Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-08-2015, 06:11 PM - 4 Likes   #4456
Pentaxian
vinceloc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 352
B+W film is 3D magic....



ACROS100

---------- Post added 12-09-2015 at 09:30 AM ----------

Upon watching one of Ansel Adams' documentaries in Youtube, one of the things he said made a major impression on me. Adams, aside from being a legendary photographer, is also an excellent classical piano player. When comparing photography to a symphony orchestra, Adams commented on the difference between the two principal processes of a photograph, namely the film negative process and the printing process. He considers the film negative as the core of a symphonic orchestra while the printing being the interpretation of a symphony by the orchestra.

For me, it is this explanation by Adams of photography which makes film photography still very relevant today in our digital age. A photographer can continue to use film as the "core" of his photographs, while migrating to the digital process from the classical wet process when "interpreting" the final outcome of his photograph. I have printed some of my 35mm B+W shots by first digitally scanning them using my K5 and having the PP done by an expert printer, and I have to say the result has been amazing.

Comparing it to my prints of B+W photos taken by my K5 DSLR, the results just have more life, texture and depth to it. Before I had these shots of my film photos printed, I was very happy with the print output of the digital B+W shots. But now, when comparing the two, I see the difference, and it is significant in my eyes.

Long live B+W film photography!!

12-09-2015, 07:25 AM - 2 Likes   #4457
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047

Agfa Record II 6x9 folder
12-09-2015, 07:55 AM   #4458
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,303
QuoteOriginally posted by vinceloc Quote
I have [had] printed some of my 35mm B+W shots by first digitally scanning them using my K5 and having the PP done by an expert printer, and I have to say the result has been amazing [...] Comparing it to my prints of B+W photos taken by my K5 DSLR, the results just have more life, texture and depth to it.
While I'm (still) exclusively a film user, I have used digital on a few occasions, and looked at digital images both on screen and prints, and have done considerable PP work on digital scans from film originals and wet darkroom prints using Photoshop and GIMP. I can't say I agree with your premise which appears to be based on a sentimental bias towards film as an appealing concept, and perhaps lack of understanding of digital PP and (presumably) inkjet printing.

When film is transferred to the digital realm, it's a 'level playing field' -- if the scan is high enough quality(!) The fact that your k5 (described as an 'enthusiast' model in reviews), is apparently more than capable of producing a sufficient quality 'scan' from your negatives, speaks volumes about the relative resolutions of the two media.

I saw a show by the master photographer Sebastião Salgado here last year, comprising huge inkjet blowups from both film and digital captures, and was very hard pressed to spot any qualitative differences in these prints, apart from a few shots on fast 35mm film.
12-09-2015, 12:48 PM - 3 Likes   #4459
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 251
M7, 35FLE, Acros 100, Qualls' monobath, X1 scan:







M7, MacroElmar-M 90, Acros 100, Qualls' monobath, X1 scan:







M7, Elmar 135, Acros 100, Qualls' monobath, X1 scan:







Chris

12-09-2015, 07:51 PM - 1 Like   #4460
Pentaxian
vinceloc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 352
QuoteOriginally posted by dsmithhfx Quote
While I'm (still) exclusively a film user, I have used digital on a few occasions, and looked at digital images both on screen and prints, and have done considerable PP work on digital scans from film originals and wet darkroom prints using Photoshop and GIMP. I can't say I agree with your premise which appears to be based on a sentimental bias towards film as an appealing concept, and perhaps lack of understanding of digital PP and (presumably) inkjet printing.

When film is transferred to the digital realm, it's a 'level playing field' -- if the scan is high enough quality(!) The fact that your k5 (described as an 'enthusiast' model in reviews), is apparently more than capable of producing a sufficient quality 'scan' from your negatives, speaks volumes about the relative resolutions of the two media.

I saw a show by the master photographer Sebastião Salgado here last year, comprising huge inkjet blowups from both film and digital captures, and was very hard pressed to spot any qualitative differences in these prints, apart from a few shots on fast 35mm film.
You may be right and I am just being somewhat sentimental and subjective in my views Maybe I need more time to do more comparative tests between B+W film digitally scanned vs. B+W digital before I make such a conclusion. But don't get me wrong. I was not comparing resolving power between both mediums. It was more a comparison on what I have observed so far, and that is B+W film is grittier with more depth. Digital B+W prints are seamlessly flat, unnaturally clean and sanitized. I guess for certain shooting styles, digital will prove more attractive (portaiture perhaps?), but for others such as street and abstracts, well film, even when digitally converted and printed, have more character IMHO.

But again, I have to admit that my views are extremely subjective and not based on hard facts or expertise. After all, I'm just a photo enthusiast that still uses a 16mp K5 and CS3 and only have my photos printed to sizes of 8x12" to 12x18", not any bigger. So no one should take my word for it.
12-09-2015, 09:47 PM - 5 Likes   #4461
New Member
lamlux's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 4
Hi all, new here, figured it's a nice place to start.
12-09-2015, 10:53 PM   #4462
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 4,102
QuoteOriginally posted by lamlux Quote
Hi all, new here, figured it's a nice place to start.
Welcome. Looks like you're off to a good start.
12-10-2015, 01:53 AM   #4463
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,303
QuoteOriginally posted by vinceloc Quote
You may be right and I am just being somewhat sentimental and subjective in my views Maybe I need more time to do more comparative tests between B+W film digitally scanned vs. B+W digital before I make such a conclusion. But don't get me wrong. I was not comparing resolving power between both mediums. It was more a comparison on what I have observed so far, and that is B+W film is grittier with more depth. Digital B+W prints are seamlessly flat, unnaturally clean and sanitized. I guess for certain shooting styles, digital will prove more attractive (portaiture perhaps?), but for others such as street and abstracts, well film, even when digitally converted and printed, have more character IMHO.

But again, I have to admit that my views are extremely subjective and not based on hard facts or expertise. After all, I'm just a photo enthusiast that still uses a 16mp K5 and CS3 and only have my photos printed to sizes of 8x12" to 12x18", not any bigger. So no one should take my word for it.
From what I've seen of your work here (in digital format only, obviously), I think you are an outstanding photographer and I broadly agree with many of your points, however I'm speaking of the potential of digital PP to bring out any quality you are looking for, including the 'look' of film. You may be interested in following up on Salgado's methodology to achieve exactly that, which turns out to be a good deal more complicated than I described, or imagined.

12-10-2015, 02:22 AM   #4464
Site Supporter
chickentender's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,987
QuoteOriginally posted by dsmithhfx Quote
While I'm (still) exclusively a film user, I have used digital on a few occasions, and looked at digital images both on screen and prints, and have done considerable PP work on digital scans from film originals and wet darkroom prints using Photoshop and GIMP. I can't say I agree with your premise which appears to be based on a sentimental bias towards film as an appealing concept, and perhaps lack of understanding of digital PP and (presumably) inkjet printing.

When film is transferred to the digital realm, it's a 'level playing field' -- if the scan is high enough quality(!) The fact that your k5 (described as an 'enthusiast' model in reviews), is apparently more than capable of producing a sufficient quality 'scan' from your negatives, speaks volumes about the relative resolutions of the two media.
I disagree with this in part. The example here speaks of using the K5 to digitally capture what the film emulsion has already captured, which while it's certainly up to the task (if setup properly, far better than most consumer scanners) it doesn't really speak volumes about it's ability to capture the same scene. The OP's opinion is rather common one, that many have discovered, bias or no; the way that a b&w film records photos is dirty, chemical and takes place on a 3d surface, leading to all the barely-perceptible intimacies of the film image, contrasted greatly with the way the the Sony sensor in the K5 achieves the recording in a series of "on/off" switches. The former is a hand-print of sorts, the latter a numerical value. It's also not surprising that the K5, which can capture so accurately a 2d representation captured originally on film. A digital camera is, after all, a very compact CCD or CMOS "scanner".
12-10-2015, 11:56 AM - 2 Likes   #4465
Pentaxian
bobbotron's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,865
I developed a roll of Rollei Retro 400s on the weekend, I took a number of IR photos with it. I screwed up the focus on a lot of the shots, either by a little or a lot which is too bad, but it's a fun little camera!







12-11-2015, 06:43 AM - 3 Likes   #4466
Veteran Member
Cuthbert's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,573
Nikon FM, Nokton 58mm f1.4, Delta 100...development that left to be desired:








Last edited by Cuthbert; 12-11-2015 at 06:51 AM.
12-11-2015, 10:07 AM   #4467
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,303
QuoteOriginally posted by bobbotron Quote
I developed a roll of Rollei Retro 400s on the weekend, I took a number of IR photos with it. I screwed up the focus on a lot of the shots, either by a little or a lot which is too bad, but it's a fun little camera!






I really like the 2nd shot as a photograph, regardless of gear/film (which is generally irrelevant) -- the others may convey something of interest to folks who want to try the film.
12-11-2015, 12:29 PM - 1 Like   #4468
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,017
Yes, long live BW photography!

Ansel Adams compressed/expanded his highlights (his zone system) of his sheet film. So he was custom developing the negative for the scene. That is what I think was the core of that orchestra analogy. But sending your small format film out for average development or developing all your film with average developing is not in the same league as what Adams was doing. But nevertheless you can still get great results without doing that because may scenes fall within average developing.

Last edited by tuco; 12-11-2015 at 12:51 PM.
12-11-2015, 02:43 PM - 1 Like   #4469
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,298
QuoteOriginally posted by vinceloc Quote
He considers the film negative as the core of a symphonic orchestra while the printing being the interpretation of a symphony by the orchestra
"score" (as in musical score), not "core", although the meaning is similar enough in this context.
12-11-2015, 11:45 PM   #4470
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,617
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
Ansel Adams compressed/expanded his highlights (his zone system) of his sheet film. So he was custom developing the negative for the scene. That is what I think was the core of that orchestra analogy.
The quote is from "The Print", though you are correct that care and expertise applied in the capture and developing are basis for all that follows. My understanding has been that the care taken in making a good negative is analogous to the creative orchestration/exposition of a theme (compose, expose, and develop to interpret the range of light on the subject) and that same negative can be nuanced multiple ways in the same sense that a conductor might revisit the same score multiple times to a different effect. I thought a good example might be the various treatments Adams gave the famous "Moonrise over Hernandez New Mexico" negative (there were many), but then I remembered that the negative was not a "careful" creation. In short, the "score" was a mess and very difficult to print.


Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 12-11-2015 at 11:57 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
autofocus, camera, d-76, dog, doubt, exposure, film, flickr, fp4, kiev, leak, lens, love, mine, minutes, nikkormat, pentax, phil, photography, pm, post, quality, roll, shot, shots, smc, sp500, station, steve, thanks
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Travel Some B&W film shots from the Gulf of Gaeta, Italy Rense Post Your Photos! 3 04-23-2011 12:22 AM
First post - few b&w shots sealisthenewbeaver Photo Critique 2 09-22-2008 06:40 PM
My Pentax shots in print & film. blwnhr Photographic Technique 5 03-18-2008 05:13 PM
First shots with a zx-5 film camera (c&c welcome) jbrowning Post Your Photos! 2 12-23-2007 08:18 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:31 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top