Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted April 10, 2016 Share #561 Posted April 10, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) See Tom Abrahamsson's videos for loading. It works. I use his RapidWinders but the technique is the same with any tulip take-up. (I have used Leicavits and Tom's invention for years. His is the very best.) See: Best of luck. Cheers Pico...........putting the kink in the end of the film is the trick Thanks mate You are running a world class ocean oil rig and having troubles with a Leica? Trust me running a 6th generation drill ship is 10 times easier than shooting a Leica camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 10, 2016 Posted April 10, 2016 Hi Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS, Take a look here Leica Film Odyssey for a beginner. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
madNbad Posted April 10, 2016 Share #562 Posted April 10, 2016 Jef I will be doing my own processing when I get home next hitch.........then the fun will begin. My wife has already said that she will go on holiday for a week when I start that shit......I wonder why :) Loading the film on a developing reel with your arms inside a changing bag, wow, I can't wait for that thread! Keep at it, Neil! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpavich Posted April 10, 2016 Share #563 Posted April 10, 2016 Loading the film on a developing reel with your arms inside a changing bag, wow, I can't wait for that thread! Keep at it, Neil! On a warm humid day with a plastic reel! Oh no! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frase Posted April 10, 2016 Share #564 Posted April 10, 2016 On a warm humid day with a plastic reel! Oh no! Don't bother with plastic reels go straight to some nice cheap stainless ones Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted April 11, 2016 Share #565 Posted April 11, 2016 The fact you're having these loading issues make me wonder if there is something amiss with your camera. It shouldn't be that temperamental. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EoinC Posted April 11, 2016 Share #566 Posted April 11, 2016 Just take your time loading the film, Neil. Make sure it is seated all the way down. You can use your thumb to feel the sprocket take up while you wind on. As Joshua said, once you put the base plate back on, check that the winder is turning when you cock the shutter (if it isn't, the film hasn't taken up properly - open the back and check). I'm back in Singapore now, but I'll catch up with you in KL to check progress. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted April 11, 2016 Share #567 Posted April 11, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) For Neil Unloading M6 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCKNxJQZLWw Loading https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e0sntsinjM Good photos and meet you in film thread Best Henry I post again these links for Neil Rg. H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted April 11, 2016 Share #568 Posted April 11, 2016 Okay so I got my first rolls of film back. I'm happy and gutted all in the same breath. Happy I eventually got something to share and gutted as 99.9% of the pictures look like there were shot in the eighteen hundreds. I need to go to bed and sleep on this and think about this film lark. I mean some of these pictures look like they were shot at ISO 750,000 when in fact they were shot in broad daylight...........are they meant to look like that?? When I look on the film forum there are some fantastic B&W pictures, that could easily look like they were shot on a M240.....WTF did I do wrong and just when I managed to master the loading of the film?? Here are the best of the bunch.............comments, advice, anything really but please don't say "I told you So" Later Neil 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/258574-leica-film-odyssey-for-a-beginner/?do=findComment&comment=3024471'>More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted April 11, 2016 Share #569 Posted April 11, 2016 a few more 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/258574-leica-film-odyssey-for-a-beginner/?do=findComment&comment=3024472'>More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted April 11, 2016 Share #570 Posted April 11, 2016 last one out of 144 keepers :) 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/258574-leica-film-odyssey-for-a-beginner/?do=findComment&comment=3024477'>More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 11, 2016 Share #571 Posted April 11, 2016 I need to go to bed and sleep on this and think about this film lark. I mean some of these pictures look like they were shot at ISO 750,000 when in fact they were shot in broad daylight...........are they meant to look like that?? Assuming you are not winding us up with this thread, I knew you would have this reaction. Yes, film looks like "that". One of the former posters here (Alex Tufte?) stated that one of the differences between (scanned) film and digital is that the former looks like shit at 100% magnification but prints beautifully, whereas with digital it's the other way around. I agree with him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpavich Posted April 11, 2016 Share #572 Posted April 11, 2016 Okay so I got my first rolls of film back. I'm happy and gutted all in the same breath. Happy I eventually got something to share and gutted as 99.9% of the pictures look like there were shot in the eighteen hundreds. I need to go to bed and sleep on this and think about this film lark. I mean some of these pictures look like they were shot at ISO 750,000 when in fact they were shot in broad daylight...........are they meant to look like that?? When I look on the film forum there are some fantastic B&W pictures, that could easily look like they were shot on a M240.....WTF did I do wrong and just when I managed to master the loading of the film?? Here are the best of the bunch.............comments, advice, anything really but please don't say "I told you So" Later Neil I think the issue is that you need to get used to how film looks. Your pictures are fine. I'd be happy with them for the most part. Sure there are small improvements to make but there isn't an "I told you so" coming as far as I'm concerned. Film is grainy...film doesn't look like digital..that's just the truth. Enjoy and keep shooting and posting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted April 11, 2016 Share #573 Posted April 11, 2016 Good night......I will reply to any answers/questions when I get up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpavich Posted April 11, 2016 Share #574 Posted April 11, 2016 Assuming you are not winding us up with this thread, I knew you would have this reaction. Yes, film looks like "that". One of the former posters here (Alex Tufte?) stated that one of the differences between (scanned) film and digital is that the former looks like shit at 100% magnification but prints beautifully, whereas with digital it's the other way around. I agree with him. True. It's a shock at first. Prints look amazing though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 11, 2016 Share #575 Posted April 11, 2016 last one out of 144 keepers :) I think you've done fine – none of these would look out of place in the monster "I like film" thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted April 11, 2016 Share #576 Posted April 11, 2016 Assuming you are not winding us up with this thread, I knew you would have this reaction. Yes, film looks like "that". One of the former posters here (Alex Tufte?) stated that one of the differences between (scanned) film and digital is that the former looks like shit at 100% magnification but prints beautifully, whereas with digital it's the other way around. I agree with him. Please stop asking if I'm winding you up or have started this thread as a bull shit scam or something like that. Lets put this to bed right now........I have never shot film before in my life, I genuinely want to learn how to shoot film and genuinely thank everyone who has contributed to this thread.....thank you and good night Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 11, 2016 Share #577 Posted April 11, 2016 Not a bad start. You expected to master film, as well as scanning/PP, for an entirely new and hybrid workflow.....in one outing? [And if the store did the scanning for you, that introduces other issues.] Silver printing might offer a better end result for you, but that skill doesn't come overnight either....if ever. You started with the easiest and most flexible workflow, i.e., digital....front to back. Knowing what you want your film output to look like is key.....do you? There are myriad ways to get there, including variations in materials, workflow and techniques. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted April 11, 2016 Share #578 Posted April 11, 2016 Okay so I got my first rolls of film back. I'm happy and gutted all in the same breath. Happy I eventually got something to share and gutted as 99.9% of the pictures look like there were shot in the eighteen hundreds. I need to go to bed and sleep on this and think about this film lark. I mean some of these pictures look like they were shot at ISO 750,000 when in fact they were shot in broad daylight...........are they meant to look like that?? When I look on the film forum there are some fantastic B&W pictures, that could easily look like they were shot on a M240.....WTF did I do wrong and just when I managed to master the loading of the film?? Here are the best of the bunch.............comments, advice, anything really but please don't say "I told you So" Later Neil Very nice pictures specially the two first . perhaps too big size when posting To answer your questions Neil, Why I like film now ? "Soft" edges and lines specially face in portraits (of your 2 ladies), not "agressive" , not "cutting" lines "grains" of film highlighting skin "pores" , more artistic ... than pixels with "smoothing" lines inevitably by camera software Nice portrait pictures 4 and 5 Is Kodak Gold for color ? and TX for B&W ? Question to Neil : Scanning in Tiff or in Jpeg compressed ? in 1600 Px as you said above ? Again Bravo Neil , Good Work for a beginner Someone who used Leica M digital during 5 years Rg H. PS: for "pores" skin look at this link translated https://translate.google.fr/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.summilux.net%2Fforums%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ff%3D10%26t%3D51356&edit-text= Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 11, 2016 Share #579 Posted April 11, 2016 However, I do feel there is place for improvement in the developing and scanning, and the handling in postprocessing too (Schewe and Fraser have quite a bit of interesting information on grain control and sharpening for film in their book "Real World Sharpening). You could, for B&W, try some chromogenic film for C41 developing, as that process is more tolerant and can be done in any minilab. An example of such film is Ilford XP2 Super. Overexpose that film one stop, never push it, whatever you are told. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat Posted April 11, 2016 Share #580 Posted April 11, 2016 Those look pretty good to me given that you've never shot film and have had to allow someone else to dictate how they're processed. You can tailor the look of the negatives, eventually... you have yet to master the parts of shooting film that elevate your work from the realm of snapshots. Learning how each emulsion reacts to light, how developers react with the emulsion and all of those things previously described here. Now, perhaps, all that advice from earlier in the thread might begin to make sense. There's more to shooting film than composing, metering, focusing, and releasing the shutter. And unlike developing RAW files, you can't rescue the highlights or shadows with sliders, nor can you minimize grain with PS filters. There is no "hidden" data in your negatives. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.