|
deaders posted:This series is a bit of a departure for me, shot with a Mat 124g on Tmax 100. I really like Tmax now, it is also amazing for portraits. These are pretty good, love the tones and kinda makes me think of Robert Adams.
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 12:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
deaders posted:This series is a bit of a departure for me, shot with a Mat 124g on Tmax 100. I really like Tmax now, it is also amazing for portraits.  hey baby, you goin my way?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Thanks, and that is awesome you made the RA connection alkanphel, I have been looking at his work a lot lately so was going for that kind of quiet, isolated feeling. I can't believe the tones you get with Tmax 100, I just ordered a few more boxes. There was not much to be done to these after scanning, it just naturally seems to have nice contrast and tonnes of shadow detail.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
deaders posted:Thanks, and that is awesome you made the RA connection alkanphel, I have been looking at his work a lot lately so was going for that kind of quiet, isolated feeling. I've looked at quite a number of his photobooks (he has so many!) so the connection just popped into my head naturally. Good stuff, look forward to more!
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
I am pretty bad about remembering to remove the dark slide out of the camera before shooting and good about advancing the frame manually after each shot. I wish it was the other way... advance by Stingray of Doom, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
Just got into phone range so have been able to look at the pics in this thread from last couple of months (our net connection has blocked most image sharing sites) Lovely work all!
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
 Yuan Ching by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Counterpoint: give up on such bourgeoise concepts as "focus" and "sharpness" and get an old folder. They're great fun. Yep, so I took this advice. Decided on a Voigtlander Perkeo II, since it seemed to have pretty good optics and shutter, as well as being ridicuslously small (which will make it nicely pocketable for work travel).  I took it out this weekend and shot a few rolls. Finished developing and scanning the first one last night, it makes some nice photos! I didn't botch nearly as many frames due to bad focus as I feared. Things were either a meter away and easy to estimate, or far enough away to just throw the camera in f/8 and focus on infinity. The viewfinder looks like it mostly lines up with the frame, although a few frames were botched due to parallax. Ultrafine Xtreme 400 + Rodinal 1:100 stand dev.  Icy Marsh by zacharytong, on Flickr  Public Hunting Grounds by zacharytong, on Flickr I was curious what wide open (f/3.5) would look like. The answer is: soft and swirly, pincushion distortion, although I could see it being fun for certain situations in the future  Cattail by zacharytong, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
I'd suggest setting your black/white points correctly, looks like you just pulled them straight from the scanner without adjustment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:I'd suggest setting your black/white points correctly, looks like you just pulled them straight from the scanner without adjustment. Argh, I actually struggled with them for ages in Lightroom. I inverted in Lightroom this time so I didn't have to jump hoops in photoshop: my copy of PS doesn't like ARW files, so I have to convert to DNG then downsample to TIF before editing in Lightroom. But because the inversion is done with the curve in lightroom, all the sliders are backwards and my brain melts. Will take another crack at processing tonight 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Yeah, Lightroom seriously needs a better way of inverting. People have been asking for that feature for years and Adobe doesn't give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
polyfractal posted:Argh, I actually struggled with them for ages in Lightroom. I inverted in Lightroom this time so I didn't have to jump hoops in photoshop: my copy of PS doesn't like ARW files, so I have to convert to DNG then downsample to TIF before editing in Lightroom. But because the inversion is done with the curve in lightroom, all the sliders are backwards and my brain melts. What? Downsample to TIF? DNG is TIFF. It doesn't matter if your curve is inverted - just adjust the curve until you have actually black pixels. I'm not sure what you managed to do in LR beyond invert, it looks like a scan without any contrast adjustments at all. This is just setting the black and white points and adding a bit of an S-curve: 
bellows lugosi fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:What? Downsample to TIF? DNG is TIFF. It doesn't matter if your curve is inverted - just adjust the curve until you have actually black pixels. I'm not sure what you managed to do in LR beyond invert, it looks like a scan without any contrast adjustments at all. Hrm, I thought the ARW -> DNG -> TIF process lost data in the process. I guess I was just confused, sorry for that. This is my before / after. Not as much contrast as yours for sure, but I did make an effort to stretch the histogram some. Will do more next time   
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Stop messing with your lightroom sliders and learn how to use curves https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_qeZOWqchM
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
Curves in Lightroom on negatives sucks, yes. Extremely cramped and hard to do something precise. It works somewhat better if you do a pre-process step to 16 bit TIFF with inverting and basic range cropping. Pre-process to DNG doesn't work though, because Lightroom saves the unprocessed image and then the processing settings, so importing that back in gives you nothing new to work with. Not using Photoshop because it's stupid expensive. Btw sorry for soiling the medium/large format thread with a small format negative. nielsm fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
How do people here take notes on location, time, and exposure settings for your film when out in the field?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Helicity posted:How do people here take notes on location, time, and exposure settings for your film when out in the field? I used to do that at the start with a notebook, I stopped after a few rolls when I realised I never referred to them at all. Maybe it would be useful if I was doing crazy zone system poo poo like Ansel Adams but so far I'm not thus it doesn't really matter for me. The easiest way now is probably just punch them into your phone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Not using Photoshop because it's stupid expensive. Curves is definitely something you can do in something lovely like the gimp or paint.net without problems
