Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-28-2009, 03:18 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
Fuji 800Z Sample Photos

anyone use this stuff? i tried a roll and everything came out more saturated than i expected. i find my stash of Press 800 less saturated but more grainy. i heard Portra 800 is better anyways.





but there are times when the saturation works





03-28-2009, 03:23 PM   #2
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,742
It is a little bit saturated, but that has his charm...

Which camera and lens did you use ?
03-28-2009, 03:27 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
Original Poster
MZ-S with FA43
03-28-2009, 04:15 PM   #4
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,216
What the hell are you guys eating over there in Toronto? And burning?

But I LIKE it! Not grainy at all!

I cropped the plate photos with my fingers to focus in on the food, and it looks pretty damn nice to me. And that first table shot looks great.

We're talking 800 here!

03-28-2009, 06:11 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
Original Poster
it's teppanyaki, japanese style of cooking on a metal hot plate!
yeah, the grain really isn't bad, even when i go 100% on the scan.
03-28-2009, 07:38 PM   #6
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gabriola Island
Posts: 591
Are you sure it's the film's saturation that's the issue? There are often variations in film scanning due to the inherent stupidity of scanning sofware interacting with varying characteristics of different manufactures' film.

I had a look at your file in Photoshop and make a couple of basic adjustments- reduced yellow saturation to correct colojr balance, then reduced overall saturation to produce a more natural appearance. Hope you don't mind!

03-29-2009, 08:44 AM   #7
Site Supporter
Buffy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts
Posts: 334
QuoteOriginally posted by John Poirier Quote
I had a look at your file in Photoshop and make a couple of basic adjustments- reduced yellow saturation to correct colojr balance, then reduced overall saturation to produce a more natural appearance.
I think I like the original better--the yellow adds a certain warmth to it that's very inviting.
03-29-2009, 08:51 AM   #8
Veteran Member
ftpaddict's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yurp
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,669
QuoteOriginally posted by Buffy Quote
I think I like the original better--the yellow adds a certain warmth to it that's very inviting.
Agree with Buffy here.

Also quite enjoy the output of the film.

03-29-2009, 09:01 AM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by John Poirier Quote
Are you sure it's the film's saturation that's the issue? There are often variations in film scanning due to the inherent stupidity of scanning sofware interacting with varying characteristics of different manufactures' film.

I had a look at your file in Photoshop and make a couple of basic adjustments- reduced yellow saturation to correct colojr balance, then reduced overall saturation to produce a more natural appearance. Hope you don't mind!
usually the scans from the place i go to are pretty reliable in terms of colour (at least for negatives ), but you're right, might just be the scanning.

no worries, i like the extra input
03-29-2009, 12:48 PM   #10
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gabriola Island
Posts: 591
QuoteOriginally posted by Buffy Quote
I think I like the original better--the yellow adds a certain warmth to it that's very inviting.
I agree with Buffy that a warmer rendition (and a bit more saturation) would make the image more inviting.

However, my point was that the saturation of the image could easily be adjusted to "natural" looking levels.

In other words, the high saturation is not necessarily a fixed characteristic of that particular film- and even if the film does tend to be saturated, it can readily be adjusted in Photoshop. Therefore people shouldn't be turned off using that film by one set of results.

When films, particularly negative films, are scanned, the "output" is not a fixed quanitity. Scanning at this level is not a science. It's a soup of variables involving hardware, software, the perceptions of the scanner operator, and the perceptions of the photographer.

Unless you are operating in very controlled conditions that eliminate all variables in scanners and scanner drivers, it is not practical to evaluate a colour negative film's saturation, and colour rendition in general, with any degree of accuracy. Comparisions of a given film between different scanners running different software operated by different people are essentially meaningless.

It doesn't really matter. A scan should be viewed as a starting point from which you make proper corrections using your image editing software. Scan at 48 bit colour depth, avoid clipping shadows and highlights, try to get half-decent colour balance, and do the serious corrections in Photoshop. The idea is not to produce a finished image when you're scanning, but to avoid producing a screwed-up file that cannot be corrected properly in your image editor.

This advice is valid for the typical desktop scanners that most of us use. There are pre-press scanning systems that operate on a different level, but we won't go there.

I'm speaking as someone who ran a film lab using densitometry for process control for 10 years, followed by a transition to scanning in the mid 1990s. I've reproduced many thousands of archival images, which can be very tricky, for publications and exhibits. I think I know a few things about both the potential and limitations of film scanning.

The reason I'm making these comments is that on this and other forums I've seen a lot of inexperienced people making blanket statements about film and scanning. This causes much confusion about what is in fact possible. In my view this tends to discourage newcomers from pursuing the medium by creating the impression that a lot of negative things (like apparent excessive saturation, or excessive contrast, or unsharpness) are set in stone, when in fact all that is required is a simple, systematic approach to scanning and image editing.

Cheers
03-29-2009, 01:16 PM   #11
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 52
On a side note to what John said here: I was thinking quite the same thing (although without the years of experience of course ) when I was looking at some of the photos posted in the thread "Lets see those film shots". Although definately not all, some scans show colors and saturation that seem to be quite off, which can be probably quite easily be corrected with PP software like Photoshop, Lightroom or Aperture. Like shown in this thread, over-saturated pictures can usually quite easily be turned into (very) neutral tones, and everywhere in between. How much you edit your photos, is all up to you and your personal taste.

Since I plan on doing much more film shooting in the near future, I would wanna look into some sort of self-scanning method for my 35mm film. I found that one can find a negative-scanner relatively cheap (for a about 60-100 euros, the ones I looked up briefly), however I was disappointed to see that they all only seemed to support Windows XP / Vista. You can see where I'm going with this: I'm a (proud) Mac user, and looking for a negative scanner compatible with my OS. Does anyone have any suggestions on this front? I really only need a negative-scanner, and since my desk-space is limited I'm not really looking into flatbed scanners with negative holders.

Sorry if I'm hi-jacking the thread with this...
03-29-2009, 05:28 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
Original Poster
if i'm going for neutral colours ... i would rather use a neutral film rather than using a saturated one and then desaturating in post :P

it is tough to compare film stuff because there are so many variables in the procsesing and scanning phase.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sample photos of K-x RVN Pentax News and Rumors 63 09-26-2009 03:33 AM
Sample size of photos to email jbrowning Photographic Industry and Professionals 12 08-24-2009 08:24 PM
Sample K7 photos some with high ISO pastorbbc Pentax DSLR Discussion 0 07-05-2009 06:22 PM
Sample Photos from a Cosina 50/1.4 MF lens. frank Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 12-28-2008 11:37 PM
Full sized sample photos from several lenses tcom Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 10-13-2007 09:02 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:13 AM. | 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