alekos_elefteriadis

<p>-Thank you Douwe for your response, actually this is what i look around. When people look at my prints almost all have the same ''wow'' reaction.. Even people ho they don't now about color, tonality or skin tones, they say that my prints have very rich color that they don't look elsewhere. This give me a courage to think of start my job all over again. I have a very good darkroom knowledge any way and in the past i print in a big professional lab. <br /></p>

<p>-Hello to all friends. <br /> -I am now a retired wedding photographer for almost 7-8 years and i keep analog photography only for my self, and make video and video editing for job. <br /> -I have my own color & b&w darkroom and develop and print frequently. I have stop to make wedding because i don't like the result of digital progress, and if i didn't like something i don't want to make! life is not only money!<br /> -But now i realize is what i make is something deferent and maybe some people prefer than digital, as this traditional photography give better quality in DR, color, skin tones and is a proof progress of something is really existence than the digital manipulations, which you are not sure if the image is real or manipulate.. <br /> -I want to ask if other photographer have the same approach, and keep shooting weddings with traditional photography, and if this is success, please give advice or some link from other traditional photographer.<br /> -Thanks to all.</p>

<p>-I try once but is over contrast for my taste, and have color shift in shadows as other say.<br>

-I print color in my own darkroom and i think those ektar is optimizer for scanning than traditional printing.<br>

-If you want this film for scanning maybe is good i don't now as i am against scanning processes for many reasons.</p>

 

<p>-James you are right about flat negatives, but even this can exceed the contrast of paper or at least have the same. I prefer flatten negatives any day than contrast, it's easy to print those day's with multicontrast paper. The problem is the opposite, when you don't have shadows details.</p>

<p>-Don't worry either, the most film if you make a zone test is 1,5-2,5 stop less sensitive than they say..<br>

-Just under-develop about 30-40% and maybe you find the holy grail of tonality...</p>

<p>-Why Tetenal and no Kodak rt lorr for 10 liters those use in mini-lab? Maybe you skip the need of starter in developer and bleach but this is no big deal after all, the Kodak is cheaper and you are sure for the quality. I by Kodak RA4 for 10 liters with the two starter just 58 euro here in Greece, and then i have to put only 80ml replenisher every square meter of paper.. Its very cheap compared to Tetenal. </p>

<p>-Yes, Kodak is OK and i use in Kodak RA4 chemicals in Durst paper processor after the developer. You can also use just water but you have to change it every time. I print about 40 color photos 20x30cm before stop bath change color..</p>

<p>-I think they mean that you can use a part of a chemicals, e.g. 1/5 of the concentrate to make 1litre of solution, you don't need to make once all the chemicals.</p>

<p>-Stefan is the problem of scanning that make the grain so obvious. If i print the same picture in wet-darkroom the grain is very small compared to scan. That's why most people now from new photographer who never see a real print, but evaluate a scanning picture, believe that the film have so much grain.<br>

-I have print many times from Fuji press 800 & 1600 in the past and in the actual prints there is very little grain, but if i scan and look in computer screen those negatives, the grain is very obvious. </p>

<p>-I continue to shoot weddings with films on my Mamyia 645 in church, buck up with fuji S5 as it have the best skin tones close to film, and in my studio Mamyia RB 6X7.<br>

-I print in my wet-darkroom but if you want to evaluate a film you need to look the picture alive, not in the screen of computer, first because no one scanner can handle the deep color of film and second because of the way that light work in the scanner the grain is very obvious. </p>

<p>-Don't wοrry, i have 30 years the same tank and i develop thousands of b&w, E6, C-41... AND no need so water to clean as many think 3-4 times chance water is ok.</p>

<p>-That's a good news... now can some one tell me if the formula of agfa films came buck again? I keep my breath...</p>

<p>-Its clear the developer, its not the right amount.</p>

<p>-Hello to all friends. <br /> -I just bout this color paper processor from a friend ho give me free, after many years with jobo cpp 2.<br /> -I have some questions, this machine already have modified to take normal RA4 chemicals, but i don't understand that the second bath need to be a stop bath! <br /> In jobo never i use stop bath, after the paper developer i fill the tank twice just with tap water and then put the bleach. So what stop bath shall i need to put? The same i use in black & white chemistry? and in what solution?<br /> -Please someone help me. The friend ho give me they don't remember..</p>

<p>-Well i develop a 100asa color film which i use in both of them. The focus is not my problem in MINOX and the lens i like better in the shadows with great tonality, no light leak or problem with film advance. <br />The tessar in Yashica have better colors but is contrast for my taste.<br />-In the end while Yashica is dead on with exposure and focus, the Minox have those problem with exposure. I put 50 asa in the camera and still underexpose even when i put x2 overexpose in camera button the negative miss the right density. A so sad.. i like those lens and camera handling but its a waste overall..</p>

<p>-My biggest problem with Minox is the plastic barrel of the lens which is pathetic and loose, so i can't use aperture 2.8 & 4 because the left corners is blur... Also the position of the photocell in front of the lens give me always underexposure.. But i like the compactness of the body and special the tonality of the lens when they work... Tomorrow i develop a color film that i have expos half in both of them an i take my last chance, thank you very much.</p>

<p>-Hello to all friends. I shoot b&w film with my Mamyia 645 and i wont to have with me a small camera with color negative film. So i have the two camera above, minox and Yashica, both have their strength and weaknesses.<br />-I like the minox for the small body and the filing that give me, also have better tonality in the shadows, but the meter is a crap and the manual meters have very small ring, also the same for the aperture ring.<br />-The Yashica on the other hand is dead on with the auto focus and exposure (also you can lock exposure with the half press), the lens is amazing sharp but not so good in the shadows as the minotar. The body is bigger and feel not so good in my hand. I am happy to give me some advice for what i use, thank you very much.</p>

<p>I don't care so much, the film is over forgiving if you now how to print. That's the reason i come buck from digital to film again.</p>

<p>-No need to save in RGB, just 16bit crayscale, there isn't any color information.</p>

<p>The way to go is Vuescan as Andy say.</p>