Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

3 … 26 27 end

Archive 2011 · The medium format image thread

AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · The medium format image thread

Gunzorro wrote:
What is the best quality and lowest price equipment to scan 6x7 negatives to RAW format? I would love to shoot more 120/220 film if I could easily and simply scan the negs.

Epson V700 or V750 seems to be a good choice. Relevant discussion here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1001472

Nice thread idea Martin!

May 16, 2011 at 12:44 PM

c00kiem0nster
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · The medium format image thread

wee, i already love this thread and hope to be adding to it as soon as i get to shoot some 120 film...unfortunately being a medical student is quite timeconsuming

until then my old stuff (as posted on the film thread) can be seen on my flickr.

as for the issues of film flatness during scanning. i use a canon canoscan 9000f which i really like for my mf scans. since some of my film is slightly curved i bought anr-glass inlays from monochrom.com who sell inlays that specifically fit the standard holders of most canon/epson scanners. of course this lacks the opportunity to change the holders height which is possible with the betterscanning holder but on the other hand it is much cheaper and i have found the results to be quite satisfactory.

@ mikethevilla: damn i really have to get myself that 80 1.9 for my mamiya m645. great shots!

May 16, 2011 at 01:37 PM

freaklikeme
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · The medium format image thread

Have you guys seen or heard anything about this scanner? Pacific Images PrimeFilm 120

At $2K US (B&H pricing), it seems like it could be a nice compromise between a flatbed and a drum scanner, and it allows for a wide range of film sizes and formats.

May 16, 2011 at 05:32 PM

cgiff
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · The medium format image thread

^ Interesting. I can't think it's worth it for the enthusiast -- the V750 (even V500) is just fine for small-medium prints and more than enough for web. If you want to get more serious, wet-scanning on the V750 is probably good enough. If it's really fast it might be viable for the studio though..

Tried something different with the Pantheon.
Mamiya 7 + 80/4 + Velvia 100F + 81A

May 16, 2011 at 05:55 PM

lbloom
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · The medium format image thread

Makten wrote:
The chemicals can be used for 10-15 rolls or so, but some people have reported that it works fine for up to 25 rolls. Probably this won't be the case with fast film (400 or so), since it will exhaust the developer faster.

Because of oxidation issues, do you try to open the bottles as few times as possible and develop in large batches, or is it okay to develop those 15 rolls one at a time, as and when they are shot?

I read things about people using plastic soda bottles, semi-crushing them to squeeze out the air, and all kinds of other contraptions. I've been considering color processing at home for some time now.

May 16, 2011 at 08:55 PM

abhijeeth
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · The medium format image thread

martin, mike: great hosts.

Luka: Although I haven't shot extensively with film, I recognized the difference in the first shot to the rest based on the color differences in the shadows. Isn't Velvia famous for that slight purple/magenta tint in the shadows?

May 16, 2011 at 09:03 PM

mikethevilla
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · The medium format image thread

Thanks folks.

Cookiemonster - I highly recommend that sucker. Not that I have any other 645 glass to compare it to, but man, I dig it.

May 16, 2011 at 09:25 PM

AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · The medium format image thread

lbloom wrote:
Because of oxidation issues, do you try to open the bottles as few times as possible and develop in large batches, or is it okay to develop those 15 rolls one at a time, as and when they are shot?

Something like this should do: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1Ltr-COLLAPSIBLE-ZOOM-BOTTLE-DEVELOPER-FIXER-etc-/120535688609

May 17, 2011 at 07:15 AM

Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · The medium format image thread

lbloom wrote:
Because of oxidation issues, do you try to open the bottles as few times as possible and develop in large batches, or is it okay to develop those 15 rolls one at a time, as and when they are shot?

I read things about people using plastic soda bottles, semi-crushing them to squeeze out the air, and all kinds of other contraptions. I've been considering color processing at home for some time now.

I use 1 liter brown glass bottles, so there's very little space left for air with the 1 liter kit. I also use anti-oxidation spray (which obviosly is propane and buthane) and I never develop more than one roll at once.
I'm only at my seventh roll this far, so I have no idea of how long the kit will last. But I'll try at least 15 rolls before I scrap it.

May 17, 2011 at 07:19 AM

Ed Sawyer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · The medium format image thread

Collapsible bottles are not really a good choice. They are not air tight (the plastic will suck in air, over time), plus difficult to clean and invariably crack at the joints eventually.

A neutral anti-oxidation spray is a better choice. butane/propane is not a good idea. Better choice is Argon (used for MIG welding) and/or CO2. I use some Beseler anti-ox spray I have from a long time back but when done with that will switch to argon.

I batch develop 48 rolls at a time, so I end up only developing film 2 or 3 times a year at my current shooting rate. 5L (Kodak chems) will process 48 rolls of 120 or 35mm, one-shot, via the Phototherm SSK-4 that I use. The bleach, fix, stabilizer all keep fine for several months or more, the dev is the only really critical one as far as oxidation goes. Which is why I wait and save up all that film then run it all in the space of a week or so - to prevent developer oxidation issues from being a problem. Dev, fix, and stabilizer I use one shot (could be re-used if desired), but I recycle the bleach at least 2-3 times, with regeneration.

apug.org has many good threads on home-developing C-41.

-Ed

May 17, 2011 at 08:25 AM

Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · The medium format image thread

Ed Sawyer wrote:
A neutral anti-oxidation spray is a better choice. butane/propane is not a good idea.

That's what Tetenal sells.

Better choice is Argon (used for MIG welding) and/or CO2. I use some Beseler anti-ox spray I have from a long time back but when done with that will switch to argon.

I'm not so sure about that. Argon is inert, which means that it won't "do" anything with oxygen that eventually gets into the bottle, while propane and butane probably will react with the oxygen and thus "take care" of it.

Edit: I'm gonna use LPG the next time, as it is the same stuff as Tetenal sells, at like 1/10 of the price.

I batch develop 48 rolls at a time, so I end up only developing film 2 or 3 times a year at my current shooting rate.

I'm developing a roll directly after shooting it, some times even the same day.

May 17, 2011 at 08:30 AM

lbloom
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · The medium format image thread

Makten wrote:
I'm developing a roll directly after shooting it, some times even the same day.

Will be watching this thread for your comments as you use up more of that batch.

May 17, 2011 at 09:42 AM

Morfeus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · The medium format image thread

Rolleiflex T, Provia 100F

May 17, 2011 at 11:11 AM

buggz2k
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · The medium format image thread

This is really questions for everyone here, as I've always been interested in this gear.
These are scans of prints?
Or are some from negatives?
Which is the better route?
I'm further guessing to scan negatives, they have to be slide (positives) film?
What scanners are you using?
I'd like to try the medium format route, though, I am a total newbie with this.
I don't think I would ever be able to afford a digital back, even the cheapest one, sigh...

May 17, 2011 at 02:22 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · The medium format image thread

If you read back a bit, you will find some answers. Basically, the V700/V750 is very popular for medium and large format scanning, but you might need a better holder for the best results. It can scan both B&W and colour.

May 17, 2011 at 02:35 PM

Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · The medium format image thread

philip_pj wrote:
1., 2. and 4. Mamiya 7II - 65/4, Fujifilm Astia 100F
3. Fujifilm GA645 (60/4), Fujifilm Reala

I forgot to comment on those shots, but I love them! Very, very nice colors and "simple" compositions, which for me is something good.

lbloom wrote:
Will be watching this thread for your comments as you use up more of that batch.

I'll keep you updated. I just shot a roll of Portra 400 this evening with my newly acquired SMC 6x7 55/4. The AOV feels much wider than what I though it would be, probably because of the aspect ratio.

buggz2k wrote:
This is really questions for everyone here, as I've always been interested in this gear.
These are scans of prints?
Or are some from negatives?
Which is the better route?
I'm further guessing to scan negatives, they have to be slide (positives) film?
What scanners are you using?
I'd like to try the medium format route, though, I am a total newbie with this.
I don't think I would ever be able to afford a digital back, even the cheapest one, sigh...

Mine are all scanned negatives. And no, you don't have to scan positives (slide film). The scanner software usually have auto functions to flip a negative to positive, with quite good result.
I use an Epson V700 and the Epson scan software, which is simple but convenient. For color negatives, I let the scanner software do most of the "PP" and then I open the TIFF files in ACR to tweak colors and contrast if it's needed.
For B&W negs, you get the best results if you scan as a positive and then do all the editing manually in Photoshop (or similar), but it takes quite some time per image.

