tim_tim3

"In fairness, it's nearly impossible to duplicate the color and character of film. That doesn't mean film rendition is better or worse, just different." You said everything indeed. My preferences are definitely for the look of film and this is why I am trying to learn about it. About the business part of the topic : - I actually have lost a few clients because they were looking for a film photographer (it didn't happen a lot I agree, but it happened a few times) - There are actually photographers shooting engagement / couple sessions and even weddings with film cameras...some of them are actually in the most famous of the wedding photography industry. I do agree that the cost is higher of course, but the price of these photographers' services is also way higher. PS : sorry for my late answer, I stopped getting notifications I don't know why

@igord : okay, thank you for your explanations about the auto mode they might be using. I also tried to take pictures of the negatives and to quickly process them in Photoshop (the quality is very bad but it's just for test purposes). In Photoshop I used an Invert adjustment layer and a Level adjustment layer. Everything is attached to this message (left is PENTAX, right is NIKON) @steve_rasmussen : thank you for this point. I do agree that it would be great to give clients the physical print. Nevertheless: - in order to create an online portfolio (and I can't afford to not be present on the Internet), I have to get the file digitalized - people almost always ask for digital files...

@John Seaman : Thank you very much, indeed I made a mistake, the exposure is different indeed (I would have said less than half a stop difference). But you are right the Pentax image looks way darker than this (and I have some other images that are even worst than this one). @igord : Thank you for taking the time to work on the image. I agree with you the scan seems really poor (even though I never worked with a high-end lab so I cannot compare). The files weights 891 Kbytes and its dimensions are 994 x 1416 pixels....I expected something bigger...what's the point of shooting medium format to get such tiny files. I had also worked on the file to adjust a lot of things. But of course the result is very messy due to the quality of the file and I expected something way cleaner than this. I mean I shoot a lot of digital content and have a very precise workflow in place to achieve something close to the film look. I expected (maybe I am naive) to get that film look directly from the film without spending time post-processing the scan. @jochen : thank you very much for your analysis. - I do speak french...I asked the guy from the Lab why the files are so dark and if they were doing something during the process. He told me no, they didn't do any pull or push as I didn't ask for it. The Nikon and the Pentax rolls were both developed and scanned by the same Lab. Nevertheless, I think he told me they send the medium format ones somewhere else. - About overexposing, I have to say that I read that online. Everybody says that it's better to overexpose (at least the Fuji 400h) and that it's way better than to get to much darkness in the result which would be difficult to recover. The goal is to achieve very light and soft portraits, like the ones some wedding photographers get using a Contax 645. - I will try to take pictures of the negatives, thank you for the tip!

Hello, I am very new to film photography, but already earning a living of digital photography. I recently bought two cameras and shot some test rolls - A fuji 400h Roll (rated at ISO 200) on the Pentax 645n - A Portra 400 Roll (rated at ISO 200) on the Nikon F100 Then I took the rolls to a local lab (in Paris France, nothing very fancy just a normal lab...the files are very very small...). As I have no experience at all about it, I would love to have you opinion on the results. On the attached image you can see two pictures. - The one on the left was taken with the Pentax 645n rated ISO 200, 1/180s F/2.8 - The one on the right was taken with the Nikon F100 rated ISO 200, 1/500 F/1.4 These two pictures were taken at the same moment, same light conditions. And the shutter speed + aperture settings should give an identical results when it comes to exposure. Here are my questions : 1 - As the Fuji 400 and Portra 400 films were rated at ISO 200, I expected the picture to be a bit overexposed. Nevertheless as you can see on the attached images, the Pentax result is very very dark and the Nikon result seems to be normally exposed. Is there something I am missing? 2 - Do you think the result is normal or maybe I did something wrong? 3 - I know that the lab is very important in the process. I used a local lab as I just wanted to make sure the cameras were fully working. Do you think the result would have been completely different with a pro lab such as TheFindLab or RichardPhotoLab? Thank you very much for your help and opinions on this :). Have a great day! TimTim

<p>Thank you all so much for your detailed answers, I can feel your involvement and passion while reading them.<br /><br />@Paul I tried this, and apparently it's not the mirror :s.<br />@Rodeo Joe, so sorry to read this :s, may I ask what camera are you shooting with then?<br />@Glen thank you for your help, hope a solution will be find by the expert<br> I gave the camera to an expert in order for him to give me his opinion and how much it would cost to fix it. In the meantime I found a very good deal for a Pentax 645n so I will receive it very soon (and I hope this one will be working normally).<br> <br /><br /></p>

