Gregm61
Well-known
Simply put, beautiful quality..
https://adrianbacon.com/
I sent a couple of rolls of TMax 400 for a test run that I exposed through my Leica M4, using a set of lenses consisting of the 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar, 35mm f1.4 Summilux FLE, 90mm f2 APO Summicron and 135f3.4 APO Telyt.
I'll just say this up front, if we all had the same film processing and scanning talent as someone like Erik Van Straten (gorgeous stuff) labs like this would never be necessary. Unfortunately....NOT, in my case.
Adrian processed the files and sent me a zip file of the resulting 72 DNG files last night. Oh, to not having had to process and scan those myself, LOL...
Actually I had already gone to bed so I downloaded them this morning into my M4 file folder where I had previously loaded (poorly) scanned images with a Plustek scanner. I eyeballed them all, but only had time to run three through Adobe Camera raw and loaded to my Smugmug web page this morning.
The raw file quality is quite excellent. I typically shoot with a Monochrome M246 or one of two color bodies, an MP240 and/or M262. I am sending Adrian two rolls of Kodak Ektar 100 I ran through an M6 last weekend to see how those work.
For the most part my exposure technique was simply using the Sunny 16 rule and adding time as I felt it was needed for subjects with more or less shadow detail. For one or two images I used an incident reading with a hand-held Sekonic meter.
The DNG files are HUGE, and it was amazing how well I was able to open up shadow detail and images shot with contrasty skies the detail was retained so well. All I had to do was pull back on the Highlights/white exposure sliders in the exposure tab, or dial back the highlights in the tone curve adjustment. The resulting JPEG's I loaded to my Smugmug page are 28-29 MB each.
Keep in mind, the images below are "quick and dirty" processing in ACR. I still have plenty of work to do in determining optimal sharpening and other slider settings that will effect everything from contrast to amount of grain, etc.
Here is the one image I captured with the 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar, against the light. No color filter used, yet I was able to get all the detail I could have wanted in the sky on this shot, which would have been very tricky to do with the M246. This was a straight "Sunny 16" exposure. I may have added a tad additional exposure for shadow detail.
90mm f2 APO Summicron..
and with the 35mm f1.4 Summilux FLE..
One aspect of shooting this images one cannot discount is how different it is compared to shooting digitally, unless one is using something like the MD262 with no back LCD. No chimping and checking exposure, re-shooting to "get it right" in the moment. I simply walked, saw what I wanted to shoot, shot, and walked on. It was quite nice, and when I got home I didn't immediately run to the computer to download raw files to see how everything worked. The process from the time I mailed the film off to when I loaded the images to my computer took about a week, and that was with the Labor Day holiday in the mix.
I'll load some more images here tonight after processing the rest of the two rolls. These three images are the first three files on the page shown at the link below, if you want to view or download the full 11,873 x 7,935 (!) jpeg files.
An aside to all this, any suggestions on a good EXIF data manipulation tool I could use to add the camera/lens detail to that data?
Greg
https://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/Leica-M4/i-W2v5Gtz
https://adrianbacon.com/
I sent a couple of rolls of TMax 400 for a test run that I exposed through my Leica M4, using a set of lenses consisting of the 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar, 35mm f1.4 Summilux FLE, 90mm f2 APO Summicron and 135f3.4 APO Telyt.
I'll just say this up front, if we all had the same film processing and scanning talent as someone like Erik Van Straten (gorgeous stuff) labs like this would never be necessary. Unfortunately....NOT, in my case.
Adrian processed the files and sent me a zip file of the resulting 72 DNG files last night. Oh, to not having had to process and scan those myself, LOL...
Actually I had already gone to bed so I downloaded them this morning into my M4 file folder where I had previously loaded (poorly) scanned images with a Plustek scanner. I eyeballed them all, but only had time to run three through Adobe Camera raw and loaded to my Smugmug web page this morning.
The raw file quality is quite excellent. I typically shoot with a Monochrome M246 or one of two color bodies, an MP240 and/or M262. I am sending Adrian two rolls of Kodak Ektar 100 I ran through an M6 last weekend to see how those work.
For the most part my exposure technique was simply using the Sunny 16 rule and adding time as I felt it was needed for subjects with more or less shadow detail. For one or two images I used an incident reading with a hand-held Sekonic meter.
The DNG files are HUGE, and it was amazing how well I was able to open up shadow detail and images shot with contrasty skies the detail was retained so well. All I had to do was pull back on the Highlights/white exposure sliders in the exposure tab, or dial back the highlights in the tone curve adjustment. The resulting JPEG's I loaded to my Smugmug page are 28-29 MB each.
Keep in mind, the images below are "quick and dirty" processing in ACR. I still have plenty of work to do in determining optimal sharpening and other slider settings that will effect everything from contrast to amount of grain, etc.
Here is the one image I captured with the 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar, against the light. No color filter used, yet I was able to get all the detail I could have wanted in the sky on this shot, which would have been very tricky to do with the M246. This was a straight "Sunny 16" exposure. I may have added a tad additional exposure for shadow detail.
