Thanks Frank. They leave something to be desired both in terms of subject and
rendering, but I had some fun with film.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 10/2/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I did as I had
On 10/2/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did as I had threatened, and shot a couple of rolls of Portra VC 160
> at the local Farmer's Market. I used the 6x7 with the 165/4 Leaf
> Shutter lens and the AF 400T flash with a Lumiquest Softbox. I like the
> fill from the softbox, partic
I'll soon, hopefully, be in a position to tell myself the same thing.
Have fantasy shopped for a scanner for quite awhile.
That pressure has recently lifted. WHEW!!
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yes, I see what you're saying. Those highlights are probably the
> result of my pushing the cur
On 10/3/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I see what you're saying. Those highlights are probably the result of my
> pushing the curve to eliminate muddiness. I'd love to have a Nikon Coolscan
> 8000. They're much less expensive than they once were, but I just don't shoot
>
Yes, I see what you're saying. Those highlights are probably the result of my
pushing the curve to eliminate muddiness. I'd love to have a Nikon Coolscan
8000. They're much less expensive than they once were, but I just don't shoot
enough film to justify it.
Paul
-- Original message
There are obvious areas where highlights could not be controlled,
you're absolutely right. I was looking more at skin tones and hair, on
the guitarist, for example.
I found the high contrast Kodak UC highlights very difficult to
control. I also, wanted to acknowledge the problem you may have been
Yes, I fiddled with them for quite a while. There's just not much in
the scan. I had to push them hard to get rid of an overall muddiness. I
might be able to tweak the scan adjustments and get something better,
but it may just be due to the limited range of the flatbed.
Paul
On Oct 3, 2006, at 6
Paul wrote:
>
> > I did as I had threatened, and shot a couple of rolls of Portra
> VC 160
> > at the local Farmer's Market. I used the 6x7 with the 165/4 Leaf
> > Shutter lens and the AF 400T flash with a Lumiquest Softbox. I
> like the
> > fill from the softbox, particularly in the shot of t
The shots have some blown highlights because there are some peripheral
areas in direct sun, for example in the background of the pic with the
pumpkins. But the main light is provided by the flash and softbox, so
the exposure had to be based on those. Any film or digital would show
some blown h
Thanks Bruce. Yes, I had fun. But I'm glad I don't have to do it every
day:-).
Paul
On Oct 2, 2006, at 11:23 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
> Some fun shots, to be sure. I like the first and third best. Looks
> like there is still some life left in film.
>
> --
> Bruce
>
>
> Monday, October 2, 2006,
Paul,
Thanks for the look. Generally crisp and well composed, but contrast
seems a problem. Maybe it's due to the scanner you want to replace or
the VC version of Portra. Hot emulsions has blown highlights for me to
the point where I usually increased the ISO by about a third of a stop.
Jack
---
Some fun shots, to be sure. I like the first and third best. Looks
like there is still some life left in film.
--
Bruce
Monday, October 2, 2006, 7:07:18 PM, you wrote:
PS> I did as I had threatened, and shot a couple of rolls of Portra VC 160
PS> at the local Farmer's Market. I used the 6x7
On 10/2/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And of course scanning
> negs isn't exactly a piece of cake, especially since I haven't done
> that for over two years.
I feel your pain. I could never get the color balance quite right.
I've had better luck with slide film on the scanner. B
Thanks Mat. It's definitely a different look than digital. I had to
readjust my thinking when processing these. And of course scanning
negs isn't exactly a piece of cake, especially since I haven't done
that for over two years.
Paul
On Oct 2, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Mat Maessen wrote:
> On 10/2/0
On 10/2/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5027776&size=lg
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5027772
> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5027701&size=lg
Very nice Paul. I've always liked the look of the Kodak VC films.
I did as I had threatened, and shot a couple of rolls of Portra VC 160
at the local Farmer's Market. I used the 6x7 with the 165/4 Leaf
Shutter lens and the AF 400T flash with a Lumiquest Softbox. I like the
fill from the softbox, particularly in the shot of the kids sitting on
the wall with th
16 matches
Mail list logo
