Here is my second go around with scanning these negatives. I am getting better color and contrast this time, but there is a weird mottled coloring happening across the photos. I am going to assume the negatives have degraded over time unless someone has a better idea. When I scan freshly shot film I don't have these kinds of issues. The scanner and Silverfast do a good job normally.
Well, anyway this is my daughter Rachel. She's a grown, married woman with her own portrait photography business in Milford, CT now. This is obviously a birthday party. Based on the imprinted date on the photo this would be her 6th birthday. Seems off, but maybe the date was wrong on the camera?
Regardless of the outcome of these scans, it is fun to revisit the negatives and get some practice scanning.
I used to finish rolls off (last few unused frames) after shooting a paid gig, on the way home. Just didn't like to waste film. I found a strip of four color negs in my studio - glued on the long edge to a strip of paper, and somehow laminated in thin peel away plastic. I'm not sure which camera, or lens - Likely the Nikon F3HP, or the FM - early 1990s. I think it was Fuji 400, but the film edge isn't much help.
One of the vistas from the top of Sleeping Bear Dunes (now a national park). Back then it was approximately 600 in elevation above Lake Michigan, but I think it lost about 50 feet to high winds a few years ago. This was shot in September 1994 - Nikon F3HP - TechPan 25 - lens is the Nikkor 35-105 ais. You can see both North and South Manitou islands off the coast - approximately 7-10 miles from the nearest shore. For some reason, my search used Leland (a fishing village) as the nearest point of reference - which makes it 12-16 miles from shore. However, if you are ever up north on the Leelanau peninsula, go to Petersen Park - it is directly opposite the gap between the two islands on a bluff. Best sunsets ever!
genji wrote:
I switched from Nikon to Canon SLRs after the F3 but I just read Ken Rockwell’s page on the F4 and was blown away by the top view photo: the layout of the controls looks almost perfect, certainly the best of any camera I’ve seen.
You probably switched from Nikon to Canon after the F3 because in the 90s Canon had a great AF system while Nikon did not.
I used to own an F4s. I don't miss it. I have to agree though -- it had the perfect control layout and it it felt wonderful in the hand. The downside for me was that Nikon's AF in the early 90s absolutely sucked, and the camera was a heavy pig. It started Nikon down the path of the heavy electronic cameras, something that to this day I still prefer to avoid.
Every time I feel a bit of nostalgia coming on and I think about that camera, I remind myself about the absolute horror of it's battery system, it's heavy weight, the crappy AF system that I prefer not to use, the high improbability of finding one where all of the features actually work properly and the inability to get it serviced. To me, that camera is a headache that I really don't want to revisit. JMO. YMMV.
It’s interesting how my recent F4 experience - with two of them - was completely different to yours.
I made sure to buy late production model ones, so I’m wondering if there were any ‘silent’ production changes because mine were awesome, and I wish I kept one of them.
coralnut wrote:
You probably switched from Nikon to Canon after the F3 because in the 90s Canon had a great AF system while Nikon did not.
I used to own an F4s. I don't miss it. I have to agree though -- it had the perfect control layout and it it felt wonderful in the hand. The downside for me was that Nikon's AF in the early 90s absolutely sucked, and the camera was a heavy pig. It started Nikon down the path of the heavy electronic cameras, something that to this day I still prefer to avoid.
Every time I feel a bit of nostalgia coming on and I think about that camera, I remind myself about the absolute horror of it's battery system, it's heavy weight, the crappy AF system that I prefer not to use, the high improbability of finding one where all of the features actually work properly and the inability to get it serviced. To me, that camera is a headache that I really don't want to revisit. JMO. YMMV....Show more →
I got my dates mixed up because I realise now that I was already using Canon at the beginning of 1981—I recall buying a New FD 85/1.8 from 47th Street Photo on a trip to the US around April 1981. And by 1984 I was using medium format gear exclusively so I never experienced those early AF systems.
Believe it or not, the actual reason I switched from Nikon to Canon was so that my lenses focused in the correct (i.e. Leica M) direction. The fact that Nikon lenses focused in the opposite direction to Leica M lenses had become a constant source of irritation. I chose to ignore that when I bought my first DSLR, a Nikon D300, because the plastic build quality and tunnel viewfinders of Canon APS-C DSLRs were a deal breaker. In any case I was using AF Nikon lenses so it wasn’t important. But as soon as I fell into the Fred Miranda adapted lenses rabbit hole, I realised that the the long Nikon flange distance made it a hopeless platform for adapting so i switched to Canon, never bothering with any of their branded lenses, instead enjoying the optical delights of Leica R, Contax C/Y, Olympus OM, etc—all of which focused in the correct direction. I seem to be an extreme outlier in this regard though because it’s clear that focusing direction is a non-issue for most manual focus lens users.
1972. Tri-X. Me playing a gangster in an independent 16mm film based on the Phantom comics. No idea what camera or lens, another cast or crew member must have taken the picture with one of my Nikons. I modelled my character on the gangsters in 60s French New Wave movies.
Desmolicious wrote:
It’s interesting how my recent F4 experience - with two of them - was completely different to yours.
I made sure to buy late production model ones, so I’m wondering if there were any ‘silent’ production changes because mine were awesome, and I wish I kept one of them.
IMO Nikon's first efforts at AF (late 80s/early 90s, F4/N8008 era) just weren't as good as Canon's and resulted in a great many photographers switching to Canon during that era. I don't remember anyone who shot sports using Nikon at the time. IIRC the problem was that Canon had some sort of patent on a certain type of in-lens motor system that forced Nikon to develop screw drive AF, which was their second technological choice. Canon's system was much faster and more accurate. Back in that era I had both an F4S and an N8008, which were Nikon's first gen AF offerings. The N8008 The matrix metering was great but the AF was so clumsy, slow and hunting that I got quicker results using manual focus. I ended up leaving both cameras to shoot an F3 and an FM2.
Long after that, during The Great Film Camera Purge, I bought a box of later-era Nikon AF film cameras from KEH for a song. I think my perceptions on the first gen AF cameras was on-target. The N90s and F100 came out about 10 and 10+ years later but they have AF that is better by leaps and bounds. I recently pulled my N8008 out of mothballs and it's AF was so bad compared to the N90s that I put it back in the box and it won't see another roll of film. All of these cameras had battery systems plagued by the propensity of alkaline batteries to destroy the cameras. I learned the hard way that you really have to develop a habit of battery removal to avoid that.
The F4S led Nikon to produce the F5, which was another heavy pig of a camera that just didn't work for me. Even the N90s is a very heavy camera that I'd prefer to replace with a lighter system. Of course, that's not a big deal if I'm only carrying one camera/lens, but when carrying a full kit the weight starts to matter to me.
To me, Nikon's AF film systems have limited appeal. Nikon came along with an AF system that was never really mature until they decided to stop making film cameras. The Goldilocks in me prefers a Nikon film camera without the dead weight of a clumsy AF system and it's batteries, or a digicam with modern AF.
Fuji Velvia circa 1994 dslr scanned this afternoon with a Canon 5DS-R EF 100mm f2.8 macro lens + 12mm Kenko auto extension tube on a 1970's era copy stand. EFH, Raleno light panel, and a wired trigger
James Markus wrote:
Love the hats, and clothes - a wonderful image grandpa.
Jim
Thanks Jim. It's really strange to be looking back at these and having no recollection of taking the photo. I have the negatives so I must have been there.
