|
I love your second shot, but can't really put my finger on why. It just looks nice I guess v v
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 16:46 |
|
|
Well I managed to get something out of the Tri-X at 3200 in Diafine. I wish I had a film scanner, but for now the point and shoot macro next to a lamp is the best I can do, sorry.    Edit: I kinda like this one too 
penneydude fucked around with this message at 07:35 on Feb 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 07:28
|
|
|
S.C. sweeps posted:Would anyone recommend the Canon Canoscan 8800F as a good 35mm slide scanner? I have about 3000 slides that need to be scanned and that is starting to look like the best one for the value. I don't really get the best of results from mine. "Would not buy again"
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 08:19
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:I don't really get the best of results from mine. "Would not buy again" Speaking of pushing Tri-X, I shot a roll last week at 6400. 
pwn fucked around with this message at 13:27 on Feb 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 10:38
|
|
|
pwn posted:Same here. I still spend money paying a pro lab to scan most of the time. I know it's painful to watch the shadow detail melt away, having been through this myself about a million times, but you really should bump up the low end on that photo so the blackness around him isn't so grey.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 15:43
|
|
|
S.C. sweeps posted:Would anyone recommend the Canon Canoscan 8800F as a good 35mm slide scanner? I have about 3000 slides that need to be scanned and that is starting to look like the best one for the value. What you want is a Epson V500 and a shitload of free time. Infrared cleaning is pretty good, you can do five at a time, and it's a decently high-res scanner. It can't do 4x5 like the V700, though. What you really want is a Nikon Coolscan 9000 with a slide feeder, though. You'll have to babysit and refill or unjam the hopper, but it'll chug while you're watching TV or playing games or whatever. 3000 is a lot of slides, and that's a nice scanner and you probably won't get scans that nice for $1 per slide commercially. Sell it to me when you're done 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 19:25
|
|
|
Jesus christ 3000 slides. You're going to be at this for the next two years, seriouspost.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 19:29
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:What you want is a Epson V500 and a shitload of free time. Infrared cleaning is pretty good, you can do five at a time, and it's a decently high-res scanner. It can't do 4x5 like the V700, though. Martytoof posted:Jesus christ 3000 slides. Yes... I know. I'm willing though! Thanks for the information, I'll look into the Epson V500/V700. The Nikon CoolScan 9000 looks nice but I just don't have the money to spend something that expensive right now. It looks so good too 
S.C. sweeps fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Feb 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 20:23
|
|
|
If it's a one time thing don't forget you could look at used stuff and resell it after.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 22:01
|
|
|
S.C. sweeps posted:Yes... I know. I'm willing though! Thanks for the information, I'll look into the Epson V500/V700. The Nikon CoolScan 9000 looks nice but I just don't have the money to spend something that expensive right now. They're both going to be slooow compared to the Nikon. Since it's top of the line (and not being made anymore) the Coolscan isn't going to lose any value anytime soon, so if you can scrape together $1000 or so for it you can expect not to lose much if anything when you sell it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2010 22:58
|
|
|
I'm going to be listing my Epson 4490 (NOT the 4990) on SA-Mart this weekend. I'll follow all the rules about posting/selling gear and do it through there, but I thought I would mention it here first. I'm going to make the jump to the V700, and would be willing to let the V500 (including all the accessories) go for $110 shipped if anyone wants it. I don't have the original box, but I do have the MF and 35mm holders. PM me if you're interested or I can do my best to follow up while I travel home today and tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2010 19:18
|
|
|
so i just moved and turns out there is a darkroom in the building. i've never developed myself before so it's probably going to turn out poo poo. shooting tx400 in an olympus XA now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 17:46
|
|
|
MY NEW PHANTOM!! posted:so i just moved and turns out there is a darkroom in the building. i've never developed myself before so it's probably going to turn out poo poo. shooting tx400 in an olympus XA now. What developer do you plan on using?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 17:52
|
|
|
MY NEW PHANTOM!! posted:so i just moved and turns out there is a darkroom in the building. i've never developed myself before so it's probably going to turn out poo poo. shooting tx400 in an olympus XA now. My personal favorite way to shoot TriX is to meter it at 320 and develop it in XTOL 1:1 at 8:15 @68 degrees. It's a minor pull, but it helps me keep shadow detail with my high-contrast printing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
I really like how Neopan 1600 looks.  I also need to do something about the water spots on my negatives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 19:04
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:I also need to do something about the water spots on my negatives. Do you use photo flo?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 19:38
|
|
|
Nope, I'm guessing that's something that stops that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 19:56
