Posted by Tom Hilton on October 28, 2011 at 8:24 AM
After seeing (and reading about) images that photographers have posted from film, I have decided to seriously consider reviving my Rolli 6006 system, it has 3 beautiful Zeiss lenses that I have not used in about 10 years.
My question is how do you film folks work with the negs after they are processed... I really do not want to give up any of my PS or ACR controls...so I guess I would have to scan the negs to get digital files.... I have never done that...
any and all advice would be appreciated...
Thanks
Tom H
Posted by Kent Staubus on October 28, 2011 at 9:30 AM
Look for a used Epson v500 (I think that one does 120 rolls.) I use a v700 because it also scans 4x5. VueScan software seems to be the best. After scanning, I simply run the file through PS. I only shoot b&w film, but color comes out nice too.
Kent in SD
Posted by Eva McDermott on October 28, 2011 at 9:38 AM
I use the Epson V750 with Silverfast Studio Ai software to scan 120 color transparencies. After scanning I use CS5 for minor touch up. I also use the V750 to scan my old transparencies, B&W, and negative. With the older negatives it is difficult to find ICC profiles and end up having to do a lot of color balance adjustments. It is probably not an issue with the newer negative films.
A flatbed scanner such as the Epson models Kent refers to will give you a decent digital file for prints up to about 11x14. If you plan to make big prints, you'll likely want to have the film drum scanned by a skilled operator at a service bureau. (The V-700 is a great scanner, by all accounts)
VueScan is great. I use it for color transparency, black and white and color neg films (mostly 4x5). Epson Scan (if you get an Epson machine) is also very good. If you decide to get VueScan, get the 'Pro' version. Going this route will get you free upgrades. Regarding scanning in general...getting a great scan is not a spectator sport. You will really need to put in the time to learn how to obtain scans that are (relatively) easy to work with in PS.
I know that VueScan creates a "RAW" file that you can work with in ACR. However, most scanners do not do this and will save your file as either an 8 bit or 16 bit *TIFF. file type. Personally, I don't use ACR-no need. I scan my film to get 16-bit RGB TIFF and work them directly in PSCS-5. My suggestion would be to import your scans directly into PS, duplicate the scan and save it as a *.PSD master file.
Welcome back to the film world. Your Rollie sounds great--put it back to work!
--P
Posted by Tom Hilton on October 28, 2011 at 10:40 AM
Thanks you all,
Thais looks like a good alternative to buying a Nikon D3x
All I need a $150.00 battery for the Rollie, sounds good
My lab offers hi res pro scans, which should work until I see if the scanner stuff is worth it.
Do y'all like this film?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/512065-USA/Fujifilm_15757517_RVP_120_Fujichrome_Velvia.html
Thanks again for all the info,
you all are great
Posted by Tom Hilton on October 28, 2011 at 11:18 AM
Would you all agree with this from the Ken Rockwell web site:
"My crummy medium-resolution 1,800 DPI scan of the 4x5 film gives me over 8,500 x 6,500 clean, complete RGB pixels. Heck, even scanning a small 6x7 transparency at 4,800 DPI at home I get over 12,000 x 9,000 complete RGB pixels (108 MP in a 324 MB file). Today's digital cameras only produce images between 3,000 and 5,000 Bayer-interpolated pixels wide at best. This difference should now be obvious, even to the blind. And if mere numerical comparisons are not obvious enough to the Braille crowd, remember the under $10,000 digital cameras are only producing interpolated pixels at best, usually Bayer (info here and for you Ph.D.s here and here), which means that each pixel isn't a full-resolution RGB pixel anyway, as they are in film scans."
Without getting into the technical arguments (or digital vs. film argument), a 4800 ppi scan from an 1800 ppi scanner is interpolated because the 'native optical' resolution is only 1,800 ppi (assuming the 'true' optical resolution is 1,800). In my experience, you will get the best scan at the scanner's native resolution. If you are going to make exhibition quality prints of 20x30 from 120 film, a quality drum scan is the only way to go because you want excellent detail and tonal separation at a print resolution of 300 dpi, or better. The other option, of course, is to shoot 4x5 or larger--but that's a whole 'nother ball game.
