animefx
Established
I took 26 shots (I was able to get out of a 24 roll) of Kodak bw400cn film with my "new" Leitz Minolta CL. This was the first time I've ever used a range finder in my life, I also haven't used film for 15+ years. I had Walgreens process them and make a photo cd. I was dissapointed some in the resolution of the JPGs on the CD, so if anyone knows if Walmart or CVS does higher DPI film scans then let me know.
I opened up in photoshop and converted to b&w becasue the JPGs had a slight tone to them, I also used a red filter in processing. Any exposure adjustments or sharpening on these JPGs will quickly turn the photo bad looking. I really wish they would offer uncompressed TIFs as an option for photo CDs.
Anyway are these photos good? Should I expect better? Be honest, I've take much better with my DSLR. It's hard for me to tell if either of these (especially the photo of the couple) were originally underexposed or overexposed by me and the lab had to push or pull it. If anyone has suggestions let me know, my meter isn't working so I use the sunny 16 rule and estimate or the lightmeter iPhone app.
a friend
http://www.flickr.com/photos/animefx/5037750825/sizes/l/in/set-72157625064401262/
couple
http://www.flickr.com/photos/animefx/5038385430/sizes/l/in/photostream/
I opened up in photoshop and converted to b&w becasue the JPGs had a slight tone to them, I also used a red filter in processing. Any exposure adjustments or sharpening on these JPGs will quickly turn the photo bad looking. I really wish they would offer uncompressed TIFs as an option for photo CDs.
Anyway are these photos good? Should I expect better? Be honest, I've take much better with my DSLR. It's hard for me to tell if either of these (especially the photo of the couple) were originally underexposed or overexposed by me and the lab had to push or pull it. If anyone has suggestions let me know, my meter isn't working so I use the sunny 16 rule and estimate or the lightmeter iPhone app.
a friend
http://www.flickr.com/photos/animefx/5037750825/sizes/l/in/set-72157625064401262/
couple
http://www.flickr.com/photos/animefx/5038385430/sizes/l/in/photostream/
porktaco
Well-known
those are great. i have a 40 summicron that i adore.
underbyte
Established
I have found that just about every hour-process lab that processes and scans 35mm makes pretty horrible scans. They are usually over-sharpened and not representative of what the camera can do. Unfortunately, scanning 35mm is pretty difficult, at least that is what I find. I have seen remarkable results from 35mm when someone has a very high quality scanner. I am almost always disappointed with my 35mm scans though. I use them more for Internet posts than anything else.
Film is awesome, but 35mm takes some practice to get the most out of it.
You're shots are interesting. The "friend' shot, you can see the jagged edges from the sharpened scan and the contrast is pretty high.
On the "couple" shot, that's about the hardest lighting problem to solve. Dark and light subjects on a light background. I don't think the exposure could be much better
Film is awesome, but 35mm takes some practice to get the most out of it.
You're shots are interesting. The "friend' shot, you can see the jagged edges from the sharpened scan and the contrast is pretty high.
On the "couple" shot, that's about the hardest lighting problem to solve. Dark and light subjects on a light background. I don't think the exposure could be much better