Flowers Anyone?

[jcoldslabs]

Dried out Polaroid Type 53 film revitalized with a reagent pod harvested from 100 Sepia pack film.

Pacemaker Speed Graphic, 6.5" B&L Cinephor projection Petzval, Polaroid Type 53.




Jonathan

[jcoldslabs]

...with a little more sharpness and contrast this time.

Pacemaker Speed Graphic, 15cm Zeiss Tessar @ f/22, 3x4 Kodak Electron Image Film (SO-163).




Jonathan

[Ramiro Elena]

Holly cow that's crisp!
http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2013/08/21/...er-of-the-day/

[jcoldslabs]

It might be a bit oversharpened as I am still trying to sort out my own best sharpening workflow. In this case (as a test) I used the scanning software for unsharp masking rather than Photoshop. I've read all I can in books and on the Web and I still can't get my scans sharp in the right way; they're either too soft or too crisp relative to the original. I can't seem to find the sweet spot.

Jonathan

[Ramiro Elena]

hmm... I never sharpen my scans. I often find it accentuates the grain and ruins softness. Sometimes I'll do a 30% amount unsharp mask but that's all.

[jcoldslabs]

I never used to do any sharpening on my scans either, but then I was reading about sharpening in a book on Photoshop and it said this: "No matter how good your scanner and how crisp your original may be, you always lose some sharpness when the image is digitized." It went on to explain the nuts and bolts of why, but once I read that I zoomed in on some of my highest resolution scans and sure enough there wasn't much edge sharpness at all. A little sharpening goes a long way, at least for on-screen viewing, but like I said I haven't found a good middle ground between too much and not enough. I usually err on the side of less, but the negative above was a test of what happens when I dial up the USM settings on the scanner. It does increase grain somewhat, but I figure the grain is there already. Just as long as sharpening doesn't make the grain worse than it is in the original.

J.

[Winger]

With all the flowers I've shot on other formats, I really haven't done much with LF. Here are two of my first - not great, but I got what I tried for at least. Negs scans for now (and some cropping on one).

[TheToadMen]

Found some beautiful late summer roses. I'm finding it difficult to do them justice. Part of me just wants to admire them and watch them fade, but the photographer in me has to try a few shots.
Pacemaker Speed Graphic, 6.5" B&L Cinephor projection Petzval, 3x4 Kodak Electron Image Film (SO-163).

Jonathan

Hi Jonathan,
Nice shot! I recognized the Petzval.
Bert from Holland
thetoadmen.blogspot.nl

[jcoldslabs]

Thanks, Bert!

J.

[jcoldslabs]

Sometime last year I bought a 5" x 700' roll of Kodak Aerographic Duplicating Film from Jim Galli, and today I finally motivated to cut some 4x5 sheets from the roll. Below is the first test shot I made, and it isn't half bad tonality-wise. For the curious, I rated it at EI 1.5 with tungsten lights and developed it in HC-110 dil. E at 68°F for 4 minutes in a rotary drum.

It's a good thing I like the film since I will be able to cut 2,100 4x5 sheets from the roll!

Calumet C-1 w/4x5 back, 8 1/2" Series-S Caltar, Kodak Aerographic Duplicating Film (2421).




Jonathan