Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Little rocky inlet...
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 2:31 am    Post subject: Little rocky inlet... Reply with quote

Little rocky inlet...

Taken with Minolta X700 and Minolta 21mm f2.8 @f8 on Kodak 5302, stand developed in Rodinal and scanned on my Epson 4990.



PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dang, that's a nice lens. A little bit of blur and distortion in the corners, but tack sharp everywhere else.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 3:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
Dang, that's a nice lens. A little bit of blur and distortion in the corners, but tack sharp everywhere else.


Yes I very much like this lens. One of my all time favorites. I felt this emulsion I have been testing, which is ISO 6, really shows just how good it can be.
Thank you for taking the time to view and comment. Thank you!


PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You know, I just now noticed you scanned that image in on your Epson 4990. I have a 4990 and I gotta say that your image is very impressive. I've always felt that my 4990 is very good for medium format, but just a bit soft for 35mm. Wow, I'd like to see what your images look like if you duped them with a high resolution camera. That's what I do with my 35mm images now. I dupe them with a rig that uses a 55/2.8 Micro Nikkor and a Sony NEX 7, which gives me actual 4000 x 6000 pixel images, not the inflated numbers that all flat bed scanner makers claim.

I'm not familiar with Kodak 5302, but man, that must be some fine-grained stuff. Wow, I just found a listing on it. A place called Photo Warehouse has it in stock, either as 36 exp rolls or 100 ft lengths. Interesting stuff!

http://www.ultrafineonline.com/ko53figrpore1.html

Lets see, ISO 6 using the sunny f/16 rule, call it 1/8 as closest shutter speed, that means something like 1/125 @ f/4, hey that's do-able.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 3:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
You know, I just now noticed you scanned that image in on your Epson 4990. I have a 4990 and I gotta say that your image is very impressive. I've always felt that my 4990 is very good for medium format, but just a bit soft for 35mm. Wow, I'd like to see what your images look like if you duped them with a high resolution camera. That's what I do with my 35mm images now. I dupe them with a rig that uses a 55/2.8 Micro Nikkor and a Sony NEX 7, which gives me actual 4000 x 6000 pixel images, not the inflated numbers that all flat bed scanner makers claim.


I have tried to do it with a digital as you mention. I have a few friends who do it this way, but I have never really had too much success doing it this way to be honest. That and with a 17 month old son I just don't have time for that much fiddling around. I barely have time to fit in shooting, let alone dev'ing and scanning as it is. haha. I have generally been happy with the 4990 as long as the negs are well developed and not too dark. It's basically a V750 just with regular incandescent lighting as opposed to LED and actually has a higher DMAX rating.

cooltouch wrote:
I'm not familiar with Kodak 5302, but man, that must be some fine-grained stuff. Wow, I just found a listing on it. A place called Photo Warehouse has it in stock, either as 36 exp rolls or 100 ft lengths. Interesting stuff!

http://www.ultrafineonline.com/ko53figrpore1.html

Lets see, ISO 6 using the sunny f/16 rule, call it 1/8 as closest shutter speed, that means something like 1/125 @ f/4, hey that's do-able.


Yeah I scored 2 100ft rolls of the stuff a few years back and just getting to playing with it now. I shoot it on a tripod with remote release cable and a red filter in this case. But on a sunny day with a decent fast lens it is definitely still hand hold able. It is more blue spectrum sensitive and has low red spectrum sensitivity I have found out, so you have to watch over exposing blu skies etc and under exposing anything red. I'm thinking it wouldn't be too good for people shots.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I knew a bloke once who caught water really well, in all it's forms. It was rarely the subject of the photograph, but there it was. I have a framed large print he kindly did for me of, ostensibly, a cliff scene, on my wall. It also has the best shot of a breaking wave I've ever seen in my life. All the power and movement is there. All the frothing fury.

I think you catch skies really well. I couldn't have produced that with what you had, skies wise, to work with. It would have came out as, well, just sky.