Your film workflow?

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lucy,

 

I've just started back with b&w film and like others here I'm doing it the easy way by sending it to a pro lab for developing and scanning in the knowledge that if I don't like their scans then I have the negs to waste my own time trying to do better.

 

Metro Colour Lab (Metrocolourlab Non C41 BW,Digital Photo printing) develops a 36 shot film, scans at 18MB onto disk and returns it (usually) in 5 working days for £7. You pay postage for the first one and they send a jiffy bag and free 1st class postage back when they return the negs and disk.

 

I've become hooked on Tri-X and Neopan 400 but knowing my capricious nature I'll move onto another emulsion before long.

 

Pete.

[shootinglulu]

This all sounds like fun and heartening that digiital editing film is not second rate to the wet process..i've got the gear from ebay so i can start developing and must find a good lab. As mentioned in another thread i've 200 film to process. I will develop most myself but send some to a lab to see where i'm going wrong, but all the negs i'll have scanned for me in batches over time.

I am looking forward to seeing 15 year old images of my daughter and many forgotten moments. If a lab can send me the scans that would be pretty good to see them on my screen.

All the replies here have me thinking and i'll come back again while i learn and try ideas.

Thanks very much for your help.

Lucy

[shootinglulu]

Pete, that sounds cheaper than i expected, thanks for the link.

[aymoon]

Metro Colour Lab (Metrocolourlab Non C41 BW,Digital Photo printing) develops a 36 shot film, scans at 18MB onto disk and returns it (usually) in 5 working days for £7. You pay postage for the first one and they send a jiffy bag and free 1st class postage back when they return the negs and disk.

 

Pete, that is excellent pricing! How does the quality stand up? Is it possible to see a full size scan done by them?

[farnz]

Pete, that is excellent pricing! How does the quality stand up? Is it possible to see a full size scan done by them?

I'm no expert at judging scans but they look okay to me. The, ahem, 'photographer' is mildly concerned that his work will embarrass him:o but providing that you're assessing the quality of the scan rather than the lack of quality of the photo I'm happy to share one with you. But it'll be an 18 MB file so how would you like me to get it to you? (If you have an email account that'll swallow 18 MB without bringing tears to its eyes then PM me you're email address rather than publishing it on the forum.)

 

Pete.

[aymoon]

I'm no expert at judging scans but they look okay to me. The, ahem, 'photographer' is mildly concerned that his work will embarrass him:o but providing that you're assessing the quality of the scan rather than the lack of quality of the photo I'm happy to share one with you. But it'll be an 18 MB file so how would you like me to get it to you? (If you have an email account that'll swallow 18 MB without bringing tears to its eyes then PM me you're email address rather than publishing it on the forum.)

 

Pete.

 

yes, I'm only interested in the quality of the scan, so don't worry about my photographic judgement

 

I'll send you a PM now...

[kivis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I hate to admit it but Ken Rockwell turned me on to North Coast Photographic Services just cause I hate agreeing with him. Great lab, great results.

[hw9l]

Two processes, depending on time and light:

 

1. low light, no time:

- Ilford XP2 Super

- Chromobyte professional lab in Basel, Switzerland (2 day max. delivery included!)

- Fast scan with Epson V600

- Rescan of the good ones with Nikon V ED

- Print von HP 7960 with black-grey cartridge

- For perfect prints: negs back to Chromobyte

 

2. normal light, time to develop:

- Ilford FP4+

- Ilford Ilfosol 3 4:15 min. at 20°C, Ilfostop, Ilford Rapid Fixer

- Fast scan with Epson V600

- Rescan of the good ones with Nikon V ED

- Print von HP 7960 with black-grey cartridge

[shootinglulu]

Thankyou very much!.....

Why scan, then re scan??

[erl]

Thankyou very much!.....

Why scan, then re scan??

 

Speaking for myself, I 'fast' scan @ low res to produce thumbnails, in lieu of the proofsheets I used make in the darkroom. This allows better evaluation of shots to be chosen for 'proper' scanning, which is much slower, and subsequent printing or presentation in other ways. ie. it's time and energy saving because I probably don't 'proper' scan all images as a result.

[menos I M6]

Thankyou very much!.....

Why scan, then re scan??

 

Lulu, producing an excellent scan file can be very effort and time consuming.

You deal with perfecting scan exposure, to expand dynamic range of the measly scan technology to that of the better film negative, you deal with focus issues due to not flat film, etc.

I often end up with scans, being made by a professional, that are for bigger prints, as my flatbed film scanner doesn't suffice.

 

You don't want to invest this effort in every frame, but rather want a quick proof of all frames, to select.

I do this in a very emotionless, automated manner, just pulling the whole film through the scanner without taking special care on focus, etc … just auto everything in the scanner, to end up with a quick, but usable outcome.

 

Only the selects will get a rescan (for print, for web, the quick scan often suffices).

[shootinglulu]

Aaar, i see, Thanks very much!

[MPerson]

Genie Imaging by Wandsworth Common station are good and reasonable.

[al-fresco]

Today my workflow took a new twist at step 4.