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:Nope, I'm guessing that's something that stops that? Yeah, it's super concentrated (you mix it at like 1:100) and causes water to slide right off the negatives when you hang them up to dry. One bottle will probably last you years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 19:58
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:Nope, I'm guessing that's something that stops that? yeah. It's something called a surfactant. It lowers the surface tension of the water so that it doesn't bead, it sheets, therefore drying evenly. I've heard you can use Jet Dry (or generic dishwasher rinse aid) in a pinch. With both, you really don't need much at all, just a drop or two.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 20:00
|
|
|
fartzilla posted:I've been shooting and developing P3200 recently and my negatives have been extremely dark. I don't mean the picture area, the whole strip of film is dark. Is that how it's supposed to look, or did I screw up the development process somehow? Or did four separate factory-loaded canisters' worth of film get exposed to light? Sounds underdeveloped. What developer/time did you use?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 22:26
|
|
|
I've got two rolls of Arista Premium 100/Plus-X that I pulled to ISO 50 (the first one was by mistake when I forgot to change ASA settings after Velvia, second I just shot to match), suggestions on development time? For its normal rating of 125, Massive Dev Chart gives me:quote:Plus-X HC-110 B 125-250 3.5 3.5 20C quote:Plus-X D-76 stock 125-250 5.5 5.5 20C for HC-110 and D-76 (haven't decided which to use yet), which already seems quite short. Then again, I'm used to 1600/3200 pushes in Tri-X, so what do I know?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 23:22
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I've got two rolls of Arista Premium 100/Plus-X that I pulled to ISO 50 (the first one was by mistake when I forgot to change ASA settings after Velvia, second I just shot to match), suggestions on development time? For its normal rating of 125, Massive Dev Chart gives me: That chart only mentions D76 stock times. Use a 1:1 dilution. D76 1:1 and take 20-25% off the N time. That should keep it above 5 minutes, which is the minimum you want.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2010 23:49
|
|
|
spritely posted:Sounds underdeveloped. What developer/time did you use? This was actually spread out over two developing sessions months apart with completely different chemicals. The first two rolls I did a while ago - shot at 3200 and put in D-76 at whatever concentration and time Kodak's documentation recommends. The second two I shot at 800 and put in Tmax developer for about 9.5 minutes around 68 F. I've been following Kodak's development charts. I'm told that isn't always the best way to get good results from P3200, but that would't be causing the film to look underdeveloped, right? Edit: The film was a couple years out of date but not much. I can't remember if the guy I bought them from kept them cold, but I think he did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 03:53
|
|
|
It's probably radiation darkening then. High-iso films are very suceptible to picking up background radiation from the sun and getting a haze. Same theory as x-rays. If it's old, you'll need to overexpose a little to try and help the image take. In color film you may get a color shift as well. I have some Fuji 800NPZ 220 that I've been afraid to try. I think it's 2004 dated. Probably toast. tl;dr expired high speed films are bad
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 05:09
|
|
|
Back to my water spots, is there a way of cleaning them off without damaging the film?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 19:00
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:Back to my water spots, is there a way of cleaning them off without damaging the film? Sure, do the wetting stage again, dislodge bubbles, agitate, then skip to the rinse, this time using photo flo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 19:18
|
|
|
Or just buy some film cleaner from your local photo shop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 19:22
|
|
|
notlodar posted:According to some nerds on the internet, velvia's contrast is quite possibly the highest of all films, as in, the blacks on the slide are really black and the whites on the slide are really white. From what I gathered, most film scanners can't capture the full dynamic range of a velvia slide. This is actually why I started using my 5D to digitize more control and it seems like I can just barely get all the shadow detail and highlight detail in one pass. yeah velvia is really exposure sensitive - ive taken back to back shots with my digital and i think it's DR is less than my CMOS sensor. looking at the slides, I really don't think it's my scanner. fwiw, i got the Epson V500, which is pretty good but the scan software is pretty lovely
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 22:14
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:yeah velvia is really exposure sensitive - ive taken back to back shots with my digital and i think it's DR is less than my CMOS sensor. looking at the slides, I really don't think it's my scanner. I was actually looking it up today (I have the V500 and am looking to upgrade to something that does 4x5) and the V500 has a somewhat modest Dmax of 3.4. It's not lovely, but there are other flatbeds out there with 3.8 and even 4.0, in the case of the V700 and probably some other pricier models. According to analvolcano.com, Velvia is around 4.0, most other slide film about 3.5, and C-41/B&W about 1.5.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 22:21
|
|
|
