john_walsh7

<p>Sunshine Color Lab .. Was very happy with their developing and scanning. A lot of people from the New york Camera club down the road use them. </p>

<p>" Paul, if you shoot at 3200iso, you'll have underexposed images. Delta 3200 is really around iso 1250. You expose at 1250, and process as per the 3200 box speed. " </p>

<p>I am entrigued by this comment . I recently exposed a roll at 1250 but took the dev times for 1250 and used those. If i develop at 3200 with that same film shot at 1250 do i not end up with overdeveloped negatives ? Sorry if its a noob question but im ,, well a noob at home developing and playing with film at non rated speeds. </p>

<p>Gosh its a grainy film unless the lab im using is making a hash of it , i can only imagine it achieving cell phone quality pushed. </p>

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I am in Spain <a href="http://www.foto-r3.com/quimica/kit-revelado-e-6">http://www.foto-r3.com/quimica/kit-revelado-e-6</a> and have a choice between them and fuji kit. <br>

When you get the 5 liter kit is is better to break it down into smaller solutions or do you just work from the bigger bottle. I have been accumulating cheap E6 MF film on ebay for the last two months and currently have about 150 rolls of the stuff so am hoping that I can get through the chemicals in a reasonable period before they go bad. I am unsure If i needed some type of " collapsable " bottle in order to avoid storing the chemicals with too much air in the bottles ?</p>

 

<p>I know this is as old thread but i found it searching for peoples thoughts on Hasselblad versus Bronica and here is my thoughts and limited experience for people coming after me. </p>

<p>I have held and used a Bronica SQ-AM and while its a nice camera , it never really " felt " nice to use it. I like the feel and noise level of my RB67 but its a tank, its positive when you click the shutter and the mirror is not a tank door closing like the Bronica. I met some guys in the New Yorkcamera club recently and one had a Hasselblad 501cm.. held it and shot a few frames with it..wow... If a camera was a woman she would be called Hasselblad! I am going to pay the little extra for the entire experience of using the camera which starts at the engineering , loading and then using the camera.. clicking the shutter the camera just does this little dance in my hand but feels " balanced " doesnt sound horrible ( no grinding like the SQ-AM) and the mirror slap is to my ear lower than even the RB67. I for a long time felt that the sharpness of a lens was its only quality but am slowly enlarging what i am looking for ..things like microcontrast and something I cant describe technically but am convinced I can pick a Hasselblad image out over something else with..Im going to call it " cream " in the bokeh ..the 800mm Planar has a dreamlike quality that I just love ..its ezquisite :=) So i think I know why I will pay a premium for this machine.</p>

<p>That being said my experience is different to that of others. I won an Exc++ A12 back for 100 US, will go and check out ( shoot a roll and then develop it ) a 80mm F2.8 T* for 280 US tommorrow and then order a 400US EXC+ body with finder from KEH i think. Buying it this way with a little patience seems cheaper by far than KEH complete body and also cheaper than buying a whole body together on ebay. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi,<br>

I won a JOBO CP-E2 on ebay recently and it will arrive soon, it was cheap and I intend to get into developing my own E6 and C41 in addition to the experience I already have of developing black and white at home using a little tub in my sink. I went down to the local chemicals store and while they had a large selection of analog items on sale they were not helpful to a beginner as to what I would need or indeed based on their experience what they would <em>reccomend.</em> So I have identified the tetenal 5L kit which I believe comes with the chemicals I need but I am not so clear on what smaller bottles etc I need. As i understand it i would need at least 4 x smaller bottles to mix and store batches of chemicals. If you were to put together a beginners slide / C41 kit with a JOBO CP.E2 at its heart what other things would you include in the kit and why ? Sorry if its a broad question but I am a total noob to color film and am not even sure what questions I should ask and if I can reuse chemicals, any help with a to buy list that balances functionality with cost would be most welcome. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I understand that one of the orders they processed in the last few days amounted to 15,000 dollars worth of processing. </p>

<p>There is a free piece of software from microsoft called " microsoft virtual pc " you can basically run a pc within a pc using it and install xp on that virtual machine. Its not that complicated and i use it to get around any backwards compatability issues on old software. </p>

