I like film...(open thread)

[Doc Henry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One of the castles in England but where ?  I do not remember, you help me
May be Windsor ?  I only know the Queen comes to rest

 

 

Kodak Ektachrome

MP-50 Cron

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Best

Henry

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[philipus]

I much prefer the film version, dust and all. The T version looks washed out, plastic and flat. Interesting also to note that the brighter parts on the right-hand side "scream" a bit (perhaps the lens was smeared/dirty?). Anyway, digital just doesn't work for me, even with the highest-end cameras.

 

As someone here once said, scanning is a dark art so trial and error is key. I think you're well on your way to achieving good scans. In fact, the image you posted doesn't seem particularly flat, at least as I am used to seeing them out of my Coolscans. There's quite a bit of contrast, even though there are longish midtones which a simple S curve would deal with if one prefers a punchier result.

 

The coarser grain in the darker areas (esp top right) with Rodinal surprised me somewhat but I guess it's a result of the development. In any event, the film version is alive whereas the digital is not (imho).

 

 

 

 

As an update, I originally posted the version that I imported ito Lightroom. It had a scratch or two on it etc, so I fiddled briefly with the Tiff in Photoshop, and then uploaded that version, replacing the first. It looks "better", but still is vastly different to the Leica T/28 Elmarit M shot I posted post #615, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/226003-post-your-t-shots-here/page-31

Gary

 

[Doc Henry]

Gary,  thanks for sharing

The mushroom and this last picture are fine IMHO

They are all scanned with Minolta Dimage ? it's a shame that Minolta stopped production of this scanner

because it's equal to Coolscan Nikon and cheaper.

As you said it depends a lot of your pictures , but the combo M6/Summicron normally gives very nice pictures

specially in b&w.

Regards

Henry

I was too fast for my previous comment (the mushroom) , sorry Gary

but I agree with the comment of Philip adding that 

firstly, the lines and edges of your photo of T camera are not "soft and natural" "smooth" as I said in digital

secondly, the black and gray stones and such top borders are not in deep black

In addition and as Philip says, film grain gives a contrast more natural than digital.

The failure of digital in b&w is the absence of pure white and deep black (I saw it with my M8 and M9) and also opinion

of photographers that I know.

Best regards

Heznry

Edited October 29, 2015 by Doc Henry

[gbealnz]

Hey, you two are ganging up on my and my T, LOL.

Thank you both, I'll contnue with my scanning lessons, practice makes perfect.

I think any "smearing" will be a result of the coatings being older than me, and just something to be aware of. Certainly into the light will be difficult/impossible.

I'll try some M6/35 Summicron/28mm Elmarit scans next.

Gary

[Doc Henry]

...Gary because we all love you

 

Deep black at right , nuance of grey at left , silver grain for fog , and Leica camera lens = the winning game

for film photo ...... and thanks for dreamers ducks

 

 

Ilford HP5

MP-50 Summilux Asph

 

Fog downtown

7 am

Winter 2015

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Best

Henry

Edited October 29, 2015 by Doc Henry

[Doc Henry]

HP5 Ilford

MP-50 LA

 

Autumn trees

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Best

Henry

[Doc Henry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quais de Seine in autumn

Paris

 

Kodak Portra 400

M7-35 Lux A

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Best

Henry

[A miller]

Really struggling, albeit I have only started, with the new (to me) scanner.

I got a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 II recently, and caved in today and paid for Vuescan.

Part of the fun was that for the last week or so I had a roll of T-Max 100 in the old Model 1A, so back to basics. No meter, no rangefinder, no chimping. I finished the roll yesterday while wandering about town with the Leica T in the bag too.

Ran the T-Max through 1:50 Rodinal this morning, the negs looked OK to the eye, some slightly overexposed, but that was me, nothing else.

Getting a decent looking scan is the hard part, they all look as flat as a turd to quote a phrase.

Certainly as our resident Doc would say, different to digital. Better? Not sure, but different.

I realise the old lens, heck the whole camera is 85+ years old and the front coatings are not perfect, but the scans look flat as.

Here's one anyway, I'll experiment heaps, and perhaps try a "gutsy" looking neg from the M6/35 Summicron and come back. This one took a heap of conrast etc to get it looking as I wanted. A flat cloudy day didn't help, but still.

