dirk_dom1

<p>last 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>

<p>Hi!</p>

<p>I 'm developing film from San Francisco.<br /> One film shows, on the image "Kodak", end a number. It is on the negative, it's not a scanning artifact.</p>

<p>Kodak Tmax 400, pushed for 800 ASA<br /> 6 min 10 sec in Tmax developer, water stop bath, 4 min fix.<br>

Never had this before, I didn't forget the black cilinder in the reel or exposed the film to light.</p>

<p>i still have 17 films to do.</p>

<p>Anyone an idea? The film went to the carry on Xray twice.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi!<br>

Good answers here, I appreciate them a lot; Thanks!!</p>

<p>Dirk. </p>

<p>Hi!<br /> After three years of shooting digital with an Olympus PEN I got fed up with the color noise and I switched back to film. That was a very rewarding experience.<br /> Yet I'd love to have a digital camera with a film look. By film look I mean beautiful grain which has the same color as the image part it is in, and rich pastel colors. the grain won't happen, I know, but the rich pastel colors might.<br /> My good friend Ivo has a Leica M240 and it has this film look, but at the moment I can't afford it. <br /> the Film sales person at my photo shop says, that, indeed, Canon and Nikon are much too hard to have a film look.<br /> My Olympus PEN is very close to the Leica M240, but has lots of color noise and I hate that.<br /> I read the Sony A7S has no noise at all and as such should provide the ultimate film like images. But what I'd like to know is if it's just as hard as Canon and Nikon. It's only 12 megapix but I couldn't care less about that.<br /> I guess I have three options:<br /> Continue shooting film.<br /> Buy a used Leica M240 when the next model becomes available.<br /> somehow rent a Sony A7S for awhile and check out if it has a film look.<br /> Do any of you have experience about all this and can provide me with useful information? Maybe post some shots?<br /> Hope I don't start a film/digital thing.<br /> Thank you,</p>

<p>Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>Very wise words, here.<br /> In Spain, I enjoyed the Linhof like I've never enjoyed any other camera. I got into some kind of ultra calm condition, and I immensely enjoyed creating the image. I didn't know photography could be like this.<br /> So, i think it's a camera for me. It's just that I don't feel comfortable at all taking it to San Francisco. That may be because I think the way I shoot it, with setting up etc etc, for me isn't compatible with this very busy city. It also may be that I'm simply not experienced enough to take the camera there. And i lack the self confidence. When I bought my 6x17 it was half a year before I had the confidence to shoot it, then I suddenly took it everywhere and made hundreds of shots with it.<br /> The camera, I have. i'll be back in S.F. in a year and a half. than it may have changed.<br />At the moment I don't feel in the mood to shoot the Linhof, or any other camera. I've had these not in the mood to photograph things before. it'll pass. I'm strictly an amateur, so, no big deal. <br /> Finally, I apologize for the less gear statement. I way overgeneralized. When I went to China, I had a rangefinder with a 15mm, an SLR with 28-105 zoom and an 80-200mm f/4L with me all the time. In S.F. last time did carry one camera, one lens, but I was there for six weeks. i had about four lenses with me. <br /> Well, thanks for the very constructive comments!</p>

<p>Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>About fifteen years ago, I had bought the Nikkor UW 15mm f/2.8 underwater lens, for my Nikonos V. This is an ultra wide angle and the best lens in the world for underwater. I had never shot ultrawide before and the learning curve was extreme.</p>

<p>I went to the Red Sea in Egypt to learn to shoot it, after one roll in the pool.</p>

<p>After an exhausting and extremely frustrating week of trying very hard and making worthless images I suddenly had a breakthrough: I suddenly saw the underwater world in wide angle perspective. I started to make really good shots taking advantage of the extreme DOF and I didn’t even need my viewfinder anymore. I got the film developed every evening and the good images I got printed on 8 by 12 inches and I showed them everywhere. People wanted copies and every evening I spent until 10.30 in the lab, not daring to leave my negatives alone.</p>

<p>Another thing was, that once I had the wide angle composition look switched on, I couldn’t switch it off. Willing or not, I saw wide angle compositions until deep in the night and even with my eyes closed.</p>

<p>Because of all of this, I slept very badly.</p>

<p>I came home after a month with really good pictures, but with an intense disgust of photography. It was over a year before I touched a camera again. It had been a very serious lesson. BTW, after 30 years and a couple thousand dives of underwater shooting, I have 23 images which I consider good. I have no problem at all with that.</p>

<p>Now, the core of the story.<br /> About a year ago, I bought a Linhof Technikardan 6x9 rollfilm camera to shoot serious black and white with. The camera is just what I wanted in every respect. My wife and son live in San Francisco, I live in Belgium and I'm going there for six weeks this summer. I wanted to take the Linhof and got everything together: lenses, filters, spotmeter, Gitzo travel tripod (oh, my, was that expensive!!!), custom backpack.<br /> This Easter I was in S.F. with just a Hasselblad Xpan with the 45mm lens and I had a fantastic time, i even made a few worthwhile panoramic shots. In S.F. I go on five to seven mile walkabouts, shooting, about five hours a day.</p>

<p>Now, the Linhof.</p>

<p>I’m afraid I’m taking this camera to S.F. before I’m ready. I have almost no experience, all I did in serious shooting was ten days in Spain with it and I 'm afraid I take it because I ought to because I invested so much in it. I’m afraid that when I’m there I’ll be under great pressure to produce images and that it’ll be very stressing and it will make me feel miserable. S.F. in the summer is a very busy place and it may be very stressing shooting a technical camera there; it’s no comparison with the absolute calmness of Spain with Christmas at the coast and in the mountains. Maybe I’d better shoot the Linhof in S.F. with Easter.</p>

<p>The goal is to have a fun time and to take very, very good pictures. I can take my rangefinders, the Xpan and the Mamiya 7, they guarantee that. With them the process is very spontaneous and very relaxing. When I’m in the city, I can look for Linhof compositions, maybe even write them down with exact location and a little sketch every evening. Then, next time I’m in S.F. I can shoot them. My son and wife live there so I’ll be there quite a few times more. Meanwhile I can get experience with this camera. The 47mm of which I expect so much is equivalent to a 19mm and such a lens takes some time to master even for me: I discover compositions before taking the camera to the eye. With the Linhof with it’s set up hoohah that’s triple important.</p>

<p>Why don't I go practicing here, in Belgium? Well, the last two months I don’t feel like photographing here. I didn’t shoot any spring flowers, that’s the first time ever, but why should I? I’ll just make more perfect shots I’ll do nothing with. I could go to the Kalmthout heather, but I won’t shoot anything worth printing there. I 've taken so many shots of the Antwerp port and city i don't feel like doing it anymore. I’ll shoot in Spain or at the Atlantic coast or in the Ardennes. Then, in a year and a half, I'll have mastered the camera. I don't enjoy shooting the Linhof here, now. It may come, but I don’t know when.</p>

<p>When I truly master the camera, I’ll take it to S.F. Then I’ll be in complete control, very calm and relaxed and I’ll enjoy myself.</p>

<p>It’s of course also possible that after this stay I decide S.F. is rangefinder territory.</p>

<p>The less gear you take, the better your photography. I'm taking the Xpan with 45 and 90mm, for color work and the Mamiya 7 with the 43mm for black and white. That's it. 30 films each: about a thousand images, that's more than enough. it's decided.</p>

<p>Dirk.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Hi!<br /> I was in San Francisco with Easter, shooting spring flowers.<br /> Canon F1, speedfinder, FD 85mm f/1.2, some extension tubes. Fuji Superia 800 ASA.<br>

f/1.2 of course.<br>

Dirk.</p><div></div>

<p>I'd give another vote for the Sony A7.</p>

<p>Dirk. </p>

<p>And here's how it looks on the inside:</p>

<div></div>