|
  My favorite shots from a Pentax ME super and the SMC 50mm 1.7 lens from a trip to California way back, shot on Ektar 100, developed and scanned by NCPS
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2023 03:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
First roll came back! A few other usable shots but I think that's the best one for sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
I wish I'd gotten such a good one for my first roll! Nice work lollybo posted:
Is NCPS a mail-in place? I've been using The Darkroom for years but I've been thinking of trying other spots out. And the pics from my Pacific Coast Highway trip with my ME Super were victims to a wonky film speed dial. Everything was really underexposed 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 02:47
|
|
|
a dingus posted:
I saw a few people complain about the scan quality from The Darkroom. I really like their articles and videos I find them entertaining, but I haven’t used them myself so can’t say about their quality. NCPS is a mail in place, I have also used Dwayne’s as well as Richard photo lab and they are all pretty good. The next place I want to try is Memphis Film Lab- they individually adjust each scan, offer discounts for bulk as well, and the prices seem low compared to other lab. However I heard the turnaround times are usually slower than other labs. It seems to be a popular choice on other forums.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 02:57
|
|
|
That's funny I was just looking at Memphis Film Labs and was thinking of giving them a shot. I normally get the upgraded scans at the darkroom which I'm normally satisfied with except for pics that are a little under-exposed. Underexposed pics look sharpened to hell and I think Id be able to do a better job salvaging so-so shots that what they give me back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 13:22
|
|
|
The Darkroom will likely scratch your film. A buddy tells me that Richard Photo Lab will do so as well and that NCPS will not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2023 14:52
|
|
|
Took some photos in Sweden on a camera with a malfunctioning shutter that would sometimes randomly lock or not close all the way     
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
Anyone in the Rhode Island area know where’s the best place to have film developed and doesn’t ship it out?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2023 14:46
|
|
|
I got a few shots I like from roll 2. I even tried to crop this time.  
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2023 02:34
|
|
|
So, like 16 years ago, I bought all the junk for developing B&W and... never did it. It all got lost or thrown away in the intervening years. With winter coming, I thought it would be fun to dust off the old Nikon and try again. Was nervous about it, but ended up being way easier than I'd anticipated. Practiced rolling the film into the reel twice. Once outside the bag and once inside. Then developed two real rolls of film. All went very smoothly! The bag is way less of a pain than I'd anticipated.    I don't have a macro lens for my DLSR. Or a light box. So, I'm thinking of just grabbing a scanner. Is the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE fine? That's the best seller on B&H.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
dema posted:I don't have a macro lens for my DLSR. Or a light box. So, I'm thinking of just grabbing a scanner. Is the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE fine? That's the best seller on B&H. Save future you the hassle of having bought things that didn't meet your standards and get a cheap macro lens or an extension tube for a long but sub-100 lens you already own, and a lightbox.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 22:20
|
|
|
??? The 8200 is good and way way less hassle than dslr scanning
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
Is DSLR scanning that big of a difference? I have an epson perfection v370 photo and I feel like it does a pretty good job
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
Between a flatbed and DSLR, for 35mm the DSLR is better. But otherwise the Plustek is the best choice for 35mm
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2023 23:38
|
|
|
I have the 8200i SE. It's a little slow (unless I have something screwed up on the settings and I'd be happy to hear what others have their settings at), but gets the job done and works well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
I am probably overthinking this, but what am I trading off if I adjust my development time so the density of the negative has a smaller dynamic range (for a fixed subject dynamic range)? So suppose I have a recipe where I develop for X time and get Zone 1 and Zone 8 densities of 0.1 and 2.0. If I were to reduce the develop time such that Zone 1 and Zone 8 have densities of 0.1 and 1.2, I think I would trade off film speed and tonal separation, but in return I would get less grainy highlights in my scans, right? Is there anything else I am missing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
Speaking of scanning how do y’all approach color correction of scans? Do you accept the scan as true to life or do a lot of lever fiddling? Keep yourself to edits that could be done in traditional printing? It seems like a lot of digital editing would defeat the purpose of shooting film but how do you know what accurate is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:20
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:Speaking of scanning how do y’all approach color correction of scans? Do you accept the scan as true to life or do a lot of lever fiddling? Keep yourself to edits that could be done in traditional printing? It seems like a lot of digital editing would defeat the purpose of shooting film but how do you know what accurate is. I scan as raw and use NLP for both colour and bw. I don't do any funny stuff like trying to adhere to traditional printing styles. I do whatever it take to get the result I want. Cloning healing spot colour correction casts etc, nothing is off limits. I would never consider getting a JPG straight out of a scanner
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:Speaking of scanning how do y’all approach color correction of scans? Do you accept the scan as true to life or do a lot of lever fiddling? Keep yourself to edits that could be done in traditional printing? It seems like a lot of digital editing would defeat the purpose of shooting film but how do you know what accurate is. Even Saint Ansel did a *lot* of darkroom wizardry, so if your workflow is hybrid there is no shame in dinking with those sliders till the cows come home IMO. Speaking of which, can't recommend a Behringer X-Touch Mini + MIDI2LR enough. It makes post processing a lot easier/more organic-feeling being able to twiddle with knobs without taking your eyes off the image.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:I am probably overthinking this, but what am I trading off if I adjust my development time so the density of the negative has a smaller dynamic range (for a fixed subject dynamic range)? So suppose I have a recipe where I develop for X time and get Zone 1 and Zone 8 densities of 0.1 and 2.0. If I were to reduce the develop time such that Zone 1 and Zone 8 have densities of 0.1 and 1.2, I think I would trade off film speed and tonal separation, but in return I would get less grainy highlights in my scans, right? Is there anything else I am missing? I don't do anything fancy with dev, so I can't answer to that, but I'm curious if you do a side by side example.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
Ethics_Gradient posted:Even Saint Ansel did a *lot* of darkroom wizardry, so if your workflow is hybrid there is no shame in dinking with those sliders till the cows come home IMO. I mean I assume any editing you can do in a darkroom would be “ethical”, but does that include things like level and curve adjustments?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
I have the tools at hand and I use them. I'm not a purist or a photojournalist that has to adhere to editing standards.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
If anyone is in the Sacramento area there is someone in Nevada City giving away what could be a ~$700 color enlarger assuming it works. I'd pick it up but I have nowhere to setup a darkroom. https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/616923847086710/
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 00:54
|
|
|
Ziggy Smalls posted:If anyone is in the Sacramento area there is someone in Nevada City giving away what could be a ~$700 color enlarger assuming it works. You probably do, though Do it! dupersaurus posted:I mean I assume any editing you can do in a darkroom would be “ethical”, but does that include things like level and curve adjustments? You mean like, split grade printing? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 05:36
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:I don't do anything fancy with dev, so I can't answer to that, but I'm curious if you do a side by side example. I will probably do this on some Delta 400 before I apply the lessons on the batch of expired FP3/4/Panatomic-X I have coming in. Edit: And I should test this for two scenes, one with a high dynamic range and another one with less. theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Oct 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 18:01
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:I mean I assume any editing you can do in a darkroom would be “ethical”, but does that include things like level and curve adjustments? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:I mean I assume any editing you can do in a darkroom would be “ethical”, but does that include things like level and curve adjustments? There's so much you can do in the darkroom. In no particular order and not a complete list
If you can do it Lightroom it can probably be done in the darkroom
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2023 23:23
|
|
|
Lest we forget the photographer's most unethical trick: the crop
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2023 07:08
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:Lest we forget the photographer's most unethical trick: the crop Was going to post the same thing but I couldn't find that picture of the two soldiers with one giving water(?) to a child while the other is holding a rifle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2023 14:26
|
|
|
Welp, I learned some stuff but I think the real question I was asking was overlooked, so lets talk examples. Now that I have a scanner (opticfilm 8300) I've been revisiting some favorite frames and scanning them, and at least with the color shots I've been testing, I've been getting some significantly different results compared to the photo lab scans. This is from a roll of Portra 400: What the lab gave me:  What my scanner gave me using its Portra 400 setting and some very rudimentary level adjustments:  And I mean... what? Is that green cast authentic to the film or an invention of the lab scanner? Is my scanner right or is it adjusting away some inherent tint to the film when underexposed? How do I even figure that out without access to a darkroom to make actual prints? Or are both correct because there's no objective reality so I should just invent my own? I'm no digital novice so while I know that any digital scan of a physical item is going to need some work, I was hoping a film scanner would be a reasonably honest recreation of what you'd get out of a darkroom. I'll pull the all the levers all day long on my digital photos, but I dunno it feels like if I'm doing the same to my film photos then what's even the point of shooting film in the first place, y'know?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
The only way to be sure is to do a white balance and a color card, set your processing to what it should be based on the card, and then never touch the color settings (whether it's the ones on your RA-4 printing setup or your scanner) again. But it's likely that it won't give you the kind of pictures you want. Correct and nice aren't always the same. The green cast might be 'in' your film, but that's a thing that regardless whether you scan or print, you'll have to correct for. RA-4 processing involves a LOT of loving around with either a color meter system, or with transparent filters that make a print with a color cast look neutral, and then have 'Add 20% extra yellow' or 'add 50% blue' or whatever on the enlarger's color filter system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2023 18:21
|
|
|
The scanner software is what is deciding on color You should scan as a positive and then do the inversion and color correction manually or with nlp or something to your taste
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
Yeah, it's all subjective. The green cast may exist in the negative but it's something that would be corrected out in the darkroom using something like this This would tell you how much to adjust your enlarger by to fix any given cast. There's no purity in film photography. Your film was scanned at whatever the lab tech thought was right and they put your whole roll through with those settings. They're not sitting there and adjusting individual photos for you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
dema posted:So, like 16 years ago, I bought all the junk for developing B&W and... never did it. It all got lost or thrown away in the intervening years. Happy with the PlusTek 8200i. This is all auto settings:    
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
Those of you scanning film with a scanner, what software are you using? I have an epson v370 photo and the epson photo scan software is a pain. I struggled a lot getting it to crop images properly, and it doesn’t allow you to adjust the crop at all. So you either have to scan the film like a transparency and then crop everything yourself, or deal with it’s botched cropping
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 14:12
|
|
|
Beve Stuscemi posted:Those of you scanning film with a scanner, what software are you using? I had to switch to VueScan a few years ago due to ongoing driver issues with Epson Scan, it works great.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 14:23
|
|
|
Silverfast is a hundred times better than Epson scan and vuescan
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 14:44
|
|
|
Another Silverfast user here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 15:31
|
|
|
Also ditto Silverfast
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
I use a v700 for 120 and a plustek 8200 for 35mm I use vuescan to scan as raw and NLP to process
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2023 02:50
|
|