Leica Film Odyssey for a beginner

[rpavich]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Unfortunately I am offshore so I don't have the negatives or the facility to photograph anything

By the way, you said that one scan is good, one scan is "muted" without a histo that touches the ends. To me, that would indicate erratic exposures and what sometimes happens is scanners try and compensate for underexposed negatives and make them look washed out and blah.

 

It could be that on the ones you don't like, the negatives are really thin or something.

 

 

I'm a noob so others might have to correct me on this or chime in an add to it.

 

In any case...don't get upset...all is solvable when you post a picture of your negs.

[hepcat]

Okay here is my new problem. I have just got my scans back from the photo lab and there are quite a few of the scans without any Black and White details according to the Histogram and also according to the image IQ.

My initial thought was WTFIGOH, can’t put that down in English but I am sure you can get the jiff of it J

These pictures were taken in fantastic daylight conditions, and absolutely should not look like this so my question is; Is there a problem with either my camera or my camera settings (there aren’t any of those) or is it just what to expect from a scanned image………………..not frigging happy.

When I look at the histogram there is no black detail and also no white detail………why is that possible??

These pictures should be in your face correctly exposed, I’m starting to get second thoughts on this film lark, why is it that one minute a picture blows you away and the next they look like shite. I’m trying hard to fall in love with shooting film but can’t handle all these disappointments for no reason at all.

I guess I will find out for myself when I look at the negatives when I get home.

Not a happy camper.

 

Take a deep breath, Neil.  Life is good.   One of those things about shooting film is that sometimes, even though you think you've done everything in your power to do everything right, sh*t happens that's out of your control.   And because you don't have that instant feedback on your LCD ('cause there ain't one...) you don't know it until its much to late to do anything about it.  That is why I have a clause in EVERY contract I do that "should the photographer not present any images for display for any reason, the remedy is limited to a refund of fees paid."

 

My guess is that they're just crappy scans, but you won't know anything definitive until you actually see the negatives.  This is why you've gotten the advice not to use labs that scan your negs, send you the files and then pitch your negs.

 

Don't get excited or upset until you have something to be upset about...  and you won't know whether you do or not until you see the negs.  Patience, Grasshopper.

 

This, Neil, is life with film. 

[EoinC]

Having a histogram jammed up in the middle is better than having it slipping off either end (generally). It still looks like there's quite a lot of data there.

One easy path is to go into LR's Develop module and:

1. Adjust the Exposure slider until the overall level looks about right.
2. Drag the Black slider to the left, until blue clipping starts to show, then move right until it disappears.
3. Drag the Highlight slider across to the right, until you are losing definition in the highlights, then move left again until definition returns.
4. Drag the White slider across to the right until red clipping starts to show, then move left until it disappears.
5. Play with the Contrast and above sliders until you get something you are happy with.

If you read the scanning threads, you'll see that some people go to great lengths to get a flat scan. When you get home, check if these, and the frames to either side, appear contrasty in the negatives. That will tell you whether it was the shooting or the scanning.

 

Can you post the jpegs? - then people can have a shot at mad science on them.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Take a deep breath, Neil.  Life is good.   One of those things about shooting film is that sometimes, even though you think you've done everything in your power to do everything right, sh*t happens that's out of your control.   And because you don't have that instant feedback on your LCD ('cause there ain't one...) you don't know it until its much to late to do anything about it.  That is why I have a clause in EVERY contract I do that "should the photographer not present any images for display for any reason, the remedy is limited to a refund of fees paid."

 

My guess is that they're just crappy scans, but you won't know anything definitive until you actually see the negatives.  This is why you've gotten the advice not to use labs that scan your negs, send you the files and then pitch your negs.

 

Don't get excited or upset until you have something to be upset about...  and you won't know whether you do or not until you see the negs.  Patience, Grasshopper.

 

This, Neil, is life with film. 

I know mate.................I'm hoping its the scans as I really want this film stuff to work. I'm back home in 2 weeks and will get the negatives and digitize them myself and see if it is me or the scanner......the noise/grain in the bridge shot is horrendous, and even lightroom wont bring it back. 

Hay I'm offshore I'm missing my wife and beer, and a wee bitty disappointed with the scans...... I will get over it

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

so so

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!

[EoinC]

That's a lot better, Neil. Play around with the Shadows slider and see where the sweet spot is between lifting the dark shadows (whilst keeping the deepest blacks), and getting more definition in on the face of the bridge.

[@McLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looks like exposure issues to my simple eye. Have you tried 3 shots all the same + and - 1 compensation?

 

Also you're taking long shots in a hot, humid and hazy environment. How do closer shots of groups, people go?

 

Advice above is right, forget the scans and check the negs.

 

For my 2 cents worth at this stage of your development (see what I did there  ), I would have just bought a Coolscan or Hasselblad X1 (on an oil budget) and played around with your own scans. That way you can influence how you adjust scans of your negatives and cut down the 'lack of results' frustration time. 

[jaapv]

Okay here is my new problem. I have just got my scans back from the photo lab and there are quite a few of the scans without any Black and White details according to the Histogram and also according to the image IQ.

My initial thought was WTFIGOH, can’t put that down in English but I am sure you can get the jiff of it J

These pictures were taken in fantastic daylight conditions, and absolutely should not look like this so my question is; Is there a problem with either my camera or my camera settings (there aren’t any of those) or is it just what to expect from a scanned image………………..not frigging happy.

When I look at the histogram there is no black detail and also no white detail………why is that possible??

These pictures should be in your face correctly exposed, I’m starting to get second thoughts on this film lark, why is it that one minute a picture blows you away and the next they look like shite. I’m trying hard to fall in love with shooting film but can’t handle all these disappointments for no reason at all.

I guess I will find out for myself when I look at the negatives when I get home.

Not a happy camper.

Neil, start your postprocessing properly by setting a black and a white point and then adjust the midtone contrast. After that you can tweak the file to your taste.

[honcho]

If you want by far the best Leica film camera find yourself a M5 in mint condition it is the finest Leica made

Then this. Just at the point when my laughter at this thread was downgraded to a smile...........

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Neil, start your postprocessing properly by setting a black and a white point and then adjust the midtone contrast. After that you can tweak the file to your taste.

I'm doing that Jaapv. That's the first thing that I do in Camera Raw.

When I look at the detail in the buildings there just seems to be no detail in it at all. I shot this building last year with my MM or was it my S (I can’t remember which one) but the detail was wow compared to this………………let me find the file

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!

[Keith (M)]

Neil, the three images (apart from showing what a good eye for composition etc you have) are just the starting point of the digitising process.  Lots of good advice has already been offered.  Having imported my negs (scanned with Epson V700) into LR, I go into the Develop module and shot by shot click on the Auto button as a starting point. This generally but by no means always results in images that then just need some fine tuning with the clarity slider, tone curve etc.  Oh, and a bit of time with the invaluable Spot Removal tool to eradicate the *$£@*&^ dust spots!  Then some judicious sharpening and maybe some noise removal. Once you have your work-flow developed (so to speak) you will probably find you spend no more time on them in LR than on .dng's.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Neil, the three images (apart from showing what a good eye for composition etc you have) are just the starting point of the digitising process.  Lots of good advice has already been offered.  Having imported my negs (scanned with Epson V700) into LR, I go into the Develop module and shot by shot click on the Auto button as a starting point. This generally but by no means always results in images that then just need some fine tuning with the clarity slider, tone curve etc.  Oh, and a bit of time with the invaluable Spot Removal tool to eradicate the *$£@*&^ dust spots!  Then some judicious sharpening and maybe some noise removal. Once you have your work-flow developed (so to speak) you will probably find you spend no more time on them in LR than on .dng's.

I hear you Keith..................but there's just no detail in the building, no matter what slider I use there is nothing

[jaapv]

Very flat light, a bit of haze and a hopeless sky - a yellow or red filter might have helped a bit...

[rpavich]

I hear you Keith..................but there's just no detail in the building, no matter what slider I use there is nothing

Neil,

No, not unless you purposefully put it there.

 

Again, it's a combination of the neg and the scanning settings. That's just life when you scan negs.

 

I painted on some local contrast and lowered exposure at the buildings.

 

Is this what you expected to happen when you moved the sliders in LR?

 

Before on the left, after on the right

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!

[hepcat]

There seems to be good detail in the shadows, which means they're properly exposed... but the buildings and sky will be over exposed.  I'm guessing that the negative has detail in the buildings and sky, but the scan didn't capture it as it was set to capture details in the shadows.  

 

Neil, I just wouldn't even mess with those scans... use them as proofs, and wait to see what your negatives actually look like before you get frustrated.   Working with film is NOT the "NOW" process that working with digital files is.  Patience is a virtue...  and I know you've expressed that you're not a patient guy.  But that's the way it is sometimes. 

[@McLeica]

Very flat light, a bit of haze and a hopeless sky - a yellow or red filter might have helped a bit...

 

Jaapv is right. I was thinking the same thing.

 

Sunset, sunrise in Asia is just fabulous. Middle of the day is bloody awful generally.

[seabea23]

Neil

If you are looking for subjects, a series of images of life on an oil rig would be a really interesting photo story. 

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Very flat light, a bit of haze and a hopeless sky - a yellow or red filter might have helped a bit...

Jaapv

These were taken at 08:00 am about 40 minutes after sunrise, with the sun on my back .

[rpavich]

Jaapv

These were taken at 08:00 am about 40 minutes after sunrise, with the sun on my back .

Just a thought, light coming "on axis" i.e. from the same angle as the camera is flat light. It does the LEAST for accentuating texture.

 

Side light is (in my opinion) much better overall.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

Jaapv

These were taken at 08:00 am about 40 minutes after sunrise, with the sun on my back .

I.e flat light. No visible shadows or highlights