With regard to the Velvia-50...I don't shoot much of it, mainly because of its narrow dynamic range. I love the color. If you use this film, keep deep shadow areas and bright highlight areas small or they will become eye grabbers. Harley shoots a lot of V-50, so hopefully he'll chime in with his expereince. I really like V-100 and Astia 100-F. I suggest you try the different emulsions and see which works best for your style.
--P
Posted by Mark Stahlke on October 28, 2011 at 1:02 PM
Velvia has a very narrow exposure latitude, four or maybe five stops. In low contrast lighting it's spectacular. Taming Velvia's contrast in less than ideal lighting conditions can be difficult and frustrating. It's also not that easy to get good scans of Velvia.
I've been shooting a lot of Kodak E100VS and E100G lately. E100VS has Velvia's punch and contrast with a slightly different color palette. E100G is a bit less contrasty and saturated but still very nice.
I believe Preston shoots a lot of Astia. He gets very nice results with it and I think he'll tell you it is easier to scan. I've never cared for Astia's color palette so I don't use it.
If you're shooting in high contrast lighting situations, you might consider some of the color negative films. I understand Kodak's Ektar 100 is very good. I don't shoot color negatives so I have no personal experience it.
I wouldn't put much stock in what Ken Rockwell has to say.
Posted by Kent Staubus on October 28, 2011 at 6:00 PM
The new Kodak Portra 400 print film is designed to be scanned, and I really like it. I've been shooting it in 120 rolls in my 1914 Kodak Special No. 1.
Kent in SD
Posted by Paul DeCesare on October 28, 2011 at 6:09 PM
Tom, for a really important image (or even to test your film venture before buying a scanner), get a couple done at West Coast Imaging and see how things turn out. They use the big 16-bit Tango drum scanners that seem to pull every silver halide crystal in your film to digital.
Posted by Eva McDermott on October 28, 2011 at 7:22 PM
Hi Tom - I sold all my film cameras (Cambo 4X5, Mamiya 645 and Olympus OM4T) and darkroom equipment (Bessler 4X5 with color head and Zone VI cold light condenser) in the early 2000's when I thought I would never go back to film. Really missed it though, the quality of film image but not the darkroom work. I have not shot film since the late 1990's until my trip to Scotland on a Transient Light Workshop this year, were I used both Ektachrome 100G and Velvia 50 using Ian's spare Pentax 67ii. Film has changed quite a bit since I started in film in the mid 70's. Ektachrome 100G is definitely less contrasty than Velvia 50 but the Velvia color is amazing. I have had printed 30X20 prints from my older film images scanned with my V750 and they look great at viewing distance on the wall. I am sure close up with a microscope or spectrometer analysis there maybe a difference compared to a drum scan but is it worth the cost unless you want really really large prints. The bottom line is I think it all depends on what you want to do with your scanned images. BTW - Shortly after I returned home from Scotland I picked up my own Pentax 67ii.
Posted by Tom Hilton on October 28, 2011 at 7:36 PM
Preston - Mark - Kent - Paul and Eva...
Thank you folks ... soooooo much...
I just made the first step...I ordered a new battery for the 6006 from B&H today...
Once I get it fired up, I can see what it can produce....
I really an excited to put it back to work... I loved that camera and never even thought about selling it....
(but I hated shooting wedding with it... lugging it around for 8-9 hrs at a time)
I really appreciate your time and effort to reply to my slightly off the wall question..
You guys are great!!!!!
Posted by Eva McDermott on October 28, 2011 at 9:18 PM
So what film are you going to use? :-) Another big decision. It was for me once I decided to get back into it.
Posted by Tom Hilton on October 29, 2011 at 8:03 AM
I got my old batteries fired up (shocking they recharge after 9-10 years)...
I'm going get all the films you all recommended today...
