Photographs by Kenneth Parker
April 28, 2005 10:47 AM   Subscribe

Kenneth Parker - photographer.
posted by Gyan (23 comments total)
 
yawn.

how is this relevant for discussion?
posted by stevejensen at 10:58 AM on April 28, 2005


Hi stevejensen, and welcome to metafilter. This is a place where we post interesting and cool things we find on the web. Some engender discussion, and some don't. Photography, for example, is a category that has long been a source of interesting posts, like this one.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:05 AM on April 28, 2005


Thanks Gyan. A friend just visited Arizona and bought back a print of his and I had been meaning to check him out. I like the way he calls himself a "large format landscape colorist".
posted by iconomy at 11:14 AM on April 28, 2005


Excellent link, Gyan. I begrudge an SLR for long hiking trips so the idea of carrying large format equipment is incredible. Or is that what assistants are for?
posted by Huw at 11:15 AM on April 28, 2005


Wow, those are some amazing images. I've tried slowing down my shutter to get that cool running water effect. It never comes out looking like that though. I must be missing something (like you know talent).
posted by willnot at 11:16 AM on April 28, 2005


how is this relevant for discussion?

What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.
posted by StickyCarpet at 11:19 AM on April 28, 2005


You need a looong exposure to get that "cool running water effect". Which means a monopod at the very least, a tripod is better.

The Peeling Wall is really neat. Just the idea of seeing it and saying "hey, I could get a good picture out of that"....
posted by jlkr at 11:22 AM on April 28, 2005


I've tried slowing down my shutter to get that cool running water effect. It never comes out looking like that though.

The trick is to use a neutral density filter so that you can get the exposure length up.
posted by kindall at 11:29 AM on April 28, 2005


I'm familiar with the photography of Peter Parker, but this is much more impressive work. Thanks for sharing.
posted by Jart at 11:31 AM on April 28, 2005


Yep, 51 outstanding photos in one single gallery with thumbnails large enough to appreciate even without clicking through. It makes for a single spectacular page totally worth my time and bandwidth.

The site itself is a nice example of simple presentation, although I would love some nav within the popup.

I get a bit exhausted with the number of clicks it sometimes takes to get a sense of some photographers' work, the way so much photography is presented online. There is often too much emphasis on single photos, and thumbnails are often too tiny for my tastes. (I am personally guilty of way too tiny thumbs...)
posted by KS at 11:42 AM on April 28, 2005


Beautiful!
posted by prostyle at 11:44 AM on April 28, 2005


and here I am, stuck in an office. I need a vacation.

Thanks for the link!
posted by pmbuko at 11:46 AM on April 28, 2005


1. Landscape photography isn't my cup of tea, but these are quite nice. I bet that they're much more impressive in print.

2. Anything slower than 1/15 should be plenty slow enough to get the blurred water. Tripod a necessity.
posted by R590 at 11:47 AM on April 28, 2005


Wow. I have to admit my first reaction when I saw the post was "What, photography again?" but as soon as I clicked on the link my jaw dropped in awe. Thanks, Gyan.

stevejensen, I've flagged your comment as "Noise" and I hope it goes away. Please don't do that again.
posted by languagehat at 11:51 AM on April 28, 2005


I used to use a 1/4 second exposure for that cool running water effect. Too long and it doesn't look like water anymore.

Huw, I agree, in these days of miniaturization, lugging around an SLR does seem arduous. Have some pity, though, for these guys.
posted by QuietDesperation at 11:52 AM on April 28, 2005


The problem with many cameras is if you increase the exposure time all you'll get is a blown-out photo. The ND filter mentioned above essentially reduces the amount of light available, allowing you to extend exposure time you need to capture the motion of running water.
posted by linux at 12:18 PM on April 28, 2005


Another way to do it is to wait till dusk or dawn. ;)
posted by linux at 12:19 PM on April 28, 2005


> You need a looong exposure to get that "cool running water effect".
> Which means a monopod at the very least, a tripod is better.

In the case of this particular artist, a sturdy tripod system that works with large format cameras, since it's what he's using.

> I've tried slowing down my shutter to get that cool running water
> effect. It never comes out looking like that though. I must be missing
> something (like you know talent).

Most likely technique. I have no talent and I can get the running water effect when I need it. What you need to do is use a tripod and meter appropriately. If, because of the ambiant light, you can't go slower than the required 1/10 of a second (or so, i depends on how fast the water is running,) you need to use a bigger aperture value (a smaller aperture hole) to diminish the amount of light that reaches the sensor/film, forcing you to open the shutter for a longer time in order to obtain proper exposure. Failing that, use a neutral density filter -- it's a gray filter that will just cut the amount of light, forcing you to use longer exposure (or smaller apperture value, in your case, you probably want longer exposure time.)

Use your camera in a mode where you have control over the shutter speed -- I use manual mode all the time.

This is my take on the running water effect. I used a Olympus 3040Z old digicam, with a neutral density filter (ND2, halves the amount of light reaching the sensor) and a warming filter 81B (IIRC.) I used the spot meter to place the white where I wanted them, at +1.7 departing from the gray card metering I did first (of course, I've been testing my camera to know that a 1 and 2/3 of a stop past middle gray, my camera retain details in the highlights (good quick intro on the Zone
system here.

Also note that some digicam have a built-in ND filter, like the Canon G3. I like the concept, but I've never tried it.
posted by NewBornHippy at 12:30 PM on April 28, 2005


I'm not even a fan of photography, but that lot will give you daydreams.
Nice link, Gyan.
posted by NinjaPirate at 1:43 PM on April 28, 2005


This guy groks color! I love it! colorcolorcolor YUM.
posted by foozleface at 2:25 PM on April 28, 2005


It never comes out looking like that though. I must be missing something (like you know talent).

No, just a simple tripod will suffice.

The trick is to use a neutral density filter so that you can get the exposure length up.

Or decrease your f-stop. Or decrease your film speed. Or wait until dusk.

Too long and it doesn't look like water anymore.

Try a really long exposure, like 5 minutes. Then it starts looking cool again.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:07 PM on April 28, 2005


Nothing beats large format.
posted by alexwoods at 5:11 PM on April 28, 2005


Ah, these are so lovely - dreamscapes, like places I imagined when reading fairy tales as a child. What a wonderful body of work. Thanks, Gyan - these made my day.
posted by madamjujujive at 9:38 PM on April 28, 2005


« Older Have you seen this child?   |   Forced Marriage Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments