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

Refurbed an Oly 35RC
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:13 am    Post subject: Refurbed an Oly 35RC Reply with quote

A lady friend talked me into replacing the lightseals, battery, etc, to
bring the little cam back to working condition. After cleaning it inside
and out, replacing the battery, and installing new lightseals I ran a roll
of expired Kodak 200 color film through it. A local drug store only charged me a dollar
for processing as they didn't have a price for it! These are scanned on my Epson 2450,
no special holder, using stock Epson software at 2400 dpi:









All shots were made in "auto exposure mode" to make sure the metering
was OK.

Bill


Last edited by Katastrofo on Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:46 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One word: W O W !


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, Orio, but I should add that the Boxter Porsche and Softail
Harley are not mine, but a friend's, who owns several vehicles and 2-3
more motorcycles. They make nice subjects, but I'm not envious, well,
a little for the Boxter, maybe! Laughing

Bill


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Handy man, eh? Very Happy

Hm... a lady friend... offering to repair her camera.... shooting expensive cars as a test film... am I the only one to see a pattern there? Laughing


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
Handy man, eh? Very Happy

Hm... a lady friend... offering to repair her camera.... shooting expensive cars as a test film... am I the only one to see a pattern there? Laughing


Now, Orio, everything was on the up and up, no hanky panky, I'm a
married man! Wink

Bill


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well done, Bill!

I'm doing the same process with the little Konica C35V.
(I received yesterday the sealing kit from Jon Goodman).

BTW, you scanned the prints, didn't you?.
Which size were them?.
Thanks!

Best regards,
Jes.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jesito,
I scanned the negatives, I didn't have prints made. I'm thinking a
dedicated film scanner of course would have done a much better
job, but these were serviceable enough to tell me if there were light
leaks, meter problems, etc.

Bill


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:
Jesito,
I scanned the negatives, I didn't have prints made. I'm thinking a
dedicated film scanner of course would have done a much better
job, but these were serviceable enough to tell me if there were light
leaks, meter problems, etc.

Bill


Thanks, Bill!

I was trying to scan some prints, but the quality was really poor.
So now I'll be scanning the negatives. So I understand (maybe I'm wrong) you shot slides and scanned them. Or maybe you scanned negative film and did some processing to "reveal" it?.

Best regards,
Jes.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jesito wrote:

I was trying to scan some prints, but the quality was really poor.
So now I'll be scanning the negatives. So I understand (maybe I'm wrong) you shot slides and scanned them. Or maybe you scanned negative film and did some processing to "reveal" it?.
Best regards,
Jes.


Jes, Epson scanners come with proprietary software that has the options for different types of film. You do not have to reveal anything, the scanning software converts from the correct film types (unless you set it wrong on purpose, of course. Which could also be a creative option).


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
Jesito wrote:

I was trying to scan some prints, but the quality was really poor.
So now I'll be scanning the negatives. So I understand (maybe I'm wrong) you shot slides and scanned them. Or maybe you scanned negative film and did some processing to "reveal" it?.
Best regards,
Jes.


Jes, Epson scanners come with proprietary software that has the options for different types of film. You do not have to reveal anything, the scanning software converts from the correct film types (unless you set it wrong on purpose, of course. Which could also be a creative option).


Ok. My scanner (an HP scanjet2400) has no film options. I've talked to my daughter that owns another HP one but with film scan options (there is a tray in the cover) and she will lend it to me for a couple of month (she's going to the US to learn "american english" and won't need it for that time).
Impressed for the quality of the pictures...
Best regards,
Jes.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

A WOW! from me too.

The quality of the images is good. Better then those which I made at the local photolab. Could you please, post some small 100% crop from the most noisiest areas. I would like to make a comparison with my scans. I use the same Kodak 200.

Jesito: I think here you cand find a driver for your daughter's HP scanner if you don't have one (or it doesn't came on CD) : http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/static_software_select?lc=en&cc=us&dlc=en&


PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's a 100% crop of the upper right corner in the first pic:



No sharpening was applied after crop.

Bill


PostPosted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tried scanning the first image like the guy on RFF described:

1. Placed directly on glass held down by coins
2. Emulsion side down
3. Scanned at 4800dpi
4. Flipped image horizontally in CS3

This is full image including (faintly) the sprocket holes of the film.
Can't say that the sharpness is any better. ?



Bill


Last edited by Katastrofo on Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:18 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wow nice scan !


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
wow nice scan !


Thank you for your comment, poilu. I'm undecided whether I like it or
not, will be doing some more experimenting.

Bill


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another WOW from me Bill! I think you did a great job with the camera as well as the scanning. The sharpness is fantastic when you consider the image has been through both camera and scanner lenses. I'm not sure I'm a fan of the high contrast though, particularly the bike pic, but maybe that's due to either the old film or the scanner software.

@Jes:
If you don't have software that corrects the cast on colour negs, I posted a technique recently you can use with PS, which works really well:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=2184&start=0


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peter, thanks for your comments. The bike picture is simply not a good
capture, expired film issues aside. I think I was a little overzealous with
curves and brightness/contrast adjustments in CS3.

I'm loading one of my own Oly 35RC's for this weekend.

Regards,

Bill


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:
I think I was a little overzealous with
curves and brightness/contrast adjustments in CS3.


Yes, it's so easy to overdo adjustments isn't it? I think maybe it's because one's eye becomes accustomed to changes as you're working. I like to save changes and then look at them again later, maybe even next day, to compare with the original before committing.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Yes, it's so easy to overdo adjustments isn't it? I think maybe it's because one's eye becomes accustomed to changes as you're working. I like to save changes and then look at them again later, maybe even next day, to compare with the original before committing.


I probably should've let it "marinate" a little before finally posting, good
advice, Peter.

Bill


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:


I probably should've let it "marinate" a little


Laughing