And yes, some of natures protective covering (dust) and a line or two visible.

Gary

Gary - the scan is supposed to be flat straight out of the scanner.  It needs to be digitally dodged and burned just like a fiber print would need to be in the darkroom.   Do you edit your bw scans at all?

[Doc Henry]

Adam, not always systematically , it also depends on your picture well exposed or not that day , your film , your isos, sunny time or not , shade or not etc ...
In addition, some films need and others not . I do not always touch my Tiff pictures that come out of the scanner , for the simple reason that when I enlarged in b&w through my enlarger, I do not retouch and printing time with photo paper plays. Matter of habit.
Some tests pieces of paper to get the right exposure and finds the exposition , I now have an automatic electronic meter account that gives me the right exposure time , but if I want to change this time , to have more contrast for example , I do it manually in adding some seconds more
Inversely  when I photograph with my 2 digital M , I'm still required to correct mainly in b&w for more contrast, more black, more luminance for the "true" white ....and also in color sometimes with WB, temperature because of dominant , but I recognize it is very delicate and difficult, because the resulting color may not be true to what we saw.

Best

Henry

Edited October 29, 2015 by Doc Henry

[A miller]

Adam, not always systematically , it also depends on your picture well exposed or not that day , your film , your isos, sunny time or not , shade or not etc ...

In addition, some films need and others not . I do not always touch my Tiff pictures that come out of the scanner , for the simple reason that when I enlarged in b&w through my enlarger, I do not retouch and printing time with photo paper plays. Matter of habit.

Some tests pieces of paper to get the right exposure and finds the exposition , I now have an automatic electronic meter account that gives me the right exposure time , but if I want to change this time , to have more contrast for example , I do it manually in adding some seconds more

Inversely  when I photograph with my 2 digital M , I'm still required to correct mainly in b&w for more contrast, more black, more luminance for the "true" white ....and also in color sometimes with WB, temperature because of dominant , but I recognize it is very delicate and difficult, because the resulting color may not be true to what we saw.

Best

Henry

Hi Henry - Thanks for sharing your process.  It works well, indeed.   I can only speak for myself when I say that, no matter how contrasty or not the image is and no matter how well or poorly exposed it is, I nearly always deliberately try to produce the flattest scan that I possibly can.  This way the scanned file captures all of the necessary information and doesn't leave me with crushed shadows or blown highlights.  I make all adjustments in Lightroom with a view to adding my own artistic spin on the image (which generally closely follows the way I saw the image, as I typically will seek out and photograph only those scenes that have exceptional color and/or drama), in the same way that all the famous large format film photographers have done.  I have no shame in this and, in a way,view it as an expression of art.

[RoiDuNord]

Quais de Seine in autumn

Paris

 

Kodak Portra 400

M7-35 Lux A

 

Image1quaykp400m735lalfht+++900.jpg

 

Best

Henry

Bonjour Henry,

 

Magnifigue!

 

Pierre

[gbealnz]

Gary - the scan is supposed to be flat straight out of the scanner.  It needs to be digitally dodged and burned just like a fiber print would need to be in the darkroom.   Do you edit your bw scans at all?

 

Adam. I do "fiddle" with them slightly, mostly due habit (from digital I expect), but to a  minimum on account of the Doc standing on my shoulder telling me not to.

This last lot is a poor benchmark, a very old camera with an equally old uncoated lens. Plus a new to me scanner, and scanning software.

In essence though I have what you suggest I need, flat as scans, and the info is definitely all in there. Now I just need to get it out.

And yes, when in the dark, I am all over the place dodging/burning, usually always.

Patience, on my behalf, needed.

