Edlingham Church, Northumberland

John King

John King

Well-Known Member
Registered
A delightfully simple 11thC church just south of the Cheviot hills. Very remote but easily reached by car. Simple inside and still used for services every 4th Sunday (The vicar has another 3 churches as well as this one.) Well worth a visit but not too close to the end of the day because the sun dips behind the hills to the west. I would have liked to get a better (wider) view of the exterior, but that is well neigh impossible because of the stone wall around the Church Yard As it was I was standing on a pile of rubble to one side.
Yashicamat 124 + Foma 100, dev in ID11 @ 1-1
 

Attachments

  • The Font, Edlingham..jpg
    The Font, Edlingham..jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 29
  • Edlingham Church.jpg
    Edlingham Church.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 29
  • Edlingham Church001.jpg
    Edlingham Church001.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 29
Last edited:
I like these. I enjoy photographing churches too, and am a great admirer of the British photographer Edwin Smith, who was close to the Bardfield Group of artists and a great enthusiast of churches. I often visit and photograph churches that he recorded. He had a great eye for the fall of light, and the two interiors very much remind me of him. One small point - I wonder if the processing, on the first particularly, doesn't look a bit 'smudgy'?
 
Toby Webster said:
I like these. I enjoy photographing churches too, and am a great admirer of the British photographer Edwin Smith, who was close to the Bardfield Group of artists and a great enthusiast of churches. I often visit and photograph churches that he recorded. He had a great eye for the fall of light, and the two interiors very much remind me of him. One small point - I wonder if the processing, on the first particularly, doesn't look a bit 'smudgy'?
Click to expand...
More like the actual original negative isn't as sharp as it could be, and possibly the limited depth of field. Inside the church it is quite dark and this frame was hand held. (I think 1/15th second) Unfortunate for me I had forgotten to bring my tripod. The dark roof on the upper right and the steps are very 'thin' on the negative so had to be carefully lifted out of deep shadows to represent what actually was there.
The same could be said about No3 but the negative is sharp. I used a pew to support the camera, but the contrast range limit was about at each end of what was usable.
 
Ah, yes, many memories of doing that. If I couldn't find a useful 'prop' I tended to set the speed at 1/30th and hope for the best.
 
Yes but I could not get down there on the day I took these it was flooded and ankle deep with very cold water.
 
A beautiful series on that church. The last image is also my favorite, for the simplicity of its composition.
Additional question: how do you digitize your negatives?
 
HansTrapp said:
A beautiful series on that church. The last image is also my favorite, for the simplicity of its composition.
Additional question: how do you digitize your negatives?
Click to expand...
These were 120 negs scanned on an Epson 600 to give TIFF file images for the basic scan, then with PS worked on with the RAW tab. and finished off with converting the file to Jpeg and resized and finally finished off and saved. The one with the shadows on the floor was problematic because of the extreme contrast and needed swapping between RAW and PS several times to get the balance as near correct as possible.

The one with the font was the same, but in reverse with deep shadows and little detail, but the same technique with swapping between RAW and PS with the dark sections being isolated so the remainder of the image was unaffected. The final TIFF was again converted to Jpeg.
 
Flack said:
John I was there last year and it was quite boggy and wet then.
Click to expand...
The actual church itself has suffered from damp and wet for a very long time, not surprising because it is built on a slope with a nearby spring. I visited it again last month and by chance the the Vicar was there (He administers to 4 or 5 other churches in the parish). He was overseeing a new water drain being laid to take water away from the spring underneath the church yard, and path and into the edge of the fields outside. Before the work was started, there were permeant sandbags at the door to stop water entering over the surface .
 
Last edited:
John King said:
These were 120 negs scanned on an Epson 600 to give TIFF file images for the basic scan, then with PS worked on with the RAW tab. and finished off with converting the file to Jpeg and resized and finally finished off and saved. The one with the shadows on the floor was problematic because of the extreme contrast and needed swapping between RAW and PS several times to get the balance as near correct as possible.

The one with the font was the same, but in reverse with deep shadows and little detail, but the same technique with swapping between RAW and PS with the dark sections being isolated so the remainder of the image was unaffected. The final TIFF was again converted to Jpeg.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your answer. Nowadays, I prefer to photograph my negatives with my camera and a macro lens, directly in RAW format. Essentially because I own that gear.
It's so easy to remove dust and other marks from 50-year-old films with digital editing...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top