Shoot tomorrow,
and have them scanned by a local pro lab (that I haven't been to in 8 years)
This should be fun...
Posted by Tom Hilton on October 29, 2011 at 8:16 AM
Question about latitude and Velvia...
(I'm an old Neg film guy so positive film is "new" to me)
Would a 2 stop exposure bracket, and blending the images take care of some of the limited latitude issues?
If you plan to do a lot of photography of scenes with a dynamic range beyond that of color transparency films, a color neg film would be a better option. If you still plan to use a transparency film, you may be able to avoid blending of exposures by using Fuji Astia 100F. This film has about 6 stops of dynamic range. It does have a more neutral color than the Velvias.
When I expose transparency films I expose so that the brightest signiifcant high values have texture. With Velvia, I adjust my exposure to 1-2/3 stops above my meter reading (I use a 1-degree spot meter). For Astia, I expose the high values at no more than 2 stops above my meter reading. I have found that these exposures settings give me the best density for a good scan.
There are two key items to note regarding transparency films. First, after setting your exposure so that the high values have texture, check to see if significant low values (shadows) fall within the film's dynamic range. Second. Obtaining optimum exposure requires careful metering. A 1/2 stop exposre error may result in an useable shot. I strognly suggest that you obtain a spot meter.
I don't do exposure (scan) blending, so I can't help you there. Lon has done a few with 4x5, so he may be able to give you more on this.
Long-winded answer to a short question, but I hope it helps.
--P
Posted by Tom Hilton on October 29, 2011 at 7:49 PM
Not a good day for my medium format plans,
No local 120 film... (the big local photo store looked at me like I was a cave man, when I asked for 120 film.... none to be had)
I don't mind getting film from online sources...
but a trip to the local "pro" lab.... they will only be processing film (+ or Neg) until Dec. then they are going to drop that service...
I really don't want to send out film too...
basically he talked me into getting a Nikon D700 with the DX sensor...
I'll give him a coupla' tiff files for 20x30's from my D3000s and see how it goes...
I have been using Millers Lab... with OK but not overly impressive results...
Thanks for all the advice...
I'll see where all this leads...
I mostly purchase my film from B&H. Good prices and service.
Yes, it's true that labs are going away. In fact, a big lab in Los Angeles (A&I) has said they will stop doing E-6 processing in November. They will still be doing C-41 (color neg). I now send all my E-6 to Samy's Camera in Santa Barbara, CA.
I don't know where you are located, but there are labs that will do mail order E-6 and/or C-41. I encourage you to use one of these labs so that we film users will continue to be able to have our color film processed.
I hope you'll put that Rollie and Zeiss lenses to good use.
I am a film user and work with a Pentax 67ii and Fuji Astia 100F film. The digitization process involves getting the slides drum-scanned and after that I rely on Photoshop to prepare the images for printing. While I have been using this workflow for almost 9 years, I am running into a lot of issues lately as described below.
1) I cannot find the film I want locally in the San Francisco Bay Area. Imagine that! Often times the film I get via mail order (from B&H, Adorama, etc.) is past the expiration date. More often than not, even those vendors don't keep the film in stock.
2) I cannot get my exposed film processed locally any more. I have to send it out and it takes a week or longer to get it back. A few years ago I could get my film developed locally in a matter of a few hours.
3) The local drum-scanning shop went out of business last year. Now I have to mail my film out and it often takes 3-4 weeks before the scans are done. The cost of drum-scanning has also sky-rocketed and I believe I will need to sell both kidneys soon if I were to keep up.
4) Flat-bed scanners and affordable dedicated film-scanners simply don't meet my quality requirements. I just cannot see myself using the resulting scans for anything more than 11x14 sized prints.
I typically work on projects where the end result is a series of prints. Due to the problems listed above it takes me more than 2 years to get a series completed and this is becoming very frustrating. Time and cost issues also prevent me from pushing past the 20-image-per-series limit. I am therefore considering a move toward digital capture.
