View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 7:54 pm Post subject: First go with HP5 + Xtol - Kiev 6c, Vega 12 90mm |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
This was some of a test roll from my 'new' kiev 6c. It has film spacing issues so the images are cropped on the sides slightly (making 4x5 images). It's a consistent overlap so it should be fairly easy to rectify. HP5@200, Xtol 1:1, Scanned with v700.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Eye on second one is stunning, others are too gray to my taste _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
Quote: |
others are too gray to my taste |
Yes, I noticed this too. I didn't know if it was the development, the film, or the Vega (which is not a contrasty lens, relatively speaking). I flocked the kiev completely. WAY MORE than anyone else would. So contrast should not have been lost there.
I just wanted to present them without contrast adjustments to see what people would say. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I don't think so lens is a factor in this, I rather beleive film+developer combo. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I don't think so lens is a factor in this, I rather beleive film+developer combo or/and subject if background was in a large color block without white and black this gray is natural. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
No 2 is the best IMO.
I've not used Xtol so I cannot comment, but this is how HP5 looks when I develope it in either rodinal DDX. I don't mind low contrast as I can add more; too much is a different story. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Scheimpflug
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1888 Location: New Zealand / USA
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Scheimpflug wrote:
Attila wrote: |
or/and subject if background was in a large color block without white and black this gray is natural. |
I think so as well. The contrast seems fine - the buckle on the collar is a deep black, while the highlights on the clasp are just barely clipped at white. The histogram shows a nice spread with only a touch of clipping at the ends, so the exposure was good.
I think it was just an unfortunate case where the photo was technically "correct", just without enough separation in the recorded colors to allow the different parts of the scene to stand out against each other...
About the only thing I can think of to try differently is using color filters on the lens.
Other than the spacing issue, I would say both the photographer and the camera did a fine job! _________________ Sigma DP1, Nikon D40 (hers ), Polaroid x530, Pentax P30t, Pentax P50, (P30t/P50 K-A to Nikon F body mount conversion)
Nikon: 18-55/3.5-5.6 "G ED II DX" (F) Soligor: 28/2.8 (FL->F converted), 135/3.5 (F), 3x TC (F, modified) Kalimar: 28-85/3.5 (F)
Vivitar: 70-210/2.8-4.0 Version 3 (F), Tele 500/6.3 Preset (F), 19/3.8 (F) Minolta: 300/5.6 (SR/MC/MD pending F conversion)
Tamron: 28/2.8 (Adaptall) Panagor: 28/2.5 (FD) Aetna: 300/5.6 (F) Osawa: MC 28/2.8 (F)
Vintage Lenses: Dallmeyer: 1940s A.M. 14in 356mm f4 (ULF->M42) 1930s Adon Telephoto Taylor, Taylor & Hobson: 1880s Rapid Rectilinear 8 1/2 x 6 1/2 11.31in f/8 (LF->?)
Parts Lenses: Nikon 35-135/3.5-4.5 (F), Sigma 70-210/4.5 (F), Nikon 50/1.8 Series E (F) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
I found using xtol gave this long greyscale, not compressed but giving the impression of low contrast. In a way that is a good thing as you get to choose how you want your 'print' to look yourself. _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
I think it's a characteristic of HP5+. I got just the same result using LC29 developer: (BTW, this is a pic of the frost damage to my runner beans last October grrrrrr )
_________________ Peter - Moderator
Last edited by peterqd on Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
peterqd wrote: |
I think it's a characteristic of HP5+. I got just the same using LC29: (BTW, this is a pic of the frost damage to my runner beans last October grrrrrr ) |
And October is just around the corner! _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 7448 Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote: |
peterqd wrote: |
I think it's a characteristic of HP5+. I got just the same using LC29: (BTW, this is a pic of the frost damage to my runner beans last October grrrrrr ) |
And October is just around the corner! |
Yea, I know, don't remind me! I can't complain though, because this year I got the beans plants in early - risking frost damage in May - and luckily they survived, so the crop this year has been magnificent.
Back on topic, after several disappointing rolls of HP5+, I've decided FP4+ is going to be my stock B&W film from now on. If I need 400 I'm going to use BW400CN. _________________ Peter - Moderator |
|
Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
It may be that I won't like hp5. I really only bought it because some distributors were selling packs of 2 35mm rolls for around $5. My favorite film, delta 100, is $6 for 1. I HAD to see how hp5 performed in comparison.
I don't like to be using several different films at once so several 120 rolls were bought too... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John Poirier
Joined: 24 Aug 2010 Posts: 11 Location: Gabriola Island, British Columbia
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John Poirier wrote:
themoleman342 wrote: |
Quote: |
others are too gray to my taste |
Yes, I noticed this too. I didn't know if it was the development, the film, or the Vega (which is not a contrasty lens, relatively speaking). I flocked the kiev completely. WAY MORE than anyone else would. So contrast should not have been lost there.
I just wanted to present them without contrast adjustments to see what people would say. |
I think it is safe to say that the contrast issues being discussed are a result of scanning technique. Whether you realize it or not, your scanning software applied contrast adjustments that distorted the character of the negative.
The algorithms used by scanning software are pretty dumb. That goes for every piece of scanning software I have ever used.
I suggest that you do a little experiment with your Epson Scan software in professional mode.
Make a preview scan of a strip of negatives of different subjects. Open the histogram adjustment window. and look at the histogram for eacn negative. You will probably find the sliders in different locations for each image. Some may have clipping, some may not. Depends on the density and contrast range of the negs, and what random things the algorithms choose to do with them.
If you hit the auto correction button, you will most likely observe clipping in the histogram for nearly all images.
Then choose one neg, preferably one that has clipping. Move the shadow and highlight sliders to eliminate clipping. The result will probably be dark, but will have a full range of highlight and shadow detail. Experiment with how far you move the sliders. You will notice quite dramatic variations in the amount of detail at both ends of the scale, particularly in highlights.
If the image seems excessively dark, open the tonal correction window and drag the middle of the tone curve line up and to the left. You will than have an image that is lighter but somewhat flat. Don't overdo the lightening, as you can correct it with more control in a good image editor.
At this point you should have a somewhat dark, flat scan- which you then finish adjusting in Photoshop.
The controls available in scanning software are rather crude. In the real world, the target for scanning should be to produce files that capture the full tonal range of images at high bit depth, with the really serious work to be done in Photoshop.
Below is an example of what is possible. The preview scan (35mm HP5) looked something like your samples- light and flat A few minutes of work produced this:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Thank you John for this deep explanation, it will be a great help to most uf us. I wish to see more pictures from you , you are living at an amazing place! _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kram
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR
|
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kram wrote:
Xtol is great stuff. I'm not an Ilford fan and would have recommended Neopan 400 but it's extinct now.
Rolleiflex SL-66, 80mm Zeiss Planar, Fuji Neopan 400 rated at 200, developed in Xtol 1:1. Medium yellow filter.
My favorite black and white film is Fuji Acros developed in Xtol 1:1.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
Love the Xtol image.
I can still get Neopan 400. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kram
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR
|
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kram wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote: |
I can still get Neopan 400. |
In 120? Where? I need some! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|