<p>I have no experience of the Epson V750 just the V700 , fiddle and flatten ,fiddle and flatten that will be your motto. I am currently looking to move up to a nikon because whilst according to a magazine review on an ideal piece of film the it can get results that dont make you look like a goon for shooting 35mm film that is the exception and not the rule in my experience. There is as far as i understand it little real difference between the v750 and v700 except the software. As for medium format you can cut out some of the fiddle and especially the flatten with the betterscan holders and glass. Everybodies mileage seems to vary with the V700 series , some think its the best thing since sliced bread , personally i dont and Im sorry i wasted so much time trying to get magazine review results out of it so much so i consider it the " noob tax " especially for 35mm. Its not just what results you can get from it but the trouble you have to go to.. so much so that at one point I questioned why i was bothering to shoot film at all. Im not suggesting to anybody to skip the epson scanner just to make sure you have eyes wide open as to what the workflow with it really entails. For any kind of black and white work id skip it. I thought my bathroom development process was really horrid because I was getting so much grain , saw the same scans on an imacon i am testing with a view to purchase also and i became convinced that the epson series light source just exxagerates grain so much so that I have hidden the results from public view for the most part lol. Best of luck with your decision.</p>

<p>Tom, Those are acutally pretty nice images from a slide, i had never seen the slide copying mechanism at work before. I also know from my limited experience with scanning that the diffused light source is so much better for scanning anything not just kodacrhome. Out of curiosity did you try to scan negatives using the DSLR method , if so could you post a result. Sorry the the thread creep , to the op perhaps try the silverfast demo to see if it will do anything for for you. </p>

<p>Neil, I find myself in the same position as yourself. I am considering a new Nikon 9000ED for about 1300 pounds or a lightly used Imacon III for about 2000. The holders in the Imacon are attractive even though I know it means the workflow will be intense especially as my preferred format is 35mm. I figure i can run contacts on a cheap scanner ( PI250) and scan what I want in decent quality in the imacon. <br /> <br /><br />John your tale of the focus is something that is on my mind, I am unsure why it comes with a focus calibration target if there is in fact no autofocus whatsoever with the scanner. Have you found that the 848 offered you much of an upgrade in image quality. Did the Imacon ever give you cause to have it sent for repair ? Im concerned also about the light source as I understand it after my initial research the light tubes for the precision III are no longer made. <br>

Neil I would be interested to know if you went for the precision and what your experience was with it , not per say in the condition of the unit but basically any unenvisaged aspects of using the scanner. <br>

I shoot a certain amout of MF but I am really interested in as I said 35mm and it seems to leverage the look of film you need a pretty meaty scanner for it. </p>

<p>I used it for a while but in the end saw little net gain beyond a well done white balance. Others mileage may vary. </p>

<p>For picture quality in many instances I prefer the look of the original 5D over the 5d Mark II , i have no idea why that is in technical terms...we are taking the ISO 100-800 range of course. Surely there are many holding off to buy the 5 d mark III but the big jump in quality really comes in moving up to the full frame sensor. I used a crop body as a back up about 2 weeks ago and its just not the same league when it comes to out of camera results... that is something subjective and not likely to be seen in spec or pixel peeping. </p>

<p>oh boy do i feel thick. i just realised this is the canon forum. I think i found the topic on the front page and just went straight to it.</p>

<p>Sorry William I believe those to be Canon lenses but Im not certain hence the doubt..are canon the only show in town at those focal distances?</p>

<p>Think very carefully about how you will use the equipment at each stage of the day , plan and practice your setups .dont go for anything fancy that you are not familiar with ... dont wing it .. the equipment is not the important bit. I have managed to second shoot recently and I can tell you that the equipment isnt the factor in what i kept and what was thrown away. IF you are in situations where you dont / cant use flash take extra frames from various angles..in the pressure cooker its what to point the camera at and in what general manner to use the camera that is the problem as oppossed to what the camera is. Whatever gear you have practice using it , whatever gear you rent get it delivered days before the wedding so you can practice using it , even if it is lenses so you can somewhat predict what happens with the particular copy you have, ie is it soft as mushy peas wide open etc. </p>