 

1. Shoot a roll of Tri-X on a wet and rainy Leica forum meet at the Black Country Life Museum.

2. Carefully transfer the negatives to a Patterson tank in a changing bag.

3. Add developer and agitate every minute for the required time.

4. Drain developer allowing the inner lid of the developing tank to fall off and exposing the film.

5. Fix.

6. Rinse.

 

Now I'd have thought that step 4 would have screwed things up but most of the negs look OK. Will they be alright or will I find that they're fogged when they're dry and I come to scan them?

[menos I M6]

I do some development of my film to digital workflow at the moment.

I found, that doing a macro shot of a well prepared negative does indeed have potential … let me find the right word … to … to completely smoke the output of my EPSON flatbed scanner.

 

I am still in development phase, having put proof of concept behind me and looking for the right material, to fix my own preferably tethered macro setup for better file quality from negatives.

 

For playing, I use a portable slide light box, conventional negative holder for strips of 6, a table tripod and a point and shoot camera, which does DNG raw files @ 10MP with quite capable quality.

 

The files are sharper, more detailed, less blotchy/ noisy, are very easy, to adjust for perfect negative exposure, are smaller (DNG on hdd opposed to TIFF files from the scanner), …

 

So far, I see only good things …

[earleygallery]

Today my workflow took a new twist at step 4.

 

1. Shoot a roll of Tri-X on a wet and rainy Leica forum meet at the Black Country Life Museum.

2. Carefully transfer the negatives to a Patterson tank in a changing bag.

3. Add developer and agitate every minute for the required time.

4. Drain developer allowing the inner lid of the developing tank to fall off and exposing the film.

5. Fix.

6. Rinse.

 

Now I'd have thought that step 4 would have screwed things up but most of the negs look OK. Will they be alright or will I find that they're fogged when they're dry and I come to scan them?

 

What do you mean by 'inner lid' ? My Patterson tank has the lid proper, which screws onto the tank, then the lid or cap to stop the chemicals pouring out when you invert the tank.

 

As you were at the end of the developer cycle you should be OK though.

[chrism]

Currently I take a film out of the fridge that is dedicated to such things (but when my supplies of 35mm canisters are gone I think I will stick to the bulk (Freestyle) versions of Neopan 100 and 400, which do just what I want at very little cost. 120 film will have to continue giving me a variety!), load it, shoot it, then develop it in Diafine. I don't quite follow the directions for Diafine, since I pre-soak the films to remove anti-halation dyes - the ones that give purple negs - yech! Then 4.5 minutes in solution A with four gentle inversions at start and each 1.5 minutes thereafter, then exactly the same with solution B. Then I give one quick wash with plain water to make the fixer's job easier. I use Kodak fixer, knowing that each batch is good for 24 films. The first ten get 4.5 minutes, the second ten get twice that and the last four get three times the time. This is substantiated with clearing times of the film leaders. Then I use Kodak Hypoclear (the time doesn't matter much, but since the timer is set for 4.5 minutes...), then I wash using the Ilford desert method - three fills and emptyings, followed by a fill and five inversions, empty and a fill followed by ten inversions, followed by a fill and twenty inversions. Phew! Now a fill of dilute PhotoFlo, remove the film from the reel, use to two fingers as a squeegee, and hang to dry.

Next I cut the film into lengths suitable for my scanner, and scan each strip in preview mode. Decent images get to go into the batch scan at the next stage while I make lunch or have a Campari soda. Scans are stored on a NAS drive and I tend to import them into Lightroom. "Developing" there generally involves cropping first, then altering exposure (if too dark I increase expose till clipping, or if too light I add Black until clipping). Then I look at it and think. The curves control comes next and generally involves me diddling with the lights and darks rather than the highlights and shadows, which have been set in the stage above. Then I print, if it's worthwhile. When I look at the print, I feel a certain pride of creativity, even if I am the only soul in the whole world who does so. And that, I guess, is why I do it.

 

Chris

[erl]

snipped ........... Then I print, if it's worthwhile. When I look at the print, I feel a certain pride of creativity, even if I am the only soul in the whole world who does so. And that, I guess, is why I do it.

 

Chris

 

Yes Yes Yes. You have just revealed the meaning of life!

 

Thought: those poor devils who always thought it was 42!

[cheewai_m6]

i'm not a professional. i just shoot for travel and things that i see, or family stuff.

 

i shoot fuji superier 100 a lot. i love this film. kodak cn400 as well.

 

develop only at a very good lab.

scan negatives on a epson v500. usually to tiff

lightroom editing.

print the ones i want at 6x4 and rarely at 7.5x5

 

i have big hard drives and my neg catalogue system is so far, just putting it in a box. i don't shoot enough for it to be a problem yet.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[MPJMP]

I'm shooting C41 exclusively these days, so...

 

1) Drop off film at local camera shop. Process only (no prints or scans).

2) Pick up sleeved negatives the next day.

3) Sort the good from the bad on a Gepe light table with 8x loupe.

4) Scan the keepers with Nikon Coolscan V at 4000dpi, uncompressed TIFF format, Digital ICE activated to remove dust and scratches (don't know what I'd do without this feature).

5) Import scans into Lightroom for final tweaking.

6) Export as maximum resolution JPEGs (I may kee the original TIFF file if I think I will later tweak my adjustments or make prints, otherwise they take up too much HD space to keep around in quantity).

7) Occassional prints from a consumer-grade Canon inkjet, or upload to the lab's website for pro printing.

8) Once scanned, negatives are stored in Printfile sleeves and archived chronologically in three-ring binders.