Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
They're all good, but I like this one especially well.Holga double exposure
...
Cool shot. The world will miss Kodachrome.
Shot on a Hasselblad Xpan on Kodachrome 64
That is an insanely cool photograph!!!
Shot on a Hasselblad Xpan on Kodachrome 64
The detail on that big jelly is just gorgeous!
one more
Thanks Cindy. I'm pretty sure I didn't add additional sharpening, so thanks for mentioning that they appear too sharpened. Not sure if it's the lab scan, or whatever flickr does to uploads. I do hate relying on others to get the quality right. I was also a very contrasty day, shooting with a yellow filter, etc, so I'm not surprised that they're very contrasty. I ordered a 16x24" print from my zenfolio site, and while the print looks nice from a few feet it's definitely not what it should be. It shows digital artifacts close-up, and the whites are blown clear out. I'm going to have a same-size wet print made of it at my local family-owned lab to see what I can get from the original negative (though again, I'm at the mercy of someone else, since I don't have a wet darkroom).Drazin, Amazing.
ScottG, I really like all of the Holga shots, but the double exposure is really cool.
Mike, The landscapes look great in black and white, especially the first. The lab scans are just a little too sharpened for my taste.
My guess is that the wet print will look great. I gave up on having my film scanned out. I didn't want to pay to have a pro lab scan (and you can get great scans out at a good lab). My local lab oversharpened mine. If you are seeing artifacts, I would guess you aren't getting the best scan that is possible for those negatives.Thanks Cindy. I'm pretty sure I didn't add additional sharpening, so thanks for mentioning that they appear too sharpened. Not sure if it's the lab scan, or whatever flickr does to uploads. I do hate relying on others to get the quality right. I was also a very contrasty day, shooting with a yellow filter, etc, so I'm not surprised that they're very contrasty. I ordered a 16x24" print from my zenfolio site, and while the print looks nice from a few feet it's definitely not what it should be. It shows digital artifacts close-up, and the whites are blown clear out. I'm going to have a same-size wet print made of it at my local family-owned lab to see what I can get from the original negative (though again, I'm at the mercy of someone else, since I don't have a wet darkroom).
These are crazy! How big are they?
Shot on a Hasselblad Xpan on Kodachrome 64
The whole series is wonderful, this one is my favorite.
Congratulations on getting back to your first camera.I recently was able to trace back and get my very first camera. It was a Russian Zenit ET. These shots are on 400TX, processed and scanned by the lab.
Definitely a "you are there" photo. I recall driving early one morning in KY over a bridge that spanned the KY river. The fog was rolling heavy, and it was fall. I didn't stop. Your photo reminds me that stopping is part of the battle, and can be oh-so-worth it....
...
Thanks for your comments, folks. In case anyone is interested, I just took this negative to a pro printing shop. They're going to "drum scan" it (something like 8000 dpi -- probably a 100MB file? -- I haven't done the math), and then do "corrections" on it, then print it at 16x10" on some fancy high-end carbon printer. Total cost: $100 just for one scan/adjust/print. But it will be the best possible result for a hybrid film/digital process, and I'll have an adjusted file that I can use for future print jobs (or uploading to the web for others to make prints from).The whole series is wonderful, this one is my favorite.
Agree with Cindy, I think the lab's sharpening on the scans is a little too much. Not uncommon from most labs, the last time I had a roll of film scanned, they were downright crunchy.