<p>Yes and it made me wish my backup was as good as my main camera. I became aware of the limitations of a crop sensor / consumer orientated body in a circumstance i would rather have had my 5d mark II available. ( as it turned out the body was not the problem but the lens ..stupid 24-70L cant handle a wee knock at all ) Luckily I also had a film body with me and a few rolls of fresh tri-x and as luck would have it captured the images I wasnt happy with out of the backup on that.</p>

<p>lol yes I was , see what gear lust does to you, i cant even pronounce her name :) I think it does depend a lot on the lens itself. Some professionals really dig for example the canon 50mm F1.4 prime which bests ( imho ) the 50 F1.2L when stopped down ..so many go for the 1.4 due to the price differential , including professionals .. but its generally accepted that the 1.4 consumer lens is mushy at 1.4 ( my experience is that it is ) , the 85mm F1.2L is in my experience sharp wide open so im more inclined to go there If i need it open and am happy to manage the dof one gets at that apperture. The OP in thread title doesnt specify which 24 and 85 primes. Im still working toward managing in the artistic sense DOF ,, i think " bokeh " can be abused a little in the beginning..sometimes a dreamy but discernable bokeh imho is appopriate and very pleasing. </p>

<p>I like my primes a few stops down from their largest opening. I shoot canon and with the exception of the 85mm they are all a little soft wide open. I suppose if I owned a noctilus ( spelling ) it would be different perhaps but I dont. If im really backed into a corner ill shoot at the full opening apperture but try to avoid it. </p>

<p>The interview with kodak on inside analog photography was interesting. <a href="http://www.insideanalogphoto.com/">http://www.insideanalogphoto.com/</a></p>

<p>He basically claimed that in recent years they had been slowly bringing the characteristics of VC and NC together such that if scanned a little tweak in saturation meant one could not be distinguished from the other. All that being siad I just put 100 rolls of 400VC in 220 format into the freezer and will do the same in 135.</p>

<p>I think the biggest mistake i have seen ( and made ) with higher ISO photographs is not equipment related but exposure related. I am constantly getting as close to overexposure as I can , otherwise known as "shooting the right ". Often what looks toasted in preview on the screen and even in the histogram ( histogram is not of raw file but of jpeg as far as my understanding goes even if shooting in raw ) can be pulled back to the left in a raw converter for a pleasing high iso image. Conversely sliding up the exposure on a slightly underexposed image brings out the noise in a very displeasing manner. Knowing your camera in this manner ie what you can get away with and bracketing around that exposure area will give you less headaches in the end. </p>

<p>I do know that some of Canons "EFS" lenses are marketed as digital only but I " suspect " that these are in fact suitable only for crop bodies and not full frame and hence film cameras..as such they are digital only because that is all they fit. The 18-55 kits lens with plastic optics that comes with consumer digicams from canon is one example. </p>

<p>Digital coating indeed. Im no expert but that sounds like something I would have one of my people in marketing make up if I owned a company with a marketing department. As far as i know none of Canons " L " lenses are considered digital only ..and that is just speaking of one mainstream manufacturer. </p>

<p>The Rollieflex and Hasseblad are certainly top cameras in the right hands, but then so is the Brownie lol .. Personally I would love a Rollieflex over a hasselbad, I am not sure my photography at this point could tell the difference but its a balance of budget which for a person making their first steps into MF has to include the cost of a decent scanner etc.. That scanner is likely to cost as much as the camera if you are going to want to be able to tell the difference between the same picture taken on a C330 Mamiya or Hasselblad.. that is to say if digitization of the film picture is the end game. </p>

<p>The really odd thing , its kind of sad really is if I want to see the rough layout of an airbase or what BOA on Canary wharf looks like all I have to do is go to google maps or some such service.. the culture that allowed that guy get arrested or tourists to be asked to delete their pictures is rooted in a wider view of society at least that is how I see it. I agree Shadforth that it is actually a very hard genre all other challenges aside. Javier thanks for the post, this is an interesting thread.</p>