Those first two are just stunning. I know waterfalls with milky water are quite common but i never tire seeing images of them that are done well. Great stuff. I also don't mind the slight blue cast tbh, im only on the laptop but it sort of adds to the image for me.
the only one that's been sharpened by YOU, Nate. I'm sure Kakazu did some sharpening already, since not doing any leaves a very mushy scan out of almost every scanner ever made.
ISO1600 wrote:
the only one that's been sharpened by YOU, Nate. I'm sure Kakazu did some sharpening already, since not doing any leaves a very mushy scan out of almost every scanner ever made.
Actually, I disagree. My scans of images from my Mamiya 7 and Velvia don't really need much sharpening at all -- and at the small size of the images posted in the this forum, none is needed at all. I'm using a Nikon LS-8000 scanner. Not sure what TWoK is using, but his scanner would have to be absolutely horrible for his 6x6 Velvia slides to require sharpening.
I don't know where the sharpening came in - in the scanner, in a resizing routine - or maybe it's just bad resizing rather than true sharpening. But I've seen plenty of original slides and large prints from 66 and 67, and the gritty pixelly edginess in the first two is a digital artifact from somewhere in the chain, not representative of the slides that camera produces.
Not knocking your photography at all, just a kink in the signal path, that's all. Otherwise I think they're lovely
fourfa wrote:
I don't know where the sharpening came in - in the scanner, in a resizing routine - or maybe it's just bad resizing rather than true sharpening. But I've seen plenty of original slides and large prints from 66 and 67, and the gritty pixelly edginess in the first two is a digital artifact from somewhere in the chain, not representative of the slides that camera produces.
Not knocking your photography at all, just a kink in the signal path, that's all. Otherwise I think they're lovely
I don't know what TWoK's workflow is, but if he says there was no sharpening, I would tend to believe his. Again, I get similar sharpness for similar sized slides from simialr sources without any sharpening added -- and I know my workflow and software, any sharpening in the scanning process (Vuescan/LS-8000) is turned off, and none is added in ACR or PS. From my experience and knowing what he is using, his statement is perfectly credible.
If there are artifacts, it is quite possible they were introduced in reducing the image to web size -- it is a huge drop in size (~90% drop in width).
Guys, no need to argue. These are scans from my local shop. I have no idea what they did, I am sure they sharpened the shots. I haven't tried scanning them again on my own and I didn't sharpen them any more. ISO 1600 messed with the Big Mini F shot and I assumed sharpened it. The slides are retardely sharp, but I can't get that to come through with my scanner.
no argument, it's something the shop did. looks just like the oversharpened, tonally crushed files I get from the local minilab from the exquisitely sharp, subtlely-toned negs from my Ikon/50Cron-DR
fourfa wrote:
no argument, it's something the shop did. looks just like the oversharpened, tonally crushed files I get from the local minilab from the exquisitely sharp, subtlely-toned negs from my Ikon/50Cron-DR
Yep, Minilab scans are typically gawdawful. Especially the DR loss and massive oversharpening.
Even my flatbed will produce files that only want a hint of sharpening from a good 645 neg as long as the film is flat. I'm using a Epson 4870 with betterscanning.com holder and ANR insert (which can't hold a candle to Lotusm50's 8000 ED, but does damn well for the cost).
These aren't minilab scans, but aren't great either. ISO 1600 came over today to try and help me work out a scanning work flow after developing some B&W.
Grass went crazy on this, but it was like that on the original scan. Pretty crazy.
67 160vc
67 Neopan 400
67 Color corrected 64t
124G with 160s before I sold it.
124G. 160s
124G. 160s
124G. Acros 100
124G. 160nc
Contax G2. 45mm Planar 160s
Contax G2. 45mm Planar 160s
My dad thinks I'm crazy for shooting this much film even though I have a great digital setup. He's always gotta run me to the lab to drop of the film too . 1 month and I'll have my license. haha
My dad thinks I'm crazy for shooting this much film even though I have a great digital setup. He's always gotta run me to the lab to drop of the film too . 1 month and I'll have my license.
Completely understandable. You've got a Contax G2. ;-)
!
. 1 month and I'll have my license. haha