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

So much dissapointed from the colour film
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2014 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks. We flooded everyone with posts. I think the train shots were more an exercise on what I can do with shutter speeds and how much I can freeze things. I was also testing my dof when I was wide open. I am satisfied in that sense from the exercise.
My favorite ones are these three

(they were moving though and it turned a bit blurry)


this one also for its simplicity


and finally as you said the


but I wonder if I could something in the post processing to improve it a bit


PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2014 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me #1 and #3 are very good, maybe #2 could show some more detail in the shadow....but what is important is that YOU (and maybe friends and family) like your shots as everyone else in the world has their own opinion for what they like.


PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2014 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How I should have thought to show more details in the shadows for the #1? I saw the bus. I though the frame.. just before the bus left... How I could fast calculate the correct exposure in such scene? I was mostly looking through the viewfinder and the exposure measurement from the camera

Alex


PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2014 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
How I should have thought to show more details in the shadows for the #1? I saw the bus. I though the frame.. just before the bus left... How I could fast calculate the correct exposure in such scene? I was mostly looking through the viewfinder and the exposure measurement from the camera

Alex


Well for a very quick shot of the bus there isn't much you can do other than trust the camera, but you got the shot and is better than nothing. Anyway someone else might not want to see what's in the shadow and like it as it is.
If what is in the shadows are important to you while doing street shots then you could adjust exposure controls on top of the camera, but the highlights would be more over exposed....always a problem with film or digital.


PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2014 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Supermarket scans have very poor dynamic range, I estimate as much as 2 stops less than my Plustek scanner. I recon if you could scan that bus shot again on a good scanner, you could extract a load more shadow detail.


PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2014 7:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios those 3 shots you have posted are very good, I like them and high contrast and lost shadows at the bus photo give really good mood in my opinion.
I also come back to film some time ago and I found out that Fuji Superia 200 is for me, the film to go (or cheaper Fuji C200 / Agfa Vista Plus 200 for that matter). I didn't like Kodak Color Plus as it gave me strange, washed out colours, but it was out of date negative which was storred on shop's counter on the sun, so this could be the problem.

What I could recommend to you is to find good lab and I really mean GOOD lab for develop and scanning of the negatives. It gave me so much difference in terms of quality of photos I couldn't believe. I found my best and it was fourth lab I tried (and it's not the most expensive of those four). You could have the best negatives, spot on exposures but crappy lab and the results will be, well... unsatisfactory.

Another way to go is to scan the negatives for yourself, I don't have scanner so I pretty much followed this guide: http://petapixel.com/2012/05/18/how-to-scan-film-negatives-with-a-dslr/
and the results are pretty good for my purposes:
http://forum.mflenses.com/fuji-superia-200-super-takumar-55-2-and-tamron-02b-28-2-5-t65997.html

Cheers
Mateusz


PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2014 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi thanks
Then I need to find an online lab in germany.. and I am willing to pay for transportation costs because as you said quality I get is bad...

Alex


PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2014 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maco is selling development vouchers in Germany
http://www.macodirect.de/developing-voucher-c-746_520.html?osCsid=0d9db01374865377611a8ac85f06aa6c

Don't know if this lab is good but you can try it.


PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2014 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
Hi thanks
Then I need to find an online lab in germany.. and I am willing to pay for transportation costs because as you said quality I get is bad...

Alex


I don't think the quality you're getting is bad at all. If you scanned the negatives yourself, after you got them from the lab, you would get much better results.

I think your expecting digital-like results and that is why you're disappointed.


PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2014 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Ian,

I agree with you about that alaios may expect more digital like results, but good dev and scan could put some mood into the greyish photo as well and lousy dev and scan will render those photos useless.
However I think the main problem is that most of your photos alaios you're taking from moving train by the train's window. If you take a closer look you'll see that almost all photos taken not by the window of the moving train is a lot better. Have better contrast, sharpness and more vivid colours (one with the umbrellas is exceptional in my opinion, one with the bus as well). Also don't expect vivid colours or high contrast on photos taken on dull, grey day Wink . It's good for moody portraits as skin would look nice, but landscapes don't have such punch that sunlight add with contrast and vivid colours (of course moody landscapes are great as well, but I doubt you could shoot such scene from the moving train).
Another thing, maybe try scanning your negatives by yourself with DSLR or flatbed scanner, it's time consuming process, but you will end up with good to v. good results as Ian said.

Mateusz


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

so we all agree then that the film has a specific character that differs from digital. Can someone put some words to describe how the film capabilities are? Like less vivid colors less contrast or perhaps more saturated... such kind of things

Alex


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In good light any colour print film will give vivid images with good contrast (just like digital), but each film has its own character with variables such as grain and colour rendition. This is Agfa Vista 200 which cost 1 a roll:

Warning by skida, on Flickr


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well one way of looking at it is:- The digital guys spend lots of money for a full frame camera and I can get these results from a film camera for 4-35 inc lenses mind you some excellent lenses I got for peanuts Wink

All using Superia 200









PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To be fair, no colour 35mm film can come close to the level of detail of a modern FF digital sensor and even if the film could record the detail, where are you going to find a scanner that can extract it? My Plustek makes nice 14mp scans from 35mm, to get more resolution you have to spend a lot of money on a high-end scanner, as much or more than a modern FF camera costs. The modern FF sensors also match or surpass the dynamic range of film, certainly they have surpassed the dynamic range of most scanner; so really, 35mm film has been outclassed now.

Here's an example of the difference between a supermarket scan and my Plustek 7600i, the dynamic range is nearly 2 stops greater with the Plustek and the resolution is three times higher. The difference in colour accuracy is pretty obvious too. One other thing to note is that the supermarket scanner always misses off the edges.




100% crops show the difference in resolution:




PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oh god, oh god....

your scanner costs as a new digital camera... sorry can not afford . I just hope that cheaper film scanners would be good for my black and white photography

Alex


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mine was 40ukp secondhand on ebay.

With patience you can find older Plusteks cheap.

Here's a 7200i that should go pretty cheap:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Plustek-OpticFilm-7200i-Film-Scanner-original-transport-boxes-and-bags-/301189826947?pt=UK_Scanners&hash=item4620500983


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
To be fair, no colour 35mm film can come close to the level of detail of a modern FF digital sensor and even if the film could record the detail, where are you going to find a scanner that can extract it? My Plustek makes nice 14mp scans from 35mm, to get more resolution you have to spend a lot of money on a high-end scanner, as much or more than a modern FF camera costs. The modern FF sensors also match or surpass the dynamic range of film, certainly they have surpassed the dynamic range of most scanner; so really, 35mm film has been outclassed now.

Here's an example of the difference between a supermarket scan and my Plustek 7600i, the dynamic range is nearly 2 stops greater with the Plustek and the resolution is three times higher. The difference in colour accuracy is pretty obvious too. One other thing to note is that the supermarket scanner always misses off the edges.



Well all my film is dev and scanned by the supermarket and anything decent I spend 1min adjusting in Photoshop...If I wanted a large print would either scan on my V750 (bought for 90 three years ago) or let a lab do the scanning.

Remember in your bluebell thread I mentioned I would try a shot with a Vivitar 24mm f2 @ f2...h'mm well it certainly looks different and for Alex it's results from Agfa Vista film dev and scanned by a supermarket.


Agfa Vista film with Vivitar 24mm f2 stopped down (about f5.6)


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can see the problem with supermarket scans on the first one - the blocked out shadows. That lens has a lot of glow wide open, is it the Cosina one? I had that, didn't find it sharp enough until closed to 5.6 so got rid of it.


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
You can see the problem with supermarket scans on the first one - the blocked out shadows. That lens has a lot of glow wide open, is it the Cosina one? I had that, didn't find it sharp enough until closed to 5.6 so got rid of it.


It's the Komine one....I knew it glows wide open with "highlight glow flare" (h'mm have I invented a new phrase Wink ) and thought it might work...well the pinhole and lomo guys would probably like it Laughing


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Epson 3490 I pointed you at for 10 would have made excellent scans. Check the link again - it may still be there.


PostPosted: Wed May 21, 2014 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have an even older Epson 3200 and it does indeed make excellent scans. Since I got the Plustek I only use the Epson for scanning medium format, as the Plustek is better, but still, the Epson is more than good enough.

Some Epson 6x9 scans:






100% crop shows it will extract plenty of detail at the maximum 3200dpi setting:



PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2014 3:20 am    Post subject: is not this Reply with quote

plustek 7200i a mickey mouse type of scanner? Because I link its size
a lot
Alex