chubasco
Well-known
A lady friend talked me into refurbing her Oly that her mother had given her. The
camera was in a closet for close to 15 years so I replaced the lightseals, cleaned
it, replaced battery, shutter miraculously seemed to be close to right on, so shot a roll of
expired Kodak 200 color film through it:
The negatives were scanned on an Epson 2450 at 2400dpi, not the best
outfit for 35mm negatives. The Harley shot was a few days before the
Porsche shots.
Bill
camera was in a closet for close to 15 years so I replaced the lightseals, cleaned
it, replaced battery, shutter miraculously seemed to be close to right on, so shot a roll of
expired Kodak 200 color film through it:
The negatives were scanned on an Epson 2450 at 2400dpi, not the best
outfit for 35mm negatives. The Harley shot was a few days before the
Porsche shots.
Bill
Last edited:
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Bill, good job on the CLA. The XA seems to be doing well.
Edit: Writing about Olympus RF cameras can take its toll
, I meant RC, not XA, thanks, Olyman!
Edit: Writing about Olympus RF cameras can take its toll
, I meant RC, not XA, thanks, Olyman!
Last edited:
OlyMan
Established
Shadowfox is that the XA which is actually an RC as per the thread title?
Good photos with great sharpness and contrast. The demunitive RC doesn't look as though it should be able to produce photos like that. Great camera indeed.
Good photos with great sharpness and contrast. The demunitive RC doesn't look as though it should be able to produce photos like that. Great camera indeed.
chubasco
Well-known
Thanks, fellas!
John, these pics are scanned from the Epson 2450, with no special holders using
stock software (no Silverfast, Vuescan). I wonder how these negatives would turn
out with a dedicated 35mm film scanner...
Bill
John, these pics are scanned from the Epson 2450, with no special holders using
stock software (no Silverfast, Vuescan). I wonder how these negatives would turn
out with a dedicated 35mm film scanner...
Bill
Last edited:
bcostin
Well-known
Nice shots, looks like it's working great. I just got an Olympus RC last week and really enjoy using it. It's a nice little camera.
R
ruben
Guest
chubasco said:
The Epson 2450 is not the best, of course. But not the worst either. Nor am I defending what I own, just making justice
Cheers,
Ruben
chubasco
Well-known
ruben said:The Epson 2450 is not the best, of course. But not the worst either. Nor am I defending what I own, just making justice
Cheers,
Ruben
Ruben, I'm not belittling the 2450, it's just that it's universally understood that
scanning 35mm negs is not its forte. It does a pretty fair job at 6x6 and 6x9 negs,
tho, which is why I keep it around. I've been thinking about the Plustek 7200 for
35mm films.
bcostin, yes, I really like the Oly 35RC! Thinking about getting a new leather
coat for both of mine!
Bill
chubasco
Well-known
I tried Sanders McNew's method of scanning on one of the above:
1. Emulsion side down, weighted with coins
2. Scanned at 4800 dpi with USM off
3. Flipped image horizontally in CS3 + cleaned up image of artifacts, etc.
This is the full image including the sprocket holes but are pretty much invisible,
then resized/sharpened (USM was done on larger file in CS3). I think there is
less noise in this image than the first pic in the above set, but I might be wrong.
Comments/critique welcome!
Bill
1. Emulsion side down, weighted with coins
2. Scanned at 4800 dpi with USM off
3. Flipped image horizontally in CS3 + cleaned up image of artifacts, etc.
This is the full image including the sprocket holes but are pretty much invisible,
then resized/sharpened (USM was done on larger file in CS3). I think there is
less noise in this image than the first pic in the above set, but I might be wrong.
Comments/critique welcome!
Bill