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

Contax IIIa, Opton Biogon 2.8/35, Fujicolor 200, DIY process
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Colour Film Gallery
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 12:49 am    Post subject: Contax IIIa, Opton Biogon 2.8/35, Fujicolor 200, DIY process Reply with quote
Just a quick test roll to see if my new Contax works and I'm delighted to discover it works perfectly, both the shutter and meter seem pretty accurate.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Works very well indeed, congrats!


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Works very well indeed, congrats!


+1, enjoy


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Don't worry, I will enjoy her a lot Smile


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ahhh, these are very nice, Ian! I can see where your Hexes will languish on the shelf, now.

Your avatar has gotten much snootier, too. Laughing I'm getting damn anxious to try the
Russian copy with the Kiev. Congrats!


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Damn nice results! Envy. Laughing


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hello!
Ian how much do you charge for developing ? Laughing
You improved so much ! Congratulations !


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cracking results Ian. The processing looks to be just about sorted too.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks guys. I have to be honest, this roll was only semi-successful. I had an issue I've not seen before where some frames had a blue mark on the bottom part, like a watermark; it was weird because you could have a frame ruined by this an right next to it one that was fine. I had to crop some of the frames to avoid it. Also, I'm still having an issue with white spots, but on this roll it was only on one side of the negatives, which would be the right hand side of these scans, and only about 30% of the frame had the spots. I removed most of them in PP.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's one I processed further, just wondered what people think:

Original first.



Last edited by iangreenhalgh1 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:24 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
And another one, original first again:




PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
And one more, original first again:




PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Katastrofo wrote:
Ahhh, these are very nice, Ian! I can see where your Hexes will languish on the shelf, now.

Your avatar has gotten much snootier, too. Laughing I'm getting damn anxious to try the
Russian copy with the Kiev. Congrats!


Forgot to say, the Konicas will still get loads of use, they are my staples on the NEX, and my favourite ones like the 4/21, 2.8/24, 3.5/28, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 3.2/135, UC 4/80-200 will still serve me well. I love my FT-1, FP-1 and FS-1 SLRs, I use them pretty often, especially with the 21mm, it's quite addictive on full frame. Smile

As for getting snooty, if the J12 would fit the NEX, I'd have been happy with that I think, certainly on film it's wonderful, so I'm, sure you'll enjoy yours. You never know, when the FF NEX arrives the J12 might fit, it's only the plastic frame around the sensor that stops it fittings, it that was just a mm or so deeper, it would fit. It does actually fit, but only with the lens focused to it's min distance, it won't focus any closer as the rear element touches that plastic frame. If the FF NEX does materialise and the J12 does fit, expect the prices for the Russki Biogon to rise quite a lot as any Biogon is a great lens.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh, and one more thing, what are people's thoughts about doing extensive digital processing of film shots? Better to shoot digital if you're going to process them and film should be left 'au naturel' so to speak? Or it's fine to embrace processing as a tool for tweaking film shots?


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I prefer the originals, alhtough the edit of the second image has it's merits.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I too like the originals more, however think that the second one could/should be in B&W. This would bring a more nostalgic side of the image.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I shoot film exclusively and I am not embarrassed about doing a bit of PP, but I only do what could be achieved in an analogue darkroom - adjustments to light and contrast and no sharpening or colour adjustments.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the feedback guys, always appreciated. I like the second of the three processed images most, not sure whether I prefer the original or processed version of it though.

Drack, I have made the same shot with bw film before, roughly same tame of say, this was with my Konica FT-1 with Hexanon 1.4/57 lens, Polypan 50 film which has no halation layer, hence the glow on highlights.



PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Oh, and one more thing, what are people's thoughts about doing extensive digital processing of film shots? Better to shoot digital if you're going to process them and film should be left 'au naturel' so to speak? Or it's fine to embrace processing as a tool for tweaking film shots?


erm I'm sure film has been tweaked for over 100 years, just think of all the different types of developers that are/were available before PP in the chemical printing darkroom or on a computer screen....and then different types of paper for prints etc.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh sure, post processing is nothing new, but with the extra processing I did on the three examples, I went a bit beyond what you could have done with traditional techniques. To me, they are all equally valid tools to be used to create the result you want, I just wondered how others felt.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Oh sure, post processing is nothing new, but with the extra processing I did on the three examples, I went a bit beyond what you could have done with traditional techniques. To me, they are all equally valid tools to be used to create the result you want, I just wondered how others felt.


Well as long as PP is not obvious e.g. over sharpening, who is to know..... Wink
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Colour Film Gallery
Page 1 of 1