Leica M3, images to be scanned

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

49 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

I tried lab development and scans, then went the route of a flatbed scanner, then a dedicated 35mm scanner, and in the end found that a macro lens on a mirrorless body mounted on an enlarger base for ease of use worked best for me, as I began digitizing the best of 90 years worth of family negatives.

I found this late last night - wonderful information, very helpful.

It has a huge amount of information on scanning, what equipment to use, and why - and a lot more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxmFjvFLPu4 

Edited January 11, 2021 by MikeMyers

[frame-it]

8 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

I found this late last night - wonderful information, very helpful.

It has a huge amount of information on scanning, what equipment to use, and why - and a lot more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxmFjvFLPu4 

 

[lmans]

Is  there a Cliff note of that? 🙂

[Axelwik]

For black & white you really don't even need a meter - just use the sunny-16 method for exposure.

Bad thing about sending black & white film out to get developed is that most labs simply plop it in with all the other black & white films regardless of type,  and it comes back either too dense or too thin. Better to develop it yourself using the proper developer, temperature, and time for the specific film. All it takes is a small daylight developing tank, a spool, dark place to load the tank, and two chemicals. Anything else you need, you probably already have in your home.

Edited January 13, 2021 by Axelwik

[Martin B]

13 minutes ago, Axelwik said:

For black & white you really don't even need a meter - just use the sunny-16 method for exposure.

Bad thing about sending black & white film out to get developed is that most labs simply plop it in with all the other black & white films regardless of type,  and it comes back either too dense or too thin. Better to develop it yourself using the proper developer, temperature, and time for the specific film. All it takes is a small daylight developing tank, a spool, dark place to load the tank, and two chemicals. Anything else you need, you probably already have in your home.

I can't recommend from own experience the sunny-16 method. IMO it only applied in very sunny locations and certainly not to locations at higher latitude where it is a sunny-f11 or f8 rule at best. The rule also does not work in high contrast environments. Just do yourself a favor and buy a simple light meter or at least use your cell with light meter app installed. Every option is better than this rule IMO. 

I agree though with the second paragraph. Most labs use std D-76 developer which is certainly not the best. You get charged a lot and need to wait weeks before they accumulated enough films to run in a batch. Not worth it IMO. Make a one time investment to get tools to develop film yourself. It pays off very quickly. 

[bags27]

For some Sunny 16 works and for others it may not. Try it to see which you are, because it's fun and you pay far more attention to light, shade, contrast, etc. than you do if you have a meter in your hand. Problem with the cell phone light meter app is that when you forget to close the app (and you will!), that'll burn your battery, because it's using your camera. So, get a small meter, if you want to go that way.

I use Sunny 16 during the summer months, when there is a long, high sun, and tend not to use it as much in the winter, when the sun is low and light is far more complicated. But most B&W films have a pretty wide latitude, and the great thing about film is that the "mistakes" are often the real gems.

Edited January 13, 2021 by bags27

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/10/2021 at 3:09 PM, BradS said:

A 16x20 print from a 35mm negative is asking/expecting a lot, no matter what equipment & method is used...

Around 1995, on the photo.net Leica Forum as well as on the old Compuserve Photo Forum many people used to say that, if you wanted prints larger than 11x14, you should should shoot medium format. But I've always been interested in the "35mm aesthetic" and was never wanted the smoother gradation and less noticeable grain of medium format film. Then, around 2006, I saw a Moriyama Daido retrospective at the Gallery of New South Wales that showed sixty large prints — 150x100 cm (40 x 60 inches) —  from 35mm Tri-X, printed on an Epson wide-format printer: they were dazzling. So, how large you can go depends what type of look you are seeking.

When I used an Imacon Precision III scanner, I used to scan 35mm negatives at maximum resolution 6300 dpi (true optical resolution), with the idea of archiving the scans.These days, I do camera scanning with my M10 and, while the resolution is somewhat less, the results are, in my view hard to distinguish from the Imacon scans.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook
 

Edited January 13, 2021 by Nowhereman

[MikeMyers]

What I plan to do for taking the photos is shown in the attached image - almost.  The dome on my Sekonic in this photo is for incident light - I called B&H and they found me the proper disc for reflected light, and it will be here in a  few days.  Not sure which I'll use, and when.  I guess I'll try the meter with my M10 first, to make sure I'm doing things reasonably well.  My current plan for. developing is to send a roll or two out for development, but I can easily see getting the gear to do it myself - again.  If this seems to be working, then I can use this video as a reference for scanning   (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxmFjvFLPu4 )    .....but some people I chat with seem to think I'm insane for doing this, when I have an M10.

I don't know if I'm up to this challenge.  When I was a kid, it's just the way it was done.  Now that it's 2021 and I'm 60 years older, does it still make sense?  Only time will tell.

A disadvantage of film, is I have all these negatives from growing up, and while I know the earliest ones were with my Contax II, it's impossible for me to remember for others if I was using that Contax, or my Nikon SP, or my M3.  I guess I should have kept better notes.

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!

[bags27]

16 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Around 1995, on the photo.net Leica Forum as well as on the old Compuserve Photo Forum many people used to say that, if you wanted prints larger than 11x14, you should should shoot medium format. But I've always been interested in the "35mm aesthetic" and was never wanted the smoother gradation and less noticeable grain of medium format film. Then, around 2006, I saw a Moriyama Daido retrospective at the Gallery of New South Wales that showed sixty large prints — 150x100 cm (40 x 60 inches) —  from 35mm Tri-X, printed on an Epson wide-format printer: they were dazzling. So, how large you can go depends what type of look you are seeking.

When I used an Imacon Precision III scanner, I used to scan 35mm negatives at maximum resolution 6300 dpi (true optical resolution), with the idea of archiving the scans.These days, I do camera scanning with my M10 and, while the resolution is somewhat less, the results are, in my view hard to distinguish from the Imacon scans.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook
 

What set up do you use with the M10? I've tried with live view and I have a hard time focusing precisely. but my old macro lens might be at fault, too.

[MikeMyers]

Maybe this is a good time to use a visoflex?

 

[bags27]

19 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

Maybe this is a good time to use a visoflex?

 

hmmm. yes, that would be the optical solution. I'd have to imagine leaning over the visoflex with it upside down and doing fine focus. but it is a good idea. However, I very much doubt that consistently it will give you the supreme sharp and fine detail required for negative scanning. You really do need 1:1 and the tolerances are very tight.

 I

Edited January 13, 2021 by bags27

[MikeMyers]

37 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Then, around 2006, I saw a Moriyama Daido retrospective at the Gallery of New South Wales that showed sixty large prints — 150x100 cm (40 x 60 inches) —  from 35mm Tri-X, printed on an Epson wide-format printer: they were dazzling. So, how large you can go depends what type of look you are seeking.

I'm not aware of any of this, but the 35mm try-x film  negatives were printed at 40 x 60 ?   Wow.  Do you say "dazzling" because of the subject of the image, or the technical quality?

 

[Guest Nowhereman]

56 minutes ago, bags27 said:

What set up do you use with the M10? I've tried with live view and I have a hard time focusing precisely. but my old macro lens might be at fault, too.

I use the Leitz BEOON copy stand and a Focotar 2 lens and focus with the Visoflex 020, using magnified focus. If I have any doubt, I focus on the frame number.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[Guest Nowhereman]

42 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

I'm not aware of any of this, but the 35mm try-x film  negatives were printed at 40 x 60 ?   Wow.  Do you say "dazzling" because of the subject of the image, or the technical quality?

Aesthetic quality and emotional impact. If you look at Moriyama's work you can see he's not interested in technical quality.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[Martin B]

10 hours ago, bags27 said:

For some Sunny 16 works and for others it may not. Try it to see which you are, because it's fun and you pay far more attention to light, shade, contrast, etc. than you do if you have a meter in your hand. Problem with the cell phone light meter app is that when you forget to close the app (and you will!), that'll burn your battery, because it's using your camera. So, get a small meter, if you want to go that way.

I use Sunny 16 during the summer months, when there is a long, high sun, and tend not to use it as much in the winter, when the sun is low and light is far more complicated. But most B&W films have a pretty wide latitude, and the great thing about film is that the "mistakes" are often the real gems.

I agree regarding cellphones and battery, I also found that the free mater apps are less accurate than a decent external meter. For me personally I have the following preference regarding metering options starting with the best IMO:

1. In-camera reflective metering
2. External light meter
3. Smartphone meter app
4. Sunny f-whatever rule

I have tried the sunny-f16 rule but didn't like the unpredictability in the results. Yes, B&W film has a good leverage to smoothen out exposure mistakes, but I prefer precision over guessing. But I agree that it is a subjective preference. Like liking or disliking focus tabs - I made several effort to try to like them without success so far. I much more prefer manual focus lenses without tabs and just with a focus ring. What works well for one is a culprit for another!

[Axelwik]

Sunny 16 takes practice and some common sense knowledge of the light you're using, but once mastered the meter is one less thing to get between you and your photography (in most cases).