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Also your can pay monthly with CC so it's not prohibitively expensive now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I used to do that at the start with a notebook, I stopped after a few rolls when I realised I never referred to them at all. Maybe it would be useful if I was doing crazy zone system poo poo like Ansel Adams but so far I'm not thus it doesn't really matter for me. The easiest way now is probably just punch them into your phone. I actually went back to pen and a moleskine for this after using Evernote because I found it quicker and simpler than dicking around with my phone every time I wanted to record information about an exposure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
polyfractal posted:
From another folder user/fan. Wide open is usually OK, but you chose basically the double worst case scenario which is wide open and close up. Any lens will suffer in this scenario, folders like this especially. Folders like the Ikonta and the Perkeo use a so called "front cell" focussing method. That means only the first element (group) moves to focus VS the whole lens, which called unit focus and is usually better. Some folders like the Mamiya Six (not the plastic one, the folder) and some others have it. The Mamiya actually circumvents this whole problem by leaving the lens alone and moving the film, achieving the same thing, essentially. What does that mean for you? It means those lenses are usually either corrected for mid-distances (think people shots) or infinity, where they perform at their best. Everything outside that range is usually OK, but not great close to wide-open. That said, listen to Ansel Autisms: You should set your black points and contrast properly coz it will improve the image rendition. A lot. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Wide open is usually OK, but you chose basically the double worst case scenario which is wide open and close up. Any lens will suffer in this scenario, folders like this especially. Folders like the Ikonta and the Perkeo use a so called "front cell" focussing method. Ah, interesting. I wanted to try wide open, but was afraid I'd miss focus on a farther away target, so I chose something close. Didn't realize it carried performance implications depending on distance to target. Will keep that in mind in the future, thanks. And yeah, point taken about the black points
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
e: nvm
Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Jan 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
polyfractal posted:Yep, so I took this advice. Decided on a Voigtlander Perkeo II, since it seemed to have pretty good optics and shutter, as well as being ridicuslously small (which will make it nicely pocketable for work travel). Helicity posted:How do people here take notes on location, time, and exposure settings for your film when out in the field? I'm never on the ball, though (other than that one time), so I'll scribble some half-assed notes in a non-waterproof notebook, or on the back of a receipt, then lose the paper before I get around developing the film.  Sometimes I'll put a few notes into my phone, but not often.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
 _DSC8043-Edit by Stingray of Doom, on FlickrThe 6x9 Back on my Mamiya can make decent panoramic pictures with some cropping. Something I will have to investigate further.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:
drat, that's nice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
 Hougang by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Helicity posted:How do people here take notes on location, time, and exposure settings for your film when out in the field? I'll add coordinates to my GPS if I see something that might look cool in different light or at a different point in the year, but other than that, shooting instead of writing things down will get you where you're going a lot faster. Once you get a solid amount of fuckups under your belt, things will be intuitive enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
I have a notebook for jotting down potential locations that might be good to revisit if the light is bad when I am there. Not so much for writing down technical details because it doesn't matter and 90% of the time is going to be f16 or f11 @ 1/250th
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Have you noticed a significant developing time difference between 120 and 135 Tri-X in HC-110 (1 + 46)? I thought dev times were usually the same for 135 and 120, but DigitalTruth is saying 7 minutes for 135 and 8 minutes for 120.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
mulls posted:Have you noticed a significant developing time difference between 120 and 135 Tri-X in HC-110 (1 + 46)? I thought dev times were usually the same for 135 and 120, but DigitalTruth is saying 7 minutes for 135 and 8 minutes for 120. I doubt 1 minute would change anything in the end result of the development, especially with that dilution ratio.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Overall surface area doesn't affect development time http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/ 6.5 minutes at dilution E (1:47) shot at 400
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
Finally starting to get my vietnam photos scanned in. 13 rolls to go. Rice Fields of Sapa, Vietnam by Paul Frederiksen on 500px
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
The first time I loaded a roll of film into my new Mamiya C220, I hadn't closed the back properly, so the frame counter never clicked over to 1 before I had wound the entire roll onto the take up spool. I stuck it in a dark bag and tried to wind it back on to the original spool, but I think I got fingerprints all over the emulsion and probably didn't wind it very tightly before taking it out of the dark bag. I'm going to burn off and dev this roll really quickly just to make sure the mechanics all work. But on the whole, medium format is as cool as it gets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Busy January so far! May by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Busy January so far! I'm curious on what aperture you shot that at? I haven't shot any real portraits with the 6x7 yet really...and will be soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
Can someone explain to me the difference between a circular polarizer and a linear polarizer? I keep reading that circular polarizers are more geared towards those with autofocus and with ttl metering. Since I am using a Hasselblad with a WLF is there any reason I should spend the near $100 extra to get a circular polarizer? Also how do you compensate with your metering? Since I can't put the filter on a handheld light meter, how do I get a proper exposure?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 18:18
|
|