I just picked up an older SCSI Imacon scanner on ebay. I chose it over a Nikon 8000/9000 ED after deciding I didn't want to deal with wet scanning or newton rings or any of that kind of nonsense. I've used Imacon scanners before (there's a photo studio in town that rents darkrooms and scanning stations by the hour) and the magnetic film holders make things move *much* faster. It's a "virtual drum scanner" - the film carrier is bent as it moves past the CCD so there's no film flatness issues. They pop up on ebay from time to time and there are models that do scan large format film. Mine came with a RATOC SCSI to Firewire adaptor and it works great. You have to use the older FlexColor scan software, which works fine. Scans at 30 MB/min and 120 film at a max resolution of 3200 dpi. I blew up a 6x6 slide to 30in x 30in and it looks great. That's my recommendation if you have a ~2k budget and don't ever want to deal with Nikon's horrible horrible tech support. I have a friend with a 9000ED and it's finicky and jams up all the time on him. He's sent it in a few times to Nikon and it's always come back with the same problem. He's given up and just deals with it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 04:00
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I was actually looking it up today (I have the V500 and am looking to upgrade to something that does 4x5) and the V500 has a somewhat modest Dmax of 3.4. It's not lovely, but there are other flatbeds out there with 3.8 and even 4.0, in the case of the V700 and probably some other pricier models. According to analvolcano.com, Velvia is around 4.0, most other slide film about 3.5, and C-41/B&W about 1.5. i had to check analvolanco...lol. So I won 5 expired rolls of Velvia 50 on an ebay auction and after shooting a bunch of Velvia for nature I think it's actually pretty weak compared to Provia. There was a poster Chetorsky or something who had really great Velvia shots of facades...shame he doesn't post anymore. Also, PanF is over 4 according to these guys: http://www.dr5.com/blackandwhiteslide/panf.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 12:49
|
|
|
HPL posted:I know it's painful to watch the shadow detail melt away, having been through this myself about a million times, but you really should bump up the low end on that photo so the blackness around him isn't so grey. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 13:25
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:I really like how Neopan 1600 looks. You said it man. This is my favourite too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 23:06
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:I really like how Neopan 1600 looks. Have you tried Delta 400 at 1600 or 3200? Similar results, but Delta 400 is easier to find in stores. Also, in other news, I'm scanning a bunch of 120 HP5 I shot at a show at 3200. I'll post pics later in the SAD thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 00:19
|
|
|
Delta 400 is probably my favourite 120 film now. Too bad I can't buy it in five-packs from Henry's anymore
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 01:58
|
|
|
Get it from photo-co.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 03:57
|
|
|
My uncle recently gifted to me his uncles camera kit. He died about ten years ago. There is an Olympus OM-1, various lenses, lots of filters, two light meters that hurt my head to look at, and even an Olympus "Handy Copy Stand". There are a lot of extension tubes and a macro lens, so maybe he liked macro work? He even has two extra focusing screens. Everything is in tip-top condition. Original boxes and cases and manuals for it all. There was film in the camera and the counter read seven shots. I've dropped it off to be developed. I am hopeful there is something to look at. I have a roll of black and white in it now, and so far everything in order. The cameras light meter still works! God knows how old the battery is. The flash appears to take two 1.5v AA batteries. Is there any reason I can't give that a go? I've been doing a wee bit of reading and the battery inside the OM-1 is something special. Tips or suggestions appreciated. I am just reading random things on the web about how to use this thing. The manual for the camera was in a packet that seems to have been damp at some point, so it's not really in any condition to use. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 20:48
|
|
Associate Christ
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:Tips or suggestions appreciated. I am just reading random things on the web about how to use this thing. The manual for the camera was in a packet that seems to have been damp at some point, so it's not really in any condition to use. You will likely find this handy if you haven't seen it already: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/om1/index.htm OM-1's are really pretty, I envy you.
l33tc4k30fd00m fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Feb 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 21:06
|
|
|
The OM series of cameras are pretty sweet. They're my manual film SLR of choice and I have a couple of OM-2SPs and an OM-4Ti that I love. The OM-1 is nice, but the battery is kind of a pain in the butt. Since you've already got a ton of Olympus kit there, you might want to look into getting a cheap OM-2SP body from KEH or something since it takes common watch batteries, has a spot meter, program mode and can meter up to ISO 3200. It also has a hot shoe built in, which is kind of an annoying thing about earlier OMs where it was an option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 16:46 |
|
|
I remember seeing someone's post on how they set up a shoebox as a little lightbox with a DSLR inside for photographing negatives. I'm thinking about trying this, anyone got any advice/tips?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 19:42
|
|