Desmolicious wrote:
Samsung AF Slim Zoom, Lomo 800
I keep taking a pic of this structure because it is so two dimensional. It almost looks like a prop that can fall flat at any given moment. I like how the light, clouds etc keep changing on it.
coralnut wrote:
bestdayz -- those last 2 photos demonstrate why I like Gold better than Ektar in direct sunlight: too much magenta in the Ektar, great looking Gold.
that ektar was from 2007. supposedly they improved the emulsion but I haven't shot it recently. the colors are tough to get right on scan. If I'm gonna spend that much time on scanning and edits, why not just shoot slide. rather spend that time figuring out the filters and exposure on scene.
bestdayz wrote:
that ektar was from 2007. supposedly they improved the emulsion but I haven't shot it recently. the colors are tough to get right on scan. If I'm gonna spend that much time on scanning and edits, why not just shoot slide. rather spend that time figuring out the filters and exposure on scene.
I've shot Ektar recently. I never liked it when I last shot it in the 90s, but I really liked the roll I shot earlier this year. In fact, I would say it is now my favourite colour negative film.
I followed someone's advice that I was a good film for dull days and to avoid underexposing it.
I scanned using a DSLR and converted using SmartConvert (an alternative to NLP). I didn't find the new version any more difficult to scan than any other film. I think it was probably easier to get the colours pleasing.
