Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,529   Posts: 1,543,961   Online: 1065
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35
  1. #1
    dodphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    131

    New to 35mm Film - Horrible Images or Bad Scanning? Opinions Needed

    These were shot on a Leica M6 35mm Zeiss Biogen shot on Agfa APX 100. Film was developed at Color Services in Needham, MA. I decided to forgo scanning services and complete myself on an Epson V600 scanned at 1200 DPI. They look pretty bad, am I just THAT bad of a photographer or am I scanning too low of a DPI. I am more of a MF shooter, 1200-2400 is just fine for 120 (6x6, 6x7 experience). OR, is this film not highly regarded.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	12390557823_37f473fe9b_c.jpg 
Views:	265 
Size:	135.7 KB 
ID:	81777
    Daniel-Duarte.com

  2. #2
    Ricardo Miranda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    641
    Hello!
    Excuse me the question, what does scanning has to do with 35mm cameras?
    I fail to see the connection.

    Perhaps you would like to post your question to DPUG.
    My cameras:
    Fed 2
    Zenit 11, 12XP
    Nikon F4, F4S, F401S, F601, F801, F801S, F50, F55, F60, F65, F70, F75, F80, F90, F90X, EL2, FE, FM, FG, FG-20, EM

  3. #3
    dodphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by Ricardo Miranda View Post
    Hello!
    Excuse me the question, what does scanning has to do with 35mm cameras?
    I fail to see the connection.

    Perhaps you would like to post your question to DPUG.
    I haven't had the time to print these, so I scan for sharing online.

    This is the 1st roll out of my Leica M6 and 1st time using Agfa APX 100. When you view the image I attached, does the poor quality say "that's a poorly taken photograph" or "that's a poor quality scan". The bokeh is horrible.

    I can't say because I haven't made a print of anything off this roll.

    This is obviously an analog site, but we all scan to share work... right?
    Daniel-Duarte.com

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,027
    Your posted image looks pretty good to me. What's the problem you see?

    >>The bokeh is horrible.<< What's 'bokeh'?


    BTW, it seems the 'purest' here prefer scanned prints



    ++++++++++++++

    OK, so I looked it up: 'Bokeh has been defined as "the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light".' That's way to 'artsy' for a photo engineer like me.
    Last edited by Prof_Pixel; 02-08-2014 at 05:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California desert
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    736

    bad

    You need to say what you think is "bad" about it? On my computer screen it looks plenty sharp but is focused a bit close and the depth of field is very narrow. I suggest you should take the negs back to the place where you got them developed and ask them what they think. They no doubt have plenty of experience at looking at negs of this type. You should also get some old fashioned silver halide prints to look at.
    Too many photograbbers today have a large orifice fixation. Using a fast lens wide open is for special circumstances and should be used sparingly, like laxatives. There is life below f1.4. (You did ask.) Stopping the lens down a little is not just for wimps.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,963
    I can see what looks like dust or more likely small hairs in the scan which suggests that the scanner plate needs cleaning or is the hair embedded into the neg? If it is then you need to clean it and it should be fine but the neg as far as one can tell from a scan looks OK. I can see every reason to believe that a darkroom print from this neg will be fine.

    If you look at the neg through a loupe can you see anything wrong? If the neg looks OK and I expect it to, then translating that to a good scan is really a DPUG matter

    It might help us if you were to state what it is about this neg that makes it a horrible image.

    pentaxuser

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,061
    You guys slay me... that's what I was thinking... it's not a bad image (although I'd consider a bit of a change in framing) and its not a bad scan. The dust could be criticized and I almost mentioned the spots but found out that the spots were really coffee splatters on my monitor. I don't see much of a problem and would second the comment by snapguy on stopping down.

  8. #8
    dodphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by snapguy View Post
    You need to say what you think is "bad" about it? On my computer screen it looks plenty sharp but is focused a bit close and the depth of field is very narrow. I suggest you should take the negs back to the place where you got them developed and ask them what they think. They no doubt have plenty of experience at looking at negs of this type. You should also get some old fashioned silver halide prints to look at.
    Too many photograbbers today have a large orifice fixation. Using a fast lens wide open is for special circumstances and should be used sparingly, like laxatives. There is life below f1.4. (You did ask.) Stopping the lens down a little is not just for wimps.
    One of the challenges I am still getting over is getting away from 100 speed film, I like a slower emulsion but then I find myself at a party and 100 makes me shoot wide open because of a lack of light.

    I think I need to just make some prints of this, another problem is I am working on a 27 inch iMac so perhaps I am looking at them on a large screen and seeing some things I might now see in smaller formats.

    I think it's a bad image, the quality just doesn't feel right to me.
    Daniel-Duarte.com

  9. #9
    ParkerSmithPhoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    811
    Images
    6
    Light is kind of flat on the face, and it looks like you used the in scanner sharpening, which is always awful. Try scanning without any sharpening, and then give it two or three very light sharpening passes (rather than one heavy one) using a high pass filter sharpening. Google that for the technique.
    Parker Smith Photography, Inc.
    Atlanta, GA

    Commercial & Fine Art Photography
    Portrait Photography

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ogden, Utah USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,066
    if you are new to 35mm then be advised: your first roll of film sucks. No two ways about it.

    That shot looks fine for a first roll. Go take more. Have fun. Learn about lighting and composition.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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