Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

APS film
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Adapters and other accessories
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
I was given a Canon Ixus. I've not tried it yet, but looking at the results, I don't think I'll bother.

I 'd think that the postprocessing is very important for reasonably results on this format . I have not yet a very good workflow for this , and the exposure was rather crap (rough on camera flash , bad environamental lighting) . I reprocessed the image , with the new Capture one & trial version , I think it's better .Of course , don't beat 35 mm , but who said it would ? I didn't expect to be close to 35mm Anyhow , it's more acceptable . I'll try again with a fresh film to see what I can get .

Click to see better an bigger version :



[/url]

Last edited by yinyangbt on Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:06 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
And another one , same workflow : Capture one 7 ( Clarity 0 , structure 57 , curves , highlight 27 ) + denoised in NeatImage (auto profile) + sharpened (slightly ) and healed ( scratch removal cloned dust ) in Helicon Filter free edition (best healing software I've used) .
a little too much ? Laughing
Tamron 17-35mm(around 30mm) flash of the camera .
Click on it to see large :

Last edited by yinyangbt on Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:22 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
And a third one :
Tamron 17-35 .I think it was 17 0r 20mm set . Pp in LR 4 trial vers( slight sharpening at 21 ) + denoised in NeatImage + cloned/erase scratches/sharpened(weery slightly) in Helicon filter




After all I think that It works , and the APS can be used ,at least for WEB posting , with very much care at processing the image : scanning on dedicated film scanner , in TIFF files and enough inconvenience (much more than the files I get from 35mm film) at PP to get the final JPEG s . It seems to me that the emulsion is a little more delicate and scratches easier than the 35mm , but maybe it's just an first impression .
I think that I have to look more for better PP solutions ( if there are any ) I'll try to experiment more . Maybe better denoising /sharpening algoritms with dedicated softwares could push up a little the IQ .

Last edited by yinyangbt on Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:23 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
They've turned out not bad at all considering the small neg area.
I wonder if 110 format could ever have reached the same level.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:
They've turned out not bad at all considering the small neg area.
I wonder if 110 format could ever have reached the same level.

The frame area is 17mm x 13mm for 110 format , 30,2 mm x 16,7mm for APS , so a little under 1/2 of surface .
according to this site : http://cacreeks.com/films.htm Nexia Fujifilm (APS) shares the same emulsion with Superia . The grainier aspect of the APS files comes from the enlargement ( APS frame is around 56% from 35mm surface) . So , basically , those who say that APS film has a limited enlargement (print) potential are right (probably around 60 %). But , if we don't want to blow big prints for exposition , these first results make me think that the results are acceptable for screen viewing.
Why wasting time with it? I don't know if it's time wasting , maybe just for the fun of discovering a new toy? Smile Maybe dusty , maybe not last tech , but still useable... as long the film is available and can be developed . As for the 110 , I've never used , but I know there are guys that still do .I am expecting that the grain/frame area ratio to be bigger than in APS ( roughly 2x factor ) thus lower enlargement potential and perceived sharpness . Probably still acceptable for small area up to 700 px /500px images ?
I calculated that my APS scans on Dimage III are 6.3 MP files . 110 would produce probably 3mp files .
In digital world they solved the sharpness problem using smaller pixels ( wich isn't possible in film , the lp/mm is the same regardless the format) , and in this way the small format digital samples look sharp(er) . But , as sharpness isn't all , I'd give a try on the APS film against the small digital P&S when I think about dynamic range , for example .
Of course , we can hang on the 35mm and go on without complications ,concentrating on image Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
See my new results here : http://forum.mflenses.com/fuji-nexia-200-t54540.html


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now I am curious... I just bought a Minolta APS S-100 SLR. It came with a roll already in, so half of the roll are pics from somebody else.... And there's an extra roll of film too.
I have 2 lenses with it: 28-56mm and APO tele 80-240mm. The set was extremely cheap, so I could not resist!


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrueLoveOne wrote:
Now I am curious... I just bought a Minolta APS S-100 SLR. It came with a roll already in, so half of the roll are pics from somebody else.... And there's an extra roll of film too.
I have 2 lenses with it: 28-56mm and APO tele 80-240mm. The set was extremely cheap, so I could not resist!

I know the feeling ! Laughing
Be careful , you have to get it scanned on a dedicated film scanner : Nikon Coolscan ,Konica Minolta Dimage ,Plustek or Reflecta , at 2800 or 3300 dpi . ,to get 6-8MP file .
Flatbeds generally are no good for scanning them (35mm either :Epson V700 or 750 are OK , they give 7MP from 35mm ,my Minolta Dimage III gives 6.3 MP from APS file )
Grain and sharpness can be managed with careful PP to get more than decent results .
I my modest experience the format suits better for normal , tele focal lenghts and slight wide ( 28mm see : http://forum.mflenses.com/old-sigma-28-200mm-f3-8-5-6-eos-mount-t54590.html ) . at superwide (17mm) the grain interfere too much with the fine detail .


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That should not be a problem.... I use a Minolta Scan Dual myself, but i do not have the APS film holder that you need.....


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrueLoveOne wrote:
That should not be a problem.... I use a Minolta Scan Dual myself, but i do not have the APS film holder that you need.....

It depends . If you have a lab wich has the special devices to develop APS they'll give it back in the original cartridge. So, an Konica Minolta APS adapter should be one that you'll have to search ( they are rather rare on the bay ) . Those made by Nikon are more easy to find , but obviously don't fit.
If your lab doesn't have the devices , it's simpler : they have to get out the film from the cartrige and develop without getting it back in to the original one . Then scan it in the 35 mm holder ( of course ,more tome consuming , because you'll have to reajust the position of the film to match the frames ). This is what I do. If you develop yourself , it can be done in the tank , but the spool has to be modified to take the APs film

PS http://www.manualslib.com/manual/104173/Minolta-Dimage-Scan-Dual-Ii-Af-2820u.html?page=28


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That sounds promising! I did not know that I could eventually put them in the 35mm holder.

Very good tip, thank you! I'll just ask them to leave the film out of the cartridge, then i do not have to search for an APS holder!


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrueLoveOne wrote:
That sounds promising! I did not know that I could eventually put them in the 35mm holder.

Very good tip, thank you! I'll just ask them to leave the film out of the cartridge, then i do not have to search for an APS holder!

I cut the film in strips of 6 frames .Wnen fixing it in the holder , the first frame fits in the first position , and the last one (the sixth fits in the fifth pisition of the holder . Scan the first and the fifth position. then get out the holder and fit the film in the manner that the secind and third frame fits in the second and third position of the holder. scan them , and re position the film in the holder to scan 4 and 5 . I fix the film with one side fixed by the holder . It's a little more trouble but can be done . I think it worth if you have the time. One side of the frames doesn't reach the holder ,wich is made for the 35. film .I think I'll make a paper mask at the dimensions of the 35 film with a hole that fits the APS film
17mm : Tamron 17-35mm , EOS IX Fuji Nexia 200


Last edited by yinyangbt on Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:11 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Okay! Super, I was already thinking that i should bring the film to a digital studio to scan it and put the pics on a cd. This way is much better, the scanner is here anyway!

Did you ever try to get film out of the cartridge yourself? Or shouldn't i try?


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrueLoveOne wrote:
Okay! Super, I was already thinking that i should bring the film to a digital studio to scan it and put the pics on a cd. This way is much better, the scanner is here anyway!

Did you ever try to get film out of the cartridge yourself? Or shouldn't i try?

It can be done.I didn't tried because I didn't needed to.
A developed film can be get out : http://www.camerahacker.com/extract_APS_film/index.php
Your scanner has ICE2 ?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Adapters and other accessories
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2