Ed Sawyer wrote:
Lovin' the Mamiya 7 43mm stuff. that is a fantasic lens, no doubt. Probably my most used lens on the M7 system. (that and the 80 are probably tied for usage in my kit)
Same here - 43mm (i.e. 21mm) is a very natural focal length for composition (at least for me). It makes me wonder why I am holding onto the ZM 18 (the 21mm Super Elmar looks pretty appealing).
adrianb - I like your purpley clouds and the smokestacks - it's fun to see how well modern lenses work on film.
sebboh - my tripod lives in my trunk, but when I need it, it's indispensable (after I spend the obligatory 10 minutes to reattach my L-Bracket)
Some more medium format - the 35mm versions of these are posted in Edward's thread:
Mamiya 7 / 43mm / Portra 160 VC
(the moon is barely visible in the sky, but crisper than I think it would be on digital 35mm)
KatieInTexas wrote:
Wow. No idea how those were scanned ... either VERY carefully or perhaps a digital shot and processed to look like the print IRL? Either, way, beautiful work by that guy!
I have the new Ilford Art 300 paper that I am starting to use. It has a unique textured surface and I anticipate it being a pain in the @ss to scan!
Let me know how the paper works. I haven't started experimenting with those yet as I'm still trying to iron everything else out. But I find the different papers very interesting.
corposant wrote:
Zach - These are very cool - including your interpretation. I am sure the scan has loads of detail.
I have to say though, I'd much rather see the finished product in person/in print vs. on my computer screen. I think a lot of the film v. digital debate gets lost in "resolution" and never considers the fact that film tends to look better projected or optically printed, rather than on a computer screen.
So, that said, I'll just PM you my mailing address, and you can make one of these for my wall, and we can continue this discussion properly. Thank you and I agree! Right now there are still a few issues I am trying to work out with the process. So the prints aren't wall worthy imo. Here is another Palladium print from the other day. The contrast on this negative was better.
sebboh wrote:
here's a couple i posted on the rokkor threads previously. both on portra 400:
sebboh - these are nice examples of the great range of Portra 400. What was your scanning medium?
I had some kind of blah results from my Mamiya 7 over the weekend. I had never really pushed it to see how well it can do with wider than desired apertures and lower than desired shutter speeds. While rangefinders can be shot usually a couple stops longer on SS versus a camera with a mirror, there's a limit! Both the 43mm and 80mm lenses are great even wide open, but they have their limits too.
Bad development and scanning too - just not my weekend!
sirimiri wrote:
Mike, didn't you end up ditching your Mamiya 7, in the end?
No - I was getting frustrated with the 65mm - it's that pesky 30-40mm focal range (in 35mm) which is like kryptonite for me, I can't really do much with it compositionally. I am naturally a wide/UWA or a "normal" shooter, and so the 65mm just didn't fit well with me. Ironically it's what I shot most of my commercial stuff with (B-Roll on celeb photoshoots), but outside of that I hated it. I traded with Katie(inTexas) for an 80mm and I'm much happier. Ultimately I use the 43mm the most anyway, with the 150mm used for the short-tele and moments of insane OOF goodness.
I really like medium format - the Mamiya 7 lenses are obviously incredibly compelling (as most rangefinders are next to their SLR peers), but I also have rented the Mamiya 645D from Samy's a few times. Mamiya lenses all seem to have a certain classic quality about them that I like. I was thinking about picking up a 645 system to complement the M7, since I missed looking through the lens, but the ergonomics of 645 systems in general just don't compare to the M7 - just too bulky and heavy. I will probably dedicate the money I would have spent on an AFDIII into an M9 once Leica announces an M10 next year. I have resolved not to buy any more 35mm film (still have about 80 rolls in the fridge/freezer) and have bought almost 70 rolls of expired 120/220 for $2/roll, so I think I'll be torturing the thread with Mamiya 7 pictures to come! I have been thinking about adding a GA645Zi or a cheap Bronica, but not so sure.
By the way, Greg, I came across two brand new Contax 645 systems in LA - they can be all yours for 2002 prices!
corposant wrote:
sebboh - these are nice examples of the great range of Portra 400. What was your scanning medium?
some depressing answers to this question. i don't have a scanner and i haven't processed a roll of film myself in over a decade. i've just been shooting b&w film since i went digital, despite having a bit of expired superia laying around (i have no idea where it came from). so this was my first role of portra to try it out and i just took it to the wolf camera by my house to get it processed and scanned. i've been trying out various different processing places since moving to sf and so far i like photoworks the best (sadly i didn't try them till after this roll).
