Lomnický štít
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3897/...d96e5026_z.jpg
Łomnica by JaZ99wro, on Flickr
Graflex 4x5
Fujinon 105mm
Velvia 100F, expired
Printable View
Lomnický štít
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3897/...d96e5026_z.jpg
Łomnica by JaZ99wro, on Flickr
Graflex 4x5
Fujinon 105mm
Velvia 100F, expired
Tachihara 4x5, 75mm Super Angulon, Velvia 50, Drumscanner Scanmate 11000
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2920/...d6facc10_b.jpg
Bornholm 5 von sdzsdz auf Flickr
Thank you very much.Quote:
Originally Posted by DennisD
It's funny how we can't remove our "signature" even when we're not aware of putting it on in the first place.
very nice!,, this shot reminds me of a scene in "sound of music"Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrick
Thank you! I have not seen that film, but I have heard good things.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSoNegative
Very nice! Love the composition and lighting.Quote:
Originally Posted by sdzsdz
Really beautiful... I have been only once in the Dolomites but since then I hope to return there - and spend there as much time as possible...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrick
Thank you Andreios. I too will be going back to the Dolomites, maybe in the autumn this year. I really liked the place, and I have only seen a small part of the Dolomites so far. I have been many places, but the Dolomites are even better than the Lofoten Islands in Norway.Quote:
Originally Posted by andreios
Fantastic. I wish I had some Velvia 50 left. Alas I have run out.Quote:
Originally Posted by sdzsdz
love !Quote:
Originally Posted by sdzsdz
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5...via_rvp_50.jpg
Sinar 4x5, Schneider 180mm
Velvia RVP50, Tetenal E6
Holy crap! Amazing!Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrick
Vitality: Beautiful picture. Is that Latvia?
Thank you. No, picture taken in Italy. Monte Baldo, next to Garda lake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lewin
Very nice. Appealing too.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitality
Lovely! Are you using any NaOH to correct white balance?Quote:
Originally Posted by vitality
Thank you. No i'm not using any additional chemicals to correct balance. I do not have that level of knowledge what I'm doing to start correct WB with additional chemicals.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZ99
Also this shot is on Velvia which expired 12 years ago, so I'm not sure if it is worth to try to correct something during developing process.
Anyway to me looks fine how it came out. Some adjustments done with post processing, but nothing major.
Indeed it looks fine, that's why I was asking. I've discovered that uncorrected tetenal kit gives me too much magenta cast.Quote:
Originally Posted by vitality
Perhaps you could share how you correct the white balance(maybe on another thread).Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZ99
It is actually described in the booklet shipped with the kit. I just add a 0.06 ml of 20% NaOH per 0.5L of CD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deval
Chromes look good with naked eyes, but I'm going to develop the control strip tomorrow. I can report back, if anyone interested.
Just a quick snap to test out some expired film I just received (TMAX 400). Shot at 250ISO through a 25A filter and developed in HC-110(h) for 8.5 minutes.
That black thing is an Alpaca.
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5562/...b2d0ce64_o.jpgStorms-Coming by Colorado CJ, on Flickr
Some people's tests are better than my normal photographs.... LolQuote:
Originally Posted by Colorado CJ
Thanks. It wasn't a complete success though. As you can see, the photo isn't in 4x5 proportions. I had to crop the lower area because of a developing error. I am new to large format and am currently using the "taco" method. Things didn't go right and the edge of the film didn't get developed right.Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
I think I'll try tray development next.
I was never happy with taco, Mod54 or JOBO 2509n are both excellent, have never done tray. Good luck!Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado CJ
I've never used any other metheod except tray developing for almost 70 years. And the guy who taught me, my grandfather, had been tray developing since 1895. So between us we've covered almost 140 years of this, if my math is right. He developed them one at a time, and so do I. Maybe that's why the process works so well for us. (Actually he passed on in 1950). He started when he bought his first bottle of Rodinal in 1895. I still use it. I develop it the way all the old photo guides tell you to do it. I use 5 ounces of soup (offen 50-1), tilt the tray slightly, and flow the soup across the top of the negative in one fell swoop. Not rapidly enough to get bubbles or air bells, but fast enough to cover the whole sheet quickly, so development is even. About 8 minutes for the films I use. More or less 100 speed. I use a 5X7 tray for 4X5 negatives, and 8X10 trays for 5X7 film. Agitate per directions. Ortho and Panchro films. Incidentely, while tray developing is faster than tanks and other ways, I just adjust the mix to get the process to work at 8 minutes or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado CJ
Another morning. It should have been an holiday vacation, but I got up at 3:30 AM nearly every morning. Could not sleep while I was knowing that these colours show up on the other side of the curtain.
Tachihara 4x5, Ektar 100, 75mm Super Angulon, Drumscanner. I did NOT amp up the colour! Only RAW Scan and contrast after inverting with ColorNeg Plugin.
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3855/...3f770ccd_b.jpg
Bornholm 6 von sdzsdz auf Flickr
sdzsdz,
That was worth getting up for. Really nice shot and the Ektar captured it beautifully. Congrats!
Attachment 119457
My second large format frame ever. The first was a bit... uh... overexposed. Pulled the dark slide before closing the shutter. Whoops!
It's just a test shot off my back deck to try out the Crown Graphic I inherited from a friend's grandfather. It's equipped with an Optar 162mm 1:4.5. Unfortunately, the shutter speeds below 1/10 are gummed up and the lens has some separation in the rear group. It still makes some great images though.
Shot at f/16 with a yellow filter on Ilford FP4+, souped in D76, scanned half at a time on an Epson V550. Stitched, de-dusted, sharpened, and contrast tweaked in Photoshop.
Vacation be damned! Best ektar sheet I've ever seen, I'm a Velvia man but it's good to know SOMETHING can be pulled from that darn CN stuff :) good job!Quote:
Originally Posted by sdzsdz
Thank you guys!
@ Stone:
I always thought, Velvia is THE film for landscape and I still use it frequently. BUT I´m getting more and more to Ektar. The contrast margin of the Velvia is too narrow in many lighting Situations, and you have to do many exposures for one shot to pick out the right one afterwards, so you are wasting film and time. After that, Velvia is extremely hard to scan in my opinion, even with my drumscanner.
Ektar is much more forgiving with the Highlights/shadows, has a beautiful colour rendition and is quite as sharp. Here the whole difficulty is scanning and inverting. My drumscanner does a extremely good Job with scanning the raw negative. Everything else is done in PS.
I love Velvia, but I will use it only for Special purposes with very even lighting Situation in the future.
This Picture would have been impossible to do with Velvia e.g.:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/88626385@N03/14753365756/
Agreed. I find ektar the better option 90% of the time. The extra 2 to 3 stops of range make it better for nearly everything. You can be 1/3rd of a stop off on the exposure and still make a good image from it, the film scans easily and colorneg plugin makes easy work of the colors. It's my go-to film for landscapes. I always take velvia with me just incase the light is soft and even. If I have to use 3 filters to bring a scene into the range of velvia, I prefer one filter and ektar.
That's a beautiful photo.
To each his own though. I hate Ektar - shooting and scanning it just doesn't work for me. I have better luck with slides and tweaking my development if needed to not get quite so deep shadows/density.
Yea same with me, CN film scans horribly on my Epson V-750 ... Like it's awful! E-6 is way easier to scan for me so long as the exposure is right in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran
Stone, you have to go after it with a lot of color correction tools. And for what it's worth ColorPerfect didn't do anything for me. But I prefer the scans (and ease of scanning, if exposed well) from Velvia, is what I'm saying.
Very beatiful, FredrickQuote:
Originally Posted by Fredrick
AmazingQuote:
Originally Posted by sdzsdz
Amazing Vitality, I like itQuote:
Originally Posted by vitality
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran
Same here. I have tried it. 80% of the time, I find it has a weird color cast that all my Photoshop tricks can't purge from a scan. I have not had good luck with the Kodak films.
Would it be too much to assume when people talk about 'Velvia' they are talking of the original 50 ASA version? There are a number of Velvia variants out there and I am of the opinion that being more specific might be more helpful for people referring to this thread in the future.
I believe the 100 version is a more forgiving film ?
:-)
I use both 50 and 100 speed versions of Velvia.
Of course there is also the 100 vs. 100F, and "old" 50 vs. "new" 50!
I use the old 50, new 50 and 100. I find 100 more forgiving, the old 50 has the best reds, new 50 has the best greens and all of them have too much contrast for a lot of different situations (for the way I shoot) I have a few mates and know of a hell of a lot of people who shoot velvia and just make it sing, for me, I need a couple of extra stops in harsh light to make an image worth showing.. I love velvia, in all its speeds (except 100F, if I wanted to shoot 100F I'd shoot Provia) but it is definitely not my first choice for a landscape film. WHEN the lighting is right for it, nothing else comes close....
I've been obsessing for a year or two, searching for a jetty with a strong underside... Clean, bold, symmetrical.
On a family holiday during the week I found exactly what I had been hoping for.
For this image, knowing exactly what I wanted to achieve, I was relentless under the dark cloth, I moved the tripod time and time again to get everything lined up just as I wanted it. I spent more time looking at the ground glass for this particular image than I ever have on any other image I've made with large format. Once I had my symmetry and focus nailed I metered a couple of times to be sure I'd get what I wanted and once I was finally happy, after implementing two grad filters to bring the tones down to where I wanted them. I exposed my sheet of Fomapan 100. This was the last sheet of 6 that I took on my trip... I had one shot to get it right. One shot to make the image I had been hoping to make for nearly a year... I am very happy to say I think I pulled it off...
Really interested on hearing some constructive criticisms on this please everyone. I am very happy with this, and consider it perhaps my best B/W neg to date.
"Strength"
https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.n...92289632_n.jpg
Fomapan 100 @ 100
Chamonix 045N-2
210mm f/5.6
40sec @ f/32
Dev: Rodinal 1:100, 50min, No Agitation, 20°C
Gorgeous! You have every reason to be happy with this photograph
Nice! Sometimes the terrible reciprocity of Foma100 is actually really useful.
Fantastic Alex.
Myxine - Thanks, I suppose the reason I was asking for other opinions is that because I've lusted after this shot for so long, its likely that I could look past any flaws it may have.
Stone - Too right, This metered as 6 sec F/32.3 I shot it at f/32, 40sec. at 6 sec, this would not have been the same image... I would have had to add another ND filter to gain some exposure time...
Kev - Thanks :)
The ONLY flaw if you call it a flaw is I don't like how close to the edges of the frame the dock itself is, my eyes want it pulled back SLIGHTLY just a tiny bit, but my images suck compared to this so... I don't really know what I'm talking about... LolQuote:
Originally Posted by alexn
The original shot was actually composed a little looser than this image, however my film holder has a nice little light leak near the opening that encroached into the picture space.. I had no choice but to crop it tighter :(
I think you nailed it. But, you should get some new film holders.