Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,940   Posts: 1,585,699   Online: 1010
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30
  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235

    Beach trip with Fuji 160S and 400H!

    So i've never had much luck with 400H, and I had never tried the 160S before, but WOAH! When I got these back, I immediately ordered a pro pack of each for my trip down to Santa Barbara next week!!!

    160S






    400H





    Scanned on a Frontier too, the the pastels are just incredible!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Above the Hills, south of Rome(Italia)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    184
    Images
    13
    Nice pictures. Did you print them yourself ?

  3. #3
    ColdEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    733
    Images
    50
    Those are very nice colors there. Is this in MF?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235
    Thanks for the commments!

    No I did not scan them myself, they were done at a Ritz Camera I used to work at. One of the guys I used to work with knows what I like and I make sure to let him know to turn on "All Soft", that way highlights don't blow out and shadows don't get blocked up. They have a Fuji SP2000, which I like, the Frontiers are really alot better than the Noritsu's. These are basically straight from the scanner, I did nothing to the color except burn in a little on the yellow thing in the first picture. Other than that, just resizing.

    And no, this is not Medium format, it's all 35mm, shot with my F100 and 50mm f/1.4G. The Mamiya was too big, and I didn't want to get sand in it. Also, It's WAY too expensive to shoot the Mamiya for anything less than paid work. I just got back 3 rolls from RPL today, and with the shipping costs included it cost me OVER $100 TO DEVELOP AND SCAN 3 ROLLS. That's steep when I can get just as good of color from my old work, for a fraction of the cost.

    Bummer is that they can't do Medium Format at Ritz w/o sending it out, and my old store is about to lose their C41 processor. BUT, as long as they keep that scanner and don't go out of business, I'm happy. And if they do, well than i'll sell my D700 and buy my own frontier scanner. I'm sure about $1500 can make a pretty good dent in the cost of one.
    Last edited by F/1.4; 08-25-2011 at 04:23 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #5
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,666
    Images
    28
    $100 wtf? Contrast and Saturation look like it's been punched up for 160S.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235
    The color and contrast are totally the way the Frontier interprets the colors. Noristu's would be totally different, same with Nikon's or Imacon's.


    oops! misread my order, it was actually 4 rolls. So my last engagement which was also my last order from RPL, was:

    to buy the film:
    Shipping to RPL =10.49
    3 rolls of 120 Portra 400@4.99 =14.97
    1 roll of 135 Portra 400@ 6.99 =6.99
    to develop the film:
    3 rolls of 120 @20.50/roll =61.50
    1 35mm@22.50/roll =22.50
    shipping back from RPL =8.99
    TOTAL =125.44

    OR, $1.84 everytime i hit the shutter. Spendy Spendy! I just can't afford to shoot the Mamiya and ship the film to RPL. After a few shoots with it, my income takes a nosedive compared to 35mm. Not to mention, off their Frontier, the 35mm i got back looks surprisingly not much different from the 120. The Mamiya was a little bit sharper and contrastier in the details, but the 50mm f/1.4G handled the flare alot better and softened skintones better.

    So with that in mind, Compared to the 645 AFD: I get over twice as many shots per roll (compared to 120), the film is significantly less expensive (compared to 220 with similar number of exposures), I get faster AF, exceptionally bright lenses (I use the 24,35, and 50 all f/1.4G's), faster loading times, soft tones or biting sharpness when I want it,and an enormous weight savings. I thought i'd use the Mamiya alot, but now I just don't know now.

    I would use the labs here in Portland but they all use Noritsu's and the scans look like garbage. Pro Photo is the best of the bunch, but their Noritsu blows out highlights worse than digital. Citizens doesn't do very well with color, and Quick stop..Oh god... I swear they have a monkey manning the scanner. Last time I dropped off film there... well, take a look:

    By far, the worst scanning, i've ever seen, from anyone. Last time I checked, the sun wasn't cyan. And the worst part, they're consistently abysmal.
    Last edited by F/1.4; 08-25-2011 at 11:08 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,934
    Good looking pictures!

    Jeff

  8. #8
    ColdEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    733
    Images
    50
    Expensive! So cost wise, it may be a good decision for me to do color and BW on my my 35mm and only BW on 120 (not that I am a pro or anything). Again, nice pictures!

  9. #9
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,666
    Images
    28
    Scanning has gotta have colour balance applied. Regardless of the colour filters over the sensor in the Fuji scanner, I don't think 160S would have that much colour separation on the neg to be that saturated, so I still think it's being pumped up.

    In any case. The 645 can get the 80mm f/1.9 right?

    6x7cm costs me, 50 cents/exposure, plus maybe 50 cents/roll to develop in raw chemistry + my time, about 15-25 cents/roll in developer, 3.5-5 cents/roll in fixer, not sure on bleach, a bit more probably 50 cents/roll, but I've eliminated bleach cost.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    I like the beach shots. Coming down to Santa Barbara? That's quite a trip from Portland - you will have a beautiful coast to look at! I'm in Ventura these days, so just a bit further South than where you're headed. If you like your 160S souped up like that...have you tried some Ektar recently? Will be quite a bit finer grain than the 160S, and colors like that pretty easily achieved as well.
    Have a great time with that gear; I know some will say otherwise, but you can get a very nice 16x20 out of properly shot and processed 35mm...I have even had a few (granted, my very best) 35mm transparencies enlarged to 20x30 and they hold up well enough. Although, everyone has their threshold of quality. For me, it would be if I wanted a final print larger than 16x20, pony up for shooting the Mamiya if you have it.
    Or, if you don't mind shooting B&W, try some Adox CMS20 in that Nikon. I made a 16x20 true B&W optical print from a 35mm CMS20 neg my wife shot of the coast up HWY 1 with a Minolta XD-11, and most who are into photography think it's 6x7 MF when they first see it. I don't mean to ramble, but if cost is keeping you from shooting your MF gear, and you want super fine enlargement from your Nikon gear, a little of that film may help.
    Have a great trip down the coast!
    Jed

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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