Jump to content

joey_roth

Members
  • Posts

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Image Comments posted by joey_roth

  1. First, thank you for all the comments. The bottom is a little soft compaired to the rest of the photo- I think I shot at f8. I am very inexperienced with slide film, and color in general, so I wasn't sure how to expose this one. I decided to use the X-pan's built-in meter, which left the bottom a little underexposed. I corrected for this in Photoshop by doing a brightness/comtrast adjustment and fooling around with the levels, but there isn't enough information on the film itself to completely compensate for the underexposure. As for the scanning, it is very clumsy and annoying. I use an Acer ScanWit film scanner, which is only designed to scan a standard 35mm frame. To scan an X-pan frame, I have to first scan one half into photoshop and then eject the film carrier and move the film so that the second half is in position. The reason for having to move the film is that the scanner can't scan the tiny area in the middle of the frame, were there would normally be a separation between two standard 35 mm frames. Once I have both frames in, I stitch them together in photoshop. I'm looking into getting a film scanner that allows me to scan the whole X-pan frame in one shot, but I'm going to be starting college in the fall, so funds are a little tight ^_^.

    Golgatha

          9
    I used a red filter, which accounts for the blackness of the sky and "poofiness" of the clouds. I did adjust the levels a bit in photoshop, but not those of the sky alone.
  2. this is very well done, albiet corney ^_^. the selective coloring is seamless and you started with a good photo in its own right, although the horizion is slightly tilted. congrats.

    Golgatha

          9
    My printer actually just finished with the 1-hour print job. I used glossy roll paper, cut to 10"x46", and ran it through my Epson 1520. I was able to get a 8.5"x44" print at 300 dpi.
×
×
  • Create New...