Advice wanted

C

Cheapthrills

Member
Local time
1:14 AM
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
14
Squarely a novice here.

I was hoping I could get some feedback on how to improve my shooting with my CL and Summicron-c 40mm.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59290012@N05/sets/72157640061197924/

The colour photos were shot on Fuji Superia 400.

The black and white were Ilford hp5+ until the "Loco Mo" photo and then Ilford Delta 400, mostly with an orange 4x filter. Both were pushed to ISO1600 and developed in Microphen.

I'm finding the detail in the black and white images to be a little wanting, not as sharp as I'd expect and was wondering if that's a consequence of pushing the film or the filter. Next chance I get to shoot a roll of film I'm going to stick to the recommended ISO and switch around the filter.

Any criticism and advice on what I should be doing on the next rool would be appreciated.
 
Some of those look plenty sharp to me. How were they scanned? Did you apply any PP sharpening? For the BW, I would try a roll with out the filter. Also, I never had much luck pushing delta that far. Tri-x yes, but not delta. Yea, try another roll at 400. Finding "your groove" with film, development, scanning take a bit of trial and error. Keep at it, though because the good rolls are worth it all!!
 
Don't forget the scanner. Fliker is reporting that you used a canon MP980 all in one. If this is the case then that is the weakest link, which is limiting what you can see. Get some professionally scanned and see what they look like before getting too down. Nice images.
Michael
 
Pushed film is less sharp and grainier than normally developed film. I think some of them look like they're soft because of camera shake or inaccurate focus. I see the same unsharp look with your color shots. Do the negatives look like this, or just the scans? Could be scanner out of focus, too.
 
Try at least one roll @ iso300 and without the orange filter. Then an average developer like HC110. Just to see what normal looks like before adding the fancy stuff.
 
Thanks guys.

2WK said:
Some of those look plenty sharp to me. How were they scanned? Did you apply any PP sharpening? For the BW, I would try a roll with out the filter. Also, I never had much luck pushing delta that far. Tri-x yes, but not delta. Yea, try another roll at 400. Finding "your groove" with film, development, scanning take a bit of trial and error. Keep at it, though because the good rolls are worth it all!!
Click to expand...

I haven't done anything really to the scans PP. I tried the scanners inbuilt grain reduction, unsharp mask etc, but found it was creating too many issues. In GIMP I've sometimes upped the "exposure" but didn't really find much improvement with unsharp mask. Though post processing is probably something I should look into learning properly.

michaelwj said:
Don't forget the scanner. Fliker is reporting that you used a canon MP980 all in one. If this is the case then that is the weakest link, which is limiting what you can see. Get some professionally scanned and see what they look like before getting too down. Nice images.
Michael
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info and the compliment on the images, I'll try and get some scanned at a shop and compare. I was thinking of getting a plustek opticfilm scanner at some point as well.

FrankS said:
Try at least one roll @ iso300 and without the orange filter. Then an average developer like HC110. Just to see what normal looks like before adding the fancy stuff.
Click to expand...
Will do. I pushed to 1600 originally because I was struggling in the miserable London weather, even during the day. But I guess the filter was holding me back just as much. I do like the skin tone you get with it though. Will just reserve it for certain situations from now on. Would microphen perform poorly at the recommended ISO(or 300)?

Is the best way to shoot at 300 to meter for 400 then overexpose by half a stop?
 
@Cheapthrills,

Your B&W images look very good to me; I know you can't tell much from looking at a non-calibrated laptop screen, but they look fine nonetheless. Your color images appear to have a purple color shift, though.

If there are issues with hybrid process images (images that were shot on film, developed and then scanned), the scan is most likely more to blame than the negative, assuming proper development of the neg has taken place. Either the scan is faulty, the scanner is faulty or the media onto which the scan was transferred is faulty or some combination of those three variables. That accounts for the majority of problems.

As someone else suggested, shoot a few rolls of your chosen film (HP5+ perhaps?) at its rated ISO and do a standard developing process - use a developer recommended by the film maker at standard time and temperature. That will give you something "standard" to compare your present negs to; then you can see how they stack up against your reference negs. When you do this, don't try to compare an ISO 100 film or another brand of film to your HP5+ negs - you will be comparing apples and oranges; shoot some HP5+ and develop as recommended by Ilford.

Hope this will help.
 
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139783

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139783

The B/W look sharp enough.
i would for moment lose the red filter!
i lightens Caucasian skin too much.
A green filter is amazing.
Use some of your color shots thru an easy photoshop,
as Picassa. Then do B/W with different filters..
Your color shots are purple cast on my monitor as well..
A Warming, UV or Skylight filter good.In order of preference.
I really like many of your shots.
 
I was disappointed when first using a dark orange filter. I learned to use when necessary. To darken a sky or pronounce some clouds…but not for everyday shooting, especially in low light. With very good light, or strobes in a studio I might try it for skin tones. I switched to using a lighter yellow filter for regular shooting / contrast boosting.
 
I had a quick try at correcting the MR2 pic. The white balance (from scanning) is way off. You need approximately equal amounts of +G (to get rid of the obvious magenta shift) and -B (less obvious), plus depending how you remember the scene, a tiny bit of -R. In Lr, a temp of about +10 and a tint of -75 gives pretty realistic results (I assumed the panels in the archway on the left were grey and went from there). If the scanning error is consistent, when you get a "correct" WB value from one image you can apply it to the rest. This was done on an uncalibrated laptop (my PC is undergoing some surgery...) so take these values as starting points only :)


Don't take this the wrong way but did you check the expiry date on the Superia? I have seen some strange results from expired film.


HTH,
Scott
 
As far as the B&W stuff goes, at full size the grain is not nearly as crisply defined as I'd expect, which may be what's impacting your sharpness. I see some Newton's rings on the pic of the camera display (IMG_0056), so I guess you're using a flatbed scanner? I can't comment on the effect of pushing but I use HP5+ in 35mm with a yellow/orange filter without issues (I've also used Delta 100 (not 400) and Tri-X).

Here are some pics:

http://www.pbase.com/smcleod965/filter_test

http://www.pbase.com/smcleod965/m6ttl&page=all (a crappy weekend at Glacier NP)

http://www.pbase.com/smcleod965/utah09&page=1 (in the desert sun)
http://www.pbase.com/smcleod965/utah09&page=2

http://www.pbase.com/smcleod965/bozeman_bw&page=all (random shots)

If you'd like to see the grain from these scans at 100% let me know and I'll post some crops.

Scott
 
maniac95 said:
Are these pictures taken on portobello market?
Click to expand...
A combination of Broadway Market and Brick Lane, Columbia road. Tried Spittalfields as well but didn't find it as interesting. I've been to Portobello Road as well but without my camera. I'll definitely go back as it was a very interesting market.
 
noisycheese said:
@Cheapthrills,

....

If there are issues with hybrid process images (images that were shot on film, developed and then scanned), the scan is most likely more to blame than the negative, assuming proper development of the neg has taken place. Either the scan is faulty, the scanner is faulty or the media onto which the scan was transferred is faulty or some combination of those three variables. That accounts for the majority of problems.

...
Click to expand...

ssmc said:
As far as the B&W stuff goes, at full size the grain is not nearly as crisply defined as I'd expect, which may be what's impacting your sharpness. I see some Newton's rings on the pic of the camera display (IMG_0056), so I guess you're using a flatbed scanner? I can't comment on the effect of pushing but I use HP5+ in 35mm with a yellow/orange filter without issues (I've also used Delta 100 (not 400) and Tri-X).

...

Scott
Click to expand...

ssmc said:
I had a quick try at correcting the MR2 pic. The white balance (from scanning) is way off. You need approximately equal amounts of +G (to get rid of the obvious magenta shift) and -B (less obvious), plus depending how you remember the scene, a tiny bit of -R. In Lr, a temp of about +10 and a tint of -75 gives pretty realistic results (I assumed the panels in the archway on the left were grey and went from there). If the scanning error is consistent, when you get a "correct" WB value from one image you can apply it to the rest. This was done on an uncalibrated laptop (my PC is undergoing some surgery...) so take these values as starting points only :)


Don't take this the wrong way but did you check the expiry date on the Superia? I have seen some strange results from expired film.


HTH,
Scott
Click to expand...

I think the scanner and my scanning is definitely a weak link here. I did notice the difference in hue between the scanned colour negs and the prints from the shop, I just wasn't sure of the best way to correct. I'll have a play around with finding a white balance and applying it.

I didn't notice those rings till you pointed it out ssmc. I think it happens on my scanner when the film curls slightly as the ones I have noticed are always down the centre of the negative. I've put them all under a big heavy book for a day or two.

Can't thank everyone enough for the advice. I've now got a solid direction to go, stop pushing the film and look at my scanning.
 
Hi,

I might as well add my 2d worth, which is to second everyone's comments about the red filter; they have to be handled with care, meaning - in my case - never used. In street shots I don't think one would be necessary in any colour, although there's a case for a yellow/green sometimes.

Regards, David
 
Scanner, scanner, scanner. Wait til you get a true "film scanner".

As for filters...I try to learn a film (and developer?) well without filters first. Then, I've mostly found use for yellow. Green on occasion, orange or red rarely. I should say that a UV filter lives full time on many of my lenses (no need to open that can of worms, I know opinions vary with this).
 
Headed out today and will try and put all the suggestions into practice. Also going to try a plustek opticfilm scanner for my diy scanning. Thanks again and wish me luck!
 
Look forward to seeing the results - I think you will be surprised when you look at your negs scanned with the Plustek :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom