Hatchetman
Well-known
Wow, those are stunning znapper. How were they scanned?
Slide film...convince me!
- Thread starter FujiLove
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 157
- Views 16K
znapper
Well-known
Hey! Just straight forward on my Nikon Coolscan V. (non-mounted, 5 frames per strip feeding) 🙂
I see that they often get a bit of purple/blue in the shadows, but I like them like that.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Provia 100F:
M645 Pro.
I also project in 40x40mm superslide with two Leica/Zett 250Watt projectors, synchronized by a tape deck in tracks 1-4 3-2.
M645 Pro.
I also project in 40x40mm superslide with two Leica/Zett 250Watt projectors, synchronized by a tape deck in tracks 1-4 3-2.
Fotohuis
Well-known
Just connected with a simple interface for the slide show and dimmer. A pulse unit is on remote.
Vics
Veteran
I scan mine on an Epson V500. All 35mm, though it scans MF as well.
Mabelton by Vic Stewart, on Flickr
London '79 by Vic Stewart, on Flickr#1 is Velvia 50 last week, #2 Kodachrome 64 May 1979.
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
I'd also say "go for it". Especially if you manage to find a MF projector. Let us know how it turns out!
FWIW I shot some 35mm and MF E-6 over the past few years. I used Kodak / Fuji / Agfa films. Part of the fun was shooting the films and learning about their characteristics. Different products (obviously) render colors, grain, and contrast in their own way. You'll discover which E-6 films you prefer ... and isn't that part of the enjoyment of photography? 🙂
I developed my E-6 films at home with the Tetenal kit. If you've done C-41 then E-6 is extremely similar. You'll likely have no problem making the transition.
Since I don't have a projector, I scanned my positives using my Epson v700 scanner. I think the v500 and v700 are very similar. The bundled Epson software handled the scanning quite well, I have no reason to complain. But my goals are likely different from yours. For me I just wanted decent scans for personal viewing and archiving, so the Epson worked fine for my purposes.
I also owned a Nikon 9000ED for a while, and that did an even better job than the Epson. The scans were stunning, really. But I found the workflow on the Nikon to be more cumbersome than the Epson. But that's just me.
Comparing E-6 to digital is IMHO just resurrecting the tired old Holy War of digital vs film. I shoot both. They're equally great, but in different ways. I like the look of film. But sometimes I shoot digital. And that's OK.
But enough of my soapbox. How about a pretty picture? 🙂
Fuji Velvia 100, Kiev 88, home-developed E-6. Epson v700 scan.
Hatchetman
Well-known
Man I have a bunch of E100G in the freezer that needs to get used if the sun ever comes out!
Vics
Veteran
I find gray, overcast conditions to be better for E6 film, given the narrow latitude. Go out and shoot!
emraphoto
Veteran
i use a flatbed. anr glass insert and invested in Vuescan. this really is the proofing section of my workflow. show online etc. i am in the process of building a decent darkroom and printing is the end game. for exhibition or print sales i send them off for drum scanning. 90% of it is 35mm.
the time needed to maintain and dial in a scanner of my own just doesn't exist for me. i focus on producing good slides or negatives and taking care of them. i leave the scanning and digital printing to the pros.
Dralowid
Michael
Excellent but roughly on the other side of the world to me. I have very fond memories of Kodachrome 25 and even 64 printed on Cibas. Looks like there is no more stock to be had.
Ahh...that little yellow package coming through the letterbox...
Dralowid
Michael
...and...http://www.douglasvincent.com/ilfochrome/
Seems that there were still rumblings of a return in Feb 2015. I will not hold my breath.
Seems that there were still rumblings of a return in Feb 2015. I will not hold my breath.
FujiLove
Well-known
All this chit chat, but no shots taken with slide film...
Way expired Kodak Lumiere 100, my feet and a bee.
I love how slide film really pops thanks to it's 'limited' DR.
Lovely photo by the way. Right up my street.
rbelyell
Well-known
kodak elite chrome, fuji t64 and provia, agfachrome and even agfa scala for sale here on RFF:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...mycollection1film-26amp-3b-film-cameras/cat/3
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/pho...mycollection1film-26amp-3b-film-cameras/cat/3
FujiLove
Well-known
I'd also say "go for it". Especially if you manage to find a MF projector. Let us know how it turns out!
FWIW I shot some 35mm and MF E-6 over the past few years. I used Kodak / Fuji / Agfa films. Part of the fun was shooting the films and learning about their characteristics. Different products (obviously) render colors, grain, and contrast in their own way. You'll discover which E-6 films you prefer ... and isn't that part of the enjoyment of photography? 🙂
I developed my E-6 films at home with the Tetenal kit. If you've done C-41 then E-6 is extremely similar. You'll likely have no problem making the transition.
Since I don't have a projector, I scanned my positives using my Epson v700 scanner. I think the v500 and v700 are very similar. The bundled Epson software handled the scanning quite well, I have no reason to complain. But my goals are likely different from yours. For me I just wanted decent scans for personal viewing and archiving, so the Epson worked fine for my purposes.
I also owned a Nikon 9000ED for a while, and that did an even better job than the Epson. The scans were stunning, really. But I found the workflow on the Nikon to be more cumbersome than the Epson. But that's just me.
Comparing E-6 to digital is IMHO just resurrecting the tired old Holy War of digital vs film. I shoot both. They're equally great, but in different ways. I like the look of film. But sometimes I shoot digital. And that's OK.
But enough of my soapbox. How about a pretty picture? 🙂
Fuji Velvia 100, Kiev 88, home-developed E-6. Epson v700 scan.
I used to do E6 in the kitchen sink when I was 13, so I'm not worried about that 🙂
That photo is lovely, and it's great to see you are achieving such good results with the flatbed.
wakarimasen
Well-known
It's simply worth doing at least once. I shot a roll of slide film last year on holiday, and seeing the images projected is really rather special.
Spanik
Well-known
I hardly shoot anything else. Nothing beats holding a MF slide to the light. For me it is the easiest way, I shoot the film, drop it at the lab and can see the result directly. No hassle with scanning it myself or having the colours or contrast/density changed between the negative and the print.
Projecting isn't that easy and asks for some work. But even with my old an tired P11 it is a nice experience.
Scanning doesn't come easy to me, I cannot get out of a slide what is in it with my V700. IIRC this is some Provia 400X with the Mamiya 645.
More Provia 400X but I can't remember the camera.
Projecting isn't that easy and asks for some work. But even with my old an tired P11 it is a nice experience.
Scanning doesn't come easy to me, I cannot get out of a slide what is in it with my V700. IIRC this is some Provia 400X with the Mamiya 645.
More Provia 400X but I can't remember the camera.
brbo
Well-known
A good scanner helps, but flatbed will do for properly exposed MF slides.
Drum vs. a scan from a flatbed I bought for less than 100 EUR (OK, drum scanner wasn't that much more expensive, but it's a beast even though it's considered as "desktop drum scanner")
Drum vs. a scan from a flatbed I bought for less than 100 EUR (OK, drum scanner wasn't that much more expensive, but it's a beast even though it's considered as "desktop drum scanner")
borge
Established
E6 can be wonderful. Just remember, though, that it's a lot more difficult to scan. For some reason, most scanners tend to "under-expose" slide film a lot. Sure it can be sort of fixed during the scanning process, but it kinda destroys the good looking slide being scanned. C41 and B&W is MUCH easier to get good scans from...
I regret using Provia 400x on an important trip during last fall. The film just didn't have latitude for the type of photography that I did, and it scans poorly compared to Portra, Pro 400h, Ektar, or any kind of C41 film. I didn't know, but I learned...
Scanning properly exposed 120mm Velvia 100f on my Plustek OpticFilm 120 can be a challenge even. The scans come out murky, but oh my, the slides look wonderful on the light table... But I don't really want to view them on the light table...
I still have 2 rolls of Velvia 50 in 35mm and 4 rolls of Velvia 100 in 120mm left... And I won't use them for anything important.
I regret using Provia 400x on an important trip during last fall. The film just didn't have latitude for the type of photography that I did, and it scans poorly compared to Portra, Pro 400h, Ektar, or any kind of C41 film. I didn't know, but I learned...
Scanning properly exposed 120mm Velvia 100f on my Plustek OpticFilm 120 can be a challenge even. The scans come out murky, but oh my, the slides look wonderful on the light table... But I don't really want to view them on the light table...
I still have 2 rolls of Velvia 50 in 35mm and 4 rolls of Velvia 100 in 120mm left... And I won't use them for anything important.
Spanik
Well-known
About 1/3 of my freezer is full of Provia 😀
FujiLove
Well-known
Do you mean you regret using the Provia because it was tough to scan and didn't provide good results, or more generally that the particular photographs were more suited to negative emulsion?
Similar threads
