dirk_dom1

<p>last one:</p> <div></div>

<p>here's another one:</p><div></div>

<p>Hi!<br> Thanks a lot for the response!<br> I 'm not going to print the image I used as an example, but I finished postprocessing one like it:<br> This is how I like the grain. i want it as an important part of the image, adding to it and making it beautiful.<br> What do you think, no good?<br> Didier, what size is your image? is it 35mm or 6x9?</p> <p>Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>Here is the grain, sharpened. Does it look O.K.?<br> Ionce had an Imacon scan made and the grain was sharpened in that scan, to intense black dots.</p><div></div>

<p>Here's the detail:<br> I must say the images look completely different on my Eizo screen using photoshop, than on my Eizo using Fastone, than on my laptop screen or using my email program. On the Eizo with Photoshop, it looks exactly like the print, all the rest is different.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi!<br> I shot half frame images with a 1960 Olympus PEN F.<br> I scanned them with an Epson V750 flatbed, at 4,800PPI, using Silverfast.<br> I wonder if the grain that came out looks natural and if I could sharpen it and keep it natural.<br> Another question is: do I gain lots by drumscanning or using a Hasselblad Imacon? I intend to print it 12 x 18 inches. I'll sharpen in Photoshop, but I don't want to oversharpen the grain so it looks totally unnatural. my goal is to show the difference between my medium format (6x9) and the half frame, incorporating grain as an important element of the image.<br> So, i need to know how real grain looks like.<br> Can you give me your thoughts?<br> Can anyone post some images of grain of Tmax 100 which looks natural?<br> Added an image of the whole scan, and a detail.<br> Thanks,</p> <p>Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>Maybe this is of interest:<br> http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/02/12/hasselblad-xpan-a-print-solution-by-dirk-dom/<br> How I made a 24 inch photo book.<br> It was worth it.<br> Dirk.</p>

<p>No, i didn't succeed. What i did catch, I think, is the beauty of the forest.<br> I intend, next year, to put a model in, properly dressed, so I'll shoot a frame of reference. But if I'll be able to make that look natural, i have no idea. <br> My theory is that Ansel Adams also realized it is futile to try to photograph the size of these trees.</p>

<p>my second shot:<br> Thanks!<br> Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi!<br /> For the third time, now, I shot Coastal Redwoods, this time for the first time in serious black and white. I want to image the way such a forest of giants feels to me. <br /> My big ideal in landscape photography is Ansel Adams and I'd very much like to see how he did Redwoods, but all I can find in an internet search are very standard horizontal shots of a row of trees. Is that really all he did? Or is there more, which I haven't found yet?<br /> Shooting Redwoods in a meaningful way is difficult, maybe he figured to transfer to a print the majesty of those trees was not possible, I don't know. <br /> Anything he wrote on Redwoods?<br /> Great Redwood shots from other people?<br /> I'd very much like to learn by looking at other's ways of imaging.<br /> I add two of my shots of last time, to show what I did. This is not a request for critique.<br /> Next year I'll try to get the size of the trees by putting in a properly dressed person.<br /> Thank you,</p> <p>Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>Second, a shot with my Mamiya 7, 43mm in Ukiah, some 150 miles from San Francisco:</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>Hi!</p> <p>Spent six weeks in San Francisco and surroundings. Scanning, these shots are not postprocessed.<br> First, a shot with my Xpan, taken in Golden Gate park:</p><div></div>

<p>Hi!</p> <p>is there anything that can be done to prevent this?<br> Put the film in a bag with desiccant immediately?<br> is there still something i can do before developing?<br> This is the first time i kept roll film undeveloped for six weeks. Never had this before. </p> <p>Bye,</p> <p>Dirk.</p>