Fashion and functionality are rare bedfellows, more often they are poles apart. In the days of "Oxford Bags" a trouser belt would be fastened around chest-height, giving a man a feeling of safety and security - not to mention preventing chilblains in areas they are definitely not required.
The current trend seems to be for trouser waistlines to sag around hip level, revealing the fashion follower's undergarments - preferably with an embroidered designer monogram such as "Calvin Klein" or similar - the whole effect causing the crutch of the trouser to hang approximately halfway down the inner thigh. Thus giving the walking wearer the appearance of a nappy-wearing toddler who has had an unfortunate toiletry experience.
My 80-year-old mother-in-law, still as bright and brisk as a good Autumn morning, was sitting to my immediate left when I took this photo. She was writing a postcard home at the time. During a pause for thought (it's always difficult to know what to say and to compress the events of the holiday into the small space provided) she was looking for a place to put her pen for a moment. I remarked it was a pity we weren't sitting in the seats in front of us, since there seemed to be an ideal pen-holder available there. No doubt other options for practical uses are available - which would, at the very least, provide a much-needed link between functionality and fashion ...
Eddie
The only thing worse than Builder's Bum on a man is Builder's Bum on a woman. Thanks for the photograph, Eddie: I think.
ReplyDeleteIt was a breezy day, too. Ideal for goose pimple generation. With a bit of side lighting it could have been a nice texture shot...
DeleteRegards
Eddie
Goose pimple generation! Please, stop!
DeleteOn a technical note, do you feel that the M9 sensor is able to resolve more goose pimple detail than Tri-x, or less?
Mike.
(I forgot to sign the previous post).
Hi Mike
DeleteI haven't put it to the test yet. I think for a fine-grain film eg Ilford PanF and a fine-grain developer like Ilford Perceptol, that would be a combination that's hard to beat. However, with PanF / Perceptol combination I'd be working at ISO 25 or thereabouts. I've had great results with Ilford FP4+ at ISO 64 and Perceptol, too. Very smooth grain and incredible detail capture.
The digital sensor obviously shows no grain as such - and at ISO 160 (as in this shot) the detail is very, very fine. Even at ISO 400 there's nothing to see in terms of noise.
Doesn't have the same feel as film, though. I don't mean the camera - there's a visible difference in the film and digital prints.
I think the film scans that I've done so far for this blog are not the best advert for film - I seem to lose a lot during scanning. Judging by the results others are getting, I think I'm to blame (no surprise there). I'm doing a few trials with settings on the Plustek scanner - I've got a few details from others on the 'net.
Might be an idea to do a like for like comparison of M9 and film at same ISO, same subject, same lighting etc. You've just given me an idea for a future post! Thanks for that!!
I promise not to use goose-pimples for the test though...
Many thanks for the comment and the idea
Best regards
Eddie
Hilarious pic and commentary, Eddie. I sprayed my ipad with cornflakes when I got to the pen part.
ReplyDeleteipad - not an abbreviation of "incontinence pad" I hope...
DeleteNot yet! Just thinking about the M9 v film test. I think the way it's normally done puts film at a serious disadvantage, i.e.a crop from a digital file v a scan from a 35mm neg. A fairer way would be to take the same shot with each and scan an inkjet print from the M9 and a darkroom print from the 35mm neg. Like you, I sometimes look at a very nice neg and then can't believe the rubbish that comes out my scanner. It seems to magnify every tiny defect in the neg and diminish all of its good points.
ReplyDeleteHi Bruce
ReplyDeleteAgree with the comparison test - it's definitely got to be done from a print. I'm not convinced I get the best from the Plustek scanner, although I see results from others where the on-screen shot looks fantastic for sharpness, contrast etc. I've managed to get a few scanner settings from the 'net to try out - although I don't want to get too digital about the whole thing...
I don't have a print scanner, though. But I think the comparison would be interesting. The forecast is good for this weekend, so I may do a double camera outing!
Have a great weekend!
Oh, and congratulations on keeping your blog going for the past two years!!
Best regards
Eddie