Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-30-2016, 10:35 AM - 3 Likes   #4951
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 212
Hasselblad 500C, 150mm/f4, HP5+, Rodinal stand, X1 scan:









C.
PS: gargoyles don't get bathroom breaks either...

04-30-2016, 02:48 PM - 3 Likes   #4952
Site Supporter
jcdoss's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kansas City, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,810
Gargoyles... what a stunning coincidence. I just uploaded these two to Flickr within the past couple hours.




Two Gargoyles taken with Pentax Super Program and Pentax-K 135/2.5 on Kentmere 400 and stand developed in Caffenol-CL for 70min by Jason Doss, on Flickr

The second one has Newton rings in the upper left, an artefact of scanning. It occurs when you use glass panes as a slide holder... I picked up two 8x10 picture frames for $1 each, took out the glass, and I sandwich my negs between them to scan. It keeps the negs nice and flat, they're simple to load and unload, and allows you to scan the sprocket holes if you so desire (which I do). Newton rings occur in <1% of my photos, but strangely, as in this case, they usually add something to the picture. This time, one can imagine an interdimensional portal from which the gargoyle just came. Or maybe they're not Newton rings at all?
04-30-2016, 04:22 PM - 1 Like   #4953
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,145
QuoteOriginally posted by jcdoss Quote
Gargoyles... what a stunning coincidence. I just uploaded these two to Flickr within the past couple hours.




Two Gargoyles taken with Pentax Super Program and Pentax-K 135/2.5 on Kentmere 400 and stand developed in Caffenol-CL for 70min by Jason Doss, on Flickr

The second one has Newton rings in the upper left, an artefact of scanning. It occurs when you use glass panes as a slide holder... I picked up two 8x10 picture frames for $1 each, took out the glass, and I sandwich my negs between them to scan. It keeps the negs nice and flat, they're simple to load and unload, and allows you to scan the sprocket holes if you so desire (which I do). Newton rings occur in <1% of my photos, but strangely, as in this case, they usually add something to the picture. This time, one can imagine an interdimensional portal from which the gargoyle just came. Or maybe they're not Newton rings at all?
Dude, you just opened a hellmouth.
05-01-2016, 10:42 AM - 4 Likes   #4954
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Nagoya
Posts: 497
Recent fun with the Zorki 4. Jupiter-8 50mm f2, HP5+





05-01-2016, 03:37 PM - 1 Like   #4955
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,847
Well, I'm producing images. That's a start.

More work is required at all stages of the game - taking, developing, DSLR-macro scanning and Raw Therapee tweaking.

Harsh criticism combined with helpful suggestions most welcome.







I suspect something is going awry at the digitisation stage, but I'm not sure what it is. Shutter speed shouldn't matter because the negs are being held in a slide/neg holder attached to the end of the lens. Am I scanning too shallow (not stopped down enough?) Should I be over- or under-exposing the captures, or going for "accurate" every time, selecting a nice deep f-stop and letting shutter speed do what it will? Haaaaaaalp!
05-01-2016, 03:48 PM - 5 Likes   #4956
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,116
Back in the 1960s my favorite film in my H1a was Panatomic X, for its tonality and fine grain. Oh, I shot a lot of Tri-X for available light, but I have missed Panatomic X more. I usually developed it in Ethol UFG.
So today I loaded my H1a with the best substitute I can find now: Ilford Pan F at 50 ISO, shot a short roll, and processed in Rodinal, as I also like the tonality it gives. Just scanned in with an Epson V700. Here's one with a Super Takumar 200 f4 1/125th:
Name:  Freedom.jpg
Views: 119
Size:  346.6 KB
While in college I went from H1a to Canon FT, and had a 200 f3.5 for it, used for sports. But this S-T 200 is easily its equal.
Of course, 50 ISO sounds limiting today, but in the 1930s-1950 it would have seemed quite fast, and would have been used for available light. So here's a try, in dim room light (this lamp is our nightlight) with 55 f2.0 ST, 1/15th:
Name:  MidnightMemories.jpg
Views: 117
Size:  262.8 KB
05-02-2016, 06:26 AM   #4957
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 364
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Well, I'm producing images. That's a start.

More work is required at all stages of the game - taking, developing, DSLR-macro scanning and Raw Therapee tweaking.

