Posted by Tim Mulholland on November 29, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Greetings, all,
This photo was taken at the end of October, in the beautiful part of the Wisconsin Dells about which few people are aware. And, the way that the town looks, that's likely a good thing!
This photo was shot in the Dells of the Wisconsin State Natural Area, which is a rather large part of the riparian area to the north of the town of Wisconsin Dells. I'm looking forward to better exploring this particular area next year when the canopy is more closed, to create a darker, moodier image.
Tech: Pentax 67II, 45mm lens, Portra 160 VC; yeah, I'm not enamored with the high dynamic range in the image, but you know, light happens...
This looks like a really sweet place to explore. It's certainly very wild looking. I've never been to the Dells, but I've always have heard that it's a zoo. As far as the light goes, I actually like the way the background trees are illuminated. I think more work simply needs to be done to refine the tonalities and the color. Right now, it looks like there is a bit of a green cast green cast to me.
That darn color neg. film is tricky to scan and process!
Posted by Chuck Beatty on November 30, 2007 at 8:16 AM
What a cool place. I like the leading lines here, Tim. What's the tan background? trees? a cliff?
Posted by Tim Mulholland on November 30, 2007 at 3:43 PM
Hi all,
First, thank you for your comments - I sincerely appreciate them!
Looking at this now, a day after scanning & processing, yes, it does seem too green.
In the background, the "tan" stuff is just the remaining leaves on trees, which are sidelit and display too little detail to really show clearly. At first, I wasn't too pleased with these "hot spots," like these leaves on the trees, but the more that I was scanning yesterday, the more that I did like the color when contrasted with some blue skies...
Hey Tim, I think I'm with you about the blue sky. It adds a nice contrast to some of the gloomyness of rest of the scene.
What are you using to scan your film (hardware and software)? I'm also wondering what the density of the negative looks like. Also, how are you formulating your exposures? With Fuji 160s for example, it would easily be possible to get more shadow detail on the negative without loosing highlight detail...scanning and processing to retain that detail can be a bit tricky however.
Posted by Susie Hopkins on November 30, 2007 at 8:36 PM
From what I remember about the Dells is that it is a very green area! LOL! Nice!
Posted by Tim Mulholland on December 1, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Hi Joel,
My "formulations" are as follows, at least in this situation. I used a wide-angle lens and knew that the dynamic range was going to be a little too high for the negative film to handle (which is why I was using negative film rather than transparency film). So, I let the camera do it's own full-scene metering, then did some selective metering for highlights and shadows. I picked the exposure where I felt that I would best be able to capture the most detail in all areas, but also exposing more so that the highlights would be less blown out than the shadows blocked up, so maybe one stop less exposure than what the meter actually wanted. I think that there were at least six stops EV in this situation.
For scanning, I'm using an Imacon 343, w/ FlexColor. I use the Portra 160VC profile, and then dialed in more shadow detail before scanning.
The extra green in the image came from processing in PS, as I was trying to balance the colors, etc. After scanning all day, I'm guessing that my eyes/brain got a bit tired and I overcompensated. And, I can never tell how images are going to show on NPN site when compared to PS and my monitor. I still haven't figured out quite how to prep an image for decent posting here. Basically, I've been using an sRGB space for an image, adjusting 'til I like it, and then adding in even more saturation so that it doesn't appear washed out here...
And, our first significant snow is now falling - yippee!
Dang Tim, you have an Imacon huh? I have to admit that I'm a bit envious.
In all seriousness, you're in better shape than I am by far in the scanner department (I'm under the flatbed curse). As far as exposure goes, I find 6 stops to be easily managable on color neg. While I'm unsure of how many stops Portra 160VC can record, I have found that Fuji 160s (formerly NPS) can record 9 stops from personal experience. Danny Burk claims 9-10 on his website, which lines up with my experiences as well. I'm wondering if flexcolor isn't applying a predescribed amount of contrast to the file. Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the software to know. Anyhow, I'd be very suprised if the highlights were actually blown on the negative if the exposure values are as described. I typically place the lowest shadow values that I want to retain textures at -2. Anyhow, hopefully my rambling hasn't bothered you...just trying to figure out where you're coming from and seeing if I can help at all. Take care Tim.
Hey Joel, in case you are reading this I just recently bought the Epson V700 scanner as an upgrade based on my current project (submitting digital files this time instead of film originals). It is significantly better than the Epson 3200 I was using, and worth the upgrade. It's still a flatbed, but it's a much better piece of equipment.... Christmas is coming!!
Are you using Silverfast with it? Or just the stock Epson software? I've been entertaining the idea of replacing my Canon 9950f flatbed, but it's tough to know how much better a new Epson would be. I need to do something though as I have a large upcoming project I need scanning for. Bleh.
Discussion
9 repliesThis photo was taken at the end of October, in the beautiful part of the Wisconsin Dells about which few people are aware. And, the way that the town looks, that's likely a good thing!
This photo was shot in the Dells of the Wisconsin State Natural Area, which is a rather large part of the riparian area to the north of the town of Wisconsin Dells. I'm looking forward to better exploring this particular area next year when the canopy is more closed, to create a darker, moodier image.
Tech: Pentax 67II, 45mm lens, Portra 160 VC; yeah, I'm not enamored with the high dynamic range in the image, but you know, light happens...
Tim!
This looks like a really sweet place to explore. It's certainly very wild looking. I've never been to the Dells, but I've always have heard that it's a zoo. As far as the light goes, I actually like the way the background trees are illuminated. I think more work simply needs to be done to refine the tonalities and the color. Right now, it looks like there is a bit of a green cast green cast to me.
That darn color neg. film is tricky to scan and process!
First, thank you for your comments - I sincerely appreciate them!
Looking at this now, a day after scanning & processing, yes, it does seem too green.
In the background, the "tan" stuff is just the remaining leaves on trees, which are sidelit and display too little detail to really show clearly. At first, I wasn't too pleased with these "hot spots," like these leaves on the trees, but the more that I was scanning yesterday, the more that I did like the color when contrasted with some blue skies...
Tim!
What are you using to scan your film (hardware and software)? I'm also wondering what the density of the negative looks like. Also, how are you formulating your exposures? With Fuji 160s for example, it would easily be possible to get more shadow detail on the negative without loosing highlight detail...scanning and processing to retain that detail can be a bit tricky however.
My "formulations" are as follows, at least in this situation. I used a wide-angle lens and knew that the dynamic range was going to be a little too high for the negative film to handle (which is why I was using negative film rather than transparency film). So, I let the camera do it's own full-scene metering, then did some selective metering for highlights and shadows. I picked the exposure where I felt that I would best be able to capture the most detail in all areas, but also exposing more so that the highlights would be less blown out than the shadows blocked up, so maybe one stop less exposure than what the meter actually wanted. I think that there were at least six stops EV in this situation.
For scanning, I'm using an Imacon 343, w/ FlexColor. I use the Portra 160VC profile, and then dialed in more shadow detail before scanning.
The extra green in the image came from processing in PS, as I was trying to balance the colors, etc. After scanning all day, I'm guessing that my eyes/brain got a bit tired and I overcompensated. And, I can never tell how images are going to show on NPN site when compared to PS and my monitor. I still haven't figured out quite how to prep an image for decent posting here. Basically, I've been using an sRGB space for an image, adjusting 'til I like it, and then adding in even more saturation so that it doesn't appear washed out here...
And, our first significant snow is now falling - yippee!
Tim!
In all seriousness, you're in better shape than I am by far in the scanner department (I'm under the flatbed curse). As far as exposure goes, I find 6 stops to be easily managable on color neg. While I'm unsure of how many stops Portra 160VC can record, I have found that Fuji 160s (formerly NPS) can record 9 stops from personal experience. Danny Burk claims 9-10 on his website, which lines up with my experiences as well. I'm wondering if flexcolor isn't applying a predescribed amount of contrast to the file. Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with the software to know. Anyhow, I'd be very suprised if the highlights were actually blown on the negative if the exposure values are as described. I typically place the lowest shadow values that I want to retain textures at -2. Anyhow, hopefully my rambling hasn't bothered you...just trying to figure out where you're coming from and seeing if I can help at all. Take care Tim.
Hey Joel, in case you are reading this I just recently bought the Epson V700 scanner as an upgrade based on my current project (submitting digital files this time instead of film originals). It is significantly better than the Epson 3200 I was using, and worth the upgrade. It's still a flatbed, but it's a much better piece of equipment.... Christmas is coming!!
CJ
Are you using Silverfast with it? Or just the stock Epson software? I've been entertaining the idea of replacing my Canon 9950f flatbed, but it's tough to know how much better a new Epson would be. I need to do something though as I have a large upcoming project I need scanning for. Bleh.