My first film photo's: Abandoned Hospital

My first film photo's: Abandoned Hospital · 05:24 AM

I recently bought a Pentax ME, and here are the first results. Near where I live a hospital is about to be torn down, and last weekend they were giving tours for people who wanted to see it one last time (mainly people who used to work there). This is the building I was born in, by the way.

All were shot with a 28mm lens and a 200 ISO film and were scanned in with our shitty scanner. C&C Very welcome!

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

More here: Picasa Web Albums - Kevin Schoenmakers - Verlaten Schi...
Other pictures from the same roll: Picasa Web Albums - Kevin Schoenmakers - Faculteit Sin...

J.Scott · 03-24-2009, 05:56 AM

Small wonder their tearing it down, all the walls and floors are crroked!

I really like seeing explorations like this. We have a huge, old abandonded brewery in town that I love to go through with a camera.

Thanks for sharing.

Ira · 03-24-2009, 06:39 PM

First mistake:

You shouldn't have shot indoors to start. It's a no-win situation. Get outside into the real light.

Second, while walls can be fascinating to shoot, and I'm sure this was a moving experience for you being there in person. But it's real, REAL hard to translate that into interesting photos.

Hell, I know I sure can't do it. 99% of PROFESSIONALS can't either. That's a real talent.

Again--get outside. Photography is all about lights and surfaces, and you sure don't have that shooting under fluorescent light indoors in an institution.

fractal · 03-25-2009, 12:55 AM

I used to have an abandoned hosptial across the road from my high school and was always very intrigued by it. I was not so into photography at that time unfortunately and was usually too busy running away from teachers because that was our place to hide for a cigarette.

In any case i don't think they are bad photos, but i would have liked to see these in B&W.

Going against Ira's advice, i don't think it was a bad idea to shoot indoors, although, i would have liked to see some shots of the building. But to get a true feel of abandoned you need to be in the interior of the building. Thanks for sharing.

Damn Brit · 03-25-2009, 01:12 AM

For your first outing with film you have done pretty good Kevin. Watch the diagonal shooting angles though, they get boring very quickly. The occasional well composed diagonal shot can be impressive but a whole bunch suggests lack of imagination IMO.
Also, if you have another opportunity for a shoot like that, find a way to introduce some bright colour into the scenes. Notice in your shot with the red sign how it changes the feel of the picture compared to the ones that don't have any bright colour in them.

With regards to the comments from Ira above, don't let them worry you. Those kind of negative comments are ill conceived and counterproductive. Fortunately this forum isn't very tolerant of that kind of behavior so it doesn't happen often.

kevinschoenmakers · 03-25-2009, 02:14 AM

Yes I went a bit overboard this time with the diagonal photo's. I don't know why.

The lack of colour was a pain, I tried to get as much signs and stuff into the pictures, but the whole hospital was just one white-ish colour. Had I known in advance I'd be taking pictures here a B/W film would have maybe fit the occasion better.

Peter Zack · 03-25-2009, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by Damn Brit

For your first outing with film you have done pretty good Kevin. Watch the diagonal shooting angles though, they get boring very quickly. The occasional well composed diagonal shot can be impressive but a whole bunch suggests lack of imagination IMO.
Also, if you have another opportunity for a shoot like that, find a way to introduce some bright colour into the scenes. Notice in your shot with the red sign how it changes the feel of the picture compared to the ones that don't have any bright colour in them.

With regards to the comments from Ira above, don't let them worry you. Those kind of negative comments are ill conceived and counterproductive. Fortunately this forum isn't very tolerant of that kind of behavior so it doesn't happen often.

I'm in complete agreement with DB here. Pretty good for a first go at film and the light was challenging with various WB changes. A set of correction filters would have helped. But if you get a better scanner you can correct much of the WB in software.

As for IRA's comments. I'm less tolerant than Damn Brit. Shooting indoors was a good idea.

kevinschoenmakers · 03-25-2009, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by Peter Zack

I'm in complete agreement with DB here. Pretty good for a first go at film and the light was challenging with various WB changes. A set of correction filters would have helped. But if you get a better scanner you can correct much of the WB in software.

As for IRA's comments. I'm less tolerant than Damn Brit. Shooting indoors was a good idea.

Is that how one goes about changing the white-balance with film then, with filters? I've been wondering about that.

Gooshin · 03-25-2009, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers

Is that how one goes about changing the white-balance with film then, with filters? I've been wondering about that.

either filters, or post processing

a quality 16bit scan can give you enough information for a third party program to correct the white balance.

the problem with filters will always be that they cut light.

Ira · 03-25-2009, 04:05 PM

Hey--my comments were a lot less critical than you guys! And I still contend that I'm right.

The first time you take a camera out, you shouldn't be shooting indoors in half natural light and half FLOURESCNET light. You have to learn proper exposure first. Plus, in an empty building?

Sorry, but I strongly stand by my comments. I didn't criticize the photographer. I just commented on the photographer's decision to shoot this AS THE FIRST OUTING.

Damn Brit · 03-25-2009, 07:43 PM

You are welcome to your opinions as are we. Our comments were constructive and the OP was grateful for them. Yours weren't constructive, that isn't the way to help people. As I said before, "this Forum isn't tolerant of that kind of thing".

Oldphoto678 · 03-26-2009, 03:09 AM

Come-on Gary. If the board can tolerate you then I think it can tolerate Ira. I mean think about it. You live in Oakland.

Rodney...

Damn Brit · 03-26-2009, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by Oldphoto678

Come-on Gary. If the board can tolerate you then I think it can tolerate Ira. I mean think about it. You live in Oakland.

Rodney...

..........

.........

Ira · 03-27-2009, 05:58 PM

I really, really, REALLY believe it's helpful to tell a first-time film shooter not to shoot under fluorescent light. Which is why even experienced shooters avoid it like the plague and correct like mad when they have to.

And I really don't believe that it's helpful or practical directing a first-time shooter to buy and use correction filters for WB issues with fluorescent, as opposed to working with and learning his camera under natural light.

And finally, I also don't believe you (DamnBrit) should have pm'd me telling me that I got 3 demerits for my post.

What is this--the Boy Scouts?

kevinschoenmakers
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by kevinschoenmakers
	Find threads started by kevinschoenmakers
	Find threads in which kevinschoenmakers has posted

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Architecture The first Calgary Hospital	casil403	Post Your Photos!	5	03-05-2010 03:08 PM
People Hospital	noahpurdy	Photo Critique	4	12-10-2009 11:42 AM
released from hospital today	xs400	General Talk	41	09-15-2009 09:00 PM
Abandoned Psyciatric Hospital	columbus	Post Your Photos!	27	05-18-2009 02:50 PM
Portrait in a mental hospital	KjetilH	Photo Critique	5	08-17-2008 06:18 PM

03-24-2009, 05:56 AM	#2
J.Scott Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,675	Small wonder their tearing it down, all the walls and floors are crroked! I really like seeing explorations like this. We have a huge, old abandonded brewery in town that I love to go through with a camera. Thanks for sharing.

03-24-2009, 06:39 PM	#3
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	First mistake: You shouldn't have shot indoors to start. It's a no-win situation. Get outside into the real light. Second, while walls can be fascinating to shoot, and I'm sure this was a moving experience for you being there in person. But it's real, REAL hard to translate that into interesting photos. Hell, I know I sure can't do it. 99% of PROFESSIONALS can't either. That's a real talent. Again--get outside. Photography is all about lights and surfaces, and you sure don't have that shooting under fluorescent light indoors in an institution.

03-25-2009, 12:55 AM	#4
fractal Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,547	I used to have an abandoned hosptial across the road from my high school and was always very intrigued by it. I was not so into photography at that time unfortunately and was usually too busy running away from teachers because that was our place to hide for a cigarette. In any case i don't think they are bad photos, but i would have liked to see these in B&W. Going against Ira's advice, i don't think it was a bad idea to shoot indoors, although, i would have liked to see some shots of the building. But to get a true feel of abandoned you need to be in the interior of the building. Thanks for sharing.

