something, but I can't see the relation between "deeply troubled Dutch artist" and "breakfast".

Perhaps it has to do with my too rudimentary knowledge of the English language and accompanying sophistication...

 

[TJones]

I might be missing something, but I can't see the relation between "deeply troubled Dutch artist" and "breakfast".

Perhaps it has to do with my too rudimentary knowledge of the English language and accompanying sophistication...

I believe autocorrect thwarted your attempt to write “Van Gogh”.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I believe autocorrect thwarted your attempt to write “Van Gogh”.

Oh yes...

 

[Moose22]

Oh yes...

Mmmmmm bacon....

And, I also like the shot you took. I can see deep enough in to the shadows that the streets aren't black, and the sky has detail. And white buildings. I aspire to that.

I have been looking for a week, but I took a nearly identical photograph to yours of the wall at Ypres when last I visited, maybe 15 years ago. Yours is nicer, but I love when I can think "I was there!" with your shots.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Mmmmmm bacon....

And, I also like the shot you took. I can see deep enough in to the shadows that the streets aren't black, and the sky has detail. And white buildings. I aspire to that.

I have been looking for a week, but I took a nearly identical photograph to yours of the wall at Ypres when last I visited, maybe 15 years ago. Yours is nicer, but I love when I can think "I was there!" with your shots.

I never understood how people could have beacon, eggs and beans, even sausages (!) at breakfast, and drink (sloppy) coffee, tea, milk, or even orange juice with it (some have a beer), unbelievable...

For me it's home baken brown bread (croissants at Sunday), real butter and confiture with a little bit of chia seed sprinkled over it, some yogurt, with a pot of good and strong black coffee (made in the Bialetti) no sugar.

About the tonality of the shadows, mids and whites: that's partially due to the Pyrocatechin (I don't mind the grain), the film's emulsion, yellow filter and last but not least Carl Zeiss (for the 'sweet' contrast, less the sharpness), at one side, and, at the other side, the rain during the night clearing out the dust from the air.


And here is an other one for you...

 

[Jman13]

Mamiya C330f, 80mm f/2.8, Fuji Pro 400H, self developed:

 

[Moose22]

the rain during the night clearing out the dust from the air.


And here is an other one for you...

View attachment 305747

Nice. It's a good scene for the panoramic format. I was there only a few times, and never had a chance to scout good scenes and good times for the light. But it is an interesting town to visit.

And I love the day after a rain. It doesn't happen much here, but sometimes after a winter storm, the light at 7am will be really special.

Edit: Here's one from a different angle, though not the one I was thinking of.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Basilica, Saint-Quentin, departement de l'Aisne, Picardie, France

Hasselblad 500 CM and Planaar 80mm, full open aperture (ambient light) on Tri-X @ 1600ASA in X-tol 1+1

 

[Jman13]

Not sure this entirely fits as an architectural shot, but it really doesn't fit into any of the other categories for sharing either, and it is about the leading to a building.

Canon EOS R5 with RF 14-35mm f/4L IS:

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Basilica, Saint-Quentin, departement de l'Aisne, Picardie, France

Hasselblad 500 CM and Planaar 80mm, full open aperture (ambient light) on Tri-X @ 1600ASA in X-tol 1+1

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Why is it that since the latest reworking of this forum, my pictures are missing that piqué I used to have here?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Not sure what you mean, Phillipe-Georges -- to my eye, there's no change in the appearance of your posted images since the upgrades. I see very good tonality and contrast (both my home computer and the one I read the forum on at work have pretty good monitors), as well as sharpness that seems mainly limited by the pixel count.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Basilica, Saint-Quentin, departement de l'Aisne, Picardie, France

View attachment 306196

Hasselblad 500 CM and Planaar 80mm, full open aperture (ambient light) on Tri-X @ 1600ASA in X-tol 1+1

Was someone asking about getting shadow details? Optimus primus!

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Thanks Donald for your reaction, perhaps the dimensions I use are at the lowest side: 818x819 px.

Thanks Sirius for the complement.
I once borrowed a friend's Mamiya 645 and shot the same kind of pictures (medieval architecture) on the same emulsion and developed the same way, I didn't get the same broad tonality but more contrast and sharpness. And I didn't like the 'narrow' rectangular ratio of 3x4, 6x6 is really my cup of tea...
Since then, I definitely went for the Carl Zeiss glass, perhaps a tad less sharpness and contrast but a more broader tonality range.
Anyway, it's a somewhat complex combination of glass, recording (shooting), emulsion, processing, printing/postprocessing, and personal interpretation, in other words 'fun'.

And here is a next one from the same location (and specs).

 

[Stephen Benskin]

Caerlaverock Castle, Scotland​

 

[MattKing]

Thanks Donald for your reaction, perhaps the dimensions I use are at the lowest side: 818x819 px.

I too like the current results.
The new uploader seems to be happy with larger files, so it is worth trying.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I definitely went for the Carl Zeiss glass, perhaps a tad less sharpness and contrast but a more broader tonality range.

I won't call a Tessar "unsharp" but there are only so many aberrations you can fully correct with four elements. That said, if the result on the film is good enough for a 6x print to look sharp and there isn't excessive flare, I don't know why anyone would complain.

And I wasn't saying your upload size is too small, just that on the size we can see all at once on a common PC screen, sharpness is mostly an illusion of microcontrast.

I'll keep using my Reflex II (Kodak Anatar, 4e/4g early 1950s coating) and be happy with the results when I nail both focus and exposure, and when I can stand the weight, I'll haul out my RB67 with its more modern lenses. And usually find myself wishing for my Graphic View II...

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I won't call a Tessar "unsharp" but there are only so many aberrations you can fully correct with four elements. That said, if the result on the film is good enough for a 6x print to look sharp and there isn't excessive flare, I don't know why anyone would complain.

And I wasn't saying your upload size is too small, just that on the size we can see all at once on a common PC screen, sharpness is mostly an illusion of microcontrast.

I'll keep using my Reflex II (Kodak Anatar, 4e/4g early 1950s coating) and be happy with the results when I nail both focus and exposure, and when I can stand the weight, I'll haul out my RB67 with its more modern lenses. And usually find myself wishing for my Graphic View II...

I don't know what it is with vintage glass, and I wouldn't sing the nostalgic song now, but that 'somthing' just pleases me.
That's why I make a difference between North-Western glass and Oriental and chose the first.
Even so I have the impression that there is a, although minor, difference between the single coated (chrome-) Carl Zeiss and the (black-) T* ones, the latter are dating from the 'colour age' while the first ones are 'dinosaurs' from the B&W age, but, again, that(s a personal opinion...

And yes, the Planar, the Sonnar, the Distagon and the Biogon are sharp, but "je ne sais quoi" [in the sense used by D. Bouhours dans Entretiens d`Ariste et d`Eugène, 1671]...

 

[Moose22]

Experimenting with tri-x. And composition.

Leica M3, zeiss f/2 planar 50mm, xtol stock.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Experimenting with tri-x. And composition.

Leica M3, zeiss f/2 planar 50mm, xtol stock.

Allow me, dear Moose22, to 'participate' in your experimenting, and I do hope not to offend you.

What I see is what is to be seen in many photographs of buildings made with a wide angle lens, or an any other focal, and without vertical perspective control.
When tilting the camera/lens backwards in order to frame the whole building (top) in the picture, one must be aware to keep the upstanding middle line of the building exactly up right and parallel to the vertical middel line of the composition, this must be dome rather accurate.
So the building will not give the impression of 'falling' backwards.

In this example, the middle line is somewhere near the corner, between the narrow vertical windows of the dark part of this buiding.

I know, it's very difficult to do without a direct viewfinder and not having a fine grid on the matte glass (which the Leica M doesn't have).
A way to overcome this disadvantage is to put a linear spirit level, parallel to the film plane, on the camera mounted on a tripod.

I hope you will not have hard feelings for what I just told you...

I have to admit that the tonality of this photograph is very good, and the 'black' of the tree, at the left, stands well in contrast with the 'whites' of the reflection in the windows, at the right side.