Scanning (optically made) prints will probably yield better sharpness down to the grain, but you won't have the same control over tonality. Which is a bit funny since guys well acquainted with darkroom printing will tell you the opposite!

To make a long story short, there are of course benefits with both procedures. But scanning negs and developing film at home doesn't crave a darkroom. You can do it all in your kitchen, bathroom and at the computer.

Digital backs is a different story. Even the largest commercially available sensors aren't even "full frame" 6x4.5 format, but still expensive as hell. So if you're after the "look", MF film is both better and cheaper.

I suggest that you get yourself a nice 6x6 TLR or similar and send the first films for developing and scanning. The next step would be buying a scanner and start developing your own B&W film at home. It's not too difficult, but takes some time to get used to. There are plenty of youtube videos on how to load the reels for example, which can be a PITA before you get it right (in complete darkness).

----------------------

And now an image!

The Pentax 75/4.5 for 6x7 is really an awesome lens. You might think that f/4.5 is slow, but DOF is really short. And the bokeh of this lens wide open is simply stellar. I don't think I've seen anything like it, except perhaps for some large format lenses.

Suburbs by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr

May 17, 2011 at 02:53 PM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · The medium format image thread

Nice 75mm shot!

I have the 75mm f/2.8 Aspheric, which is also great. That's one of the reasons I'd like to find an affordable, yet high quality, color scanner!

May 17, 2011 at 03:45 PM

Ed Sawyer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · The medium format image thread

I'd be surprised if tetnal is selling flammable chemicals for that purpose...

argon is heavier than air, which is the key. The chems shouldn't react with the O2, just displace it.

Frankly, the risk of using flammable chemicals to purge the oxygen bothers me, so I'll use something inert for the purpose.

Makten wrote:
That's what Tetenal sells.

I'm not so sure about that. Argon is inert, which means that it won't "do" anything with oxygen that eventually gets into the bottle, while propane and butane probably will react with the oxygen and thus "take care" of it.

Edit: I'm gonna use LPG the next time, as it is the same stuff as Tetenal sells, at like 1/10 of the price.

I'm developing a roll directly after shooting it, some times even the same day.

May 17, 2011 at 04:55 PM

panos.v
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · The medium format image thread

buggz2k wrote:
This is really questions for everyone here, as I've always been interested in this gear.
These are scans of prints?
Or are some from negatives?
Which is the better route?
I'm further guessing to scan negatives, they have to be slide (positives) film?
What scanners are you using?
I'd like to try the medium format route, though, I am a total newbie with this.
I don't think I would ever be able to afford a digital back, even the cheapest one, sigh...

I tried scanning prints but I find the results very inferior to scanning the negatives/slides. When scanning prints, you can get a sharper image easily and you also get the colour balance spot on straight from the scan. However, the dynamic range available is much lower (at least on my V700) purely because the print has a much lower dynamic range than what is available in the film.

Scanning slides is also very easy, colour balance is spot on (or very easily correctable) and you can get a lot more out of it vs scanning a print, sharpness- and resolution-wise. However, the last two will depend on how you mount the film in the holder as that will make a difference.

Scanning negatives is a bit tricky till you get the workflow right, the sharpness and resolution will be there if you mount the film properly, the colour balance can be difficult to get right but the reward is that you will get vastly more detail in the shadows and highlights compared to what you see in the print. Sometimes the print shows you a black blob where the negative scan will show you a lot more detail.

So they all have their use but personally I stick to scanning film instead of prints.

May 18, 2011 at 02:52 AM

panos.v
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · The medium format image thread

And here are some recent ones of mine.

Hasselblad 501CM, 80/2.8CB, Kodak Portra 400VC
http://panosvoudouris.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/quinta-03.jpg

Hasselblad 501CM, 80/2.8CB, Kodak Portra 400
http://panosvoudouris.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/quinta-12.jpg

Hasselblad 501CM, 80/2.8CB (or maybe was it the 250CT?), Kodak Portra 400VC
http://panosvoudouris.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/quinta-20.jpg

Hasselblad 501CM, 80/2.8CB, Kodak Portra 400 (shot at 1600)
http://panosvoudouris.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/semana-01.jpg

May 18, 2011 at 03:15 AM

1 2 3 … 26 27 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 26 27 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.