Another Photography Thread

[abstract49]

Congo African Grey Parrot. Scanned 35mm film.

 

The beautiful range of greyscale here, plus the shallow depth of field, suggests a very slow b&w film [likely no longer available, alas], like Kodak Pan-F, AgfaPan 50, Ilford Pan 50, et al. I'm spouting here, dragging up shaky memory, and my naming could be off, but the idea is true - b& w films with slow speed and beautiful tonal range.

[penrivers]

¡Gracias, penrivers! It was a great trip. I took over 1500 pictures, and am still working my way through them. I don't want to overpost, but I'll put up some more soon.

 

You are welcome, I dont like Guanajuato city, to many ups and down hills, but I love San Miguel Allende, we wait for your photos.

[penrivers]

 

The beautiful range of greyscale here, plus the shallow depth of field, suggests a very slow b&w film [likely no longer available, alas], like Kodak Pan-F, AgfaPan 50, Ilford Pan 50, et al. I'm spouting here, dragging up shaky memory, and my naming could be off, but the idea is true - b& w films with slow speed and beautiful tonal range.

 

You can find those loved names of B&W era in nik suite, in fact 15 or 20 films, but I suspect you are a purist and wont like it.

[abstract49]

 

You can find those loved names of B&W era in nik suite, in fact 15 or 20 films, but I suspect you are a purist and wont like it.

 

Actually, I have more or less embraced digital, which I resisted for a long time. One big reason was the obviousness of early, low resolution cameras; now that much higher resolutions are available for reasonable prices, it is a much more attractive alternative to traditional photography. And there are other advantages with digital. I still have a lot of analog gear, from 35 mm to 5X7 view, but my darkroom has been in storage for a long time now. I still appreciate the work and care that go into making a "real" photographic print, but no, I am not - at least, not any longer - a purist.

[jon]

 

You are welcome, I dont like Guanajuato city, to many ups and down hills, but I love San Miguel Allende, we wait for your photos.

 

I would like to visit Guanajuato. My wife and I enjoyed this trip so much, I told her we should make it a yearly pilgrimage. Should we make it back, Guanajuato is on my wish list for a day trip.

 

Speaking of my wife, she got into the spirit of things in San Miguel, and got her face painted. This is her, and, yes, I'm a lucky man (she's just as beautiful on the inside):

 

 

She also, for an early Christmas, gave me a website for my pictures, so I've started posting my pictures there. It's at http://5centsphotos.com (hosted by smugmug). Take a look. I've got a gallery for San Miguel and another for Day of the Dead, and I'm still adding more. Here are a couple more that I like:

 

Sunset looking down Montes de Oca street, where we stayed:

 

 

 

A tree in front of the Templo de la Purísima Concepción:

 

 

 

Rainy day in San Miguel:

 

[AlohaLani787]

 

The beautiful range of greyscale here, plus the shallow depth of field, suggests a very slow b&w film [likely no longer available, alas], like Kodak Pan-F, AgfaPan 50, Ilford Pan 50, et al. I'm spouting here, dragging up shaky memory, and my naming could be off, but the idea is true - b& w films with slow speed and beautiful tonal range.

 

During the years I was an active photographer I experimented with several B&W films of varying ISOs, eventually settling on Ilford HP5 400 and Ilford FP4 125. The slower film (50) is more demanding, but does produce a spectacular tonal range. Since I kept one body loaded with color and another with B&W, I didn't want to be so light restricted with the super slow film as used on this photograph. Eventually I'll dig up a few more of the old (50) B&Ws because the range is so nice.

[abstract49]

 

During the years I was an active photographer I experimented with several B&W films of varying ISOs, eventually settling on Ilford HP5 400 and Ilford FP4 125. The slower film (50) is more demanding, but does produce a spectacular tonal range. Since I kept one body loaded with color and another with B&W, I didn't want to be so light restricted with the super slow film as used on this photograph. Eventually I'll dig up a few more of the old (50) B&Ws because the range is so nice.

 

Yes, lovely as the slower films are, it can be inconvenient at times. Tripods help, but then you get loaded down with weight and bulk. Not just with b&w, but even with some of the best color films. Kodachrome 64 was one of the most beautiful, but it has been gone many years now. Kodak even produced a very slow negative film [i think ASA 25?] in the late 80's, which made gorgeous prints, but it was very short lived.

 

I still much prefer the Ilford films over the Kodaks in b&w. I have many negatives on both, and my next project is scanning hundreds, if not several thousand, negatives and slides to digital.

[AlohaLani787]

 

Yes, lovely as the slower films are, it can be inconvenient at times. Tripods help, but then you get loaded down with weight and bulk. Not just with b&w, but even with some of the best color films. Kodachrome 64 was one of the most beautiful, but it has been gone many years now. Kodak even produced a very slow negative film [i think ASA 25?] in the late 80's, which made gorgeous prints, but it was very short lived.

 

I still much prefer the Ilford films over the Kodaks in b&w. I have many negatives on both, and my next project is scanning hundreds, if not several thousand, negatives and slides to digital.

 

Yes, I found my preference leaned toward Ilford too. Please consider posting some of your B&W scans.

[AlohaLani787]

Christmas in my town. Scanned 35mm film.

[CS388]

Wonderful photographs. I always enjoy visiting this thread. Thanks to all for sharing their work.

 

 

I have many negatives on both, and my next project is scanning hundreds, if not several thousand, negatives and slides to digital.

 

How will you do this? On a standard scanner, or do you need specialist equipment?

 

Thanks.

[abstract49]

Wonderful photographs. I always enjoy visiting this thread. Thanks to all for sharing their work.

 

 

How will you do this? On a standard scanner, or do you need specialist equipment?

 

Thanks.

 

Definitely need a special scanner. Ordinary flat bed and pass through scanners will only do flat work, e.g., prints. You have to one that passes light through, not just reflects it. Having retired a Microtek that is no longer supported by recent Windows platforms or any Mac operating system, I have just acquired an Epson Perfection V-850. I barely have it out of the box and set up, and my one attempt to scan a 4X5 negative failed. I hope to have time soon to work with settings and discover that it was just an operator failure, not defective equipment.

 

There are plenty of inexpensive scanners that will do only 35mm slides and negatives, and there are a very few which will accommodate 120 film, but to get 4X5 and larger negatives/transparencies, you have to bite the proverbial bullet. Since a great lot of my work is on 4X5, I have bitten said bullet, third time in about 20 years or so.

 

In any case, it is a slow process, and the better quality one wants in digital files [i.e., higher resolution], the longer it takes for each neg/trans. Obviously, 35mm stuff takes much less time per image than 4X5. On past scanners, it has taken as much as 20 minutes to scan a single b&w negative.

 

So, to answer your question more directly, "How will you do this?" - Very slowly.

[CS388]

Ha! Nice. Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful reply.

 

I had been wondering what I should do with my old 35mm negatives. I may look into the 35mm scanners.

 

Thanks again for taking the time. Much appreciated.

[abstract49]

Ha! Nice. Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful reply.

 

I had been wondering what I should do with my old 35mm negatives. I may look into the 35mm scanners.

 

Thanks again for taking the time. Much appreciated.

 

You are so very welcome. You can try the individual manufacturers' websites to look at their scanner offerings, or you can shop Amazon, B&H Photo, or a number of other e-tailers. If you shop the manufacturers, most have an option to find various places to buy other than directly from them; sometimes, you can get a better price by checking them out.

 

Also, looking at Amazon or such, you can look at customer ratings and read reviews that you probably won't get at the manufacturers' sites. Additionally, since some PC/printer/scanner makers don't make them, searching Amazon will give you a quick look at which ones do, and save you some time.

 

Good luck!

[penrivers]

Loop coming.

[penrivers]

[penrivers]

Autopista 57.

[penrivers]

Going up. Autopista 57.

[AlohaLani787]

 

Autopista 57.

 

 

I like this shot. It has a bit of ominous feeling to it and I wonder what's around the bend.

[penrivers]

Thank you very much for your unexpected apreciations AlohaLani787, it was took by a Nikon D810 and a 24mm f1.4, beyond the bend is just brush, desertic brush, it was edited in photoshop cs6.

[penrivers]

AlohaLani787: original image, was croped and edited in B&W: