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

Yashica MG1 kodak gold 400
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 6:23 am    Post subject: Yashica MG1 kodak gold 400 Reply with quote

I think they came out ok...






This one of the cat has strong morning light from the right,the thongs,flip flops or jandals was taken at the same moment but with the sun more to the right.




PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's hard to tell as the quality of the scan has much to do with matters and sadly these seem very poorly done?

There's lots of artifacts, and the contrast and saturation seems off?

I'd be interested to know the details of the scan as the photographer, camera and film are probably not being done justice?


Doug.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

They are scanned at the local chemist in one of those all in one machines...I don't put much into my ability (as yet Very Happy ) There were no seals in the back only on the edges along the hinges so that could account for something. I did not resize these as I usually do.



PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice shots, but why are you using 400asa film in sunny Australia in the daytime?


PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's all I can get locally,and I bought a lot of the rolls as they sold them cheap (they were selling them to clear out the stock)$4 for 3 rolls...so I am almost out of what I had previously bought then I will be looking at other sorts of film that I can get easily.I will be looking at the slide film Attila has mentioned.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mo-Fo wrote:
I think they came out ok...
Indeed they did. Compositions and exposure at least look ok. The defects Nemesis pointed out are probably due to poor scan process. This confirms my experience with minilab scans, low resolution (barely enough to get a 5x7") and poor PP (saturation and contrast off, often oversharpened). Consumer film plays its role too, pro films seem to scan better (less grain at least). Though in the past when the precess was all chemical the prints from consumer film didn't look bad, so it's not entirely fault of the film itself. The last consideration is just not to put off consumer film (negative in the specific) as crap by default.

Cheers, Marty.