I like film...(open thread)

[chrism]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Funny thing is that I didn't have to adjust a thing. Just scanned using a profile I had made for Ektar some time back, and they looked right. Vivid, even lurid, but not wrong in hue.

 

C.

[Advertisement]

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

[pico]

I do NOT like the process of film compared to the ease of digital,  and I have been into film for fifty years,  however there is no way today to produce the images I appreciate with digital. I am so tired of developing film, however the outcome for wet-printing keeps me in the darkroom. An important distinction between my work and my digital friends is that I do not expect a good print/image every day while they expect dozens of good images per day. Therein is the drift. Frankly, I do not know what to make of it. Criticism is welcome.

.

Edited July 9, 2016 by pico

[chrism]

I couldn't criticise you on that, pico. I frequently say to myself that digital would be so easy. But I think I must have some serious hang-ups in my head as using a digital camera feels like I'm cheating. On the positive side I enjoy using a skill that is getting to be uncommon, and I certainly enjoy the lovely old cameras that are now relatively cheap and that were unattainable when I was young. I don't make any fantastic photographs, but I amuse myself and I feel the satisfaction of all the factors above. I know I would feel less of that satisfaction if I arrived at the result by a shortcut, regardless of whether the final photo was better or worse for being digital. It's a bit of a curse, but at least it keeps me from taking thousands of digital images and then over-processing them in an effort to make them look better!

From what you say, you don't seem to have much choice if it takes film to get you the result you want then that's how you have to do it. You don't have to like it, but if you want those results....perhaps a good lab might relieve you of the developing burden?

 

Chris

[too old to care]

I've been into photography for fifty years too, worked my way through college as a wedding photographer. I love the look of film, but there is no way I could compete with digital if I was still doing weddings. But, I save my B&W shots for film, I enjoy the work that it takes, where I do not enjoy taking photos with digital, processing them on a computer, printing them on an inkjet printer.  Something special about watching that image appear in the tray, the smells, and knowing that I still do it.  

 

Wayne

[gbealnz]

My "scanning" of M/F continues, this an older 500C/M (6x6) Ektachrome EPR100 slide.

I've changed tack slightly, "built" a copy-stand that holds my X-Vario (and not just to keep it in the family, the X-Vario does a pretty good job).

An Elpro Vib rounds out the optical train.

The vignetting is on the original, I suspect (from the deepness of the sky) that I used a polarizing filter (as you did last century), and this may have vignetted.

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!

[A miller]

Funny thing is that I didn't have to adjust a thing. Just scanned using a profile I had made for Ektar some time back, and they looked right. Vivid, even lurid, but not wrong in hue.

 

C.

Yep, so many people think/assume that ektar's saturation will give them unnatural-looking renditions or skewed hues in a much broader array of scenes than it actually does.

 

The trick is to know what the film is good for and what it is not good for.

The one big thing that IMHO the film cannot be relied on for is producing faithful earth tones. So caucasian skin tones, beach sand and neutral colored stones and rocks come through with dominant orange/reddish hues. Not good.

 

I was telling Gary privately last week that i went to the Western Wall here in Jerusalem for some shooting with my swc a week ago and stayed far away from ektar and opted instead for a little fuji velvia 50 an mostly portra 160. The neutral earth tones in the giant stones would (in my assessment) be best preserved and glorified with the portra (for a slightly vintage look) and the velvia for the punchy but very realistic look, provided there isnt much skin around, which there wasnt.

 

So i think that having ektar in your bag and knowing when and when not to use it will seriously enhance one's color film photography.

[Doc Henry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do NOT like the process of film compared to the ease of digital,  and I have been into film for fifty years,  however there is no way today to produce the images I appreciate with digital. I am so tired of developing film, however the outcome for wet-printing keeps me in the darkroom. An important distinction between my work and my digital friends is that I do not expect a good print/image every day while they expect dozens of good images per day. Therein is the drift. Frankly, I do not know what to make of it. Criticism is welcome.

.

