denoir wrote:
It's my favorite car as too - well, the DB9 is anyway, I think the pictured one is a Vantage. It's definitely not a bad looker either but I dislike the additional vents and intakes they've added all over the car partly ruining the clean design.
Agred. The DB9 is my pick. Although, a DB[456] would also be quite alright.
Picked up my latest flea market find, a minolta srt201 with rokkor md 50 1.7, a cheap vivitar 135 f2.5, vivitar 200 f3.5 and a 2x extender. The 50 is a fun lens to play with, first roll shot on fujicolor 100 around the house so nothing special, just fun.
Agree with Makten, that last shot is great agentbird.
Makten, those shots have fantastic tonality and contrast, love the textures and shapes through all of them, well seen subjects and compositions for black & white. Always a huge fan of your portraits Patrick!
I'll share a test shot. In my haste to actually see something from my 4x5, I have acquired a Fuji PA-45 instant film holder. After wasting an entire pack of FP-100C trying to figure it out because I loaded it ever so slightly incorrectly (the instructions aren't so good) I watched a youtube video on proper loading and popped in a pack of FP-3000B. It has a low contrast and a reasonably poor dynamic range, but at least I know my camera is focusing properly before I get down to the task of serious developing.
Without further ado...
Ebony 45s, Linhof Carl Zeiss Planar 135/3.5 (at 3.5), B+W dark orange filter, Fuji FP-3000B shot just after sunset 1/100s.
Scanned on a very average Epson V300 attached to mum's laptop that doesn't have the proper software installed, so scanned using windows' wizard. I did a quick curve adjustment in Photoshop with gave it much more pop and contrast (I was careful not to clip blacks or whites further than the actual scan had already) but greatly increased grain. I'm actually quite surprised how un-grainy these shots are. Something to be said for large film size
thrice wrote:
Makten, those shots have fantastic tonality and contrast, love the textures and shapes through all of them, well seen subjects and compositions for black & white.
Thanks Dan! There's quite a bit of work behind the tonality there. I think most people don't realize how much can and must do with a B&W negative to make it justice.
I'll share a test shot. In my haste to actually see something from my 4x5, I have acquired a Fuji PA-45 instant film holder. After wasting an entire pack of FP-100C trying to figure it out because I loaded it ever so slightly incorrectly (the instructions aren't so good) I watched a youtube video on proper loading and popped in a pack of FP-3000B. It has a low contrast and a reasonably poor dynamic range, but at least I know my camera is focusing properly before I get down to the task of serious developing.
Without further ado...
Ebony 45s, Linhof Carl Zeiss Planar 135/3.5 (at 3.5), B+W dark orange filter, Fuji FP-3000B shot just after sunset 1/100s....Show more →
Nice! That Planar seems to have a great rendering even wide open (it's probably smoother but sharper stopped down a bit).
Scanned on a very average Epson V300 attached to mum's laptop that doesn't have the proper software installed, so scanned using windows' wizard. I did a quick curve adjustment in Photoshop with gave it much more pop and contrast (I was careful not to clip blacks or whites further than the actual scan had already) but greatly increased grain. I'm actually quite surprised how un-grainy these shots are. Something to be said for large film size
Maybe you should have exposed a bit higher and let the background wash out? Her face is a bit greyish now.
What sort of AOV does 135 mm give on 4x5"? Or is the instant film smaller than "full format"?
It's slightly smaller I think. the AOV of 135 on 4x5 is ~35mm on 24x36mm. Yeah the shot is a little underexposed, gotta fiddle with my meter cos it's currently set up for whole stops and doesn't have an f/3.5 option. The shutter on the Planar also has weird steps. Bought a box of TMax, we'll see how we go
thrice wrote:
It's slightly smaller I think. the AOV of 135 on 4x5 is ~35mm on 24x36mm.
It's supposed to be ~10x12.7 cm, so that seems to be right. And the DOF would then equal a 35/0.9!!!
Yeah the shot is a little underexposed, gotta fiddle with my meter cos it's currently set up for whole stops and doesn't have an f/3.5 option. The shutter on the Planar also has weird steps. Bought a box of TMax, we'll see how we go
You won't have to worry too much about perfect exposure with Tmax (400?), even if it's not as forgiving as Tri-X and some other films. As long as you're within plus/minus 1.5 stop from 400 you will be able to get very good results. Tmax 100 is a bit less forgiving, but one stop in either direction will be fine too.
Thanks Simon, and thanks for the info Martin. I did indeed get Tmax 400 I figure grain won't be a problem with 400 speed film on 4x5.
Simon, unfortunately I don't have a DSLR :P and the M9 is a centre weighted average meter of sorts. I have a very nice light meter (Sekonic L-758DR) I just need to have a good look through the manual.
I'm incredibly impressed by some of the portraits on LFF, especially those that are 8s or so!? Requiring the use of head clamps etc
Makten wrote:
Thanks Dan! There's quite a bit of work behind the tonality there. I think most people don't realize how much can and must do with a B&W negative to make it justice.
Nice! That Planar seems to have a great rendering even wide open (it's probably smoother but sharper stopped down a bit).
Maybe you should have exposed a bit higher and let the background wash out? Her face is a bit greyish now.
What sort of AOV does 135 mm give on 4x5"? Or is the instant film smaller than "full format"?
I find dividing the 4x5 focal length by 3 gives you a ballpark for the 35mm equivalent. Then divide that by 1.52 for DX. It works pretty well but the different aspect ratio obviously has to be considered. My 75mm on 4x5 is close to my 16mm on the D300s. Close enough for me to check compositions and exposures with my D300s. Same for 210mm and 50mm.
Could someone point me to good info about doing my own scanning? What are you guys doing? I've been developing at Dwayne's and just having them handle my scans. 20 year old shooter just learning the beauty of film.
.