Harsh criticism combined with helpful suggestions most welcome.







I suspect something is going awry at the digitisation stage, but I'm not sure what it is. Shutter speed shouldn't matter because the negs are being held in a slide/neg holder attached to the end of the lens. Am I scanning too shallow (not stopped down enough?) Should I be over- or under-exposing the captures, or going for "accurate" every time, selecting a nice deep f-stop and letting shutter speed do what it will? Haaaaaaalp!
Suggest you confirm the 'flare' you are getting on posts is absent from negatives.

Hold negative in front of light source.

Also confirm the rebates and interframe gaps are clear film, apart from frame numbers.
05-02-2016, 06:59 AM   #4958
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,847
Thank you, @Xmas, for your comments. I suspect it may be a side effect of the way I'm digitising the negatives, and I also suspect I now know how and why. (Further experiments to follow; I will get back to you on that one.) Now that I'm getting serious about this (four rolls already developed), I think I may be in the market for a proper flatbed film scanner, which would at least standardise the digitisation phase. I can cope with a lower megapixel count (I happily shot an *ist-DL for seven years after all) if the quality of the digital images is better and more consistent.

05-02-2016, 07:06 AM   #4959
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,145
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Thank you, @Xmas, for your comments. I suspect it may be a side effect of the way I'm digitising the negatives, and I also suspect I now know how and why. (Further experiments to follow; I will get back to you on that one.) Now that I'm getting serious about this (four rolls already developed), I think I may be in the market for a proper flatbed film scanner, which would at least standardise the digitisation phase. I can cope with a lower megapixel count (I happily shot an *ist-DL for seven years after all) if the quality of the digital images is better and more consistent.
Well, FWIW, I quite like these: the subjects, framing and the overall 'look' you obtained by this process.

Having said that, you might be able to move them toward a more conventionally 'good' technical state in PP.
05-02-2016, 07:48 AM   #4960
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,847
QuoteOriginally posted by dsmithhfx Quote
Having said that, you might be able to move them toward a more conventionally 'good' technical state in PP.
Yeah, still working on that one. I was more interested last night in getting all of the images into "positive" form for initial assessment, but tonight I might pick on one or two and see exactly what can/should be done with them. The other thing I might do with the next film is to give it another minute or two in the developer, or to use stock instead of 1:1, and see how that changes things.
05-02-2016, 07:52 AM   #4961
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 364
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Thank you, @Xmas, for your comments. I suspect it may be a side effect of the way I'm digitising the negatives, and I also suspect I now know how and why. (Further experiments to follow; I will get back to you on that one.) Now that I'm getting serious about this (four rolls already developed), I think I may be in the market for a proper flatbed film scanner, which would at least standardise the digitisation phase. I can cope with a lower megapixel count (I happily shot an *ist-DL for seven years after all) if the quality of the digital images is better and more consistent.
I use a toy Ch film scanner for proofing before wet printing - a 6 mega pixel remaindered at 10.0 GBP toy.
It will allow A3 gilee prints.
You can still get enlargers for free.
05-02-2016, 08:04 AM   #4962
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,847
Unfortunately I don't have space in the house for a wet-printing setup, nor enough time in my life. I had thought about one of these desktop toy scanners, but have been burned by that sort of "cheap and easy" tech before and was loath to try it again.
05-02-2016, 08:23 AM   #4963
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,145
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Yeah, still working on that one. I was more interested last night in getting all of the images into "positive" form for initial assessment, but tonight I might pick on one or two and see exactly what can/should be done with them. The other thing I might do with the next film is to give it another minute or two in the developer, or to use stock instead of 1:1, and see how that changes things.
What xmas said about inspecting the negs. If that's not the issue, is the slide copier thingy leaking light (I assumeyou aren't putting the negs into slide mounts)?

Here's my attempt at PP on the first shot (of the dogs): https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=308216&stc=1&d=1462202100
05-02-2016, 08:35 AM - 2 Likes   #4964
Pentaxian
cooltouch's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 497
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Well, I'm producing images. That's a start.

More work is required at all stages of the game - taking, developing, DSLR-macro scanning and Raw Therapee tweaking.

Harsh criticism combined with helpful suggestions most welcome.

I suspect something is going awry at the digitisation stage, but I'm not sure what it is. Shutter speed shouldn't matter because the negs are being held in a slide/neg holder attached to the end of the lens. Am I scanning too shallow (not stopped down enough?) Should I be over- or under-exposing the captures, or going for "accurate" every time, selecting a nice deep f-stop and letting shutter speed do what it will? Haaaaaaalp!
Can you describe the duplicator setup you're using? Is it one of the "digital" slide duplicators that thread onto the front of a lens that are periodically all over eBay? I bought an Opteka brand a few years ago, and found that it was just okay. But it got me started.

I "dupe" all my 35mm film now, slides as well as negative film. As mentioned, I started out using one of the digital slide duplicators, but I was determined to maximize the resolution I could get. My rig has gone through a few evolutions and currently the only part of the "slide duplicator" I still use is the tube that threads into the front of the lens. I've pretty much cannibalized it. I even removed that corrective element that was located inside of the tube. So now I just use this tube's flanged end to hold a slide stage and roll film stage. I bought a Cambron brand zoom slide duplicator off eBay for about $10 for the slide stage, which is held onto the duplicator by metal clips. It just slides off. Same thing is true for the roll film stage I also found on eBay, which is less common. Some of the new "digital" slide duplicators have panels that will hold unmounted 35mm film, in which case you would not need the roll film stage. You may not need the slide stage either, but I didn't like the way the duplicator I bought was holding the slides,so I just cut off the slide stage portion, leaving behind a flanged section to which I could attach the moveable stage.

The heart of my dupe setup is a macro lens. I have used both a pre-AI 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor and an AIs 55mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor. I used that old pre-AI Micro Nikkor for years, believing that there could be nothing sharper than that lens because it is just so dang sharp! But I was wrong. The AIs 55/2.8 is sharper by a noticeable amount. So I now use it at the heart of my dupe setup. Still, whether it's a 55/3.5 or 55/2.8 -- both will resolve Kodachrome 64's grain with a good digital sensor, so either will work very well. As will any other good quality macro lens in the 50mm range. Macros longer than that, though, won't work because they crop the image.

Here's a pic of my current setup, using the 55/3.5 and my NEX 7. It's almost the same wth the 55/2.8. I've made one modification. I now use both the K4 and K5 extensions between the lens and the tube. This reduces the size of the image slightly, such that I can see the borders of the slide image in the dupes. With the K5 only, it is slightly cropping the image. This may not matter, but I have a number of slides that use every bit of image area and can't be cropped at all.


The Nikon BR2 and BR3 tubes and the TC-14b can be substituted with just extension tube(s) of the appropriate length. The K5 tube has 52mm threads, and such a tube is harder to come by.

This is the setup I use with my 1.6x crop factor Canon. As you can see, there's a lot less stuff needed to get very close to full screen with that 1.6x crop factor:


How well do they work? This first image was taken with a Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5. Kodachrome 64. Late afternoon sun, hence the strong amber colors. Very good detail in the original slide, which was successfully captured in the duplicated image. This dupe was taken with the AIs 55mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor:


Here's another Kodachrome 64 slide I shot with a Sigma 600mm f/8 mirror of an offshore oil rig:


And here's a 100% crop. As you can see, it is successfully resolving K64 grain.


Oh, and since this is a B&W thread, here are a couple of B&W images I duped with this rig:

Nikon F, 50mm f/1.4 Tri-X, developed full strength in D-76:


Ditto above:

Last edited by cooltouch; 05-02-2016 at 08:41 AM.
05-02-2016, 08:48 AM   #4965
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,847
QuoteOriginally posted by cooltouch Quote
Can you describe the duplicator setup you're using?
Pentax K-5 with 35mm f/2.8 Limited Macro, Asahi Pentax slide/negative copier, and a few 49mm filters in between to act as spacers and ensure capture of the entire film frame, and to give the slide copier mount something to grip. The whole is then pointed at a very bright LED on the ceiling, though I will be doing some experiments with a flash in the near future. The filters may be causing some of the problem, and I have debated the merits or otherwise of sacrificing their glass. If I could get some sort of empty 49mm threaded tube, like a filter without its glass, that would be just as good.
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 12:35 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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