Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 10 Jul 2009 (Friday) 22:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

*Post Your Film Shots*

 
hofajoab
Member
208 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Scotland
     
Jul 14, 2009 08:10 |  #46

How about grain structure, colour representation, tonal values, dynamic range, etc, etc..

They may well be digital now but they do still retain some elements of film quality.

They must do as you can tell a lot of the time if the exposure was on film or digital.


http://www.pughphotogr​aphy.co.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bob_A
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,438 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 47
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
     
Jul 14, 2009 08:26 |  #47

hofajoab wrote in post #8277321 (external link)
How about grain structure, colour representation, tonal values, dynamic range, etc, etc..

They may well be digital now but they do still retain some elements of film quality.

They must do as you can tell a lot of the time if the exposure was on film or digital.

Well maybe not DR, unless you're using a pretty much top of the line scanner. But I will say that my scanned negs take very little work to get the colours right (unless they were stored incorrectly) where sometimes finding that right combination for digital can be a challenge. I also agree that certain film scans have a certain look and feel that I've never seen reproduced by digital ... unfortunately not many of my images have this quality! :lol:


Bob
SmugMug (external link) | My Gear Ratings | My POTN Gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hofajoab
Member
208 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Scotland
     
Jul 14, 2009 08:33 |  #48

Well I was just saying that it would be ignorant to say that all the qualities of film are completely gone once they've been digitised, although, obviously some are lost along the way of course.


http://www.pughphotogr​aphy.co.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mehran.mo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
998 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jul 14, 2009 10:23 |  #49

This is shot on the new T-Max 400. I'm still fairly new at this and I'm not exactly sure if I like the Tri-X 320 more or the T-Max 400 more.

IMAGE: http://borbal.com/Dump/1.jpg

IMAGE: http://borbal.com/Dump/2.jpg

Digital SLR: Canon 5D w/grip * EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM * EF 200mm f2.8L MK I * 580EX II
Film SLR: Hasselblad 500c * Zeiss 60mm f3.5 CF T* Distagon (whole kit for sale)
www.borbal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bjordan
Senior Member
Avatar
977 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Central Coast, CA
     
Jul 14, 2009 14:18 |  #50

rral22 wrote in post #8277302 (external link)
I looked at the whole thread, and I really think there are some good images here, but how can we talk about the "look" of film when viewing it on the web? Every one of these images has been scanned, and is now appearing on a monitor. Their "film qualities" no longer exist. They ARE digital.

I really do believe that large prints from film have qualities I like, but you can't see them on a monitor.

Scanning film (or prints) digitally captures the "look" of the film in the grain and tone. I don't know if a consumer film scanner can capture the full dynamic range of B&W film, and doubt a monitor can display it, but I don't think it's any less than photographic paper.


"...this was the destiny of our lives. A long time ago this was our future, looking now for a lost pomegranate at Big Sur." -R. Brautigan

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lizzy7
Senior Member
260 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: UK
     
Jul 14, 2009 14:38 as a reply to  @ post 8274619 |  #51

Thank you Bob :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 15, 2009 23:01 |  #52

rral22 wrote in post #8277302 (external link)
I looked at the whole thread, and I really think there are some good images here, but how can we talk about the "look" of film when viewing it on the web? Every one of these images has been scanned, and is now appearing on a monitor. Their "film qualities" no longer exist. They ARE digital.

That is not correct. They are scanned into a digital format, but they are still hold the film qualities. Negative film scanned properly will hold onto the much higher highlight retention that negative film has over even the best dSLR. I've proven it to myself shooting negative film on bright cloudless days outside when the sun is high in the sky and film can hold detail in the highlights where a dSLR would have all sorts of trouble and would end up with dark shadows and blown highlights.

Attached is a photo from my 5D (wide view and darker) that I developed in LR2 and even had to use fill light of about 35. The other is 200 speed consumer film, negative was scanned. These are taken a year apart but at the same location, same time of day and both had sunny skies. Notice how great the highlights are in the film scan and how light the shadows are compared to the 5D photo.

So scanning film doesn't make them digital. Their film qualities are maintained! Now if films scanners can "record" such a wide range of colors and brightnesses, why can't dSLRs do it at the point of capture?! :confused:


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Photon ­ Phil
Goldmember
Avatar
1,763 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Capturing Photons in Wisconsin
     
Jul 15, 2009 23:04 |  #53

I just right clicked on a film image here looking for EXIF! LOL!


