PDA

View Full Version : Fomapan 100, Nikon 210 5.6, v700. What do you think?



l2oBiN
27-Sep-2010, 13:14
One of my of my first 4x5 shots. Shot on a 4x5, 210 nikkor w, and scanned with the epson v700. Sharpening in photoshop. I am not sure where does this fit in your technical image quality scale (Crap/Below Average/Average/Above Average/Outstanding)? Any comments?

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/2814/mmstadsweb1000.jpg

http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/9954/mmstads2mcropat100.jpg

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/7418/mmstadssigncrop.jpg

domaz
27-Sep-2010, 13:46
Looks pretty good to me. There is still clearly more detail available in the negative than the V700 can get out. That's normal- not much you can do about that.

l2oBiN
27-Sep-2010, 15:55
Could someone place a 6400ppi equivalent crop from a drum scan and/or imacon? I would love to see how much difference there is..

sully75
27-Sep-2010, 16:05
Looks good to me. I'm confused why the clouds are so grey compared to the white of the sails on the boat? Were you using some sort of filter? I'm not an expert either. But looks like a decent scan.

l2oBiN
27-Sep-2010, 16:42
Looks good to me. I'm confused why the clouds are so grey compared to the white of the sails on the boat? Were you using some sort of filter? I'm not an expert either. But looks like a decent scan.

No filter. The clouds were actually like that on the day with multiple different layers of clouds. personally i am quite surprised how much quality there is in the image. Its nothing but cheap fomapan.. and the v700

BetterSense
27-Sep-2010, 17:21
That's pretty good. I'm starting to think that my cheap lenses are cheating me out of image quality. My angulon 90 doesn't have anywhere near that level of detail.

Jay DeFehr
27-Sep-2010, 21:16
It looks ok to me. I noticed the crops are reversed to the full image, and the verticals seem to be leaning to the right, but that doesn't have anything to do with image quality.

engl
28-Sep-2010, 11:27
Looks good, but the third crop seems to have some strange artifacts with lines going horizontally. The third picture could be scanned at 3200DPI without loosing any real detail. The only way to get a drum scan to compare to is to send your negative to scanning :) An easier option is to try the below comparison, they include a Epson V750:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/scan-comparison/

Try adjusting the height of the 4x5 holder if you have not done that already, that improved performance of my V700. Scan the same section at all three heights and pick the sharpest.

Steve M Hostetter
29-Sep-2010, 16:18
I see several scratches in the image which certinly affect it ..

venchka
30-Sep-2010, 13:04
... personally i am quite surprised how much quality there is in the image. Its nothing but cheap fomapan.. and the v700

Smile when you say "cheap" Fomapan and Epson and lenses. :D :cool:

Cheap Fomapan, cheap Fujinon-W lens, really cheap Epson scanner.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/232822-2/Kremers+Angle+2-4.jpg

I'm curious about the imperfections in the negative. Looks like scratches in the water and debris in the upper right corner. I'm not wild about the dark foliage, but that happens. Overall, the image seems dark. Personal taste I suppose, yours & mine. Cancel that. I was looking at the crops. Tell us all about exposure, development and scanning (software and tweaking pre-scanning). The 3 are interrelated and not always the same as you would do for wet printing.

mortensen
1-Oct-2010, 07:54
Well, Wayne, how did you manage such smooth tonal rendition in that image? Really nice, although the subject is not my usual cup of tea :)

... and to the OP - not at all bad for a first shot, imo

venchka
1-Oct-2010, 08:02
Well, Wayne, how did you manage such smooth tonal rendition in that image? Really nice, although the subject is not my usual cup of tea :)

... and to the OP - not at all bad for a first shot, imo

Consumate skill? Dumb luck? My vote goes to #2. :D :cool:
The details are:
Fujinon-W 250/6.3
Arista-EDU Ultra/Fomapan 200. It is a darn shame that the Fomapan 200 is out of production at this time. If I had known, I would have stocked up. I am semi-hoarding my remaining stock.
Metering by Gossen Luna-Pro sbc.
Xtol 1:3 @ 75°F for 7:45 minutes spun round and round in a Jobo 3010 drum on top of a Beseler motor base.
Digital conversion by an Epson 1680 Pro, Epson film holder and Epsonscan software following Ken Lee's instructions.
TIFF file processed in Adobe Lightroom.
The trick will be to repeat this result.

Back OT: To the OP, I think the effort is very good as well. I'm just nit picking the tiny details. We all must spend time spotting imperfections in our negatives. With care, those little glitches get smaller and smaller.

SamReeves
1-Oct-2010, 08:39
The first image looks fine to me. I cut bait with Ilfart and went to Fomapan. I'm nevarr going back.

Tom Monego
1-Oct-2010, 09:46
What res did you scan the image?

Tom

l2oBiN
1-Oct-2010, 14:44
The tiny sign crop is scanned at 6400dpi

creep
5-Oct-2010, 03:34
hi, we use foma100 here for secondary importance shots - there are huge problems with emulsion quality, although the price corresponds to it. I call it a lottery - sometimes it's all perfect (i do love the beautiful velvety blacks on of foma exposed with red filter and processed in hc110). I can it with epson V750 pro but rarely at resolutions higher than 4800dpi - i find the quality much better at 4800 than on 6400 or higher. I also scan as positive 16bG and invert later.

Tom Monego
5-Oct-2010, 05:20
The tiny sign crop is scanned at 6400dpi

What about the large image? Is the second image a crop from the large one?
Most of the V700 users I know feel that the scanner maxes out on res somewhere between 2400 and 3200ppi. I generally scan 4x5 at 1200 or 1800ppi. Not liking that 6400 image, the large one looks fine. If you have scanned this at a regular res for 4x5 and downsized for web display you will lose some image definition.

Tom