Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,968   Posts: 1,558,471   Online: 1004
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    170
    Images
    9
    Here is the 2nd one as a PS file.

    Would it be better if I scanned it and left it the same size as the negative. I can go up to the computer lab and rescan them this weekend if it makes a difference.

    I am doing my contact sheets in the darkroom and this film is a b**** to work with to get a decent contact print. I don't think it is the film so much as the way I have processed it.

    Thanks.
    Attached Images

  2. #12
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,190
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by sunnyroller
    Here is the 2nd one as a PS file.

    Would it be better if I scanned it and left it the same size as the negative. I can go up to the computer lab and rescan them this weekend if it makes a difference.

    I am doing my contact sheets in the darkroom and this film is a b**** to work with to get a decent contact print. I don't think it is the film so much as the way I have processed it.

    Thanks.
    Looks pretty good to me. I'm just not seeing the grain you're talking about. Look at the specular highlights on the edge of the stove. If there were any appreciable grain you'd see it there. Where is it?

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    170
    Images
    9
    These two might show it better. The one of caitlin in the cart corral has been worked over in PS for contrast d & b etc, just not spotted. Please forgive the PS part, the only raw scan I have of this is in my apug gallery. I think that working the image in PS makes the grain thing worse. Although other images shot on other film worked in PS does not have this problem.

    I am not trying to make this about PS at all, so please forgive the references.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails MAJJeepupload.png  
    Attached Images

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    170
    Images
    9
    The one of her in the kitchen was the one underexposed by 4 stops that did not exhibit grain. On the others it is in the midtones more than anywhere else.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    170
    Images
    9
    c6h6o3--
    BTW, that is a great portrait. Thanks for the help. Maybe I need to underexpose more than I am doing.

  6. #16
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,214
    Images
    65
    One thing that has to be understood is that Eastern European films seem to be running about 1 generation or more behind the films of the major manufacturers. Therefore expect to see films more like you saw in the 60s from EFKE. This includes softer emulsions, more curl, less sharpness and more grain at a given speed and etc. You will probably see a higher level of coating defects per roll as well.

    This is in no way putting them down, it is just a statement of the level of technology. The major manufacturers of today were at this level in the 60s. Nothing wrong with it, just a natural order of progression as they move up the learning curve.

    PE

  7. #17
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,190
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    One thing that has to be understood is that Eastern European films seem to be running about 1 generation or more behind the films of the major manufacturers. Therefore expect to see films more like you saw in the 60s from EFKE. This includes softer emulsions, more curl, less sharpness and more grain at a given speed and etc. You will probably see a higher level of coating defects per roll as well.

    This is in no way putting them down, it is just a statement of the level of technology. The major manufacturers of today were at this level in the 60s. Nothing wrong with it, just a natural order of progression as they move up the learning curve.

    PE
    I still don't see much grain. I really like the Efke films, and couldn't care less if they're 1860's technology, much less 1960's.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Little Rock AR
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    170
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by c6h6o3
    I still don't see much grain. I really like the Efke films, and couldn't care less if they're 1860's technology, much less 1960's.
    Ahhh the 60's. My parents loved it, hence sticking me with the name Sunny in 1972 :-)

    I think the whole hybrid thing is part of the problem. I am going to try to work with these negs in the darkroom and see what I get. Also, gonna develop for less time on the next roll. I believe in Efke--I have seen the results others get out of it--I just have to figure out how to get it to work for me.

    Thanks to all who chimed in.

    Sunny
    Last edited by sunnyroller; 10-21-2005 at 10:52 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: forgot something

  9. #19
    panchromatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lansdale, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    218
    Images
    3
    i shot efke 25 and have cropped, and printed 8x10 with ZERO grain. I'd have to look at my notes but i think it was stand development in rodinal 1:100... don't remember the time, but someone here on apug recommended it.
    --Ryan

    "The negative is the equivalent of the composer's score, and the print the performance." ~Ansel Adams

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,214
    Images
    65
    Hey, I don't object to the 60s look either. The emulsions I'm working on look more like the 40s or 30s. Who am I to complain?

    I was just pointing something out. Thats all.

    PE

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin