I like film...(open thread)

[gbealnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Matt.

Me too, using same scanner, I'm sure you'll get the answer you want.

In my case, I'll have a look at my settings and see.

Typically, using it to proof 35mm, and proof/scan 120.

What software do you use though?

Gary

[ash13brook]

I'm using the Epson Scan. I have Vue Scan on my computer, but haven't looked at it yet.

I guess I'm really asking what resolution folks are using.

 

Matt

Edited July 5, 2018 by ash13brook

[Advertisement]

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

[stray cat]

There's a serious joke that whenever a CIA agent sees flowers at noon, he looks for the funeral. "Yellow Thing!" How mesmerizing and ominous in the bright noonday sun. "Yellow Thing!" Can't even name it! This is so Tarkovsky, so "Stalker." For photographers, it's homage to 6x6 and 35mm, simultaneously; the aspect ratio of the "Yellow Thing" itself is 6x6, but it's divided into thirds horizontally, partitioned on the bottom into a 35mm aspect ratio of 2:3 with 24 squares, 4x6. All right, a tad over the top, perhaps something that would occur only to the Professor in "Stalker" as he enters the Zone. Added to your astute list of recommendations, I suggest "Stalker", taking note of Tarkovsky's innovative ways of photographing the face. "Yellow Thing" with its symmetrical composition we learn is generally reserved for the "traditional," like the serif font of Times Roman is classic as opposed to sans serif Arial of Macy's modern. What I am getting to is the tension that "Yellow Thing" creates with its classic use of space, even paradoxically reducing the square subject to only two dimensions, invites speculation about the other sides, the dimensional aspect that you have purposely omitted. There's evidence of habitation in the background, a shed, and the roadway of dry grass. Evidence! I am indebted to you for mentioning Larry Sultan and Mike Mandel's book "Evidence." Applause. The jury is still out on whether this is actually an anti-photography book for me. Evidence. The color snap of Velvia 100 and your yellow thing evidence is looking almost atomic, like you're keeping your Chernobyl distance with the Geiger counter chattering. Never mind, you've got your bullet-proof Blad. There are outtakes, perimeter reconnaissance, but this "Yellow Thing" is the only one that survives from the eyes only file.

 

Rog, there's no way I can adequately express how much I appreciate the thought and effort you put into responses like this. I invariably learn something - a lot of things - and feel enriched by your generosity. I now have two films - Persona and Stalker - that are on my list of urgent "to see" movies, and I just know I'll appreciate them both a lot more given your thoughts surrounding them, especially in regards to your thoughts on their relationship to still photography. Yours is a colourful, poetic style of writing and I imagine you are a professor of English Literature, or perhaps Art History and, if so, your students are lucky to have such a wise mentor. So glad, too, that you have found room for "Evidence" in your (no doubt) well-stocked library. It is a book I keep returning to, knowing it is trying desperately to tell/show me something, yet never (yet) quite grasping it. But I do enjoy returning to it. Perhaps it IS anti-photographic, whatever that means. It makes me recall one of Elliott Erwitt's first exhibitions/books which he called "Photographs and Anti-Photographs". When asked what he meant by the title he responded something like "Nothing. I just liked the way it sounded".

 

As for the picture "Yellow Thing" I have learned a lot about my own approach from your incisive critique. I took another, similar picture at the time but liked the one posted better. I now understand that is because of the space around it which suggests other things than just a closer shot would have. Thank you. And I called it "Yellow Thing" because I couldn't think what else to call it.

 

Look at pictures like Antonio's "Long Creek, OR", Activated's "Dazzle" and Waynes "Minox Riga USSR, Fuji Superia 100 expired" from just the previous page, not to mention the dozens of other great pictures that are posted here every day. This forum is a very good place to hang out.

[Wayne]

Extension cord

 

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!

 

Minox Riga, Fuji 100 Superia

[gbealnz]

Some more Monterosso, lovely place.

R6 with 50 Summicron

Portra 400

Plustek 8100

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!

[Ouroboros]

Hawthorn tree on King's Tor, Dartmoor.

 

The haws (fruit) are known locally as 'aggles' or 'pixie pears'.  As with many things on Dartmoor, myth or ancient wisdom surrounds old hawthorns.

 

Leica MP

50mm elmar-m f2.8

Heliopan 22

Fuji Acros 100 in RO9

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 5, 2018 by Ouroboros

[mikemgb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is probably the wrong place for this, but I wanted film shooters to see it.

I'm using an Epson 4870 scanner. I scanned some stuff at 300dpi, but it didn't look good. So, I scanned it at 3200. It looked great, but it takes an hour and a half to scan a roll of film.

I'm only scanning for internet use. If I want wall hangers, I'll get the scan and print done professionally.

So,how are you all scanning?

Advice?

 

Sorry if this is an inappropriate post for this thread,

Matt

 

I use an Epson V600. I scan both 35mm and 120 at 3200dpi, a film takes about 30 minutes.

[Michael Hiles]

I'm using the Epson Scan. I have Vue Scan on my computer, but haven't looked at it yet.

I guess I'm really asking what resolution folks are using.

 

Matt

 

I use 1200 - a B&W roll takes about 30 minutes. A C41 roll takes about 40 minutes with dust removal turned on.

 

This suits me. The objective is cataloging, testing what might be possible from the negative and preparing for on line posting. I don't scan at resolutions I don't need.

 

For the wall - Ilford silver paper and a focomat 1c.

Edited July 5, 2018 by Michael Hiles

[Shlomo]

Portra 400, M3, 28 elmarit

 

Truly a great Street Scene with an unconcerned 70's touch. Awesome

[ash13brook]

Thanks for the responses on resolution.

I think I'm good.

 

Matt

[Michael Hiles]

Once the residence of Irish Bishops. They moved out when things got a bit draughty.

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!

[Ouroboros]

Mininglow.  A winter's evening at a Bronze Age burial site in The White Peak.

 

Leica MP

CV 12mm Ultra Wide Heliar

Heliopan 22

Fuji Acros 100 in RO9

 

 

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!

[edwardkaraa]

M7 ZM 35/1.4 Superia 1600 by edward karaa, on Flickr

 

M7 ZM 35/1.4 Superia 1600 by edward karaa, on Flickr

 

M7 ZM 35/1.4 Superia 1600 by edward karaa, on Flickr

[chrism]

Mininglow.  A winter's evening at a Bronze Age burial site in The White Peak.

 

Leica MP

CV 12mm Ultra Wide Heliar

Heliopan 22

Fuji Acros 100 in RO9

 

Excellent!

[Wayne]

This is probably the wrong place for this, but I wanted film shooters to see it.

I'm using an Epson 4870 scanner. I scanned some stuff at 300dpi, but it didn't look good. So, I scanned it at 3200. It looked great, but it takes an hour and a half to scan a roll of film.

I'm only scanning for internet use. If I want wall hangers, I'll get the scan and print done professionally.

So,how are you all scanning?

Advice?

 

Sorry if this is an inappropriate post for this thread,

Matt

I had an older, slower Epson scanner. I bit the bullet and bought an Epson v800. I cannot comment extensively on improvement in scan quality- although it is obvious there is some emprovement- but I can say the the v800 seems more than twice as fast.

[gbealnz]

And in my case with the 4870, the newer scanners (v800 et al) don't take time to warm up, they are ready whenever.

It isn't too much of an issue, but upgrading will have definite benefits, when I do upgrade.

Gary

[chrism]

Having been playing with my 1972 Trip 35, I had a look around on Flickr to see what people are doing with them. I strongly recommend a look through the Trip 35 album of one user, Monica Weller, which contains photos far better than ought to come out of such a simple camera. Quite inspiring, but a bit slow to load each as they are posted at quite large sizes, and just when you think a shot is fuzzy it finishes loading and you see just how sharp this little lens is.

 

The album is here.

[A miller]

WOW, the second one - OMG so so lovely, Gary.  I scene worth framing and looking at every day!

Some more Monterosso, lovely place.

R6 with 50 Summicron

Portra 400

Plustek 8100

Gary

 

Really interesting results from the Acros .

Hawthorn tree on King's Tor, Dartmoor.

 

The haws (fruit) are known locally as 'aggles' or 'pixie pears'.  As with many things on Dartmoor, myth or ancient wisdom surrounds old hawthorns.

 

Leica MP

50mm elmar-m f2.8

Heliopan 22

Fuji Acros 100 in RO9

 

Thanks, Shlomo  Let me know if you are in Israel this summer.

Truly a great Street Scene with an unconcerned 70's touch. Awesome

 

Really interesting, Michael.

Once the residence of Irish Bishops. They moved out when things got a bit draughty.

 

Another stellar photo from the 35mm!

Mininglow.  A winter's evening at a Bronze Age burial site in The White Peak.

 

Leica MP

CV 12mm Ultra Wide Heliar

Heliopan 22

Fuji Acros 100 in RO9

[A miller]

When the feeling of photographic atrophy gets to you, radically change your film format!!!

This morning with a rented - try before you buy - 6x17

 

 

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Ernest]

Thank you, Rog for giving such considered and articulate insight to a host of possibilities in art - many classically realized yet altogether more full of potential. Your mention of L'Eclisse is right on the mark. One of the most thrilling and stimulating passages of cinema for me is the final seven minutes of that wonderful movie. So much is said and alluded to in so minimalist a way. It is pure cinematic genius - inspired, mature and audacious. If any here haven't seen it - please do yourselves a huge favour. My one short attempt at film direction/production was directly inspired by it (

). As a side-note, the penultimate (long, interestingly also seven minutes) scene of his later film The Passenger is a masterpiece of conception, planning, cinematography and inspiration. Watch that and then look up what it took to get it (Wikipedia has a good description) - then try to work out what it all means.

Yes, I can see the Antonioni overtone in your "Savage Sky," the kind of Monica Vitti look of your young woman in the exterior daylight shots and the emphasis on her as the point of view, rather than Mark Macpherson singing his song. We are always reminded that 35mm still photography was innovated by Oskar Barnack initially as a way to test a shot prior to filming with a motion picture camera. Even now, breaking a motion picture down into shots that are edited into filmic narrative has in a way been mirrored by still photographers like Ralph Gibson in his "Somnambulist" and "Dark Trilogy" that you mentioned earlier in our discussion of fragmentation. It's amusing Gibson's work, here, is often called surrealistic, which really only highlights the inadequacy of text translating image. Gibson presents the fragments of his perspective, a psychological terrain, that he leaves us to navigate. He doesn't connect the fragments, but leaving it to the viewer/participant who seeks closure by connecting the fragments, an interesting exercise takes place. Mentally connecting two visual fragments does not result in a narrative of fragment 1 plus fragment 2 but rather a range of possible surplus fragments that only echo simultaneously fragment 1 and 2 without being either. In other words, the viewer/participant connects the two photographs with something that isn't present, which only the viewer/participant brings to the game. This is what creates room for the open narrative of a Gibson series, what makes work like Gibson's thematically provocative. There is always something missing. Look at a film of exclusively still images, save for one shot, and we are looking at Chris Marker's short film "La Jetee." It's available on YouTube and published by Zone books; see Marker's inspirational, observant subway photographs in "Passengers." Still, there's a cinematic look to the framing of Marker's photography as opposed to Gibson. I remember having a conversation with Vilmos Zsigmond when he was shooting "The Sugarland Express" and mentioned to him that I had read an article in a photography magazine that praised his cinematography in "Deliverance" for its "still photography" virtues. Vilmos's eyes squinted as he smiled, clearly pleased with the high five he was getting from still photographers.

 

Coming back to "Savage Sky," one of its structural strong points is your editing rhythm and selection of shots. With a running time of only 1:34, there are about 78 shots, roughly. Like a poem (and song), it begins and ends with the same shot. There is sense of closure at the end by this repetition. With a song or poetry, there is repetition of a refrain, but the same passage repeated at the end is not the same as the beginning because the theme has been elaborated and informs a new understanding of the ending passage. Interestingly, once closure has been established, and we get a sense of wholeness, a stability, the work as a whole can "play again" in the mind. Though the shots in "Savage Sky" are fragmented, by virtue of their repetition, there is rapid rhythmic order that mirrors the soundtrack, though in counterpoint, since the song is slow. It's the speed of memory in conflict with the real time of song, and this opposition, instead of resolving conflict, poses its replay. The opening shot of the trees in wind is repeated 8 times, from beginning to ending. And the POV Girl face shot(s) are repeated 18 times, including only 6 exterior shots. And then, there are 2 shots of her on the beach in back silhouette. Again, the same face shot in sunlight of Girl is repeated at the beginning and end. There are 6 shots of the ocean, 3 of which play surf in reverse. Memory, by definition, recounting what is past. There are only 3 shots of the trio Boys walking on the beach (always from the back, again). But, only 4 shots of the singer playing guitar, in silhouette from the back. My shot count is only approximate, since you've edited your "Savage Sky" with the blur of memory! This is very much an underground music video. Applause. I could not find Macpherson's lyrics and only learned that this was one of his "normal" songs he recorded himself on his 16-track Roland hard disk recorder in 1996. Tenacious! Unfortunately, the sound quality suffers, which is the plight of all independent films; sound is always the last to be added, and that's when the money runs out. Thanks so much for digging into the vault and sharing this gem.

 

We're on the same page with Antonioni's "The Passenger," so apropos today with issues of alienation, identity appropriation, paranoia, and loss. Going down this corridor opens so many doors for discussion. I went to a lecture spotlighting Jack Nicholson at University of Southern California after The Passenger was released, and I got to ask a question from the audience. I was curious to know how he as an actor who plays off the internalization of a role squared that away working with Antonioni who directed actors using the externals of setting to reflect the psychology of the character. Nicholson answered by saying that Antonioni wanted him to wear a specific jacket, but Nicholson didn't like it. Nicholson stood up from his chair and demonstrated, "So, what I did was this. I took the jacket like this." Nicholson slouched into his jacket, and it looked awkward as he walked around for a few steps. "You see, he agreed with me. I got my way." Jack always gets his way.