Bodies: SONY A850 / Pentax K100D / D70 (18-55VR, 55-200)
Primes: Minolta 28 ff2.8 / Minolta 50 f1.7 / Minolta 50 f2.8 Macro
Zooms: 35-70 f4 / 100-200 f4.5 Lights: AB800 / AB400 & CSRB's
Classics:
Pentax Super Tak 50 f1.4 / Pentax SMC 50 f1.4,f1.7,f2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Photon ­ Phil
Goldmember
Avatar
1,763 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Capturing Photons in Wisconsin
     
Jul 15, 2009 23:09 |  #54

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3007/2968500091_3cce788a52_b.jpg

Bodies: SONY A850 / Pentax K100D / D70 (18-55VR, 55-200)
Primes: Minolta 28 ff2.8 / Minolta 50 f1.7 / Minolta 50 f2.8 Macro
Zooms: 35-70 f4 / 100-200 f4.5 Lights: AB800 / AB400 & CSRB's
Classics:
Pentax Super Tak 50 f1.4 / Pentax SMC 50 f1.4,f1.7,f2.0

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mehran.mo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
998 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jul 15, 2009 23:18 |  #55

I just love this randomized grain structure.


Digital SLR: Canon 5D w/grip * EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM * EF 200mm f2.8L MK I * 580EX II
Film SLR: Hasselblad 500c * Zeiss 60mm f3.5 CF T* Distagon (whole kit for sale)
www.borbal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mehran.mo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
998 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jul 15, 2009 23:19 |  #56

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Digital SLR: Canon 5D w/grip * EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM * EF 200mm f2.8L MK I * 580EX II
Film SLR: Hasselblad 500c * Zeiss 60mm f3.5 CF T* Distagon (whole kit for sale)
www.borbal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DStanic
Cream of the Crop
6,148 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Canada
     
Jul 15, 2009 23:41 |  #57

nice! Details on that shot?


Sony A6000, 16-50PZ, 55-210, 35mm 1.8 OSS
Canon 60D, 30D
Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 17-35, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 85mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bjordan
Senior Member
Avatar
977 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Central Coast, CA
     
Jul 16, 2009 00:06 |  #58

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #8288404 (external link)
That is not correct. They are scanned into a digital format, but they are still hold the film qualities. Negative film scanned properly will hold onto the much higher highlight retention that negative film has over even the best dSLR. I've proven it to myself shooting negative film on bright cloudless days outside when the sun is high in the sky and film can hold detail in the highlights where a dSLR would have all sorts of trouble and would end up with dark shadows and blown highlights.:confused:

I rescanned the picture I posted before of the wiener dog at 4800dpi, 16-bit to look at the shadows/highlights. Lightening the deepest shadow (the foreground man's sunglasses), I could make out trees and a few reflected people. I could even see that there were buttons on a person's shirt! Surely the highlights in the scene were blown? Nope, the brightest highlight was another man's white T-shirt, and all but the very brightest parts still had some silver defining its wrinkles. T-Max 400 in D-76.


"...this was the destiny of our lives. A long time ago this was our future, looking now for a lost pomegranate at Big Sur." -R. Brautigan

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 148
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jul 16, 2009 00:53 |  #59

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #8288404 (external link)
...

Now if films scanners can "record" such a wide range of colors and brightnesses, why can't dSLRs do it at the point of capture?! :confused:

Um, I'm gonna guess that people don't want to wait 20 to 60+ seconds for a caputre to finish? ;)


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mehran.mo
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
998 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jul 16, 2009 08:09 |  #60

DStanic wrote in post #8288607 (external link)
nice! Details on that shot?

Sorry, I forgot. Mamiya C330 + 80mm f2.8 + T-Max 400. Shot wide open. I really don't remember the shutter speed, but i don't really think it matters anyway.


Digital SLR: Canon 5D w/grip * EF 100mm f2.8 Macro USM * EF 200mm f2.8L MK I * 580EX II
Film SLR: Hasselblad 500c * Zeiss 60mm f3.5 CF T* Distagon (whole kit for sale)
www.borbal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

839,916 views & 2,934 likes for this thread
*Post Your Film Shots*
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Shawvon
902 guests, 339 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.