A miller Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46041 Posted January 19, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I mean, I can not know for sure, but, surely, Betty was/is a New Yorker. You have to be right Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 19, 2018 Posted January 19, 2018 Hi A miller, Take a look here I like film...(open thread). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
A miller Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46042 Posted January 19, 2018 I realize Lighroom is superior software, and do have a copy, but I enjoy working with my photos in the Photos application on my Macbook. Photos simplicity seems well suited to my relative ignorance pertaining to PP. Maybe I will delve into LR when I become more familiar with simple adjustments available in Photos. I am curious as to order of operations most use when adjusting a negative scan. When I DO play around with PP, I generally limit my adjustments to Neutrals, Tone, Luminance, and Exposure. What is the best order to use as adjustments are made? Does it make any difference? Sorry for the, possibly, dumb question, but I am clueless when it comes to these matters. I do mess around with Definition slider, and see a difference, but do not really understand exactly what is going on there. Best, Wayne You and me both, Wayne. I just f$$k around until I get something that I like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46043 Posted January 19, 2018 ...This is a film photo sharing thread. You are invited to share film scans. Gimme me a break! Now you want to ban camera digitalizations? You gotta be kidding! I'll say it again: digitalizing 35mm film with the M10, even transparency film, which because of its greater density is often more problematic than negative film, I get results very close to that of my Imacon Precision III that has a true optical resolution 6,300dpi and a dMax of 4.2 – substantially beyond the capability of a Coolscan 9000. And there is no point in arguing, or wondering, about the truth of a 30MB DNG having the same amount of information as a 140 MB TIFF file: just read something half-way technical on what a TIFF file is. _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Instagram: @mitchalland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46044 Posted January 19, 2018 Gimme me a break! Now you want to ban camera digitalizations? You gotta be kidding! I'll say it again: digitalizing 35mm film with the M10, even transparency film, which because of its greater density is often more problematic than negative film, I get results very close to that of my Imacon Precision III that has a true optical resolution 6,300dpi and a dMax of 4.2 – substantially beyond the capability of a Coolscan 9000. And there is no point in arguing, or wondering, about the truth of a 30MB DNG having the same amount of information as a 140 MB TIFF file: just read something half-way technical on what a TIFF file is. _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Instagram: @mitchalland No don't be silly. I am not banning your camera digitizations. I actually think they are useful reference points. But I am banning you talking about digital raw and film scans and your perceived superiority of camera digitizations and dedicated film scanners! LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46045 Posted January 19, 2018 I shot the image below in October after not having shot any film since the previous March, but in the meantime, in July-August, I digitalized some 400, mainly Kodachrome, transparencies with the M10 and a Focotar-50 II lens on a BEEON stand. Quite a difference digitalizing transparency film and color negative film (and the same goes for scanning) in that not only does a slide provide you with a color reference but also requires nil or much less color correction, in that you're not dealing with an orange mask. In contrast to this, even printing negative film in the darkroom required a good amount of interpretation in the form of the color printing filters you used as you worked your way to what you thought the colors should be: fairly similar in concept to color correction in Lightroom or Photoshop. Actually, I used a Philips enlarger that had a color head (Tri-One) that used additive colors (RGB), allowing dialing in the filtration without having to change exposure — seemed like a great simplification to the usual subtractive color filter system — the point being that color negative film always had its difficulties in the form of color memory and interpretation. As a result, before 2006 when I started shooting digital, for color I mostly shot transparencies and printed them on the Philips additive enlarger with Cibachrome. Now, I've been waiting for Kodak to come out with the new Ektachrome... M3 | Portra 400 | DR Summicron-50 Pak Nam Pran _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Instagram: @mitchalland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stray cat Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46046 Posted January 19, 2018 ...just on the "new ektachrome" - are we any closer to actually seeing something? Same goes for the "new ferrania" for that matter - haven't seen any colour film come out from them either. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46047 Posted January 19, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...just on the "new ektachrome" - are we any closer to actually seeing something? Same goes for the "new ferrania" for that matter - haven't seen any colour film come out from them either. haven't heard anything tangible lately. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stray cat Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46048 Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) Wow, fantastic colors, Phil. Congrats on the successful home development!! It would be interesting to see the schmootz on the Cinestill 50 if you are willing. There are some who think it is an aberration (e.g., per a thread in the "Film" forum) and recent examples are helpful to dissuade folks and put them on notice. Thank you Adam. I've scanned one of the worst frames from the cinestill rolls and include it here. I'd like to make the point that neither of the Agfa rolls had any marks remotely like this - in fact they were cleaner than most lab processed rolls I've received - so I conclude it's not the home processing. The marks on the picture posted here are absolutely certainly to do with the roll of cinestill. If anyone from cinestill happens to read this, I'm afraid I won't be buying any more cinestill film until I am assured this sort of thing won't happen again. At $16 a roll here it is just too expensive - and too upsetting to see your photos corrupted like this: - scanned without i/r cleaning or any photoshop. Edited January 19, 2018 by stray cat 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post stray cat Posted January 19, 2018 Popular Post Share #46049 Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) Meanwhile, in the red corner... Rosebud 2018 Canon F1N, FDn 50mm f3.5 macro, Agfa Vista 400 Edited January 19, 2018 by stray cat 24 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46050 Posted January 19, 2018 Holy smokes!!! That's schmootzitosis!! Thank you Adam. I've scanned one of the worst frames from the cinestill rolls and include it here. I'd like to make the point that neither of the Agfa rolls had any marks remotely like this - in fact they were cleaner than most lab processed rolls I've received - so I conclude it's not the home processing. The marks on the picture posted here are absolutely certainly to do with the roll of cinestill. If anyone from cinestill happens to read this, I'm afraid I won't be buying any more cinestill film until I am assured this sort of thing won't happen again. At $16 a roll here it is just too expensive - and too upsetting to see your photos corrupted like this: - scanned without i/r cleaning or any photoshop. Now that's more like it! Congrats on the home development - I am envious!! Meanwhile, in the red corner... Rosebud 2018 Canon F1N, FDn 50mm f3.5 macro, Agfa Vista 400 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stray cat Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46051 Posted January 19, 2018 Schmootzitosis??? Sounds serious, doc - how long have I got? 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46052 Posted January 19, 2018 Schmootzitosis??? Sounds serious, doc - how long have I got? Hahaha! Hilarious! The nice thing about this thread is that we can even learn Yiddish photography terms 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post sixteen pads Posted January 19, 2018 Popular Post Share #46053 Posted January 19, 2018 Another GAS purchase of this week.. It just keeps on happening to me Just found me a MINT MINT Leica M4-2 with 50mm Zeiss Planar. Pushed Kentmere 100 to 400. Developed in D76 Firestation "Wait game". Shot this evening. 20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stray cat Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46054 Posted January 19, 2018 Back to the treacherous NYC blizzard, which was shocking to many!! Portra 400 M7, 28 elmarit pre-asph NYC Snow Blizzard.jpg Her expression? Priceless. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkassenkunde Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46055 Posted January 19, 2018 Back to the treacherous NYC blizzard, which was shocking to many!! Portra 400 M7, 28 elmarit pre-asph NYC Snow Blizzard.jpg This one has a very nice three-dimensional appearance! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkassenkunde Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46056 Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) Thank you Adam. I've scanned one of the worst frames from the cinestill rolls and include it here. I'd like to make the point that neither of the Agfa rolls had any marks remotely like this - in fact they were cleaner than most lab processed rolls I've received - so I conclude it's not the home processing. The marks on the picture posted here are absolutely certainly to do with the roll of cinestill. If anyone from cinestill happens to read this, I'm afraid I won't be buying any more cinestill film until I am assured this sort of thing won't happen again. At $16 a roll here it is just too expensive - and too upsetting to see your photos corrupted like this: - scanned without i/r cleaning or any photoshop. Allthough I was spared the schmootz on my rolls of Cinestill I repeatedly found these magenta blobs on my 35mm exposures. In a conversation with the brothers Wright they stated, that they might come from residues of the the removed remjet. When I made my Kickstarter pledge for the 120 version, they gave me an extra roll of 35 with my pledge. Besides that I quite like the results with Cinestill - although there are cheaper options on the market. Edited January 19, 2018 by Sparkassenkunde 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkassenkunde Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46057 Posted January 19, 2018 Sahart, Northwestern Sahara, Morocco by _JM_, on Flickr Agfa RSX 50 - Horizon 202 What a wonderful picture, excellent use of the panoramic camera! Your latest submissions, esp. the Acros shots, are terrific. It is a great pleasure to be taken around the world by you this way 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46058 Posted January 19, 2018 (edited) Allthough I was spared the schmootz on my rolls of Cinestill I repeatedly found these magenta blobs on my 35mm exposures. In a conversation with the brothers Wright they stated, that they might come from residues of the the removed remjet. When I made my Kickstarter pledge for the 120 version, they gave me an extra roll of 35 with my pledge. Besides that I quite like the results with Cinestill - although there are cheaper options on the market. Unfortunately, cinestill is notorious for all kinds of residues from the remjet layer. It's basically the film's only flaw. There are people who remove the remjet themselves in the darkroom and I think in general they have more success than cinestill with the residues. Edited January 19, 2018 by edwardkaraa 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46059 Posted January 19, 2018 Yes, an update would have been timely because the original target was Q4 2017. I don't think many will hold it against Kodak that they have missed this target (I think most of us would rather Kodak get the film right than rush it out in a substandard form) but I'm not sure Kodak do themselves many favours when the only new announcements they have this year relate to their proposed move into cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin mining and Kodakcoin, a new blockchain currency of their own linked with image rights). As for Ferrania, I think the colour E6 film is way off in the distance, possibly no longer a realistic prospect. ...just on the "new ektachrome" - are we any closer to actually seeing something? Same goes for the "new ferrania" for that matter - haven't seen any colour film come out from them either. haven't heard anything tangible lately. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stray cat Posted January 19, 2018 Share #46060 Posted January 19, 2018 Thanks Ian. Not sure what Kodak's strategic business plan would look like, but I can't think it would resemble anything at all coherent. I do hope some Ektachrome will slip through though, and we won't need Kodakcoins to buy it. As for Ferrania, I think they've tried hard, and I admire them for it. Perhaps it was just too big an ask in the first place. Who knows, if the planets align, something may eventually come of it - I hope so. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now