judah

Oldies race.

 

http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/7470915-md.jpg<div></div>

Thanks Hector for your suggestion but a film scanner is out of question right now. I want to keep print my stuff in the darkroom, I spend already too much time at the PC. I just would like to scan my print with a better dynamic range and tought a new flatbed was the way to go. BTW, I shoot BW only so ICE is useless in my situation. I usually print a grade lower to have a bit more details in the shadows and I also print pretty heavily on the highlights. It seems to me the scanner handles prints much better this way. I can then open up the highlights a bit and darken the shadow in Photoshop Elements (more than enough for me) but if I push things too much (especially in the shadow area) everything turns into blotchy pixels with no definition. Don't know if it is a dynamic range problem or is the "default" standard with flatbed scanners and silver prints.

One final note, so far I looked at the HPG4050 and the Epson V200. Both are into my budget and look interesting and most of all the are quite new compared to my old and rusty Lide 50.

BTW, my main use for this would be scanning pictures at 300 (or 600) dpi to be used on books I plan to print. The book format is a bit smaller than 8x10" so I think a 300dpi scan would be more than enough. I just need better details in difficult parts of my prints...

Hi all,

I think I need a better scanner for my prints. Don't have the money for a

dedicated film scanner and I much prefer working in the darkroom than on a

screen. I usually print on 8x10 (with a 1" border) and then scan it with my

Canoscan Lide 50. I use Canon software and if I have to do some heavy editing

the photo turns into crap in 10 seconds flat. Don't know if the Lide 50 has a

limited dynamic range or the Canon software isn't good at getting details out of

my prints. BTW, I always have to print a grade lower (to have a lower contrast

picture) and take a lot of care on highlights. Both the extreme of the dynamic

range seems to disappear as soon as I scan it. No details whatsoever. So, is

there any products under 200? (let's make that 200USD because we do have higher

prices here in Europe when you consider taxes and import duties...) that can fit

my bills? Should I buy some of those respected scanning software (VueScan,

Silverfast...) and expect to get a better scan from my Lide 50?

 

Thanks in advance for your help.

Last one. Thanks for your positive comments. Will surely remove those dusty spots.<div></div>

Sorry for the dust spots. That's a very special feature from my crappy scanner. I edited the pics a bit with Lightroom demo version. Nice software. Will have a few more pics later.

,<div></div>

;<div></div>

:

*<div></div>

-<div></div>

.<div></div>

Hi all, my first time here at Street & Doc. A few weeks ago I had the chance to

shoot during the recording of a small indipendent movie. Here are a few pics.

Printed and scanned. Any comment is very welcome.

Sometimes happens. I bought a 28mm a few weeks ago and my D50 put up Fee error and there was no way I could use it. Obviously the aperture ring was set at the right spot, but the lens couldn't work. Had to return it back. It was used BTW. User manual or not.

Thanks Larry! But the flare is there isn't it? ;-)

Thanks Greg for your comments. I'm using an old YashicaMat and am very happy with the square format. I'm just experimenting a bit here, had the camera for a few days so far but it's really super fun. I'll have the camera CLAed very soon (noticed the spacing is not as even as mentioned in one thread I posted on Medium Format forum) and will ask my tech to check out the lens too. The taking lens (and the viewing too) looks a bit dirty but I really didn't have the time to clean them up. I'd rather shoot than spending my time fumbling around with gear ;-)

Is flare the reason why all the shots have that halo effect? Is there a way I can tame it a bit? Thanks.

BTW, had to process the scans a little bit, well maybe a bit more than a tad bit...

And a last one...<div></div>

And here's another one from the same roll.<div></div>

Hi all,

ok, this is an updated to my "First MF roll" thread. In my previous post I put a

link to a proof print scan to get some advices. After much mumbling I decided to

scan the negative instead and it seems to me that I can get a bit more details

out of'em this way. I added another roll shot a few nights ago. If you have any

suggestion please feel free to insult ;-)

 

Here you can find two complete galleries with night photography tests:

 

http://judah.smugmug.com/

 

Thanks.<div></div>

Frank, thanks. It's really a shame that Fuji is not publishing any data on reciprocity, but the funniest part is that Acros 100 doesn't suffer from it and I read it on their technical papers! I mean, the only time they mention reciprocity is for a film that doesn't have any problem with it (at least for exposure shorter than 120s). Anyway, I have a batch of Neopan 400 coming in and will have some more test to do in teh upcoming days.

Frank, thanks for your suggestions. I'm using Neopan 400 right now and there's no mention of reciprocity effect on Fuji literature. It is really interesting to note that I was shooting along with a friend of mine and he was using TX on a Yaschica FX3. We made the same exposure for each photo and yesterday I developed his rolls too. They are a bit more overexposed, or a bit less underexposed. So I guess TX has less reprocity effect for short exposure time in the 10-15s range.

Thanks Yann, I think most of the shots were at f8 as far as I can remember. What Ronnie? You didn't take any notes on your first roll at night? Nope. Sorry. I'm lazy. Asides from jokes, yes, it looks difficult to master night photography but I think I'll invest more time in it in the near future. I do really like the peace and tranquillity sorrounding you at night. Anyway, I got two more rolls to develop (shot'em two night ago) and will see what happened with those. Thanks.