Gary

[DirkR440]

a picture that I took in Zürich:

 

Leica MP by Dirk Raffel, auf Flickr

[A miller]

a picture that I took in Zürich:

 

Leica MP by Dirk Raffel, auf Flickr

very lovely, Dirk.  Please do share the film that you used as it is part of the fun

[DirkR440]

very lovely, Dirk.  Please do share the film that you used as it is part of the fun

Thank you. I've used a TMAX 400

[Doc Henry]

a picture that I took in Zürich:

 

Leica MP by Dirk Raffel, auf Flickr

Dirk superb , soft and lovely picture

Best

Henry

[Doc Henry]

As I said above, Gary I am showing you this ....
Here one picture I have taken recently at Paris with my MP + 35 LA

 

Technique  : scanner > TIFF without any correction on Nikon scan software
Conversion > Jpeg to post on LF
 

- a first picture I will not correct

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

- a second photo I "corrected" on LightRoom (LR) , by clicking "Auto Tone" (that's what I do  to go fast)

 

 

MP-35 Summilux Asph-Ilford HP5 (dev home Ilfotech 3mn30)

Quais de la Seine Paris sept 2015

 

Result : picture unchanged  and similar for the 2 pictures

As I said earlier , it is important to have a good camera with an accurate measure of exposure
Proof  that the MP is a very good camera (as the measure of exposure is just)
Conclusion:  I did not need to correct.
For this photo, it reproduces what I see that day and it satisfies me.
That said ,  I admit that some pictures need a little corrected or corrected
For one photo over-exposed, it is difficult to correct , but you can for photo under exposed  but up to certain limits

 

Best

Henry

Edited October 29, 2015 by Doc Henry

[A miller]

As I said above, Gary I am showing you this ....

Here one picture I have taken recently at Paris with my MP + 35 LA

 

Technique  : scanner > TIFF without any correction on Nikon scan software

Conversion > Jpeg to post on LF

 

- a first picture I will not correct

 

Image21ptartseineilfhp5mp35la-4LRnonlfht+++900.jpg

 

- a second photo I "corrected" on LightRoom (LR) , by clicking "Auto Tone" (that's what I do  to go fast)

 

Image21ptartseineilfhp5mp35la-3LRyesauttonelfht+++900.jpg

 

MP-35 Summilux Asph-Ilford HP5 (dev home Ilfotech 3mn30)

Quais de la Seine Paris sept 2015

 

Result : picture unchanged  and similar for the 2 pictures

As I said earlier , it is important to have a good camera with an accurate measure of exposure

Proof  that the MP is a very good camera (as the measure of exposure is just)

Conclusion:  I did not need to correct.

For this photo, it reproduces what I see that day and it satisfies me.

That said ,  I admit that some pictures need a little corrected or corrected

For one photo over-exposed, it is difficult to correct , but you can for photo under exposed  but up to certain limits

 

Best

Henry

Hi Henry - To have some fun with this as the "devil's advocate," I am not sure what "auto exposure" really is any way?  Automatic according to who?  The appropriate placement of tonal information on the histogram is totally dependent on the subject matter of the scene and the interpretation by the photographer.  The computer doesn't know what the subject is.  Sometimes, it is appropriate to have the tonal information in the histogram bunched up in the middle; for scenes that are intended to be higher contrast, it will be appropriate to have more values bunched up on the ends.  Clicking auto correct is like asking a monkey to drive you home.

 

I am highly certain that you are not suggesting that Ansel Adams wasted his life in his darkroom by endlessly dodging and burning his prints in order to enhance his highlights, open shadows where he wanted and adjust the level of contrast according to his own artistic interpretation.  Surely, HE wasn't a purist.   Neither was HCB.  If you look closely at his photos you will see that the faces are almost always brightened and in good view, no matter where they are in the scene (which you typically will not get straight from the scanner).  His printer was very keen to use dodging and burning to draw the eye to the elements of the image that HCB intended. 

 

I guess some of this comes down to whether you are trying to create an image that depicts exactly what you saw (from a reportage perspective), or whether you wish to convey a mood or enhance an aspect of the scene according to the confines of a natural looking photograph (from an artistic perspective).  Different film stocks will achieve much of this merely based on their different characteristics. 

 

As long as the photograph holds together from the perspective of color balance and smooth tonal transitions, I don't have a problem with an artistic approach. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[becker]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[gbealnz]

OK, while I am on a roll, and before I got to work, decided to try another scan from the 1A roll.

The ever cheeky grand-daughter last time she visited.

Into the light, sort of, tests the old lens for sure.

Takes a bit to get the flat scan to how I think I want it, and boy oh boy, the dust, I really need to sort that.

But the result is soft, and I like it.

Gary

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!