Shot on the shores of the Washington coast a few years ago. Developed with Rodinal at a 5% burn Stand Development for 60 minutes. Rollei 6008i system.
Filtering by Tag: Scanned
On the river bank
Shot on Fujifilm Acros 100 - with a Rodinal 5% burn and scanned with the Nikon LS-8000.
M and the Lola
Shot a few years ago with Kodak Portra 800 - of M and Lola the English Bulldog. Scanned on the the Nikon LS-8000 and developed in house.
get Great Glass - i.e. (Lenses)
Every once in a while I get reminded that great glass is not only a gift but it's a necessity. It's a necessity in order to separate you from everyone else - it's a necessity to give your images the power of a compelling view. Get great lenses - even if it's just one - get one - and shoot that system like you are going to die tomorrow.
Fuji Acros 100 - Nikon F100 - 50mm f1.4 - Stand developed in 5% Rodinal @ 60minutes - developed and scanned in house.
last Summer - with M and Violet
This was a grab shot - as most of my images are - M and Violet. One of the last of Violet as we put her down on July 1. Her diabetes got the best of her for the last year - yep - 12 months of shots twice a day. She was a Maine Coon and was an amazing animal we had for 10 years.
Shot with the Rollei 6008i on Fuji Acros 100 - self developed and scanned.
N.O. Painting
Shot thru a window of a gallery in New Orleans - can't remember if this was with the Rollei or Yashicamat 124g. Self developed and scanned.
Kodak Portra 800 - New Orleans
M and C
My Wife and my Mother-In-Law.
Shot early in the year on Kodak Portra 400. Self developed and scanned - no crop.
Whew -- it's been awhile...
Time to catch up on some previous images. This was taken this last summer in the western part of the city - toward the West Valley area. There are times when upon driving around you recognize the Sun is just perfect but no camera in hand - so don't forget that time frame and venture back when the conditions repeat - with the camera. I did just that one Saturday evening and was able to capture the color of this scene.
Film.
Fuji Acros - 100 iso
I've recently discovered this Acros Fuji stock -- and OMG -- it's of my favorite now. I wish Fuji still made the 400iso as it only comes in 100 stock. Image was taken on the overlook at Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado. The weather was cold and crazy windy for a day in September. But - it all worked out just fine.
Rollei 6008i - 80mm f2.8
Rocky Mtn National Park - Acros 100
Hold the Line !
"Three weeks from now, I will be harvesting my crops. Imagine where you will be, and it will be so.
Hold the line!
Stay with me!
If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you’re already dead!"
Nikon F100 - Salt Lake City - Summer 2016
Over a Month -- yikes
It's been too long - I'll be working on that for the future. I will say that I get delayed from posting as I copyright all images now. So there is a 3-4 month delay after the photo is taken before I have a group to register etc. And after the image is registered, then I can post. Ugh --- I know... but that's the process. Ok -- onward.
This image was taken with the newly repaired Rollei 6008i on Ilford Delta 400. Home processed and scanned - and the scan is excellent. The negative processed very flat and as always the flatter the better during the scan.
I really like this image and may print it 24"x24".
No crop.
a Favorite
Shot on a warmish spring day in downtown SLC - on film of course. The Sun adds the drama to the scene.
The big Negative
I run a constant battle between which format of film I shoot or choose to shoot.
I really like the big negative which is why I really love the 120 format, aka, Medium Format - or if you are really old skool you may call it 2-1/4. 2-1/4” which is the square format of the negative in inches.
But — I also have my Nikno F100 body in 35mm. Scanning the 35mm is super easy- and I love that. And the body is easy to carry around from place to place — and I have many lenses to choose from.
Nikon F100 - Ilford HP5+ - Home developed and scanned - SLC Utah
Kodak Ektar - YashicaMat 124G
Scanning film in the Digital age
EDIT: A friend of mine mentioned to me a few things about this post of which I've decided to clarify. And they are important enough to add this edit. My vision for how I process film is just one technique - wether that's scanning, choice of lab processing or developing at home. There are many who have used different techniques, equipment, flat bed scanners, and films of which the final outputs have been received without peer. It's never been my intent to offer the opinion of end/all, be/all - please keep that in mind.
Scanning film in the digital age
Coming at this as a newbie months ago, I really schooled myself about scanning services from labs: what they offer for resolution and pricing. None of which is standardized. And the idea of scanning my own developed film. Here's a quick distillation of my findings.
Scanning film becomes a confusing subject in this recent world of digital photography - as really the only purpose of the film scanning process is getting the best resolution possible.
The photographic / scanning labs aren't dumb either - after years of getting beat up by the influx of the digital camera eating into their survivability, they have now monetized the analog/digital aka "Hybrid" workflow with pricing tired services.
And I'll get to that in a moment.
There are a few components to the idea of scanning film. The first is the scanning; getting the resolution in-order to print something bigger than a postage stamp sized print (and I'm being a bit sarcastic of course).
The second is getting the scan to look like what would be expected when you would nakedly print. Meaning - the digital representation looks like the the original film stock, i.e. Kodak Portra, Kodak Ektar, Ilford HP5+, Ilford Delta, Koday Tri-X, etc. This can be tricky - and there are certain photoshop integrated pieces of software which keep the integrity of the "look" of the film you've scanned.
The third - is the price. That's were the monetization of services from the lab comes in. Bigger scan = more cost. Color vs. BW is a price difference there also. Color is easier to scan as the dust removal is more automated - BW scanning needs to be “spotted” manually which is more laborious.
So now I'm just touching the surface - and let's not forget shipping, i.e. getting it to the lab. Ugh. That’s a part of the expense also.
One would think that the scanning sizes per price paid would all be standardized.
But as you look around at which labs are worth considering you will see that scanning resolution sizes are not necessarily tied to price.
I might also add -- that if you are a lab and you are not scanning - then I don't even consider your services. But why -- why do you want a scan ?? --- Well that's a bit of another conversation but suffice to say - that wet printing is a bit of a diminishing return for how good ink jet and how capable large format ink jet has become.
Here's a taste of the confusion -- these numbers include Development and Scanning
theDarkroom.com 35mm BW
1024x1536 - $11
2048x3072 - $15
4492x6774 - $20
theFindLab.com
2285x3035 - $22
3042x4040 - $27
3647x5444 - $32
This is an example of what I mean -- Price and Resolution - you would think this would easily be your guide, but there is no correlation between the two. One doesn’t compliment the other - and here's another curve ball -- what's the secret sauce if there is a difference of price - what is theFindLab giving you for that extra $12 bucks on their top of the line scan compared to the theDarkroom ???
Is it better dust correction - do they care more - or is a scan a scan, especially when you are talking a high volume production shop ?
I've used these two labs as I’ve gotten started in the film hybrid workflow -- theDarkroom out of CA, and theFindLab out of UT., and I'm torn. TheFindLab is probably one of the most expensive in the country - yet I've never had to second guess with what they have provided me. The DarkRoom has great resolution, is sometimes a 1/3 cheaper but I've had to send some stuff back to be re-done, 5” prints to be exact.
So what's the future hold -- Well. As I get deeper into film I've started developing BW and color C-41 and scanning myself. I've secured a Nikon LS-8000 for MFormat film getting 4000dpi and a Minolta Dimage 5400 for 35mm at 5400 dpi.
Everything I’m doing is “cradle to grave”.
Both of these scanners will give me resolution competitive if not better than standard lab offerings - but the process for me will be a time hog. So either way you are paying -- in time or in money.
And here’s the rub - the scanners producing these outputs desirable aren’t made anymore. Yep - Nikon and Minolta scanners don’t exist as new - and services to repair them don’t exist either. Yet the frustrating part is that no one makes a comparable product - yes the technology of 2000 can’t be matched - Mind blower. Expect to pay at least $1000 for a Nikon first generation LS-8000 and expect to pay $500 for a Minolta Dimage I, used.
In closing -- the only way to see how a lab treats your negs., is to try them - util you come to the point of wanting to create your own work flow.
While I’m at it — let’s keep this conversation going — what happened to the “Flatbed option” ? Good question.
Ok — if your are planning to use a flat bed — Epson 600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850 then you will hit the wall of real resolution vs. interpolated resolution. Meaning - the flat beds really don’t resolve past 2400 dpi. And, if you are a purest in all sense of the term then that just won’t be good enough for your artwork. There are many internet posts on this subject to be searched - and this was quite an eye-opener upon researching it - as I had no idea about this aspect.
On another note, and this is the biggest reason I’m not flatbedding - the flat beds can’t adjust and focus on the film image - so you may not get the sharpness you are entitled too. The flatbeds have an arbitrary focusing point - it’s either good out of the box, or horrible.
Whew — ok — so you got all of that ?