[aurele]

hm.... it was scanned by lab, I think I need to talk to the lab about the 'doesn't look so much film-like look'... I personally also think it loses a lot of colors. Will update if I get reply from them.

So far, your picture came out really great.

On this one, i just feel, the color seems washed out, because the lack of contrast.
When i look at the left part (the wood / branch block on the left of the picture), it's like the black ain't black / dark.
Just playing a bit with the curve to just give a small boost to black will help.

I took the liberty to give it a fast try. 1st is original picture, 2nd is with a small play with curve to give it a "S" look.

Original


Change in curve


It just remove the white fog, and increase the feeling of contrast, and keep overall the same color / contrast on the whole scene. It just boosted the "black".

It's just a suggestion.

Remember, as i said before, all your picture came out really great so far*. This one, just stands out, as less contrasty and with less pastel colors than the previous ones.

*And because of you, my next christmas wish is a P67

[tuco]

...
On this one, i just feel, the color seems washed out, because the lack of contrast.

But that high-keyish looks is what he shooting for. He doesn't want the look you describe and he mentioned that way back on his first few rolls, IIRC.

[manntax]

On this one, i just feel, the color seems washed out, because the lack of contrast. When i look at the left part (the wood / branch block on the left of the picture), it's like the black ain't black / dark. Just playing a bit with the curve to just give a small boost to black will help. I took the liberty to give it a fast try. 1st is original picture, 2nd is with a small play with curve to give it a "S" look.

I think similarly as tuco , quoted below, that this colour and sort of charm is what the original author is looking for, and I personally find it quite distinctive and very appealing. My initial comments were about curiosity whether one is above to achieve this in prints as well as on the screen.
In this particular picture - the colour theme is one of the things that I actually love - this is very high quality light that I often see but rarely am able to employ in something as pleasant as this. The problem I mentioned was about the sort of film-look, that is obviously hard to define, but I would certainly ( at least partially ) attribute to that very fine distinctive grain - which I can't really see in those shots. But again - the result is what counts and that is very appealing. From those two shots I would definitely prefer the original as your changes added too strong contrast and killed some of this quality light that we all appreciate in the original

But that high-keyish looks is what he shooting for. He doesn't want the look you describe and he mentioned that way back on his first few rolls, IIRC.

Yeah I agree.

[LFLee]

So far, your picture came out really great.

On this one, i just feel, the color seems washed out, because the lack of contrast.
When i look at the left part (the wood / branch block on the left of the picture), it's like the black ain't black / dark.
Just playing a bit with the curve to just give a small boost to black will help.

I took the liberty to give it a fast try. 1st is original picture, 2nd is with a small play with curve to give it a "S" look.

Original


Change in curve


It just remove the white fog, and increase the feeling of contrast, and keep overall the same color / contrast on the whole scene. It just boosted the "black".

It's just a suggestion.

Remember, as i said before, all your picture came out really great so far*. This one, just stands out, as less contrasty and with less pastel colors than the previous ones.

*And because of you, my next christmas wish is a P67

But that high-keyish looks is what he shooting for. He doesn't want the look you describe and he mentioned that way back on his first few rolls, IIRC.

I think similarly as tuco , quoted below, that this colour and sort of charm is what the original author is looking for, and I personally find it quite distinctive and very appealing. My initial comments were about curiosity whether one is above to achieve this in prints as well as on the screen.
In this particular picture - the colour theme is one of the things that I actually love - this is very high quality light that I often see but rarely am able to employ in something as pleasant as this. The problem I mentioned was about the sort of film-look, that is obviously hard to define, but I would certainly ( at least partially ) attribute to that very fine distinctive grain - which I can't really see in those shots. But again - the result is what counts and that is very appealing. From those two shots I would definitely prefer the original as your changes added too strong contrast and killed some of this quality light that we all appreciate in the original

Yeah I agree.

Thanks everyone for your constructive input! They are very helpful and make me think of different ways of presenting a picture, style, etc., very much appreciated!

[desertscape]

It is all a matter of style preference. Years ago, a more saturated look was en vogue. Today, it is popular to have bleached out colors for model work.

[tuco]

It is all a matter of style preference. Years ago, a more saturated look was en vogue....

And look how stereo-typed "street photography" is in the digital world today. Many crush the heck out of their blacks to make it look like really pushed film as if that is the gold standard.

Hey, when I was in high school we all had fun pushing the hell out of Tri-X too. Crushing the heck out of our blacks was easy. We thought it was cool. But it was also often a necessity on film and handhold work back then.

[grhazelton]

Kodak Gold is such great film.
Nice work.

---------- Post added 10-15-2014 at 07:27 PM ----------

Zenza Bronica ETRSi
Zenzanon EII 75/2.8
Kodak Ektar 100
Epson V500

Colton, I really admire your ability to find great pictures in the simplest subjects. You have a fine eye, my friend.

[Swift1]

Colton, I really admire your ability to find great pictures in the simplest subjects. You have a fine eye, my friend.

Thank you much

[aurele]

But that high-keyish looks is what he shooting for. He doesn't want the look you describe and he mentioned that way back on his first few rolls, IIRC.

i know, but the last picture seemed quite different from the other : looked more digital, with color less "pastel" and just bleached. To my eyes, the previous one, where high-keyish (of course !), but with better colors (not so saturated, but very real), and with a far less bleached look.

I find the last picture, not very good, when it comes to color and feel, even though i really like the composition, and the high-keyish look every time.

Anyways

[spinach]

rollei digibase cr200

sure would be nice if the linux drivers could use digital ice


also digibase cr200

[Jetsam1]

Been a while but here are some Spotmatic F shots from a few years ago. The first is with Kodak BW400 and of my wife and so is the second at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park. The third is with Kodak colourplus 200 and of flooding in York. Just realised the first image is horizontal......... Oh well!!!! Oops!

Edit two: This is a truly inspiring thread and the quality of the images from the contributors is really top notch!

[rob1234]

(Cross-posted form the 90s shots thread)

I got a big box of old slide's of my father's, and am slowly working my way through them…



Pentax LX or MX
Unknown lens
Agfa CT18
4000dpi scan on Canon FS4000US

[LesDMess]

(Cross-posted form the 90s shots thread)
I got a big box of old slide's of my father's, and am slowly working my way through them…
Pentax LX or MX
Unknown lens
Agfa CT18
4000dpi scan on Canon FS4000US

Very sharp image and must be fun to go back in time!
I have never used this film type but understand it is a ISO400 speed type?
BTW, I can't help but notice the blemish when viewing the full res version of the image. Is it because the FS4000's scratch and dust removal is not compatible with this film type?

[LesDMess]

Speaking of going back in time, does anyone even wear a wrist watch anymore?

My Invicta Bolt Zeus automatic chronograph taken with Pentax LX + 100mm f4 macro using Lomography 100 film




I grew up wearing the more traditional 36mm watch for comparison. Shot using the same setup as above. It's bigger than a traditional watch . . .

[rob1234]

Very sharp image and must be fun to go back in time!
I have never used this film type but understand it is a ISO400 speed type?
BTW, I can't help but notice the blemish when viewing the full res version of the image. Is it because the FS4000's scratch and dust removal is not compatible with this film type?

It's slow going, but enjoyable! This shot was taken before I was born, on the 19th May 1981.

I see what you mean - I have just rescanned it and it is fine? Vuescan and the FS4000 seem to work very well, including the IR dust removal.




Agfa CT18 was a 50 ISO speed reversal film, similar to Kodachrome in that it had a unique development process. The slides aren't in great condition now, 33 years later, but good enough for the above.