Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello, I am considering selling my M8 and buying a M2 or M3 or maybe an MP. I used film a lot when younger, and had a black and white darkroom, but its been 15 years so I had a couple of questions if you would be so kind. Is scanning film a good workflow? What are the results like? I quite like the idea of getting out of computer use completely to be honest, but I recognise it's convenience. Film images have something great about them straight out of the box, and I would want to regain that. Does anyone know of a darkroom in London that I could use? I know that there was one in Brixton and the Drill Hall used to have them (still does?) Can you make useable contact sheets with a flatbed scanner? What's a good compact light meter (assuming I go m2/m3) Many thanks to all for your time and advice. I have much to think about. Gawain Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 16, 2009 Posted November 16, 2009 Hi Gawain Hewitt, Take a look here New Film user question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #2 Posted November 16, 2009 Just found out that photo fusion (darkroom) is still going strong in Brixton which suits me, close to my house. Photofusion Photography Centre, London, UK Also found out about the voigtlander meter as well which sounds sensible. Been told to consider the M6 over an M2 though, so going to go and try a few to get a feel for them. Gawain Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted November 16, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 16, 2009 Scanning works well for. 99% of the photos on my flickr are scanned at home - all the B&W photos. I develop in my bathroom, which is quite easy too. I'd get an M6, M7, or MP if I were you. If you really don't think you'll ever use the auto mode, get the M6 or MP, which are essentially the same. Remember the M7 works in full manual mode as well just like the M6 and MP. The built in meter is nice. I also use a Sekonic 308s with my M7 and M6, which is a nice incident meter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted November 16, 2009 Yes been chatting to a couple of people and they're giving the same advice too about M6, M7 or MP. Going to go into town and try them all over the next week or so. What's a good choice for an affordable scanner? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted November 16, 2009 Scanning works well for. 99% of the photos on my flickr are scanned at home - all the B&W photos. I develop in my bathroom, which is quite easy too. They look very nice, and retain the film look. So are the black and white images developed at home, then scanned from negatives? Do you do digital prints from these? If so how do they come out? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted November 16, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 16, 2009 Digital prints come out fine. I print most of my prints in the darkroom, but when I do get stuff printed from the digital files, I think they look great. I use WHCC and get RA4 prints done, not ink jet. Ink jet should be fine too though - as long as you have a good file to start with, it shouldn't matter if it is a scan or from a digital camera. I recently got some B&W photos printed by WHCC on the Kodak metallic paper and they look really nice. I use a Nikon Coolscan V. The 5000 and 9000 are great scanners too. Yes all the B&W photos are developed at home and scanned here. Most of the color pictures are developed and scanned at a lab, though some of the color images were rescanned by me (at higher resolutions). I think I only have one or two scanned prints up on the flickr feed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndjambrose Posted November 16, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) On a quality basis a film/digital workflow gives great results. The only downside is the time needed - it's far from immediate. But its quite possible that you, like many other people, will view the lengthier time factor as an investment. I develop my own film at home. I use a couple of large tanks so can do around 10 rolls at a time. Takes about an hour start to finish, and a couple of hours for the negatives to air dry. A flatbed makes reasonable contact sheets. Not as good (or as easy) as in a darkroom, but totally workable and a great aid to filing. Once you have a few hundred sheets of negatives you'll be very glad you spent the time. High quality scans are the most time consuming element. Expect to spend around 20 minutes per frame with a high spec scanner - a couple of mins to make a preview, around 12 mins to do an ultra high res scan, maybe another 5 or 6 mins in Photoshop balancing the image and doing any necessary spotting. This is where contact sheets save time, as you need only scan your keepers. (It's a lot quicker if you're happy scanning at medium resolutions, and very quick indeed if you scan only for web use). The upside is at the end of it you'll have an amazing file to make prints from, with all the tonality, texture and lustre of a negative retained in the file. If you need silver prints you can get the file printed with a lightjet or similar for perfect (and repeatable) silver prints on demand. Expect to spend around £100 materials and chemicals for doing your own processing, and around £2000 for a good scanner - say a Nikon 9000 or similar. Almost everything in my portfolio (personal work) was made this way. BTW - I second the advice re. an MP or M6. All the benefits of an M2 but with built-in metering, newer and in some cases with better components. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted November 16, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 16, 2009 Gawain - The London Leica Louts - all members of this forum and perfect gentlemen - are having one of their ad hoc get togethers this Saturday (21st), details here: London Leica Louts full thread here: London Meeting Quite a few shoot film and I will have my MP & M2 with me. Give you a chance to chat with users and handle some cameras. You would be most welcome to join us, even if only for the start at 1100 for coffee and sticky buns! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted November 16, 2009 Thanks for invite, biglouis has invited me already (we photograph in the same neighbourhood). I'm not sure I can make it though as have a young family and weekends are precious. Will definately try and make one in the future though. G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPJMP Posted November 16, 2009 Share #10 Posted November 16, 2009 The workflow for film is a little more involved than for digital, but the results are worth the extra effort, in my opinion. I shoot mostly black & white film and develop at home. I use a changing bag to transfer the film from the cassette to the reel and developing tank, therefore I don't need a dark room. I develop in the bathroom or kitchen and then let the film drip dry by attaching it to laundry clips and hanging it from the shower rod in the bathroom. After drying, I cut the negatives into strips of 5 which allows me to put them into PrintFile sleeves for storage and organization. I have a small 8.5x11" light table and an 8X loupe that I use to review the negatives and identify the ones I want to scan. I then use a dedicated film scanner (Nikon Coolscan V ED) to scan the selected frames onto my computer, usually as TIFFs, and use Photoshop Elements to tweak the levels and remove any dust or scratches, if necessary. I save the final file to my hard drive as a high quality JPEG and then print on an Epson inkjet printer (R800). I am very happy with the results, as are friends and family I give prints to as gifts. Most people ask me how I get the look I do and are generally amazed when I tell them it is from black and white film that I developed myself. FWIW, my scanner maxes out at 4000 dpi. A full rez scan with Digital ICE running to remove dust and scratches (only with C-41 and E-6 films) takes about 2 minutes per frame. Detail is plenty good up to and beyond the sizes I print at. I don't know what kind of scanner takes 20 minutes per frame (as stated in the above example from ndjambrose), but you might want to weigh whether you need the extra resolution that requires such a lengthy scanning process. When I shoot color (C-41 or E-6) the process is the same but obviously without the development phase, and I tend to opt for a luster or semi-gloss paper instead of matte. If my Nikon scanner ever broke down I would probably replace it with one of the Epson flatbeds (the Nikons are nice, but no longer being made). A flatbed that gives you the ability to do a quick contact sheet of all your negatives would be a worthwhile feature and would minimize the need for a light table & loupe. I'd love to make traditional fiber based wet prints, but time and space simply don't allow it. The hybrid process of analog capture, digital post-processing and digital (inkjet) output is a good compromise with satisfying results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topoxforddoc Posted November 16, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 16, 2009 Gawain, I have both a digital workflow (for my R9/DMR) and a film workflow for my Ms (M2 and M6TTL). I shoot HP5 in my Ms and soup in XTOL; I find that combo cheap,easy to obtain in the UK and flexible. I can uprate HP5 by two stops to 1600 in XTOL and get very acceptable images. Developing is done using a changing bag and a daylight tank. Most of my B/W film gets scanned (on my old Minolta 5400 Scan Elite) and printed on my Epson 3800 printer. I still do occasional wet prints in my darkroom. If you're going down the hybrid film/scanning route, then buy a top class printer. The R800 is ok for mono, but you can still get some metamerism on mono prints. On the Epson 3800 (now just deleted), I get prints that I would have to work really hard at in the darkroom to perfect. If all you shoot is 35mm, then the Nikon 9000 is a bit of overkill - lovely but it's over two grand. Buy a 5000 or a second hand Minolta 5400 (using Vuescan) and use the change to buy an Epson 3880 and a shed load of paper and ink. If you want to see what scanned film looks like, then have a look at the Berlin images on my website. They're shot using HP5 rated at 1600 and souped in XTOL - straight scans on my Minolta 5400 and post-processing