Discussion
18 repliesMy question is how do you film folks work with the negs after they are processed... I really do not want to give up any of my PS or ACR controls...so I guess I would have to scan the negs to get digital files.... I have never done that...
any and all advice would be appreciated...
Thanks
Tom H
Kent in SD
A flatbed scanner such as the Epson models Kent refers to will give you a decent digital file for prints up to about 11x14. If you plan to make big prints, you'll likely want to have the film drum scanned by a skilled operator at a service bureau. (The V-700 is a great scanner, by all accounts)
VueScan is great. I use it for color transparency, black and white and color neg films (mostly 4x5). Epson Scan (if you get an Epson machine) is also very good. If you decide to get VueScan, get the 'Pro' version. Going this route will get you free upgrades. Regarding scanning in general...getting a great scan is not a spectator sport. You will really need to put in the time to learn how to obtain scans that are (relatively) easy to work with in PS.
I know that VueScan creates a "RAW" file that you can work with in ACR. However, most scanners do not do this and will save your file as either an 8 bit or 16 bit *TIFF. file type. Personally, I don't use ACR-no need. I scan my film to get 16-bit RGB TIFF and work them directly in PSCS-5. My suggestion would be to import your scans directly into PS, duplicate the scan and save it as a *.PSD master file.
Welcome back to the film world. Your Rollie sounds great--put it back to work!
--P
Thais looks like a good alternative to buying a Nikon D3x
All I need a $150.00 battery for the Rollie, sounds good
My lab offers hi res pro scans, which should work until I see if the scanner stuff is worth it.
Do y'all like this film?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/512065-USA/Fujifilm_15757517_RVP_120_Fujichrome_Velvia.html
Thanks again for all the info,
you all are great
"My crummy medium-resolution 1,800 DPI scan of the 4x5 film gives me over 8,500 x 6,500 clean, complete RGB pixels. Heck, even scanning a small 6x7 transparency at 4,800 DPI at home I get over 12,000 x 9,000 complete RGB pixels (108 MP in a 324 MB file). Today's digital cameras only produce images between 3,000 and 5,000 Bayer-interpolated pixels wide at best. This difference should now be obvious, even to the blind. And if mere numerical comparisons are not obvious enough to the Braille crowd, remember the under $10,000 digital cameras are only producing interpolated pixels at best, usually Bayer (info here and for you Ph.D.s here and here), which means that each pixel isn't a full-resolution RGB pixel anyway, as they are in film scans."
I am looking for prints 20x30 or bigger....
Without getting into the technical arguments (or digital vs. film argument), a 4800 ppi scan from an 1800 ppi scanner is interpolated because the 'native optical' resolution is only 1,800 ppi (assuming the 'true' optical resolution is 1,800). In my experience, you will get the best scan at the scanner's native resolution. If you are going to make exhibition quality prints of 20x30 from 120 film, a quality drum scan is the only way to go because you want excellent detail and tonal separation at a print resolution of 300 dpi, or better. The other option, of course, is to shoot 4x5 or larger--but that's a whole 'nother ball game.
With regard to the Velvia-50...I don't shoot much of it, mainly because of its narrow dynamic range. I love the color. If you use this film, keep deep shadow areas and bright highlight areas small or they will become eye grabbers. Harley shoots a lot of V-50, so hopefully he'll chime in with his expereince. I really like V-100 and Astia 100-F. I suggest you try the different emulsions and see which works best for your style.
--P
I've been shooting a lot of Kodak E100VS and E100G lately. E100VS has Velvia's punch and contrast with a slightly different color palette. E100G is a bit less contrasty and saturated but still very nice.
I believe Preston shoots a lot of Astia. He gets very nice results with it and I think he'll tell you it is easier to scan. I've never cared for Astia's color palette so I don't use it.
If you're shooting in high contrast lighting situations, you might consider some of the color negative films. I understand Kodak's Ektar 100 is very good. I don't shoot color negatives so I have no personal experience it.
I wouldn't put much stock in what Ken Rockwell has to say.
