nicoimages wrote:
Great to hear that - does it have a profile for Ektar 100 - as this is the film I love to use and is the most challenging to colour correct particularly in the shadows.
Same here. I've seen a lot of nice stuff from other people with their Ektar, but I just can't seem to get the colors looking right.
arduluth wrote:
Same here. I've seen a lot of nice stuff from other people with their Ektar, but I just can't seem to get the colors looking right.
The trick lies in the white balance setting of the digitized negative. I found out about it after I printed directly from one of my Ektar 100 film negatives using the RA-4 process. Color looked fantastic and realistic in the print, but the digitized photo didn't look right at the time. I managed to get an equivalent looking digital image by setting first the black point and then a white point in one digitized negative after channel inversion. I saved this obtained curve and applied it to the remaining Ektar 100 negatives of the same film. You can still slightly adjust by setting the grey point if available in the image and by using the Hue/Saturation tool for each color channel. The correct grey point setting is needed to avoid too much of a bluish cast in the shadows as shown below.
Thanks for your comments about Ektar - really like the Pakon scans of it Jon and Retrofocus. I also seem to be getting best results by scanning using the generic negative profile in Vuescan and then usually tweak the levels of the blue channel and the magenta shadows are gone.
nicoimages wrote:
Rolleiflex T - Rollei 80S with yellow filter developed with XTOL stock for 6:30min
Really like the extended red sensitivity, non existent grain and tonality of this film and how easy it is to get dark skies with a yellow filter.
Wow I've been meaning to try some but I messed it up in my RZ, I'll prob use it in my Rollei or Mamiya 7. Just need to go out. Have you tried the 400s one?
nicoimages wrote:
Thanks for your comments about Ektar - really like the Pakon scans of it Jon and Retrofocus. I also seem to be getting best results by scanning using the generic negative profile in Vuescan and then usually tweak the levels of the blue channel and the magenta shadows are gone.
Thank you all for your lovely comments. I have also tried the Rollei Reto 400S that has very nice tonality too but found that it is more of a ISO200 film and has less red sensitivity than the 80S.
I have not tried the ISO200 version yet (Rollei Superpan 200) that is supposed to be very similar to the 80S.
I also took a few images with Acros 100 in XTOL stock - 7:30min on the same day again with a yellow filter and the Rolleiflex T - the tonality is very different compared to the Rollei 80S and the skies look brighter.
nicoimages wrote:
Thank you all for your lovely comments. I have also tried the Rollei Reto 400S that has very nice tonality too but found that it is more of a ISO200 film and has less red sensitivity than the 80S.
I have not tried the ISO200 version yet (Rollei Superpan 200) that is supposed to be very similar to the 80S.
I also took a few images with Acros 100 in XTOL stock - 7:30min on the same day again with a yellow filter and the Rolleiflex T - the tonality is very different compared to the Rollei 80S and the skies look brighter.
That is surprising, but very telling. I think if I have to shoot anything daylight, I will go with the Rollei film. It looks great with the Yellow filter.
I didn't know if this roll would work. My 9 month old overgrown puppy who is into everything stole this roll and chewed it up. The canister was smashed in and teeth marks all over it. Not sure if there would be light leaks or not. Trimmed the leader which was covered in dog slobber and loaded it in the old barnack. It worked.
From an evening walk in the woods during a light rain. Kentmere 400 at 800, developed in ID-11, pakon f135+ scan. This was I believe a Nikon FM with 35.2.5 series E.
Great shots btw. 