in Lightroom. Best wishes, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted November 16, 2009 Thanks that's very useful. I think I need to consider this carefully. While my heart accepts the increased workflow, i'm not sure if my busy life will! I'll ponder on this Thanks all for your input. G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #13 Posted November 16, 2009 If you want to see what scanned film looks like, then have a look at the Berlin images on my website. They're shot using HP5 rated at 1600 and souped in XTOL - straight scans on my Minolta 5400 and post-processing in Lightroom. , Great photo's, and they look lovely. Goodwood is good fun too isn't it! haven't been for a couple of years, but must do again. Thanks for that, very useful advice, and the results seem fantastic. Gawain Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topoxforddoc Posted November 16, 2009 Share #14 Posted November 16, 2009 Gawain, Glad to be of help. The film gives a very different look. If I were you, I wouldn't sell the M8; you'll get peanuts for it. If you want to try film, buy a user M2 (or even a CL or CLE) without a meter and shoot using 'sunny 16'. You easily get +/- 2 stops with B/W negative film. As you already have a printer for your M8 (I presume), your only other outlay would be a 35mm scanner. Buy an used Minolta Scan Dual (III or IV), Minolta 5400 Scan Elite or used Nikon 4000/5000 and spend 35 bucks on a pro licence of Vuescan. If you don't like the workflow, you can easily sell without a loss. Thanks for the comments on the photos too. Best wishes, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #15 Posted November 16, 2009 Yes that's good advice. I may even go cheaper than that and get an Olympus XA or minox or something else that fits in my pocket to give it a go. They are cheap as chips and would be much preferable to my digital compact that I use when I need to travel light! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted November 16, 2009 Share #16 Posted November 16, 2009 My recommendation would be as well to keep the M8. Personally, I enjoy to have the option for film as well as digital imaging in the same system. One can't get a very capable digital camera less expensive than by not selling a M8 now. When it comes to film, I use a Quato 5000 scanner for web posting and rely on my lab's Imacon for anything requiring a higher quality. I probably won't expose enough films in my lifetime, the savings will never finance to buy my own Imacon (now Hasselblad). Saves me also the effort to learn, how to operate it. However, the results and the speed of the Imacon are stunning. The Quato is OK for the web but quite slow. Several forum member recommended to get an extended warranty with a Nikon, who are backing out of the film scanner market now. Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted November 16, 2009 And a further observation: - what a lovely forum this is! Really friendly. I hope I am not speaking too soon, but seems like a gentler place to the digital forums! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawain Hewitt Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share #18 Posted November 16, 2009 My recommendation would be as well to keep the M8. Personally, I enjoy to have the option for film as well as digital imaging in the same system. Yes that does seem sensible. There is a user M2 at aperture in London for cheap money, £390 I think. One can't get a very capable digital camera less expensive than by not selling a M8 now. True... Digital photography is a crazy world Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted November 16, 2009 Share #19 Posted November 16, 2009 One of the biggest timesavers for me in scanning film is when I realized I don't need all my frames at 4000 dpi. I can chew through a roll of film in about 20-25 minutes if I push myself, scanning the good frames (1/3-1/2 of the total frames) AND photoshopping them if I scan at 1666dpi on the Nikon V. 1666 dpi might sound funny, but it gives you enough resolution for 300 dpi 4x6 prints, and they look great on flickr and the web. If you have a great frame, then scan that at 4000 dpi, but for a lot of stuff in this day and age, I don't need 4000 dpi scans sitting around. And as long as I'm attentive during developing and scanning, I barely have to de-dust the lower res scans. Maybe 1 out of 4 will have a piece of lint that I missed before inserting into the scanner. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted November 17, 2009 Share #20 Posted November 17, 2009 Gawain, Most of my B/W film gets scanned (on my old Minolta 5400 Scan Elite) and printed on my Epson 3800 printer. I still do occasional wet prints in my darkroom. If all you shoot is 35mm, then the Nikon 9000 is a bit of overkill - lovely but it's over two grand. Buy a 5000 or a second hand Minolta 5400 (using Vuescan) and use the change to buy an Epson 3880 and a shed load of paper and ink. I Charlie, I too use a Minolta 5400 Elite and find it gives good quality scans but is sloooow - especially with 16 bit and multiple samples. Does Vuescan improve performance? Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.