*Post Your Film Shots*

Don't think it is possible to argue about resolution online.

Cuypers1807 wrote in post #17256040
Don't think it is possible to argue about resolution online.

Yes you could. This is the shot I dslr scanned it but I didn't upload it. What you are seeing is the same shot but previously scanned with the Canon 9000f.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/dJtC​RJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pFq8​hQ

Very happy with these...coming from my heavily modded Yashica Mat...

Ilford fp4+ 125. These are all scanned, not DSLR scanned. Otherwise, all the highlights would look too grayish.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pZ79​Pr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pGRe​X6

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pZgW​vx

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pGUV​1D

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pGWE​nu

Late Fall shots. Fuji Superia 400. Olympus OM2n with Tamron 35-80 f2.8-3.6 sp.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pHwx​uJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pHr9​7R

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/p49K​Fy

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/p4cB​gk

TooManyShots wrote in post #17256217
Yes you could. This is the shot I dslr scanned it but I didn't upload it. What you are seeing is the same shot but previously scanned with the Canon 9000f.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/dJtC​RJ Scan-130106-00031024 by vracing, on Flickr

This is the 100% crop version of the above scene (far left lower corner) BUT from the DSLR scan. The original resolution is 4600k pixel.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pFq8​hQ 100precrop by vracing, on Flickr

Unfortunately, I couldn't get the highlights to snap more or to glow more. The DSLR scan result so far has that digital BW conversion look. Flat and dull highlights. Too heavy on the mid tone.

Did you post-process the DSLR scan? The resolution there is outstanding.

My experience with DSLR (well, X-Pro1...) scanning of large format negatives has been quite good. It clearly outperforms a flatbed (even a decent flatbed like the V700/750).

edge100 wrote in post #17262730
Did you post-process the DSLR scan? The resolution there is outstanding.

My experience with DSLR (well, X-Pro1...) scanning of large format negatives has been quite good. It clearly outperforms a flatbed (even a decent flatbed like the V700/750).

Yes, of course. Is the highlight tonality. Is too digital. Is not glowing enough. Like the sky in this shot here. The sky would have been more grayish than white.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pGUV​1D

Self developed.

Just got some film back from a new lab.

Rolleiflex 2.8E
Fuji Provia 100F

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/q1yR​jk

TooManyShots wrote in post #17262820
Yes, of course. Is the highlight tonality. Is too digital. Is not glowing enough. Like the sky in this shot here. The sky would have been more grayish than white.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pGUV​1D entrance by vracing, on Flickr

If someone can show me a glowing sky with vibrant highlights from the DSLR scan, I would give DSLR scan another shot.

Can you post a side by side comparison with a scan and a DSLR "scan", so we can see what you're describing?

edge100 wrote in post #17264822
Can you post a side by side comparison with a scan and a DSLR "scan", so we can see what you're describing?

Hahahaha...I took up your challenge and I am making progress. This time, I used a more powerful backlit light source, a 60w CF bulb 65k. The bulb is powered by a Homedepot flood light unit. I then made a cylinder shroud out of some white card board and sealed up opening in the other end. Make a 2.5" x 2.5" opening on the side for the negative. My exposure settings ended up to be using iso 100 and 1/100s shutter speed. Historgram shows normal exposure with enough data across the range. Before, all data was at the center.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/p5Ei​qv

TooManyShots wrote in post #17265790
Hahahaha...I took up your challenge and I am making progress. This time, I used a more powerful backlit light source, a 60w CF bulb 65k. The bulb is powered by a Homedepot flood light unit. I then made a cylinder shroud out of some white card board and sealed up opening in the other end. Make a 2.5" x 2.5" opening on the side for the negative. My exposure settings ended up to be using iso 100 and 1/100s shutter speed. Historgram shows normal exposure with enough data across the range. Before, all data was at the center.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/p5Ei​qv entrancerawedited by vracing, on Flickr

Remember that negatives (B&W or colour) will, by definition, have a very low density range; you actually want a compressed histogram, which you then use curves to expand out into a range of intensities. A negative is not simply an inverted positive; you have to map the proper contrast yourself.

As for the light source, I use a Artograph Lightpad, and it gives very even illumination.

edge100 wrote in post #17267193
Remember that negatives (B&W or colour) will, by definition, have a very low density range; you actually want a compressed histogram, which you then use curves to expand out into a range of intensities. A negative is not simply an inverted positive; you have to map the proper contrast yourself.

As for the light source, I use a Artograph Lightpad, and it gives very even illumination.

Before, the shape of the historgram is like a skinny, inverted V shape. Well, I think this is it. I think I nailed it. The final puzzle is that I still need to use Vuescan to invert my DSLR scan negatives. With CS5, certain scene is easier to invert. Others, I had troubles with last night because of some stupid color casts. With Vuescan, I just load the DSLR scan copy and to scan. Vuescan would automatically invert it and to save it. Then, I would just edit the shot normally in CS5, which is a lot better and faster than tweaking the black and white points and trying to color balance the shot.... Of course, my goal here is to do these DSLR scans without using another reference shot to match it. And to get the tone curves and the tonality right as well.

Here is another example. No HDR here just single exposure with 2 shots stitched. This is from the DSLR scan. The highlight here is very intense enough coming off the water treatment plant. The original shat has that glow and some flares too. Yes, at 100 crop, you can see the individual metal railing by the ladders on those chimneys.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/q2KG​Si

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/pAqM​K8