Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Calais Cliffs for Ian :)

 

... below

 

Kodachrome 64-Leica R4S-Summicron 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!

 

and above

Dover cliffs not visible , foggy day

 

Fuji Superia 100-R4S-50 Summicron

 

 

Best

Henry

Edited by Doc Henry
  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

A photo from last week on the Manhattan Bridge...

With a re-attachment of the gear set up :)

Linhof Technika Press 23 (1958) Zeiss Planar 100mm, Ektar

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

attachicon.gifMB morning.jpg

 

Amazing and impressive equipment Adam with wonderful result  :)

Superb color

Congrats

Henry

Edited by Doc Henry
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Arrival Eurostar London

Saint Pancras station

2015

 

 

Kodak Portra 400-Leica M7-Summicron 28 Asph

 

 

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 by Doc Henry
  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A photo from last week on the Manhattan Bridge...

With a re-attachment of the gear set up :)

Linhof Technika Press 23 (1958) Zeiss Planar 100mm, Ektar

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Cool. And you're not messing around (Lee filter system). Beautiful result. Curious what Velvia would have looked like on that scene.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just point and shoot - so please, help me explain what that would do!

 

 

Add some texture , my bad if the wall is clean and does not have any asperities to create shadows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing and impressive equipment Adam with wonderful result  :)

Superb color

Congrats

Henry

 

 

+1

 

 

Cool. And you're not messing around (Lee filter system). Beautiful result. Curious what Velvia would have looked like on that scene.

 

Many thanks, Gentlemen.

 

Gnuyork - I didn't think about using Velvia 50 for a minute.  Here's why:

 

1.  The native exposure time for this scene (based on the 100 ISO film and desired aperture) this was about 8 seconds.  With reciprocity failure on the Ektar it was 14 seconds.  I used no filter for color or WB correction.  I just take it as it comes with Ektar and it does its thing.

2.  With the Velvia, the 8 seconds would have been 15 seconds.  With reciprocity, it would have been 26 seconds.

3.  But wait - then the Velvia 50 data sheet would tell me to add an addition 1 stop of exposure time, which taking into account reciprocity takes it to 1:01 minutes.  

4.  BUT WAIT AGAIN, the Fuji data sheet then tells me that I am in an exposure time zone that is NOT recommended for use (i.e., no strength of magenta correction filter would be acceptable).  I would have had to compromise my aperture usage, open up a stop more, and I would have been left needing to use a 12.5 magenta correction filter.  That's the 4th different magenta filter that is recommended on exposure times starting at 4 seconds up to 32 seconds.  So I would have had to have the full suite of magenta filters on hand and ready depending on the exposure time, which I wouldn't have known in advance.  And I would have had to be dead spot on with the exposure.

 

Without the use of the right magenta filter, my best guess is that the photo would have come out something awful like this.  :(

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!

 

In my opinion Ektar was the perfect choice, and Portra 160 would also have been very lovely for picking up the pastels in the sky.

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

Add some texture , my bad if the wall is clean and does not have any asperities to create shadows.

 

ah, I see what you mean.   :)

The full resolution on this shows all of the dimples and texture.  Although this one was particularly smooth, although I can see the dimples in full res.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time on his hands .....

 

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!

 

 

R4, Summicron-R 50, Agfa APX 100, Rodinal 1:100 stand

  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wayne, hope you don't mind me chipping in, but I think banding of the type you've been showing is a product of digitising the image. Perhaps your scanner needs a clean, lube and adjust? Does your software have a "calibrate" function - this might alleviate it somewhat. I remember only seeing banding in my scans when the scanner wasn't running optimally or otherwise with an extremely dense negative. In any case, it's certainly fixable.

No. Not at all. I welcome any opinion/advise. The scans come from a Primefilm 7200. I also own a flat bed Epson V800. I will run them through the Epson. I just find it odd that the two photos, from the same roll, and taken pretty much under the same conditions, do not show the same banding. I guess the only difference between the two shots is the fact that one includes clear sky while the other does not. In the photo of wife and daughter the flat, uniform seat back also provides a surface from which light was reflected uniformly. Maybe that is where the problem exists.  The software used/supplied with scanner is CyberviewX. I have been unable to locate a calibration feature.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A photo from last week on the Manhattan Bridge...

With a re-attachment of the gear set up :)

Linhof Technika Press 23 (1958) Zeiss Planar 100mm, Ektar

Absolutely spectacular cityscape with superb composition and light, again with top expertise in mastering technical problems thus presenting us again a unique artistic vision. An extrordinary achievement from someone who does street - photography on the same very high level. (Let me please apologize for being the only one, who doesn't miss "big" rocks in the foreground). I don't know another one who excells in both fields. Thanks for showing your architecural series for over a year now, Adam!

Cheers,

Simon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

attachicon.gifMB morning.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A photo from last week on the Manhattan Bridge...

With a re-attachment of the gear set up :)

Linhof Technika Press 23 (1958) Zeiss Planar 100mm, Ektar

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Impressive set-up, location & result, Adam.

Edited by Keith (M)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Not at all. I welcome any opinion/advise. The scans come from a Primefilm 7200. I also own a flat bed Epson V800. I will run them through the Epson. I just find it odd that the two photos, from the same roll, and taken pretty much under the same conditions, do not show the same banding. I guess the only difference between the two shots is the fact that one includes clear sky while the other does not. In the photo of wife and daughter the flat, uniform seat back also provides a surface from which light was reflected uniformly. Maybe that is where the problem exists. The software used/supplied with scanner is CyberviewX. I have been unable to locate a calibration feature.

The Primefilm 7200 scans the frame horizontally from top to bottom so if the banding is caused by the scanner, it should be horizontal not vertical for a landscape oriented shot. I think that rules out the scanner in my humble opinion.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Primefilm 7200 scans the frame horizontally from top to bottom so if the banding is caused by the scanner, it should be horizontal not vertical for a landscape oriented shot. I think that rules out the scanner in my humble opinion.

I have no experience or specific expertise in scanner based banding but could imagine:

1. Stuttering motion of a scanning movement leading to banding perpendicular to the scanning direction, and

2. Unequal sensor sensitivity / illumination intensity of a scanning array that would lead to banding parallel to the scanning direction.

 

Rgds

 

C.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no experience or specific expertise in scanner based banding but could imagine:

1. Stuttering motion of a scanning movement leading to banding perpendicular to the scanning direction, and

2. Unequal sensor sensitivity / illumination intensity of a scanning array that would lead to banding parallel to the scanning direction.

 

Rgds

 

C.

That makes sense, which rules out no.1, leaving no.2 as a very feasible possibility.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no experience or specific expertise in scanner based banding but could imagine:

1. Stuttering motion of a scanning movement leading to banding perpendicular to the scanning direction, and

2. Unequal sensor sensitivity / illumination intensity of a scanning array that would lead to banding parallel to the scanning direction.

 

Rgds

 

C.

Edward is correct in his statement regarding the orientation of the scanner progress as it moves over the negative.

 

It has been fun to wonder about this phenomenon. It does seem that the banding is only a problem when there is some broad, uniform source of light, or reflected light, in the photograph. Is it possible the formulation and structure of the older glass has something to do with it. I guess what I need to do is shoot some color through the camera and lens, process it C41, and see if the banding appears. If not, that should pretty much narrow it down to my B&W process. Boy, another excuse to go out and shoot.......... :)

 

The Below is shot using the Svema Color ISO 120 film. I was using my IIIA (also a converted IA....I have this thing for converted IA cameras) and the Canon 50mm 1.4 LTM. No banding.

 

35572622020_3704145c41_k.jpgimage433114 by W P_, on Flickr

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Boy, another excuse to go out and shoot.......... :) "

 

Yes Wayne and after what pleasure to develop himself the film like me , with 2 rolls of Portra 160

just right now , and look the result immediately after .

 

You are right some lens can add artefact like in your case :)

Svema film has a special and nice color a bit vintage

Your picture looks like what I see in the movie like Twin Peaks

Henry

Edited by Doc Henry
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks, Gentlemen.

 

Gnuyork - I didn't think about using Velvia 50 for a minute.  Here's why:

 

1.  The native exposure time for this scene (based on the 100 ISO film and desired aperture) this was about 8 seconds.  With reciprocity failure on the Ektar it was 14 seconds.  I used no filter for color or WB correction.  I just take it as it comes with Ektar and it does its thing.

2.  With the Velvia, the 8 seconds would have been 15 seconds.  With reciprocity, it would have been 26 seconds.

3.  But wait - then the Velvia 50 data sheet would tell me to add an addition 1 stop of exposure time, which taking into account reciprocity takes it to 1:01 minutes.  

4.  BUT WAIT AGAIN, the Fuji data sheet then tells me that I am in an exposure time zone that is NOT recommended for use (i.e., no strength of magenta correction filter would be acceptable).  I would have had to compromise my aperture usage, open up a stop more, and I would have been left needing to use a 12.5 magenta correction filter.  That's the 4th different magenta filter that is recommended on exposure times starting at 4 seconds up to 32 seconds.  So I would have had to have the full suite of magenta filters on hand and ready depending on the exposure time, which I wouldn't have known in advance.  And I would have had to be dead spot on with the exposure.

 

Without the use of the right magenta filter, my best guess is that the photo would have come out something awful like this.  :(

attachicon.gifMB morning velvia.jpg

 

In my opinion Ektar was the perfect choice, and Portra 160 would also have been very lovely for picking up the pastels in the sky.

 

This picture is also beautiful

Wonderful color Adam

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...