Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,287   Posts: 1,535,314   Online: 887
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 40 of 40
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    39
    Again, thank you for the flood of good advice. Looking more closely at my scans, I have gotten a good number of Agfapan scans with 400 rated at 400 that work for me.The one-stop pushes are rough but sometimes salvageable, while the two-stops are, well, rough. I'm going to see what the TMX100 looks like (hopefully by the end of the weekend), and the next roll after that will be TMX400, so I should be getting some experience with some very low grain film. We'll see what commercial scans of these look like. I'll also throw some Plus-X (Arista Premium, right?) in with my next Freestyle order, since it seems to have a rabid following, along with maybe some more TX400 (Arista Premium 400? Gotta love Freestyle).

    I am looking into my negative scanner options as well.
    Photoblog, though I'll warn you it's only mostly analog.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by kodachrome64 View Post
    If the grain you are getting from Tri-X makes it "unusable" at times, I think something is wrong. I am in the same boat you are...I love developing my negatives and controlling the output but I do not have the ability to print for now. I use 400TX a lot and I buy it from the 100 ft roll; grain has never been a problem for me. Only in Rodinal would I call it "grainy" but even then it looks quite nice. I even shoot it all the way up to 3200 and fine the grain very nice. Even at 1600 it is noticeably less grainy than the so-called high speed films like T-Max 3200 and Neopan 1600.
    Well, "unusable" may have been an overstatement- they are grainy for sure, but in some contexts it looks good.The biggest issue is that it's been inconsistent from frame to frame. I really do need to shoot some more of it- I plan on ordering a few rolls in the next week or so from Freestyle, so we'll see what those look like. I guess what I meant was it's not something I can see using for all purposes.
    Photoblog, though I'll warn you it's only mostly analog.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by domaz View Post
    You will be much better off looking for a good used 35mm film scanner. They come up on Ebay all the time for $75 or less. Be prepared to learn how to use VueScan and set up SCSI devices. If you want more advice PM me and I can give you a few models to look for (this isn't really the forum for this).
    Yes, $75 for SCSI scanners, 5 times that for USB 2.0 of 2400 dpi or greater.

    The mere fact that many people no longer even use a desktop of either PC or Mac genes eliminates that option. Yes, there is aUSB to SCSI adaptor, but when I investigated that a couple of years ago it was USB 1.0. I could never even get USB to parallel port adapters to work correctly. If you have an old Mac with SCSI you are in luck. If you use a PC, you better make sure the scanner comes with cables, PCI card, and all drivers.

    SCSI is effectively in the dust bin of computer history.

  4. #34
    Marco B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,983
    Images
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by vic vic View Post
    optimal solutions ... get a better service with scanning, or simply buy a nice scanner and sofware with it (silverfast for example) and do it yourself. then plus-x-125 will look amazing even if not darkroom-printed :-)
    I have to agree with this and what other people have said about scanning, a decent scanner WILL make any BW negative shine. On this webpage:

    http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_te...resolution.htm

    you will find a 100% view sample of Plus X scanned at 3000 ppi on a professional Imacon Flextight 949. I think it will show you what a good scanner is capable of with BW film... a second hand film scanner like a Nikon should be comparable.

    But in the end, nothing beats the feel of your own prints coming out the developing baths...
    My website

    "The nineteenth century began by believing that what was reasonable was true, and it wound up by believing that what it saw a photograph of, was true." - William M. Ivins Jr.

    "I don't know, maybe we should disinvent color, and we could just shoot Black & White." - David Burnett in 1978

    "Analog is chemistry + physics, digital is physics + math, which ones did you like most?"

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    560
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Verizzo View Post
    Yes, $75 for SCSI scanners, 5 times that for USB 2.0 of 2400 dpi or greater.

    The mere fact that many people no longer even use a desktop of either PC or Mac genes eliminates that option. Yes, there is aUSB to SCSI adaptor, but when I investigated that a couple of years ago it was USB 1.0. I could never even get USB to parallel port adapters to work correctly. If you have an old Mac with SCSI you are in luck. If you use a PC, you better make sure the scanner comes with cables, PCI card, and all drivers.

    SCSI is effectively in the dust bin of computer history.
    Firewire-SCSI adapter exist now as do USB 2.0-SCSI adapters. It's not hard to find PCI SCSI cards for very little money, and drivers aren't an issue if you get a scanner that can work with VueScan. SCSI is still used widely in server hardware so it's not in the dustbin of history. It's a simple case of if you have the patience to setup a SCSI scanner you reap the benefits. If you don't spend hundreds more on a new USB flatbed that has worse quality.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by domaz View Post
    Firewire-SCSI adapter exist now as do USB 2.0-SCSI adapters. It's not hard to find PCI SCSI cards for very little money, and drivers aren't an issue if you get a scanner that can work with VueScan. SCSI is still used widely in server hardware so it's not in the dustbin of history. It's a simple case of if you have the patience to setup a SCSI scanner you reap the benefits. If you don't spend hundreds more on a new USB flatbed that has worse quality.
    We aren't in disagreement. I was looking at SCSI from a typical home computer user's perspective. I have found USB-Whatever adapters hit and miss, some work fine all of the time, some work some of the time, some not at all. Those results rotate with the specific computer and how cooperative the USB system wants to be. I try to avoid adapters.

    You are right about Firewire as an alternative, I didn't think of that, nor do I recall pricing on FW scanners. What little I recall puts it with USB 2.0.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    20
    I have fallen in love with Kodak T-max film. I have heard many recommendations for other 100 speed films as well as T-Max 100. Right now I only shoot T-Max 100 and 400 and love them both for their extremely fine grain, sharp image, and great tonal qualities. I have enlarged a T-Max 100 (TMX) 6x4.5 negative to 20x24 and compared it to a T-Max 400 (TMY-2) 6x4.5 at 8x10 and found the grain to look about the same, which for both, was incredible. I have also heard great things about Fuji Acros 100 and Ilford FP-4 125. I think you would be very pleased with any of these. See if any local camera shops near you have a darkroom. I lucked out immensely when I moved to Savannah, Georgia and was checking out local camera shops. One I visited had a full darkroom and I told the owner I wanted to learn how to print B/W since I had recently started developing myself. She graciously told me I could use their darkroom any time the store was open for no charge, and since hardly anyone brings traditional black and white film in anymore for darkroom printing, that I would have it all to myself. I am so grateful because I have learned so much in the last 5 months and I am addicted. The owner even gives me paper and chemicals to get me going. It's good business for them too, as I purchase much more from them than if I wasn't ever there. You never know, you may luck out as I have, so it's definitely worth checking out.

  8. #38
    bobwysiwyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,555
    Images
    3
    What a great arrangement you lucked into with the shop owner, I'm very envious. As a recent "returnee" to film, I too am limiting myself to TMAX 100 and 400 for both 35mm and the 4x5, which is entirely new to me. Very happy with both. Sometime I might experiment with other film, but I suspect it will be by choice rather than feeling I need something better.
    WYSIWYG - At least that's my goal.

    Portfolio-http://apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=25518

  9. #39
    nsouto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Sydney Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    495
    Images
    59
    I've been experimenting of late with Acros 100 developed in Ilford's DDX at standard time with only 2 inversions/min.

    The results have been quite satisfactory as far as scanning goes: very small, unobtrusive and easily removed grain at even 4000 on a nikon coolscan V ED. In fact in some cases I'm not even removing it!
    And the smooth range with this developer/time/agitation combo is really working well for me.

    Can't recommend any flatbed scanner: my experiences with epson 4990 and v700 have not been satisfactory at all with 35mm.
    Cheers
    Noons (Nuno Souto)
    Gallery here

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    39
    Update:

    Finshed off the 100TMX earlier this afternoon. Developed it in F76+ 1+19 for 12 minutes as per the chart. The negatives look great to me, but the negatives aren't the issue. They should be dry in time to get a few 4x6s done at CVS downtown tonight (maybe tomorrow morning is more realistic) and see the results of my little experiment. I bracketed most of the shots 0, -1 because I'd like to see some darker tonalities. Bad idea? Probably. We'll see tomorrow.

    The T-Max development process was less intimidating than I expected it to be. The initial rinse and developer came out a little pink, the fixer came out bright pink (Clearfix Neutral 1+4 for 10 minutes), and the first few washes after the fix may have been just a little bit pink. Plenty of rinses and the negatives look fine. I was expecting a little more of a disaster, but it went fine.
    Photoblog, though I'll warn you it's only mostly analog.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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