Show us yer film shots then!

Trying out the New Portra 160 in a landscape with some unknown lake in Chugach National Forest, Alaska, along Portage Glacier Road.

The mosquitos hounded me so bad that I shot this and got the heck out of there. I wanted to go over to those trees on the far end and do some BW work. But I was wearing short pants and became breakfast for a swarm of them. I was so distracted that I didn't even notice that plant in the lower left that could have easily been composed out of the picture.

Sadly, this was the last shot with the 50mm. The pin broke that trips the shutter on it. I hope I can get it fixed. :'(






Zeiss Distagon CF T* FLE 50mm f4, New Portra 160, Jobo C-41 Press Kit

​
 
Last edited:
Breathtaking, but i always get really annoyed that you can't really properly see a portrait image to a decent resolution on a monitor... or at least at 1440x900 resolution. Might get a second monitor just to mount portrait ;)

Who am i kidding, i don't have that sort of money :p
 
freecom2 said:
just ridiculous...
ly amazing. top shot.
Click to expand...

Thanks

Superewza said:
Breathtaking, but i always get really annoyed that you can't really properly see a portrait image to a decent resolution on a monitor... or at least at 1440x900 resolution. Might get a second monitor just to mount portrait ;)

Who am i kidding, i don't have that sort of money :p
Click to expand...

Thanks. It sounds like a laptop screen resolution.
 
jgredline said:
Love the Square crops and I really need to try some of the new Porta. The 400 also seems to be an amazing film. Great colors and comp.
Click to expand...

Thanks. The camera shoots square and you need to crop to get a different aspect.
 
Another attempt at developing two different brands of film in the same tank with stand development and Rodinal. So far the increased agitation profile I tried last time seems to be working better on 120 film with regards to even development which I usually have trouble with with using the very gentle profile typically done with stand and Rodinal.

The Salty Dawg Saloon in Homer, Alaska, had the entire interior covered with one-dollar bills placed there by patrons who usually wrote their name and home town on them. And if they didn't have a buck to spare, it looks like they would carve it on the wall or write it on the pool table light.




Zeiss Distagon CF T* FLE 50mm f4, Fuji 100 Acros, Rodinal 1+100 Stand

​
 
A few more Ultra Max 400 through the AE-1

Why hello miss.
CanonAE-1FD28UltraMax4002.jpg


Time to eat
CanonAE-1FD28UltraMax4003.jpg


Fire truck
CanonAE-1FD28UltraMax4004.jpg


Beverly Hills
CanonAE-1FD28UltraMax4006.jpg


World famous Pinks....
CanonAE-1FD28UltraMax40018.jpg


I first heard of this place a few years ago when Sir Paul played here but was not lucky enough to get in.
CanonAE-1FD28UltraMax40019.jpg
 
Superewza said:
Breathtaking, but i always get really annoyed that you can't really properly see a portrait image to a decent resolution on a monitor... or at least at 1440x900 resolution. Might get a second monitor just to mount portrait ;)

Who am i kidding, i don't have that sort of money :p
Click to expand...

Press F11 key that will give you maximum view.:thumbs:
 
AlanSmithee said:
Thanks. It sounds like a laptop screen resolution.
Click to expand...

Ruddy big laptop if it was, 19" widescreen? I thought that was pretty average for a desktop nowadays... then again, 22" screens aren't that much more. Alas, no money to upgrade and i didn't really know what i was doing when i bought it.

medwaygreen said:
Press F11 key that will give you maximum view.:thumbs:
Click to expand...

I do, it's still only 900 pixels, couldn't really consider viewing it anything less than 1024 ;)
 


Crown Graphic / Portra 160nc

Another shot ruined by using old film but I still like it.
 
Is that the same church as the one you posted a couple of B&W's from a while back Liam ?

The film problem isn't all that obtrusive anyway - and dare I say it - quite rescue-able in tatty-chop (ducks for cover) - a little localised levels tweaking should sort it.
 
Thanks for the comments guys, yes Mark its the same church as this one...



The light leak isn't that bad but I can sometimes be a bit of a perfectionist :)
 
Liam said:
Thanks for the comments guys, yes Mark its the same church as this one...

...

The light leak isn't that bad but I can sometimes be a bit of a perfectionist :)
Click to expand...

Thought I recognised it :thumbs:

And as to the perfectionist thing, don't ever beat yourself up about that, plenty of us could do with a little more of that attitude frankly. I know I could - it seems that everything I've posted in the last few months has had to go back to the 'shop for a little work before getting re-released.
 
Wblati, these all seem to have a blue hue to them. Were they shot on velvia or some similar film? Also what camera did you use? The images are wonderfully sharp!
 
They look nice, where is it? Some great landscapes there. Is it just me or do they seem a bit dark? Some vignetting too, which i seem to be the only person who thinks it can be a good thing.

What camera was it?
 
I have no idea where the blue hue is coming from - this is my first experience with this. The images also seem to be dark/ no vignetting unlike my previous images from the ricoh.

Do you guys think it may be the airport scanners? I read that this would not be an issue but all the films that i have developed(Snappy Snaps and the images image from Asda) seem to have these weird colors.

These were shot on Kodak Ektar with a Ricoh GR1. The landscape images are of Coron, Palawan in the Philippnes. The images with the masks was a restaurant called Balaw Balaw where they serve weird foods (this is the reason why i visited the place - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEv67X0WnyE). I am sending the camera back to have it checked as the images aren't that sharp - these were taken to test out the camera after getting repaired - flickr seems to be sharpening them a tiny bit.
 
Last edited:
wblati said:
I have no idea where the blue hue is coming from - this is my first experience with this. The images also seem to be dark/ no vignetting unlike my previous images from the ricoh.

Do you guys think it may be the airport scanners? I read that this would not be an issue but all the films that i have developed(Snappy Snaps and the images image from Asda) seem to have these weird colors.

These were shot on Kodak Ektar with a Ricoh GR1. The landscape images are of Coron, Palawan in the Philippnes. The images with the masks was a restaurant called Balaw Balaw where they served weird food (this is the reason why i visited thta place - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEv67X0WnyE). I am sending the camera back to have it checked as the images aren't that sharp - these were taken to test out the camera after getting repaired - flickr seems to be sharpening them a tiny bit.
Click to expand...

Sounds like flickr did you a favour then. Ektar can be a bit strong on the blue too, so that may have something to do with it, although it isn't usually too bad. I scanned my first lot of velvia recently and have had real trouble getting good looking pictures from the scans, some are just way too blue and it seems to drive my scanner loopy.
 
wblati said:
I have no idea where the blue hue is coming from...

...but all the films that i have developed(Snappy Snaps and the images image from Asda) seem to have these weird colors.
Click to expand...

Having scanned some new Ektar myself, blues and reds can be strong but a hue would totally be a color balance adjustment issue. I'd say the problem is with the service you are using. Their automagic machine may not have a profile for the film or it was an operator error if I had to guess.
 
do you mean the scanning process? i scanned the negatives myself. i tend not to adjust the color unless its way off.

i was more worried about the sharpness of the images as they seem to be soft/ not in focus after getting it repaired.
 
The colour is quite alarmingly off for Ektar, I've shot quite a few rolls and never saw that much blue.
 
Run auto levels on it, looks fine after that. Just undrexposure and the scanning colour balance that's a bit off.
 
***Do you guys think it may be the airport scanners? I read that this would not be an issue but all the films that i have developed(Snappy Snaps and the images image from Asda) seem to have these weird colors.***

Just select "auto color" in Photoshop and it corrects the scan errors...but if you scanned them yourself it would be nice if you made them 800px on the longest side to show a bigger picture ;)
 
playing with the 5x4 again, the focus is slightly off! and getting used to the depth of field or rather the lack of it.
5882228684_f4833b6aab_b.jpg
[/url] Wizzard by Marvin d martian100, on Flickr[/IMG]

Mart
 
This one was my cat Stalin from years ago.
I used a Practika MTL3 with 50mm lens and XP2 film.
Think I used flash bounced off to one side.

Stalin1_Practikasmall.jpg
 
A few from the latest roll (third shot since getting the Fujica, second successfully developed ;) ):

264055_2101286727127_1094205953_2438453_1013358_n.jpg


260465_2101292807279_1094205953_2438462_1405929_n.jpg


267513_2101294047310_1094205953_2438465_6921219_n.jpg


264778_2101288287166_1094205953_2438456_135393_n.jpg


I think on 'the graph' i'm around the first pit on the blue line :D

lzDNGl.jpg


EDIT: That's 'Profilm' branded Tri-X 400 by the way, developed in Rodinal R09, i believe 1+25.
 
Last edited:
Nice set Superewza and the graph is spot on.

Javier, loving these and yet again you've managed to find the pretty girl...

Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top