Over here they are all 'chooks', makes life easier.
Some of these guys are fearsome except the last one looks pretty droll, was he giving you the hairy eyeball? To be fair to him, he does have some strange emulsion effects next to him! And that weird pink top - did he get too close to a nuclear power plant, like that black one with no eyes ;-)
And that's the same film I'm using? I wonder why my BGs look so grainy? It must be from digitizing them with a duplicator and a camera instead of a scanner?
Of course in the upper-right (by the lettering) it looks like it has some of the same patterning - so maybe it's just that it does it on smooth gradient surfaces?
This begs a question about the best way to process a neg. when scanned in as a neg. So far I've just been WB'ing for a clear section (unexposed) of the film media. and then using my own curves to invert it. After that a little PS Color Balancing tool usage to get some of the remaining blues out and maybe a little gamma correction if needed after that.
Is there a better way (besides using the FB scanner I mean)?
Bifurcator wrote:
Of course in the upper-right (by the lettering) it looks like it has some of the same patterning - so maybe it's just that it does it on smooth gradient surfaces?
Υοu have good eyes. I dodged that part a little bit to reveal (part of) the name of the building. Also I desaturated blue to get rid of it from in the shadows, then added a touch of contrast and that was all. I have no idea why Superia comes out sometimes so grainy and sometimes so clean and all in the same roll.
Yeah, me neither. In my case I think a lot of it is because I'm being so mean to the blue range. I think it's maybe that plus the grain of the A2 camera, plus the sandy OOF BG. <shrug>
Here's one of my own. This one's been a long time coming - My first home-dev
And it's caffenol-c at that!
I struggled with loading the reel, it's an old 60's type made for thicker, stiffer emulsions - you have to push the film in from outside in.. try doing that in a humid changing bag!
I also struggled to get even development as you can see.
Definitely time for a new tank and reels
Moskva 5 6x9 folder
HP5+ in Caffenol-C, 13min, 20c
I couldnt work out how to load mine so i asked an old guy at the local darkroom supplies place and he said he hadn't seen one used since mid 60's 'cause they were so bad
I'm hooked on home dev
Now im off looking for a better MF solution, the Moskva is a pain in the arse.
Choices choices choices... pentax 67, fuji 690, pentacon six, yashicamat, bronica sq...
Whichever turns up at a good price first is the winner, although I could wait a bit for the fuji
I think the Mamiya 7II is a wicked camera. Never having used one of course. Some sharp lenses on that thing. Especially the 43mm. I think you should get one Nate
The Hewes 120 reels are decent. I still have more problems loading 120 than I do 35mm (zero problems there), but the Hewes ones are good. I've heard the Kinderman (sp?) ones are good too.
joekraft wrote:
This is one of my favorite shots I've seen on FM. Such a nice painterly quality to it, and it seems to capture some personality of the bird somehow.
kidtexas wrote:
I think the Mamiya 7II is a wicked camera. Never having used one of course. Some sharp lenses on that thing. Especially the 43mm. I think you should get one Nate
The Hewes 120 reels are decent. I still have more problems loading 120 than I do 35mm (zero problems there), but the Hewes ones are good. I've heard the Kinderman (sp?) ones are good too.
If I get one the only lens I'll have is the 43mm. I don't care about any of the other lenses for it.
All the mamiya 7 lenses are great. The Fuji GW/GSW690III are great cameras too (have/had one of each, though sold the GW recently). the 43 for the Mamiya 7 is definitely a worldbeater, no doubt. But it would be a shame to not sample the others too.
Hewes reels for 120 are supposed to be the best steel reels. The patterson plastic reels are not bad to load, even taping two 120s end to end and loading them on one patterson reel is not that hard.