<p>Than you Pete for taking the time to answer and to check the details, I really appreciate it.<br />So this confirm the face that the focusing screen is not upside down, but in the right direction.<br /><br />I actually made another test (without any film in the back) just to check something.<br /><br />I took several objects and focused on them manually. For each object I noted : <br /> - the distance between the object and the film plan<br /> - the indication in meters written on the lens when I achieve perfect focus in the focusing screen.<br /><br />Here is what I found out:<br /> - object at 0,86 meter from the film plan -> the lens says approximatively 0,75 meter<br /> - object at 2,7 meters from the film plan -> the lens says approximatively 1,7 meter<br /> - object at 4,4 meters from the film plan -> the lens says approximatively 2,4 meters<br /> - object at 5,2 meters from the film plan -> the lens says approximatively 2,7 meters<br /><br />It's like the system has actually a strong front focus. When I see my object perfectly in focus in the focusing screen, the lens is actually set on a focal plan a few centimeters to several meters in front of the object depending on its distance from the film plan.<br /><br />I hope this new input help you help me :D.<br /><br /></p>

<p>Thank you Kirk for your answer and consideration.<br />I am still Stuck but please find below some more information...maybe it will help finding the solution.<br /><br /><strong>The direction of the focusing screen</strong> <br />I just checked out the focusing screen inside the camera body (I hope that's what you meant by "Ground glass", if not please let me know). I took it out of the body and found out that indeed the matte/dull side of the glass is looking up and the glossy one is looking down. Nevertheless I also found on youtube 2 video tutorials on "how to change your focusing screen on a Mamiya 645 pro" and it seems that, on these videos, the matte/dull side of the glass is always looking up. <br />I also found out that on the Mamiya 645 Pro, there is no way to put the screen backwards - a little tab for handling works as an index. If you do put it backwards, it won't lock in place.<br /><br /><strong>About the screws</strong><br />Well I think there are no screws for the focusing screen,at least not inside the camera body. The screen is simple inside a carrier attached to the camera body. Nevertheless on the top of the camera body, there are some screws (as seen on the attached image), but I have to say I have no idea what to do with them...and I read on the Internet that "it is not a DIY work" and that the camera should be sent to a professional to calibrate the screen...<br /><br /><strong>The mirror inside the body<br /></strong>I read on the internet that the little piece of plastic supporting the mirror is fragile and can easily break. I checked it out inside the camera body and everything seems to be okay (as seen on the attached image) and the angle of the mirror seems to be 45 degrees. But again it's my first time checking all these things.<br /><br /><strong>The AE Prism Finder FE401<br /></strong>I made a test also comparing what I see directly on the camera body focusing screen and in the prism finder to be sure the focus problem doesn't come from the prism. But I see the exact same thing : when my subject is in focus on the camera focusing screen, it's also in focus when I plug the prism and look in its viewfinder. So I guess the problem doesn't come from here.<br /><br /><strong>Back and lens<br /></strong>As I only have one back and one lens, I can't actually check the behavior of the camera in the same conditions with different ones.<br /><br /><br /></p><div></div>

<p>Hello everybody,<br /><br />I am based in Paris, France, and I recently bought a Mamiya 645 pro kit on ebay (camera body, 120mm back, AE Prism Finder FE401, power winder and the lens Sekor 80mm f/2.8) from a Japanese vendor.<br />It is actually my first time shooting with a medium format camera (and actually almost the first time shooting film). <br /><br />I made a few shots for testing purpose on 2 rolls: Fuji 400h pro (a few weeks ago) and Kodak Portra 400 (a few days ago). I just got the scan from the lab and I have several problems I wanted to share with you.<br /><br /><br /> - First of all, while shooting I noticed that the light metering results proposed by the camera and readable through the AE Prism Finder are completely different to the ones calculated by my Digital Nikon Camera. For example for a single scene I want to shoot, the Nikon calculates 1/1000 second and the Mamiya says 1/4 second. I don't remember this mistake to occur a few weeks ago when I was shooting the Fuji Roll, but it was definitely not working a few days ago while shooting the Kodak Roll. So I shot both using the metering of the Mamiya and the metering of my Digital camera : the Lab results show that the Nikon metering displays the correct exposure...so I guess there is a problem with the Mamiya.<br /><br /> - Second, every single picture I received from the Lab is blurry. I focus manually of course...and well...my subject was perfectly sharp in the viewfinder while shooting. On the Fuji Roll, the subject is out of focus as if the focal plan was 20 to 50 centimeters before...On the Kodak Roll, the subject is like absolutely out of focus (I focused manually on my model and she is totally out of focus whereas the ground that is 3 meters before here is extra sharp)<br /><br />PS : I shot everything at aperture 2.8<br /><br />I am fully disappointed and I have to say I don't know if I did something wrong. It's like nothing is working properly and like it's actually getting worse...Do you have any idea of what is going on and what should I do about it?<br /><br />Thank you very much for your much needed help and I hope I was detailed and clear enough in the description of my issues.<br /><br />Tim</p><div></div>