 

Pico , allow me not agree with you , especially for color after for form

First for color no sensor (with one layer RGB) can give a color like film by its failure (only the Foveon sensor Sigma perhaps resembles in its 3 RGB layers)

after for form, the mania of the sensor to make any thing sharp (by "smoothing" all pixels) not natural at all , makes the picture flat and soulless giving a completely artificial appearance.The sensor and its processing software are stupid.

Look at last Chris pictures and look at my poppies or fog pictures , you'll understand what I mean. The poppies like a cigarette paper type ! no thanks , that's unreal

Best

Henry

Edited July 10, 2016 by Doc Henry

[Doc Henry]

Pentax 645n, 120/f4 Macro, Ektar 100, Unicolor presskit, Hasselblad X1:

 

Pansies by chrism229, on Flickr

 

Nicotiana by chrism229, on Flickr

 

Chris

 

Only one word : Magnifique

Thanks Chris

Regards

Henry

Edited July 10, 2016 by Doc Henry

[Doc Henry]

In Mongolia, discovering western magazines...

 

Ektachrome 100 HC

 

The Western World ... by JM__, on Flickr

 

Nice shot JM and nice color

Best

Henry

[Doc Henry]

My "scanning" of M/F continues, this an older 500C/M (6x6) Ektachrome EPR100 slide.

I've changed tack slightly, "built" a copy-stand that holds my X-Vario (and not just to keep it in the family, the X-Vario does a pretty good job).

An Elpro Vib rounds out the optical train.

The vignetting is on the original, I suspect (from the deepness of the sky) that I used a polarizing filter (as you did last century), and this may have vignetted.

Gary

 

Unusual green but nice color Gary

so scan with your Beoon  ?

Best

Henry

[Doc Henry]

Couple more from Israel, then a different country.  Caesarea, just a bit south of Hafia.  

Wayne nice picture reproducing a great ambiance of oriental life

Thanks

Regards

Henry

[Doc Henry]

Kodak Portra 160

M7-35 Lux Asph

Nikon Coolscan 5000

(RGB std calibrated)

 

and for Pico no correction

color of Kodak Portra

 

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 July 10, 2016 by Doc Henry

[philipus]

Funny, Chris, you've described almost _exactly_ how I think and for the longest time have thought about film and why I use it. Thank you.

 

I think anyone who is committed to film must have an appreciation for the process itself, at least to the degree that the time and effort are worth it when weighed against the results it gives. There's a satisfaction in knowing that one has followed and personally shaped a photograph from when light's rays etched onto the perishable film to the moment the image appears in its final form, whatever that form may be.

 

I feel the same as Pico regarding how many good photos one expects. I feel very pleased when I see good results in terms of technique (developing, scanning, printing) from my films, particularly when I've also developed the film myself. And I willingly accept that this applies to a minority of the images on my rolls.

 

I imagine that to a certain extent film photography is about accepting and working with its inherent flaws.

 

Philip

 

I couldn't criticise you on that, pico. I frequently say to myself that digital would be so easy. But I think I must have some serious hang-ups in my head as using a digital camera feels like I'm cheating. On the positive side I enjoy using a skill that is getting to be uncommon, and I certainly enjoy the lovely old cameras that are now relatively cheap and that were unattainable when I was young. I don't make any fantastic photographs, but I amuse myself and I feel the satisfaction of all the factors above. I know I would feel less of that satisfaction if I arrived at the result by a shortcut, regardless of whether the final photo was better or worse for being digital. It's a bit of a curse, but at least it keeps me from taking thousands of digital images and then over-processing them in an effort to make them look better!

From what you say, you don't seem to have much choice if it takes film to get you the result you want then that's how you have to do it. You don't have to like it, but if you want those results....perhaps a good lab might relieve you of the developing burden?

 

Chris

[gbealnz]

Unusual green but nice color Gary

so scan with your Beoon  ?

Best

Henry

No Henry, I pensioned the BEOON off, maybe full time, maybe temporary, trialing the "new" system.

 

I use the X-Vario to "copy" the transparency, which is a form of scanning I suppose, turning an analogue shot into a digital image.

 

The X-Vario has a decent close focus alone, but with the Elpro V1b, it is sufficient to just cover the 6x9 image, and also the 6x6. It necessitated me building a base, then an upright to accept a close up rack and pinion focus rail (an old Canon Focusing Rail actually). This keeps the camera square to the slide/neg, and it's just a matter of lighting it from underneath, same as when I used the BEOON.

 

Better? Not sure yet, but testing so far suggests it is. In trying the 6x9 frame, I just did this one, an aerial taken when I was flying in Nelson, it is Lake Rotoiti, and will have been with a Fuji GSW690. Film is Agfa RS200.

I am having trouble with the sky area, especially close to the mountain, it is unusually bright.

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!

[Doc Henry]

No Henry, I pensioned the BEOON off, maybe full time, maybe temporary, trialing the "new" system.

 

I use the X-Vario to "copy" the transparency, which is a form of scanning I suppose, turning an analogue shot into a digital image.

 

The X-Vario has a decent close focus alone, but with the Elpro V1b, it is sufficient to just cover the 6x9 image, and also the 6x6. It necessitated me building a base, then an upright to accept a close up rack and pinion focus rail (an old Canon Focusing Rail actually). This keeps the camera square to the slide/neg, and it's just a matter of lighting it from underneath, same as when I used the BEOON.

 

Better? Not sure yet, but testing so far suggests it is. In trying the 6x9 frame, I just did this one, an aerial taken when I was flying in Nelson, it is Lake Rotoiti, and will have been with a Fuji GSW690. Film is Agfa RS200.

I am having trouble with the sky area, especially close to the mountain, it is unusually bright.

Gary

Gary when watching your last lake  picture it's fine for me

Color and defintion are nice 

Thanks for your reply

 

In addition what I said above , here we post our pictures to share but the most important is the impression

this is where we see the real result.

Pictures like Chris posts here shows us that since taking picture with the camera, the C41 development,

then the scanner or the enlarger everything is important especially when we do ourself   

Another example is Adam pictures , color is wonderful and unbeatable

Best

H.

Edited July 10, 2016 by Doc Henry

[gbealnz]

Perfect explanation thank you Henry. In this case then, I was the instructor in the helicopter with the door off. I took the picture with an old but great camera. I sent the film off for processing, and was happy with it on the light-table.

 

This then required "digitizing" so I built a stand and used a camera I had for other purposes.

 

Then into the post=processing stage.

 

So all in all, a bit of work from start to finish, but it is the reason I do this, in fact "we do this" more likely.

Gary

[Doc Henry]

We must recognize that Gary you are a model of someone who seeks perfection
for example in the scanner system. Bravo for this consistency.

 

 

Mucem Marseille

In background right , Notre Dame de la Garde , la Madonna of the city

and le Vieux Port

 

Kodak TX400

MP-50 Lux Asph

Nikon Coolscan 5000

 

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]

We must recognize that Gary you are a model of someone who seeks perfection

for example in the scanner system. Bravo for this consistency.

 

 

Mucem Marseille

In background right , Notre Dame de la Garde , la Madonna of the city

and le Vieux Port

 

Kodak TX400

MP-50 Lux Asph

Nikon Coolscan 5000

 

Image21mucemmarskodtxfeslfht++++-950-3.jpg

 

Best

Henry

 

Every thing is important as I said , in beginning , with the camera and lens

The MP and the Summilux 50 Asph are great and contribute for the quality of the

picture in scan and in enlarging.

 

Look at this crop 100% where you can see the definition (or resolution) ...the film

also contributes  in this quality , I am sure it's not possible with my iPhone 

 

Crop in the middle , the definition of the film , here Kodak TX is outstanding

the windows and buildings are well defined . 

 

No correction for Pico 

 

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!

 

Henry

Edited July 10, 2016 by Doc Henry

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[A miller]

I am my best (and only) customer . I purchased this shower curtain for my home in Jerusalem from my "store" in www.fineartamerica.com

 

The snippet of NYC grafitti (Fuji Velvia 50) makes me feel right at "home"

 

I think it came out great. Good fabric and popping colors.

 

I reattach the original photo for comparison.

 

Worth $60 to anyone other than me (and perhaps my mother)?? The matter is very uncertain

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!

Edited July 10, 2016 by A miller

[A miller]

The original photo... Fuji Velvia 50

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!