Show us yer film shots then!

skysh4rk said:
A collection of relatively recent, but unrelated photographs:


[URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][/URL]
[URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][/URL][/URL][/URL]
[URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sjMSnd'][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
[URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/s3Lf8D'][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
Click to expand...
[URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/sd1DbZ'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/scS7yj'][URL='https://flic.kr/p/qTwQew']

A very good set RJ, I really like 2, 3 and 4.[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
 
Last edited:
XA2inmypocket said:
Lee, Kodak D-76 has identical (or so they say) results to Ilford ID11. Both come in a powder form which you mix into a stock, although the Ilford comes in two packs that have to be blended in order, and the Kodak in a single packet. The Ilford can be bought in 1 litre or 5 litre forms. I like the five litre size, as once mixed, it'll last me months (if kept carefully, it will keep fresh at least six months). The Kodak, although made in Germany, comes in a packet to make either 1 litre, or a US gallon (3.8 litres). In both cases you mix the stock in hot water at the recommended temperature, but as I said, the Ilford is divided into two packets to be mixed in order.

I find that ID11/D-76 make useful fall-back developers, finer grained than Rodinal/R09. I use them one shot, either 1:1 stock to water, or if I'm feeling really mean, 1:3 stock to water. I like the ID11, because the five litre version fits nicely in a reused five litre drum, and it is made in the UK. However, the Kodak 3.8 litre works out a little cheaper. To keep the stock good, it's worth trying to squeeze as much air out of the drum as you use it, while you can. Otherwise once mixed, it'll give you months of cheap fine grain developer.
Click to expand...

Paul, thank you for that....
I'm still using the D74 developer that I got from EdBray, so, when that's done I'll have a try of the D76...
 
ChrisR said:
New (first) grandson, at this point only a few days old.... Nothing in the way of a photo, but just something exciting for us!



TriX, Leitz-Minolta CL, Minolta 40mm f/2.
Click to expand...

Congratulations Chris.....
 
Congratulations Granddad,Your first Grandson will bring you much joy and photo opportunities. :)
 
I suppose I should apologise for uploading such an under exposed, dusty scan, but it is what it is, just as Helen is who she is. I grabbed this when she was having a smoke out in our back yard. I only had Shanghai GP3 loaded, and it was late evening light. I could have push processed, but that would have affected the other exposures on the film, so I've instead enhanced it with post scan Gimp software.

Anyway, I rarely offer technical perfection.

Helen on Flickr

17189282278_f70398e566_c.jpg
 
XA2inmypocket said:
I suppose I should apologise for uploading such an under exposed, dusty scan, but it is what it is, just as Helen is who she is. I grabbed this when she was having a smoke out in our back yard. I only had Shanghai GP3 loaded, and it was late evening light. I could have push processed, but that would have affected the other exposures on the film, so I've instead enhanced it with post scan Gimp software.

Anyway, I rarely offer technical perfection.

Helen on Flickr

17189282278_f70398e566_c.jpg
Click to expand...

That's damn powerful.
 
XA2inmypocket said:
I suppose I should apologise for uploading such an under exposed, dusty scan, but it is what it is, just as Helen is who she is. I grabbed this when she was having a smoke out in our back yard. I only had Shanghai GP3 loaded, and it was late evening light. I could have push processed, but that would have affected the other exposures on the film, so I've instead enhanced it with post scan Gimp software.

Anyway, I rarely offer technical perfection.

Helen on Flickr

17189282278_f70398e566_c.jpg
Click to expand...
There's something visceral and raw about this, almost painful to look at but brilliant nonetheless.
 
XA2inmypocket said:
I suppose I should apologise for uploading such an under exposed, dusty scan, but it is what it is, just as Helen is who she is. I grabbed this when she was having a smoke out in our back yard. I only had Shanghai GP3 loaded, and it was late evening light. I could have push processed, but that would have affected the other exposures on the film, so I've instead enhanced it with post scan Gimp software.

Anyway, I rarely offer technical perfection.

Helen on Flickr

17189282278_f70398e566_c.jpg
Click to expand...

