Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
Posts: 6444
Joined: Jul. 6 2003
From: England, living in Italy
My photo of the week 4
This is another medium format film scan. The contrast is frost and snow clinging to the trees and the field. I am rather pleased with this one. Worth noting that a scan of a 6x6 negative is eqivalent in resolution to a 50 Megapixel digital camera, which cost a lot of money.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
RE: My photo of the week 4 (in reply to Escribano)
quote:
Worth noting that a scan of a 6x6 negative is eqivalent in resolution to a 50 Megapixel digital camera, which cost a lot of money.
Nice shot man. You should set up an account with Alamy
Shots like this get used on sorts of things. Just submit your pics and then forget about them. Every now and then you'll get a little cheque through the post.
RE: My photo of the week 4 (in reply to Escribano)
quote:
Thanks, I'll try it, you never know.
You should Simon. Careful with the first five pictures you submit. They have to be perfect. If one minor spec is found on one frame they dismiss all the pictures you've submitted. But once you've read and understand their 'terms and conditions' etc.. it's quite straight forward.
You should Simon. Careful with the first five pictures you submit. They have to be perfect. If one minor spec is found on one frame they dismiss all the pictures you've submitted.
And folk think OUR very reasonable posting rules is asking too much???.....Shish!!
No, seriously Simon, that is a technically excellent picture, even through a computer monitor I can see the detail goes on and on...
A bit like when I say that you can listen to, say Paco on a £40 Ghetto Blaster and it still sounds terrific.
Somehow the quality of the source shines through regardless of the reproducing medium.
Just a bit of dust removal, brightness and contrast - no HDR, more difficult with film although technically possible. This is the dynamic range of film, which I much prefer over digital, even HDR digital.
RE: My photo of the week 4 (in reply to Escribano)
Nice picture!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Escribano
This is the dynamic range of film, which I much prefer over digital, even HDR digital.
Probably not informed / anal enough ( seriusly meant, despite countless nights spent in own dark room from age of 15 ), me don´t sense enough reason for celluloid anymore. At least not with the capability of digital cameras like the late Canon D5.
At first not exactly cheap either ( the package I noted down, including a couple of sensitive lenses, Pelikan case etc. amounts to 10 grands ), but then so beautifully seamless and practical without concerns about celluloid.
From what I have seen with actual digital, I´d think that meanwhile in regard of texture and dynamcis there isn´t much left to be desired. But then again, while maybe not the worst in regard of composition and timing, I know that there are others whose eyes are definitly more sensible to items like texture and dynamics than mine.
Anyway; too bad that my pecuniary household currently is being erratic, otherwise I´d be fumbling around with that Canon thingy already. As meanwhile an excellent photo printer ( up to the format of DIN A1, me thinks ) - from the same brand - can be had for around 6000 bucks, it would be tempting to get oneself such a thing as well, getting independent from the incredibly expensive and simultaneously miserable ( = far from accurate ) printing conditions at the place where I´m now. ( ... Dumbs who open "print shops", yet unwilling to spent a ~ 200$ on calibration gear ... grrr )
Besides, the D5 also delivers brilliant video quality, handy for occasional takes, as long as one does not need too much technical flexibility while filming. For music clips for instance definitly practical enough, if well imployed, allowing quality indiscernable from professional capturing.
Me, on the one hand with guitars picky enough to go for considerable extra expensenses on behalf of sonic or tactile differences many won´t even notice, in regard of photography on the other hand being correspondingly gross that the time of accepting digital tech has come since a while.
Still fighting with myself, when to purchase such a package ... So hard to keep waiting ...
me don´t sense enough reason for celluloid anymore.
Apart from my love of older 35mm film cameras - the 5D will match them for resolution (full frame) and probably in the dynamic range, especially in colour - but medium format film beats the 5D hands down by a long way and is much cheaper I am talking about larger prints here - a screen is only 70 dpi but even then I can appreciate the range of a well exposed negative from a decent 2400 scan.
My entire outfit including scanner is less than my Canon 550D plus film and chemicals, which are the price of a few beers.
Each to their own of course, I do it for the nostalgic fun and the 'look' and I have to think more about my images in analogue with no auto functions to speak of.
Agree on the 5D video, which is why I am keeping the 550D for a while, and for colour, until I work out the best colour workflow in film at least.
RE: My photo of the week 4 (in reply to Escribano)
I don't have any skills at judging photos but as a simple viewer, I think you have talent, this is another very nice picture. I really like the black and white. ... and from the previous picture, I can't tell the difference of film or digital, I would at least need side by side to compare.
RE: My photo of the week 4 (in reply to Escribano)
Thanks for your valuation!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Escribano
My entire outfit including scanner is less than my Canon 550D plus film and chemicals, which are the price of a few beers.
Intending to digitize old negatives, me has been looking around a bit for dedicated scanning options; but those are still damn expensive. Are you using such or are there common yet capable scanners out there? ( So far I noted a model named "Pixma MP630" [ accidentally a Canon again ] as an all-in-one solution to get, but don´t expect it to be suitable for scanning negatives ... As you can tell I don´t have the slightest clue of scanners, which is why I would appreciate any hints or workarounds you could give me.)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Escribano
... with no auto functions to speak of.
That´s the fun and challenge of course, which I vastly pursue too.
Are you using such or are there common yet capable scanners out there?
I am using the Epson V500 - a non-dedicated flat bed scanner, very capable of scanning Medium Format negatives and does quite well with 35mm but I would advise a dedicated scanner for 35mm and as the Coolscan is no longer available I am not sure which to recommend. The Plustek seems popular.
Printable Version
) 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread