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 09 Mar 2011 (Wednesday) 21:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Astia film vs. Canon a620 image comparison

 
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Mar 09, 2011 21:37 |  #1

I visited Big Bend National Park several months ago, and this was my only image recorded in 2 formats as a comparison. 98% of what I shot there was film: kodachrome, astia, ektar, and tmax 100. Occasional quick snaps were with my Canon a620.

I can't recall if I used a polarizer on the Astia image, but notice the differences between these images. Notice how much better/brighter the highlights are in the Astia slide film image compared to the a620 as well as the color tone. These were taken seconds apart. The initial scan of the Astia slide was rather dull, but there was the latitude within the recorded light to adjust the tone curve, etc. with Lightroom 2 to the finished version shown. And I also did what I could to fix up the a620 image using Lightroom 2 as well.

Comments? Discussion?


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
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
GtrPlyr
Senior Member
480 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Mar 10, 2011 08:31 |  #2
bannedPermanent ban

I can't bear to look, but I will.
However, I can bear-ly tell the difference.
Boy, that must've been a bear of a hike through the park.


Gear List: A Brownie. I call it a Brownie cuz it fell in the toilet.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kolor-Pikker
Goldmember
2,790 posts
Likes: 59
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Moscow
     
Mar 10, 2011 08:47 |  #3

I dare say they both look awful, but in their own ways, good thing there are no bears in Russia!


5DmkII | 24-70 f/2.8L II | Pentax 645Z | 55/2.8 SDM | 120/4 Macro | 150/2.8 IF
I acquired an expensive camera so I can hang out in forums, annoy wedding photographers during formals and look down on P&S users... all the while telling people it's the photographer, not the camera.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,531 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2466
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Mar 10, 2011 09:23 |  #4

One of the curses and benefits of using any film emulsion is the 'personality' of that film. Some love the look of Kodachrome over any Ektachrome. Some loved the saturated colors of Velvia, or the faithful colors of Kodak EPP. I loved Kodak EPP for product shots, but Velvia for landscapes...hated Velvia when there were people in the shot, though! In short, 'it depends' upon which emulsion you choose, as the final look of the shot you take. The same scene with 20 different films will absolutely yield 20 different looks!

Digital has really no inherent personality when RAW capture is used...it is entirely dependent upon the post processing settings the person wants to use. (Yes, there is a 'Canon look' vs. a 'Nikon look', but even that varies from model to model.). If you shoot JPG, which Picture Style you choose influences the look considerably.

In summary, regarding your test..."Yeah, and what is your point? :) " for the above reasons.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Mar 10, 2011 09:39 |  #5

It wasn't a test, never stated as such, just a comparison for the thought that slide film does poorly on sunny days compared to even P&S cameras. Do both photos look "awful" as Kolo retorted? No, but the lower (a620) photo looks pale in comparison to the Astia photo (higher) as has much better highlights as well.

And keep in mind both these images have been tweaked up to look their best, so the comment about "picture styles" doesn't really apply here. Note, if I apply more highlight contrast to the a620 image (to improve the highlights in the foreground grass to get similar to the Astia image), the sky just falls apart.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,531 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2466
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Mar 10, 2011 09:56 |  #6

HappySnapper90, no need to get defensive. You put up two photos and asked for comment, which we provided. You did not specify what kind of comment, you left that open. If you had post processed the same shot in digital ten different ways as well as 10 different picture styles, you'd get some "I like photo 'n'" responses...it is a matter of personal preferences. You'd also get some 'So what was your point?" reactions, too, from an open ended posting. Had you stated your premise about slide film in sunlight in your opening post (rather than five posts into the thread) that would have sparked discussion in reponse to that opening premise.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Mar 10, 2011 10:00 |  #7

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #11994249 (external link)
And keep in mind both these images have been tweaked up to look their best, so the comment about "picture styles" doesn't really apply here. Note, if I apply more highlight contrast to the a620 image (to improve the highlights in the foreground grass to get similar to the Astia image), the sky just falls apart.


You know 35mm film is pretty big sensor compared to an A620.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kolor-Pikker
Goldmember
2,790 posts
Likes: 59
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Moscow
     
Mar 10, 2011 10:01 |  #8

It'd help to at least know which photo came from which camera, you say upper and lower, but on my screen they are side to side. I'm hoping the one on the right is the Canon.


5DmkII | 24-70 f/2.8L II | Pentax 645Z | 55/2.8 SDM | 120/4 Macro | 150/2.8 IF
I acquired an expensive camera so I can hang out in forums, annoy wedding photographers during formals and look down on P&S users... all the while telling people it's the photographer, not the camera.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jetcode
Cream of the Crop
6,234 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2009
Location: West Marin
     
Mar 10, 2011 16:54 |  #9

Film or not both images were subjected to the digital process which controls the image rendition. In other words the scanner is a flat bed digital camera. The lower image features blue branches in the upper right frame and a slight blue cast in the shadows compared to the upper image. Is this a function of post processing? It is really difficult to do a comparison since the process paths are different.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GtrPlyr
Senior Member
480 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Mar 10, 2011 17:30 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

OP, mail everybody a drugstore 5x7 from the film camera will ya?


Gear List: A Brownie. I call it a Brownie cuz it fell in the toilet.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Mar 10, 2011 17:34 |  #11

GtrPlyr wrote in post #11997202 (external link)
OP, mail everybody a drugstore 5x7 from the film camera will ya?

Nope, that still adds processing.

What we need is for him to mail the piece of film around so we can all put it on our light tables to review with a loupe. Or in our slide projectors.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bjyoder
Goldmember
Avatar
1,664 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Central Ohio
     
Mar 10, 2011 18:16 |  #12

krb wrote in post #11997223 (external link)
Nope, that still adds processing.

What we need is for him to mail the piece of film around so we can all put it on our light tables to review with a loupe. Or in our slide projectors.

Yea, but what about a guy like me with only tan walls to project it on...?!



;)


Ben

500px (external link) | Website (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HappySnapper90
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Mar 10, 2011 18:24 |  #13

jetcode wrote in post #11996967 (external link)
Film or not both images were subjected to the digital process which controls the image rendition. In other words the scanner is a flat bed digital camera. The lower image features blue branches in the upper right frame and a slight blue cast in the shadows compared to the upper image. Is this a function of post processing? It is really difficult to do a comparison since the process paths are different.

No, a scanner is not the same as a digital camera. So a scan of a film image does not result in what a digital camera would have captured. Properly scanned film maintains the film's characteristics and attributes.

The blue in the corner of the a620 image was there in the original file, I would not do processing that would create that. And the "process paths" are irrelevant because the end result of how the images are used are through digital projection and printing. There are few places that are able to optically print from color film.

And the a620 image is on the "right" for those that surf with their browser in widescreen/full screen mode. I have a wide screen but keep my browser in "letter" portrait orientation so it doesn't take over my whole screen and can have more on my screen than just one window.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Mar 10, 2011 19:12 |  #14

bjyoder wrote in post #11997454 (external link)
Yea, but what about a guy like me with only tan walls to project it on...?!



;)

Get a 40x60 piece of white foam core and move the projector closer. ;)


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 200
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Mar 10, 2011 19:19 |  #15

jetcode wrote in post #11996967 (external link)
Film or not both images were subjected to the digital process which controls the image rendition. In other words the scanner is a flat bed digital camera.

No, it's not.


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

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

2,455 views & 0 likes for this thread
Astia film vs. Canon a620 image comparison
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 masoudyas
858 guests, 320 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.