Jump to content
Doc Henry

I like film...(open thread)

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, erl said:

A Bent (selfie) Portrait.

Camera, Dog, Self and Clock.

I like your house. It reminds me of one of mine when it was furnished from the estate gift from my late wife's great-grandfather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, erl said:

A Bent (selfie) Portrait.

Camera, Dog, Self and Clock.

Hassy 203FE + 30mm Fisheye lens & two remote slave flashes, activated by controller on top of camera (see shadow), 10 sec delay set on camera.

HP5+ in Xtol.

 

Crazy baby...😄

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, pico said:

I like your house. It reminds me of one of mine when it was furnished from the estate gift from my late wife's great-grandfather.

A clock and a dog don't make a house..😮

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, david strachan said:

A clock and a dog don't make a house..😮

... but it does make a home! 😁

I also have the mouse, not in the picture, to run up the clock!

What's a house without a mouse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, well then you're lucky.

11 hours ago, verwackelt said:

Nice dryer! Well done...
Although i had never dust problems drying my films hanging in the shower over night

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it depends on the area. I can imagine in dusty Towns or where a lot of debrie from plants is in the air only a dryer like yours can produce dustfree films...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 8/1/2019 at 5:26 PM, farnz said:

Ahem, it's a Panama actually. 🙂

Pete.

Ha ha, very funny guys. :)  Speaking of fedoras that don't look like fedoras, I have blown through over 20 rolls here in Israel tattooing my "fedora"-wearing silhouette on people's chests and backs, from the beach to the alleys and markets of Jerusalem, to the camels and floating people at the dead sea.  I picked up the hat at the market in Jerusalem; it was the best 45 shekels (about $13) that I have spent all summer!  Here's one of me from last Friday taken on the beach in Herzliya by an Israeli Leica friend (with his MM).  My IIIg and 28mm summation have hardly come off of my neck 😍

 

On 8/1/2019 at 10:16 PM, sblitz said:

and a second one ...

 

 

Very nice, Steve.  I do hope that you were wearing a proper bathing suit.

On 8/2/2019 at 1:13 AM, jcraf said:

Well, yes, but remember you’re only a student Pete. The Fedora is presented upon graduation.

Yes, that's right, John.  During the training course, panamas and other hats are allowed; and you are free to call them "fedoras" if you wish, as most people will know what you mean.

On 8/2/2019 at 11:06 AM, MT0227 said:

Leica M6J | 50mm Summicron Rigid
TriX in HC-110(B) Pushed 1 Stop @20c
Nikon LS-90000

Waiting at 23rd Street

 

Waiting at 23rd Street by Marc Tauber, on Flickr

Very nice, Marc.  I hope you are getting warmed up for me.  I have a new spot along the east river that we need to master.

On 8/2/2019 at 4:34 PM, Sparkassenkunde said:

As you have probably noticed, I like to experiment with different cameras, emulsions and photographic themes. When I stumbled upon a thread in the german part of this forum about a service provided by silbersalz35.com I had to try this myself - and be it only to see if the grumpy old white men in the german part of LUF are right in complaining about another player in the market who tries to sell old films in new canisters. So I made my order and got 2 rolls of Silbersalz35 in 50D and 2 rolls in 250D. The offered emulsion is nothing better or worse than KodakVision cinefilm and Silbersalz is offering the development in ECN2 developer and provides the full scanning service in RAW, TIFF and JPG format. Altogether I paid almost 60 € for the films including development, scanning in the three formats and return of the negatives. If you don't need your negatives back, you save 15 €. SIlbersalz offers only packs of 4 films including the before mentioned service.

Yesterday I got the link to the dropbox files to my pictures. The whole development & scanning service took them about 3 weeks, but I now got digital data of more than 40 GB. The jpg files come in 5900x3850 and have around 20 MB, the tiff and raw files weigh around 140-160 MB each. 

All in all I quite like the overall appearance of my pictures, they have a certain look and feel, definitely showing a true analog origin. As with other cinefilm emulsions, the results are not perfect, though and I let them check for some annoying streaks in my pictures that definitely are no result of my cameras. 

Sorry for the long read, here comes a first impression:

 

Ricoh GR 1 - Silbersalz35 250D

Wow, so many great results with this film.  It looks to have monster latitude.  Just AMAZING!

Edited by A miller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Xícara de Café said:

Leica IIIf, Summicron 5cm 1:2 collapsible, Ilford Delta 100, Kodak D-76 1:1.

A year or so ago I realised that this is, in fact, the look I was trying to create through my digital workflow (Leica X Vario, Raw Photo Processor, darktable) — except for the subject matter, that is (I shoot tied up girls, mostly, which is why I won't add an image to this thread). I think I sometimes managed to approach this look, but why not go for the real thing? I bought an M4 in very good condition, with a somewhat blurry collapsible 50mm, added a 40mm Summicron-C and a 90mm Elmarit, and began using both digital and film during shoots, and I learned to print in the darkroom. Overall, I am happy with the results, but time, and to a lesser extent cost, is a problem. Who has time to stand in the darkroom all those many hours that it would take? I now shoot 95 percent digital, 5 percent film, and this seems like an acceptable compromise. Only when there is a scene that cries out for film, I'll duplicate it with the M4. Does this sound familiar?

Edited by BAASCH
Omission repaired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BAASCH said:

A year or so ago I realised that this is, in fact, the look I was trying to create through my digital workflow (Leica X Vario, Raw Photo Processor, darktable) — except for the subject matter, that is (I shoot tied up girls, mostly, which is why I won't add an image to this thread). I think I sometimes managed to approach this look, but why not go for the real thing? I bought an M4 in very good condition, with a somewhat blurry collapsible 50mm, added a 40mm Summicron-C and a 90mm Elmarit, and began using both digital and film during shoots, and I learned to print in the darkroom. Overall, I am happy with the results, but time, and to a lesser extent cost, is a problem. Who has time to stand in the darkroom all those many hours that it would take? I now shoot 95 percent digital, 5 percent film, and this seems like an acceptable compromise. Only when there is a scene that cries out for film, I'll duplicate it with the M4. Does this sound familiar?

not at all.  I think your problem is exhausting yourself in the darkroom rather than embracing a hybrid workflow involving scanning, which is much less exhausting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A miller said:

not at all.  I think your problem is exhausting yourself in the darkroom rather than embracing a hybrid workflow involving scanning, which is much less exhausting!

I should perhaps have explained: I like the film images to be fully analog. I never scan my negatives or even my darkroom prints. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BAASCH said:

I should perhaps have explained: I like the film images to be fully analog. I never scan my negatives or even my darkroom prints. 

ah, i see.  Wow, that is an interesting perspective.  I do comparisons of analog prints and digital prints of my film photos all the time and I will tell you that in many case the digital prints will have a lot more to offer.  Paper and printing choices are key to this, I will further note...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A miller said:

ah, i see.  Wow, that is an interesting perspective.  I do comparisons of analog prints and digital prints of my film photos all the time and I will tell you that in many case the digital prints will have a lot more to offer.  Paper and printing choices are key to this, I will further note...

Do you have such a companion set available? I mean the same analog photograph handled 100% analog vs. using a scanner? That would be interesting to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May be it´s your darkroom that stresses you?
For me, worked as a photolab technican and retoucher in the 80th, i find only working in a quite professional darkroom is fun.
All compromises like darkened bathrooms and family members knocking on the door because they must dry their hair whilst you are tray developing , are very annoying and exhausting.
I am still looking for an affordable room that can be converted to a permanant darkroom. Then printing is much fun for me. No temporary "darkrooms" in bathrooms or cellars without air exchange anymore. …

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, to achieve a quite similar open structure in the depth of a picture compared to a converted scan and post processing requires mostly some splitgrade exposure, masking and a lot more trail and error. 
Only a very elaborated workflow and the use of measurement tools like densitometers or color analysers in the wet darkroom will provide results that can reach the hybrid results in speed and quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, A miller said:

When I get back from Israel I will put some comparisons together.  This photo (taken with my SWC and I believe Acros 100) is one of the last ones that I also printed in the dark room.   I was very surprised at how little detail I was able to get out of the piers in the foreground.  They were full of nearly completely crushed shadows in the wet print.  And we tried several versions to try to get the most out of the negatives.

The scan extracted much more detail and I was able to digitally dodge and burn the file to my liking.  And it prints very well on Fuji Flex paper using a light jet printer.  It would also print very well on Ilford Baryta paper using a light jet and then washed in chemicals.  

 

Very interesting, I really appreciate this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy