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

Super Ikonta IV 534/16 6x6
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Slide Film Gallery
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 3:47 pm    Post subject: Super Ikonta IV 534/16 6x6 Reply with quote
Hi-res images are here














Last edited by Attila on Mon Nov 22, 2010 11:35 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
great image quality!


PostPosted: Thu Nov 04, 2010 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
1 frame with camera shake (?) but the rest show the astounding detail these fine lenses can produce. Very nice


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi,

many of the recent scans seem to show burned out highlights.. is this the scanner or??

I like the sharpness and colours but the highlights seemed spolied Sad

Doug


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
nemesis101 wrote:
Hi,

many of the recent scans seem to show burned out highlights.. is this the scanner or??

I like the sharpness and colours but the highlights seemed spolied Sad

Doug


Don't know scanner or just simple hard to get details from white.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi!

I downloaded the shot number 5 (?) showing the guy on the horse and a simple application of curves brought out tons of detail on the masonry.. so maybe it's my monitor or??

Anyone any ideas? It was really dramatic.. other pictures on the forum sem to show ok so is it me or ??

Doug

(I know that this is now dark but I just wanted to show the highlight details that were recovered...)



Attila wrote:
nemesis101 wrote:
Hi,

many of the recent scans seem to show burned out highlights.. is this the scanner or??

I like the sharpness and colours but the highlights seemed spolied Sad

Doug


Don't know scanner or just simple hard to get details from white.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good images but as Doug says the IQ is a little off. Take this with a pinch of salt as I'm viewing at work and I suspect this is the issue.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila, I can't see the pictures because Martin is in the way, he's a big guy.
Oh, there he goes... Wink

I like the sitting statue pic, but I think I like the Pearl I shots, better, otherwise. Smile

Colors seem to be off in Doug's version, and darker, too...


PostPosted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I said the colours were off and it was too dark when I posted!

The point I was making was there is a lot of detail in the highlights that is there waiting to be recovered!

Doug



Katastrofo wrote:
Attila, I can't see the pictures because Martin is in the way, he's a big guy.
Oh, there he goes... Wink

I like the sitting statue pic, but I think I like the Pearl I shots, better, otherwise. Smile

Colors seem to be off in Doug's version, and darker, too...


PostPosted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 3:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Guys, as you may have noticed, Attila posted his pics in the "Slide Film Gallery." This says it all to me. Slide film has a very notoriously narrow exposure latitude -- maybe +/- 1/2 stop. So yeah, photo #3, the bronze guy on a horse sitting atop an ornate white pedastal, seems to have the highlights blown, and it does -- at the expense of getting the shadows and the sky correct. You can see what happened to the sky and shadows when Doug adjusted exposure for the pedastal. Then the rest of the photos went away.

With slides, what I've always done is expose for the most important aspect of the image, or at least strive for a balance, and let the rest of the image's exposure fall where it may. Sometimes this can result in blown highlights AND blocked up shadows, but that's just the nature of shooting with slides. If you examine Attila's first and second photos, you can see the blocked up shadow detail in the foreground. If Attila would have tried to expose to bring out more of this area of the frame, the sky and much of the rest of the photo would have been blown out.

Nonetheless, I've enjoyed immensely looking at these photos. What a camera that Super Ikonta is! And what a picturesque location Attila has for his work. Just spectacular.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Slide film has a very notoriously narrow exposure latitude -- maybe +/- 1/2 stop. So yeah, photo #3, the bronze guy on a horse sitting atop an ornate white pedastal, seems to have the highlights blown, and it does -- at the expense of getting the shadows and the sky correct. .


+1

I think that 10 years ago this type of observation would have not been made, as people was more exposed (pun intended) to this type of situations. We have been terribly spoilt by RAW editing of images and that 4 stops latitude that RAW gives.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
nemesis101 wrote:
I said the colours were off and it was too dark when I posted!

The point I was making was there is a lot of detail in the highlights that is there waiting to be recovered!

Doug


Thanks for that, Doug, your cheerful comments are always appreciated.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
Slide film has a very notoriously narrow exposure latitude -- maybe +/- 1/2 stop. So yeah, photo #3, the bronze guy on a horse sitting atop an ornate white pedastal, seems to have the highlights blown, and it does -- at the expense of getting the shadows and the sky correct. .


+1

I think that 10 years ago this type of observation would have not been made, as people was more exposed (pun intended) to this type of situations. We have been terribly spoilt by RAW editing of images and that 4 stops latitude that RAW gives.


Hrm . . . sometimes I use terminology incorrectly. I think I may have with my above statement. By "exposure latitude" what I mean is the amount of over or under exposure away from "correct" one can get away with before a photo's exposure is compromised.

Slides also have a narrower exposure range from absolute white to absolute black than color print film, which has a narrower range than black&white film. I'm relying on my balky memory now, but it seems as if a slide can handle only about a total of 5 EV whereas with color print film it's more like 7 and with b&w it's more like 10. Does this sound about right? Now, what I find interesting in this digital day and age is that digital sensors are similar to slides in this respect -- they can handle only about 5 EV also.

This narrower range of slide film is also a big part of the exposure problem with subjects such as Attila's bronze statue. Digital has HDR as a handy way of getting around this problem. BTW, I've tried doing imitation HDR with slides -- taking duplicate images of a single slide at various exposure settings, from way under to way over exposed, and then trying to process the images into HDR. Interestingly enough, when I do this, I use a mf lens in my duplicator rig, and most software I've tried really doesn't like this. Even Photoshop errors out and spontaneously closes!


PostPosted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Smile Smile


Katastrofo wrote:
nemesis101 wrote:
I said the colours were off and it was too dark when I posted!

The point I was making was there is a lot of detail in the highlights that is there waiting to be recovered!

Doug


Thanks for that, Doug, your cheerful comments are always appreciated.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
I'm relying on my balky memory now, but it seems as if a slide can handle only about a total of 5 EV whereas with color print film it's more like 7 and with b&w it's more like 10. Does this sound about right?


I've just written a paper which includes a bit about this... slides 6EV, colour 7-8, digital (always increasing....) 6-8, BW 10--11EV, human eye 20 EV (with adaptation).

K.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the confirmation, Kris. Glad to read I was close, at least.

And I gotta ask -- what's your paper about?


PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
And I gotta ask -- what's your paper about?


The impact, advantages, disadvantages of digital photography for recording on archaeological excavations. Archaeologists have been embracing digital photography because it is perceived to be "cheap" without necessarily understanding all the specific issues that go with that.

Best wishes, Kris.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Slide Film Gallery
Page 1 of 1