03-25-2009, 01:12 AM	#5
Damn Brit Guest	For your first outing with film you have done pretty good Kevin. Watch the diagonal shooting angles though, they get boring very quickly. The occasional well composed diagonal shot can be impressive but a whole bunch suggests lack of imagination IMO. Also, if you have another opportunity for a shoot like that, find a way to introduce some bright colour into the scenes. Notice in your shot with the red sign how it changes the feel of the picture compared to the ones that don't have any bright colour in them. With regards to the comments from Ira above, don't let them worry you. Those kind of negative comments are ill conceived and counterproductive. Fortunately this forum isn't very tolerant of that kind of behavior so it doesn't happen often.

03-25-2009, 02:14 AM	#6
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509 Original Poster	Yes I went a bit overboard this time with the diagonal photo's. I don't know why. The lack of colour was a pain, I tried to get as much signs and stuff into the pictures, but the whole hospital was just one white-ish colour. Had I known in advance I'd be taking pictures here a B/W film would have maybe fit the occasion better.

03-25-2009, 05:10 AM	#7
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Originally posted by Damn Brit For your first outing with film you have done pretty good Kevin. Watch the diagonal shooting angles though, they get boring very quickly. The occasional well composed diagonal shot can be impressive but a whole bunch suggests lack of imagination IMO. Also, if you have another opportunity for a shoot like that, find a way to introduce some bright colour into the scenes. Notice in your shot with the red sign how it changes the feel of the picture compared to the ones that don't have any bright colour in them. With regards to the comments from Ira above, don't let them worry you. Those kind of negative comments are ill conceived and counterproductive. Fortunately this forum isn't very tolerant of that kind of behavior so it doesn't happen often. I'm in complete agreement with DB here. Pretty good for a first go at film and the light was challenging with various WB changes. A set of correction filters would have helped. But if you get a better scanner you can correct much of the WB in software. As for IRA's comments. I'm less tolerant than Damn Brit. Shooting indoors was a good idea.

03-25-2009, 08:47 AM	#8
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509 Original Poster	Originally posted by Peter Zack I'm in complete agreement with DB here. Pretty good for a first go at film and the light was challenging with various WB changes. A set of correction filters would have helped. But if you get a better scanner you can correct much of the WB in software. As for IRA's comments. I'm less tolerant than Damn Brit. Shooting indoors was a good idea. Is that how one goes about changing the white-balance with film then, with filters? I've been wondering about that.

03-25-2009, 08:52 AM	#9
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers Is that how one goes about changing the white-balance with film then, with filters? I've been wondering about that. either filters, or post processing a quality 16bit scan can give you enough information for a third party program to correct the white balance. the problem with filters will always be that they cut light.

03-25-2009, 04:05 PM	#10
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Hey--my comments were a lot less critical than you guys! And I still contend that I'm right. The first time you take a camera out, you shouldn't be shooting indoors in half natural light and half FLOURESCNET light. You have to learn proper exposure first. Plus, in an empty building? Sorry, but I strongly stand by my comments. I didn't criticize the photographer. I just commented on the photographer's decision to shoot this AS THE FIRST OUTING.

03-25-2009, 07:43 PM	#11
Damn Brit Guest	You are welcome to your opinions as are we. Our comments were constructive and the OP was grateful for them. Yours weren't constructive, that isn't the way to help people. As I said before, "this Forum isn't tolerant of that kind of thing".

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-26-2009, 03:09 AM	#12
Oldphoto678 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Athens GA. Posts: 98	Come-on Gary. If the board can tolerate you then I think it can tolerate Ira. I mean think about it. You live in Oakland. Rodney...

03-26-2009, 05:00 PM	#13
Damn Brit Guest	Originally posted by Oldphoto678 Come-on Gary. If the board can tolerate you then I think it can tolerate Ira. I mean think about it. You live in Oakland. Rodney... .......... .........

03-27-2009, 05:58 PM	#14
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	I really, really, REALLY believe it's helpful to tell a first-time film shooter not to shoot under fluorescent light. Which is why even experienced shooters avoid it like the plague and correct like mad when they have to. And I really don't believe that it's helpful or practical directing a first-time shooter to buy and use correction filters for WB issues with fluorescent, as opposed to working with and learning his camera under natural light. And finally, I also don't believe you (DamnBrit) should have pm'd me telling me that I got 3 demerits for my post. What is this--the Boy Scouts?