I like it. Unusual perspective. I think it would have been nicer if the car had been on the road and there had been some indication that it was in motion (though not blur.)
Cheers, Gautam On 4/15/06, Powell Hargrave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was given about 25 feet, 8 meters of very expired, June 1979, bulk Tri-X > which had been cold stored. So I shot about a dozen frames with the MX and > the Pancake lens. The film is fogged and pretty well un-useable producing > very grainy results with shadows blocked up. The rest of the film will > soon be in the trash unless someone can suggest an interesting use for it. > > A couple of shots of my sons house construction were worth saving and then > there is this one. It is really bad! I think the Pancake lens does a nice > job of shooting into the sun but the dirty windshield sure adds to the flair. > > So why do I kind of like this shot? Just my poor taste? Or is it > interesting to anyone else? > > http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep/Image-X.htm > > My dirty windshield does not make life very secure for the nearly invisible > pedestrians. > > Powell > >
