Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: more film: "Resistance"

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    more film: "Resistance"


    Contax Tix - Kodak Advantix B&W 400
    Nikon LS-40, Lightroom processing
    flickr page: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdgphoto/3579077139/


    Comments always appreciated.

  2. #2
    Senior Member otumay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Istanbul, Turkey
    Posts
    1,690
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Godfrey,
    These images are dreamlike, magical. I don't believe this finesse will ever be achieved by digital technology. Thanks for sharing.
    Best,
    Osman

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Thank you for looking and commenting!

    I love the look... Outdated small format 400 speed film produces textural qualities that are delightful. But let's enjoy it and not revisit the 'film vs digital' dicussion, please? Graz

  4. #4
    ddk
    Guest

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    If I may Godfrey, your scans look over processed, a shame if you're using film imo. Besides no detail in your blacks, you even wiped out all detail from her hair in the first one.

    The outdated small format 400 film can have some interesting grain!

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Thank you for your comments.

  6. #6
    nei1
    Guest

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Nice to see someone else giving film a go,I dont know what this film is but it seems to show ths same characteristics as the c41 b and w films;great unsubtlety in the blacks and disapointing grain........this is not a comment on the photos..........best to you,neil.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    I have a Nikon Coolscan 5 and since the Nikon scanning is so flaky on a Mac, I use Vuescan which does a better job. With b&w, it helps to get as broad a scan as possible, flat, with lots of detail and then work a curve in PS or even LR to flavor. These web images don't do much for me. I think keeping in mind what a great b&w chemical print looks like helps to have a reference when going to any form of digital b&w.

    The content doesn't work for me, with the trash can, car and forced pose. But everyone has different tastes. Shooting volume with lots of experimentation is the key to finding what works and what doesn't.

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Quote Originally Posted by schweikert View Post
    I have a Nikon Coolscan 5 and since the Nikon scanning is so flaky on a Mac, I use Vuescan which does a better job. With b&w, it helps to get as broad a scan as possible, flat, with lots of detail and then work a curve in PS or even LR to flavor. These web images don't do much for me. I think keeping in mind what a great b&w chemical print looks like helps to have a reference when going to any form of digital b&w.
    I use a Nikon Coolscan IV ED with VueScan on Mac OS X, I've been scanning film since 1993. I assure you, the tonal scale and detailing I chose was quite intentional ... I scanned this one several times to obtain scan data that would develop exactly the look I was going for, and I'm quite happy with how it prints. ;-)

    The content doesn't work for me, with the trash can, car and forced pose. But everyone has different tastes. ...
    And that is perfect, the kind of commentary that I expect from someone critiquing a photograph.

    Thank you!

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Godfrey,

    Certainly not intending to offend you on your scanning skills. Looking at your website,if you scanned all those, then I would say you are very proficient at the craft, but looking at the example in this thread just doesn't represent your skills IMO.

    It's perfectly fine if the tones are intentional, just as a viewer they don't convey that.

    I have judged a lot of student work (in addition to judging working photogs' images) over the years and it only takes a split second to get a feel of whether someone knows what they're doing. Your website and that body of work conveys "you know what you're doing", this image just didn't, that's all.

    Your hotel image in the other thread, now that's a very nice photo in both color and b&w. I look forward to more of your images.
    Last edited by schweikert; 1st June 2009 at 11:34.

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Quote Originally Posted by schweikert View Post
    Certainly not intending to offend you on your scanning skills. Looking at your website ...
    You're not doing a very good job with your intent.

    I don't know what website you are looking at, but everything on Flickr or gdgphoto.com aside from the photograph of the hotel in the other thread, the self-portrait I posted the other day, and this diptych is digital capture.

    I have not shot film since 2004 and have not posted any of the scans I've made since then other than this stuff, and a couple of frames in 2007 that are off on my old personal website. (Most of what I've scanned since 2004 has been for clients and is their property, not mine to show...) Everything else on these websites is from 2005 and later, exclusively digital capture.

    ... It's perfectly fine if the tones are intentional, just as a viewer they don't convey that.

    I have judged a lot of student work (in addition to judging working photogs' images) over the years and it only takes a split second to get a feel of whether someone knows what they're doing. Your website and that body of work conveys "you know what you're doing", this image just didn't, that's all.
    You should have stopped after the first sentence in this quote. Why is it so difficult to simply say, "This photograph doesn't appeal to me, I dislike the tonal qualities and rendering"? or "It looks nice but there's nothing in it that commands my attention?"

    ---

    These are a couple of ancient 35mm film scans from around 9 years ago. Enjoy them.


    Nikon F2, 1982


    Nikon FM, 1981

    They're not for comment.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    OK Godfrey,

    You're the one saying you have scanning skills dating back 16 years, so I only assumed your website work was mostly film, seems a reasonable assumption. The original image simply doesn't demonstrate said skills in the technical/scanning capabilities. That's all I was trying to say. I apologize if it didn't come across in a constructive way.

    I owned an Imacon and learned how to bleed as much from that machine as I could. I know scanning quite well and am getting back to it again with more recent film work.

    I am always looking to learn and looking to help. If you are happy with the above scan, wonderful, then that's all that matters.

    Ciao.

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: more film: "Resistance"

    Quote Originally Posted by schweikert View Post
    OK Godfrey,
    You're the one saying you have scanning skills dating back 16 years,
    Actually, I started scanning (and using film recorders) while I worked for NASA in the 1980s, but I have been scanning my own film since 1992. Yes, I know how to use an Imacon too ... I teach other people how to use them.

    so I only assumed
    Bad to assume.

    ..The original image simply doesn't demonstrate said skills in the technical/scanning capabilities.
    There you go again. Get off your high horsey. For someone with so much skill in scanning, why can't you get it through your head that the RENDERING is independent of the SCANNING? I can make the picture appear any way I want to ... I CHOSE this way of rendering the photograph.

    You don't like it? That's fine. Implying something about my scanning skills on the way this photo looks is not only insulting and wrong, it isn't even a logical thing to do.

    If you want to learn something, learn not to judge other people's skills based on foolish assumptions and incorrect premises.
    Last edited by Godfrey; 1st June 2009 at 21:42.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •