Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,200   Posts: 1,531,517   Online: 1029
      
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 75
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,560
    You are plainly ignorant of the basic implications of color neg sensitometry, Athiril. If so, and you are
    happy with the results you are getting, that's fine with me. It does not change the objective facts which might be very useful to someone else. So you are perfectly welcome to ignore the following
    analogy. Let's visualize three great volcanoes in the Hawaiian Islands: Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, joined at the base, and Haleakala off on Maui. From out at sea or in the air, as a panorama, these peaks
    not only have their individual altitudes, but a distinct individual shape respective to one another, based upon sea level. Now lets imagine you "sink" Haleakala or underexpose it just by 500 hundred
    feet in altitude. If you do this, you have not only changed the height of the island, but the entire profile and shape of Maui. It geometrically becomes something entirely different in relation to the
    other two peaks of the Big Island. Suddenly, the Kona coffee growing zone on Maui is not aligned in
    elevation the same zone on the Big Island, but with lava beds covered with thorn bushes. So when
    one underexposes the yellow dye layer of a film, it is not just the reproduction of pure blue which is
    affected, but of every other hue which need any yellow dye whatsoever. The colors get off, muddied
    to some extent; and even if this is slight, it fails to achieve the full potential of the film to reproduce
    the chroma in the scene.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    More importantly, I think, while I agree the majority these days are scanned one way or another, those aren't the people who primarily come here. This is a different audience.
    I don't have a dog in this current fight, but I would like to point out that there are probably more people on APUG who scan than you realize. I shoot only film, dev and wet print my B&W, and scan both my B&W and color. I'm just not allowed to talk about that last bit. Doesn't mean I'm not doing it (just like a lot of other people here).

    Don't misinterpret scanning not being talked about on APUG as nobody on APUG scans their color.

  3. #23
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,496
    Images
    28
    If this is happening to you in daylight as you insist it is you are underexposing your film or the processing of the film isn't good. You've already admitted the problem takes underexposure to cause, hence there in lies the clincher.

    What is funny about what you say is that Ektar is worse than Portra 400. Which again, is very funny, since the yellow dye forming layer (blue sensitive) has a far steeper gradient in spectral sensitivity in Portra 400, which means less change in blue spectral width when underexposing.

    Again, take a look at your exposure (and if necessary, the t-stop of your lens), processing.

    Because honestly, it's ridiculous what you have been saying, again daylight film can't cope with daylight situations without filtration (since daylight is your definition of mixed lighting daylight and the shade created by it), where you say an 80A makes big difference in the print between ok and fantastic. That has a filter factor of 0.485 stops, and a MIRED of 18. Your film is obviously not getting enough exposure.

    The vast majority of film shooters take their colour film to be processed at a lab or mini-lab. APUG is a highly popular site on the internet for film shooters and caters to a wide audience.
    Last edited by Athiril; 09-03-2011 at 02:50 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #24
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,496
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I don't have an attitude problem and I don't have any problem with people shooting negatives for hybrid work flow, which is what you are talking about whether you call it that or not. But APUG has made a big stink about not being about hybrid methods. FWIW I don't agree with that. I'd like to see it encompass shooting film for such purposes. But I don't make that decision and it's not within the stated subject matter of APUG.

    More importantly, I think, while I agree the majority these days are scanned one way or another, those aren't the people who primarily come here. This is a different audience.

    I'm not even against arguing that, "for scanning purposes filtration concerns are different because..." etc. What I'm taking issue with is the idea that optical printing via an enlarger is such a small group as to not be a consideration. That may be true for the manufacturer who needn't be too concerned with our small quirky little band of darkroom workers, but I don't believe it is generally applicable here.
    I will not recognise it as a hybrid workflow, for all of time the majority of colour film shot has not been processed by the person shooting, but by a lab or minilab that they pay to have it done.

    Sending it to a lab or minilab has always been the normal workflow for colour neg. Thus the normal workflow for the past several years has been to scan and do a laser wet print.

    These new films are designed for this workflow in mind. FWIW I wasn't pointing the finger at you when referring to some people's attitudes on here that chase away new users.

  5. #25
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,331
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    I agree greatly that APUG should be more loose about discussing "Hybrid" work-flows. And yes there are probably alot of us scanning that are members of APUG but are too scared to share our knowledge on scanning because we're afraid we'll get scolded. I'm sure I could take my questions to DPUG, and I have, but the truth is that there just isn't as much help or folks on the site as there are here. So if the people are here, and the knowledge on the topic is here, then why can't we share it and talk about it?! After all, we're all still shooting film!

  6. #26
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,331
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    I'd like to add too that for the last 5 years I've shot nothing but black and white and developed and printed myself. When it comes to black and white printing yes most of those photographers are printing optically in the darkroom. And there are many great printers in this forum with much knowledge. But I've recently begun shooting color. I would never dream of printing my own color. For me scanning makes sense. I would like to learn more about the hybrid process and I just hope APUG starts to let more and more of this discussion slide.

  7. #27
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,050
    Quote Originally Posted by brian steinberger View Post
    I agree greatly that APUG should be more loose about discussing "Hybrid" work-flows. And yes there are probably alot of us scanning that are members of APUG but are too scared to share our knowledge on scanning because we're afraid we'll get scolded. I'm sure I could take my questions to DPUG, and I have, but the truth is that there just isn't as much help or folks on the site as there are here. So if the people are here, and the knowledge on the topic is here, then why can't we share it and talk about it?! After all, we're all still shooting film!
    There are DPUG.org and Hybridphoto.com. That ship sailed years ago and the horse has been thoroughly beating, as if you did not know.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  8. #28
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,496
    Images
    28
    There isn't DPUG and Hybridphoto. DPUG isn't for analogue photography, it is for digital photography, plain and simple. Digital Photographers don't know anything about film. Why would you want advice from them for any kind of workflow involving film?

    It is also yet another drop in the ocean of digital photography forums. There are another 100 much better digital photography forums to join out there, DPUG in that sense is useless and a waste of space.

    You may as well send any new film users just getting some of their first cameras to a forum that will actually be friendly and helpful towards them instead. Though they will probably all stay there and not ever come back here, plus less likely to get interested in any other analogue workflow besides film there too.

    Who knows how long optical printing is going to last, it's only a fractional proportion of film users. Nope, don't need to make people feel welcome and nurture their interests. Just make them uncomfortable and feel small for not measuring up to elitist standards.
    Last edited by Athiril; 09-03-2011 at 03:01 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #29
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,050
    Maybe one day I will get a digital Nikon body and post there, but I am having too much fun with film in three and a half formats.

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  10. #30
    brian steinberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    2,331
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    There isn't DPUG and Hybridphoto. DPUG isn't for analogue photography, it is for digital photography, plain and simple. Digital Photographers don't know anything about film. Why would you want advice from them for any kind of workflow involving film?

    It is also yet another drop in the ocean of digital photography forums. There are another 100 much better digital photography forums to join out there, DPUG in that sense is useless and a waste of space.

    You may as well send any new film users just getting some of their first cameras to a forum that will actually be friendly and helpful towards them instead. Though they will probably all stay there and not ever come back here.
    Exactly! So why can't we have some discussion on here from film users who have knowledge on scanning?? This would be the perfect site for hybrid talk.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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