Thanks Katie! My prints are all on Arches Platine right now since it seemed one of the standard papers. I'd love to experiment with a bunch of papers. Once I perfect my coating with kallitype and get a perfect digital negative that I really think makes a nice print maybe then I'll mess around with papers.
You can see the progression and changes I made to the negative and the resulting prints:
My Epson 2200 didn't print the negatives as dark as they seem here. I'll need to do some step wedge stuff and configure QTR in the future. Right now it's just trial and error. See what is wrong with the print and guesstimate the solution in CS5!
The first had way too much contrast. The final print still has quite a ways to go but I am out of palladium! Kallitype chemicals should be here tomorrow.
D300s original + flashes
digital negative on Pictorico OHP
100% palladium on Arches Platine paper
Awesome idea and execution. I am surprised it takes only 10min for him to expose a kallitype. My version is waaay more crude but it will work the exact same in the end. Hopefully mine take 10min as well.
Zaitz wrote:
The first had way too much contrast. The final print still has quite a ways to go but I am out of palladium! Kallitype chemicals should be here tomorrow.
Interesting progression here - are trying to go for lower contrast? I can see that as I look from left to right, the outer petal starts to lose definition. I guess it's too difficult to control DOF at this distance with large format, so that's why you're trying to adjust this in post? I am learning along with you!
Some more expired film shots - should have brought a Holga! Lomography just opened up a store near me.
Yep, ya'll are both correct! I scored this film at Sea World (or was it Bush Gardens...) in the gift shop for about $1/roll. I looked kinda silly carrying 20 rolls of boxed 35mm film when everyone else was loaded down with stuffed toys and tshirts.
edwardkaraa wrote:
First is superia, and second is portra?
Mike - which warming filter do you use most? I only have 81A and have found it to not be enough for me. I shoot lots of open shadow and need to warm things up a bit.
Zaitz - keep these coming. We are all learning with you. Super cool process there... What are you shooting the negs with again?
KatieInTexas wrote:
Mike - which warming filter do you use most? I only have 81A and have found it to not be enough for me. I shoot lots of open shadow and need to warm things up a bit.
I have an 81A which is good with practically any type of color film, but particularly Fuji films, since they tend to be somewhat cooler naturally than Kodak. For anything that I want to be really really warm, I'll go with an 85C. Those are the only two I have. 81A is usually enough for me to nudge the color temperature in LR if I need to. 85C will be so over the top at times, it starts to get a little artsy.
corposant wrote:
Interesting progression here - are trying to go for lower contrast? I can see that as I look from left to right, the outer petal starts to lose definition. I guess it's too difficult to control DOF at this distance with large format, so that's why you're trying to adjust this in post? I am learning along with you!
Some more expired film shots - should have brought a Holga! Lomography just opened up a store near me.
Mamiya 7 + 43mm + Ektacolor Pro 160 (2005)
Definitely trying to lower the contrast. The tones in the original are very fine and delicate. The left most shot is much too strong. The middle has less contrast but the pedals, especially in the middle, look muddy. It was a near high key photo originally. You're right with less overall contrast the definition of the water drops is much less and that top pedal shows it most. If I continue further with this negative/print I may dodge and burn the individual drops to bring more localized contrast back in. The right most print still has all the detail in the highlights though where the other two have lost it, hard to see at this size. The original is a d300s + rokinon 85mm with extension tubes and flashes. The dof is shallow. The high key look may be very hard to achieve with palladium. Not sure it's the best photo for it as the range of tones is a bit limited and doesn't show nice smooth gradations.
KatieInTexas wrote:
Yep, ya'll are both correct! I scored this film at Sea World (or was it Bush Gardens...) in the gift shop for about $1/roll. I looked kinda silly carrying 20 rolls of boxed 35mm film when everyone else was loaded down with stuffed toys and tshirts.
Mike - which warming filter do you use most? I only have 81A and have found it to not be enough for me. I shoot lots of open shadow and need to warm things up a bit.
Zaitz - keep these coming. We are all learning with you. Super cool process there... What are you shooting the negs with again?...Show more →
I will try and keep them coming! I don't have a ton of large format photos so a few of these are originally on a d300s. There was a big debate on largeformatphotography.info about whether you can consider a digital original film or largeformat. I can see both sides as the original is digital but the contact print is on 8x10 film and you are using a silver or equivalent print . But with alternative processes it can be hard to find info and examples out there anyway so I think it's good to see all avenues of approach. I just have many more diverse photos on digital to choose from too. Hope its ok here. I think this section and thread would appreciate them more than the Nikon section.