90mm f2 APO Summicron..
and with the 35mm f1.4 Summilux FLE..
One aspect of shooting this images one cannot discount is how different it is compared to shooting digitally, unless one is using something like the MD262 with no back LCD. No chimping and checking exposure, re-shooting to "get it right" in the moment. I simply walked, saw what I wanted to shoot, shot, and walked on. It was quite nice, and when I got home I didn't immediately run to the computer to download raw files to see how everything worked. The process from the time I mailed the film off to when I loaded the images to my computer took about a week, and that was with the Labor Day holiday in the mix.
I'll load some more images here tonight after processing the rest of the two rolls. These three images are the first three files on the page shown at the link below, if you want to view or download the full 11,873 x 7,935 (!) jpeg files.
An aside to all this, any suggestions on a good EXIF data manipulation tool I could use to add the camera/lens detail to that data?
Greg
https://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Other/Leica-M4/i-W2v5Gtz
stevierose
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Thanks for posting this. I went to their site. The scans you posted, what kind of service is that in their store—straight scans? Scans with basic corrections? Are they the scans that are 25 cents each?
Thanks
Steve Rosenblum
Thanks
Steve Rosenblum
Gregm61
Well-known
They are the "straight scans", at $0.25 each.
dmr
Registered Abuser
Exiftool. Free. Do a google search for the download.
Gregm61
Well-known
A few others, all TMax 400 scans. Currently have 5 rolls of Kodak Ektar 100 color "in the pipeline", with two more expected after tomorrow using the M4. Should have scans from two of the rolls to work in ACR around Monday evening or so.
All with the M4 and either the 35mm f1.4 FLE, 90mm f2 APO Summicron or 135mm f3.4 APO Telyt.
All with the M4 and either the 35mm f1.4 FLE, 90mm f2 APO Summicron or 135mm f3.4 APO Telyt.
Steve M.
Veteran
Surprisingly, even low line flatbed scanners can give excellent results. I used to have a Nikon V ED scanner, and it was good, but these scans from my $40 Epson 2450 flatbed were awfully close in terms of quality. These are all 35mm. The 6x6 and 4x5 scans were really nice.
Gregm61
Well-known
Yeah, as noted, I wish I could do scans half as good as some of the better posters in this forum, and while I have done some of my own b&w processing, I have no desire to do it today, or deal with color on my own and yet, I do still love loading film into the two M’s I have and shooting it....IF I can have it processed , scanned well by someone else and give me DNG files to do with, what I want. I have a really nice Epson scanner and no desire to mess with scanning film. If I want to handle the whole “process” from capture to processing I’ll just load a card into the M246 and get native digital B&W files from the start.
stevierose
Ann Arbor, Michigan
How did your Ektar rolls come out?
charjohncarter
Veteran
Those are really superior at least on my old Dell screen. Does anyone have this experience or know anything about the subject: which films scan the best? Even on my Epson flatbed I get my best scans with the two films you mentioned: TMAX400 and EKTAR100.
Gregm61
Well-known
Downloading a zip file this very moment with the first two rolls, 72 images. Plan to load a few here this evening. Just sent 5 more rolls via UPS ground this morning so should have many more files by next week.
Gregm61
Well-known
Had some "technical issues" downloading the zip files last night. Got them to work this morning and now have all the DNG files on my machine. Eyeballed them and ran one through ACR before having to get ready and head into the office for the day so I'll be working more on them this evening, figuring the various levels of adjustments and no doubt will probably re-work this one, maybe tweeking the color as well, but the scan quality looks very nice.
This was taken with the Leica M6 and 75mm f2 APO Summicron, at f4.
When the JPEG opened in Photoshop and I started to save it, I always use quality level 12 (highest available). The 24MP conversions from Leica digital cameras like the M246, MP240 or M262 typically save in the 15-24MB or so range, depending on the subject/amount of detail, etc. This particular file was going to save using quality level 12 at 45MB, LOL. I lowered to 11 and the resulting JPEG saved at 27MB.
This was taken with the Leica M6 and 75mm f2 APO Summicron, at f4.
When the JPEG opened in Photoshop and I started to save it, I always use quality level 12 (highest available). The 24MP conversions from Leica digital cameras like the M246, MP240 or M262 typically save in the 15-24MB or so range, depending on the subject/amount of detail, etc. This particular file was going to save using quality level 12 at 45MB, LOL. I lowered to 11 and the resulting JPEG saved at 27MB.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
Do you have any idea about the scanner the lab used?
Images look fantastic.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Images look fantastic.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Gregm61
Well-known
From the discussions we've had, I do not believe he's using one of the usual type machines used by most commercial labs. No idea what the setup is though.
kiemchacsu
Well-known
I believed that Noritsu hs1800 or Frontier sp3000 are among the most popular scanners used by labs.
Looking to your scans, I can say that not only the scanner is good but also film developing is top notch quality.
Super lab.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Scapevision
Well-known
many labs use Epson, results shown aren't much different from my Epson V700 scans. Maybe someone knows what they're doing.