A wonderful portrait of life in the hard lane. I think you are very lucky to have the opportunity to take such a photograph and I hope that Helen was given something,I am sure she was.Forget technic you have captured life.
 
medwaygreen said:
A wonderful portrait of life in the hard lane. I think you are very lucky to have the opportunity to take such a photograph and I hope that Helen was given something,I am sure she was.Forget technic you have captured life.
Click to expand...
Thanks all. Helen was at ours on a visit. She is an old friend of Anita. I do know her story, and understand the circumstances of her life, She was perfectly happy to have her photograph taken, and couldn't stop laughing. I'm told that I could describe it as low key rather than under exposed, I must remember that.
 
A comparison of results from a Hasselblad Flextight X5 scanner and Fuji Frontier Scanner, respectively:




Obviously, the operator of the scanner and the corresponding settings have a huge impact on the final image, so this isn't a decisive, well-controlled comparison by any stretch, so I wouldn't draw any firm conclusions from these, but I thought that they might be interesting nonetheless.

The scan from the Flextight scanner is 6723x6723!
 
Last edited:
At the web resolution and uploaded to flickr I can't see much difference between them. At first I though the second had more "pop" but on third or fourth look I thought the first did, then I realised I didn't know!

Having access to the original files, can you see major differences in the detail?

(Assuming they are 6*6 it seems the Flextight is delivering around 3000 ppi, not too dusty!)
 
ChrisR said:
At the web resolution and uploaded to flickr I can't see much difference between them. At first I though the second had more "pop" but on third or fourth look I thought the first did, then I realised I didn't know!

Having access to the original files, can you see major differences in the detail?

(Assuming they are 6*6 it seems the Flextight is delivering around 3000 ppi, not too dusty!)
Click to expand...

Ahhhh, I think that my Flickr account settings might not permit public viewing of the full resolution images. The Flextight delivers 3200dpi.

I think that both images have certain strengths and weaknesses, which just further supports how much scanning depends on the operator's intentions for and interpretations of the image.

I'd probably have to print both to really make an informed judgment about them, I think.
 
skysh4rk said:
Ahhhh, I think that my Flickr account settings might not permit public viewing of the full resolution images. The Flextight delivers 3200dpi.

I think that both images have certain strengths and weaknesses, which just further supports how much scanning depends on the operator's intentions for and interpretations of the image.

I'd probably have to print both to really make an informed judgment about them, I think.
Click to expand...

Didn't think to look properly... on the large size on flickr (just by clicking the magnifying glass with a plus in it), the Flextight looks fine but the Frontier looks way over-sharpened to my untrained eye!
 
I've just re-scanned these 6x9 slides from my first roll through Nick's Mamiya Super 23 (only waited 13 days to get it back from AG..). I got the small scans with the Dev to see the results but wasn't happy with the noise in them. Whilst I'm not 100% happy with the results or my scans because I underexposed two of them and completely lost the other 4 shots on the roll, I'll definitely be putting another roll into the Super for some landscapes.

1) Looking down from the gallery balcony



2) The corridors of time



I've got a couple more on my Flickr photo stream too but I need to get out into the daylight to get the benefit of Provia. My new (to me!) Yashica 635 should arrive on Friday so I'm looking forward to shooting some 6x6 again too.

Cheers
Steve
 
Last edited:
ChrisR said:
Didn't think to look properly... on the large size on flickr (just by clicking the magnifying glass with a plus in it), the Flextight looks fine but the Frontier looks way over-sharpened to my untrained eye!
Click to expand...

Actually, it's possible that I added the sharpening (or maybe Flickr was overly aggressive in its own sharpening algorithm?). Quite frankly, I'm likely the weakest link in any scanner comparison.
 
skysh4rk said:
A comparison of results from a Hasselblad Flextight X5 scanner and Fuji Frontier Scanner, respectively:




Obviously, the operator of the scanner and the corresponding settings have a huge impact on the final image, so this isn't a decisive, well-controlled comparison by any stretch, so I wouldn't draw any firm conclusions from these, but I thought that they might be interesting nonetheless.

The scan from the Flextight scanner is 6723x6723!
Click to expand...

Rj, This is a difficult one the Fuji looks more natural and mellow,but, the Hasselblad as dealt with the subject in a much more precise manner,looking sharper and more defined against the background. To close to call for me,other than I like very much.(y)
 
I think the Fuji shot is over sharpened which is why it looks lighter, particularly in the fur/grass. If you look at a large version of both, more detail is retained in the Flextight which would also mean you could push it more in editing.
 
Some very nice images from the XA 2's you're all posting...
I'm thinking I'd like one of them to carry around, just that there are no charity shops round here(anyone fancy picking one up for me ?.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top