I still use a meter when lighting is difficult - sometimes hard to judge interior lighting for example, but mostly don't use it. That Sekonic meter should do well if used properly in incident mode (white dome installed). Read the manual. Use the meter in tandem with Sunny 16 until you can do without the meter for most photography. Reading reflected light will often give a bad result unless all your subjects have 18% reflectance (not the real world) - Sunny 16 or an incident meter used properly will work better than a reflected light meter when your subject or its surroundings is substantially brighter or darker than an 18% gray card. 

Edited January 13, 2021 by Axelwik

[MikeMyers]

On 1/12/2021 at 9:19 PM, Axelwik said:

Bad thing about sending black & white film out to get developed is that most labs simply plop it in with all the other black & white films regardless of type,  and it comes back either too dense or too thin. Better to develop it yourself using the proper developer, temperature, and time for the specific film. All it takes is a small daylight developing tank, a spool, dark place to load the tank, and two chemicals. Anything else you need, you probably already have in your home.

All of my darkroom stuff got sold what feels like a lifetime ago, but my brother kept some of his, storing it away in a shed.  I've now got two stainless developing tanks in the mail.  So, in the near future, I need to figure out what developer to use, and get some "fixer".  I plan to use Grolsch beer bottles to hold the chemicals - they have a fancy rubber stopper on top.  I've still got my thermometer.  I'll load the tanks in a dark closet at night.  

In prehistoric times, I used to by bulk film, and load it into Leica cassettes.  I still have the cassettes.  Not sure if they even still sell bulk film any more.  I don't even know what films they sell nowadays?  I liked Plus-X because it was a good compromise between almost-no-grain and look-at-all-the-grain!

 

Maybe this:  https://filmphotographystore.com/collections/bulk-film-35mm-100ft-rolls/products/35mm-color-bulk-roll-100-ft-ilford-fp4 

Edited January 15, 2021 by MikeMyers
added a link.

[Axelwik]

8 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

All of my darkroom stuff got sold what feels like a lifetime ago, but my brother kept some of his, storing it away in a shed.  I've now got two stainless developing tanks in the mail.  So, in the near future, I need to figure out what developer to use, and get some "fixer".  I plan to use Grolsch beer bottles to hold the chemicals - they have a fancy rubber stopper on top.  I've still got my thermometer.  I'll load the tanks in a dark closet at night.  

In prehistoric times, I used to by bulk film, and load it into Leica cassettes.  I still have the cassettes.  Not sure if they even still sell bulk film any more.  I don't even know what films they sell nowadays?  I liked Plus-X because it was a good compromise between almost-no-grain and look-at-all-the-grain!

 

Maybe this:  https://filmphotographystore.com/collections/bulk-film-35mm-100ft-rolls/products/35mm-color-bulk-roll-100-ft-ilford-fp4 

Excellent. They don't make Plus-X anymore, but there are some very good films out there. For conventional grain ISO 125 you can try Ilford FP4+ or HP5+ for 400.  Tabular grain Kodak T-max 100 or 400 are very good, both relatively fine grain. Kodak Tri-X is still available. I think Fuji recently brought back their Acros film, which is very good. There are several others. All of them work fine with D-76 developer and Kodafix which are still in production. For film I don't use stop bath - simply rinse it twice between developer and fixer, but stop bath can be made by mixing a little vinegar with water. For final rinse after washing use either Photo-Flo mixed with water, or distilled water by itself and then hang to dry.

Bulk film is still available in 100 ft rolls. Plenty of bulk loaders available on the used market.

Edited January 15, 2021 by Axelwik

[tommonego@gmail.com]

When I sold/gave my darkroom equipment to a local school I kept the film developing stuff. Finally found it in my attic. I started processing film again. I am using mostly TMax 100 and 400, but have also tried FomaPan100 which has very nice midtones, but I do prefer TMax 100. I am using 2 developers, both liquid, TMax Developer and Beutler Formula I mix myself which is fantastic on slow/ midspeed films. All the rest of my chemicals are from Sprint Systems. One interesting thing was in with my developing tanks was a bulk loader with a roll of TMax 100 in it 1996 date. The film is in surprisingly good.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[MikeMyers]

10 hours ago, tommonego@gmail.com said:

I started processing film again. I am using mostly TMax 100 and 400, but have also tried FomaPan100 which has very nice midtones, but I do prefer TMax 100. I am using 2 developers, both liquid, TMax Developer and Beutler Formula I mix myself which is fantastic on slow/ midspeed films.

At some point I need to buy some developer and fixer.   What is a good source for these in the USA (Amazon?) and what are some reliable brands for general use, preferably something that is a little forgiving in development time, maybe temperature.