Kent in SD
Thank you folks ... soooooo much...
I just made the first step...I ordered a new battery for the 6006 from B&H today...
Once I get it fired up, I can see what it can produce....
I really an excited to put it back to work... I loved that camera and never even thought about selling it....
(but I hated shooting wedding with it... lugging it around for 8-9 hrs at a time)
I really appreciate your time and effort to reply to my slightly off the wall question..
You guys are great!!!!!
I'm going get all the films you all recommended today...
Shoot tomorrow,
and have them scanned by a local pro lab (that I haven't been to in 8 years)
This should be fun...
(I'm an old Neg film guy so positive film is "new" to me)
Would a 2 stop exposure bracket, and blending the images take care of some of the limited latitude issues?
If you plan to do a lot of photography of scenes with a dynamic range beyond that of color transparency films, a color neg film would be a better option. If you still plan to use a transparency film, you may be able to avoid blending of exposures by using Fuji Astia 100F. This film has about 6 stops of dynamic range. It does have a more neutral color than the Velvias.
When I expose transparency films I expose so that the brightest signiifcant high values have texture. With Velvia, I adjust my exposure to 1-2/3 stops above my meter reading (I use a 1-degree spot meter). For Astia, I expose the high values at no more than 2 stops above my meter reading. I have found that these exposures settings give me the best density for a good scan.
There are two key items to note regarding transparency films. First, after setting your exposure so that the high values have texture, check to see if significant low values (shadows) fall within the film's dynamic range. Second. Obtaining optimum exposure requires careful metering. A 1/2 stop exposre error may result in an useable shot. I strognly suggest that you obtain a spot meter.
I don't do exposure (scan) blending, so I can't help you there. Lon has done a few with 4x5, so he may be able to give you more on this.
Long-winded answer to a short question, but I hope it helps.
--P
No local 120 film... (the big local photo store looked at me like I was a cave man, when I asked for 120 film.... none to be had)
I don't mind getting film from online sources...
but a trip to the local "pro" lab.... they will only be processing film (+ or Neg) until Dec. then they are going to drop that service...
I really don't want to send out film too...
basically he talked me into getting a Nikon D700 with the DX sensor...
I'll give him a coupla' tiff files for 20x30's from my D3000s and see how it goes...
I have been using Millers Lab... with OK but not overly impressive results...
Thanks for all the advice...
I'll see where all this leads...
I mostly purchase my film from B&H. Good prices and service.
Yes, it's true that labs are going away. In fact, a big lab in Los Angeles (A&I) has said they will stop doing E-6 processing in November. They will still be doing C-41 (color neg). I now send all my E-6 to Samy's Camera in Santa Barbara, CA.
I don't know where you are located, but there are labs that will do mail order E-6 and/or C-41. I encourage you to use one of these labs so that we film users will continue to be able to have our color film processed.
I hope you'll put that Rollie and Zeiss lenses to good use.
--P
1) I cannot find the film I want locally in the San Francisco Bay Area. Imagine that! Often times the film I get via mail order (from B&H, Adorama, etc.) is past the expiration date. More often than not, even those vendors don't keep the film in stock.
2) I cannot get my exposed film processed locally any more. I have to send it out and it takes a week or longer to get it back. A few years ago I could get my film developed locally in a matter of a few hours.
3) The local drum-scanning shop went out of business last year. Now I have to mail my film out and it often takes 3-4 weeks before the scans are done. The cost of drum-scanning has also sky-rocketed and I believe I will need to sell both kidneys soon if I were to keep up.
4) Flat-bed scanners and affordable dedicated film-scanners simply don't meet my quality requirements. I just cannot see myself using the resulting scans for anything more than 11x14 sized prints.
I typically work on projects where the end result is a series of prints. Due to the problems listed above it takes me more than 2 years to get a series completed and this is becoming very frustrating. Time and cost issues also prevent me from pushing past the 20-image-per-series limit. I am therefore considering a move toward digital capture.