My first roll of b&w film in 40 years

jonbeeza said:
Just looking at scanners now. It says film scanners digitize now, what is the point in turning a film photo into a digital one?
Click to expand...

Well, you could set up a darkroom, do multiple copies of traditional wet prints and post them out to us so we can see them.

If you want to share them on the internet then they have to be digitised. I suppose you could take a digital photo of the wet prints.

Photo labs mostly only scan. The prints you have will have been scanned.
 
simon ess said:
Well, you could set up a darkroom, do multiple copies of traditional wet prints and post them out to us so we can see them.

If you want to share them on the internet then they have to be digitised. I suppose you could take a digital photo of the wet prints.

Photo labs mostly only scan. The prints you have will have been scanned.
Click to expand...

just reading up on scanners now.
 
jonbeeza said:
I have kept my notes with the developed film, for future reference. I might, only might, try a roll of colour film. I will of course have to buy some first.
Click to expand...
I would stick to black and white personally... that is a lot more forgiving of exposure errors than colour.
What I would suggest is to get your digital camera out, and, in pretty much the same conditions as with your film photos to go out and replicate the film setting on your digital camera, so you get an idea of ISO(so, if your film is 400ISO, then set your camera to that), aperture and shutter speed. Just to give you an idea of how it all works in different light.
 
Solo man said:
I would stick to black and white personally... that is a lot more forgiving of exposure errors than colour.
What I would suggest is to get your digital camera out, and, in pretty much the same conditions as with your film photos to go out and replicate the film setting on your digital camera, so you get an idea of ISO(so, if your film is 400ISO, then set your camera to that), aperture and shutter speed. Just to give you an idea of how it all works in different light.
Click to expand...


I already have used the digital camera with the same lenses that I used on the film camera, at the same ISO. The digital gives a nice exposure even at a higher ISO. The only thing I can think, the film camera might have a fault, and is over exposing. I could try more film, and under expose and see what results I get.
 
Just looking through the prints again, and while most are badly over exposed, one or two aren't too bad. One over exposed photo of the missus, was taken indoors and only window light. To be honest, it is a bad photo, but with the effect I actually like it. I used the 50mm 1.8D lens wide open. I think I really do need to run another roll of film through the camera, but this time I think I am going to under expose.
 
jonbeeza said:
I already have used the digital camera with the same lenses that I used on the film camera, at the same ISO. The digital gives a nice exposure even at a higher ISO. The only thing I can think, the film camera might have a fault, and is over exposing. I could try more film, and under expose and see what results I get.
Click to expand...
So...you used exactly the same ISO, the same 'f' number and the same shutter speed for both cameras and got completely different results?. I take it you're using aperture priority on your digital and it's choosing the shutter speed for you?.
 
Any scanner "digitises" the object being scanned! The SX200 is a printer/scanner, so not a proper negative scanner. You can get some results by scanning on them and inverting separately, but TBH you need a proper negative scanner like the Plustek range or the Epson Perfection V500 (and up), driven by a quality package like Vuescan or Epson Scan. You'll get MUCH better results.

This is sometimes called a "hybrid workflow" and is used by most film photographers on the internet. A few, including some on here, do proper wet printing and then scan and share the enlarged prints. That's a big new ball-game!
 
Solo man said:
So...you used exactly the same ISO, the same 'f' number and the same shutter speed for both cameras and got completely different results?. I take it you're using aperture priority on your digital and it's choosing the shutter speed for you?.
Click to expand...

Yes used aperture priority , same setting on both cameras. The film camera is over exposing. I will need to try more film I think, and probably under expose next time, just to see what results the camera gives.
 
The facts are that an old 35mm SLR film camera does not (generally) produce results as good (subjective) as a modern digital camera. A good medium format camera film camera can and often will produce results as good as or better than a reasonable modern digital SLR but..(and excuse my capitals)... IT'S NOT ABOUT THE RESULTS.... its about a different way of working, about the thrill of not knowing, about trying to second guess the conditions to choose the correct film/camera/lens, about learning, about thinking and even about art.
Scanning does not change the appearance of a film shot, it still looks like a film shot and it is the only practical way of showing your images on line and we like to share:)
Run another film through it, take your time and think about conditions, don't rush, if it isn't right don't press the shutter and then if your still not convinced then pick up the digital and enjoy that instead, the key word here is enjoyment (y)
 
jonbeeza said:
Yes used aperture priority , same setting on both cameras. The film camera is over exposing. I will need to try more film I think, and probably under expose next time, just to see what results the camera gives.
Click to expand...
First thing I would do is to check for any custom setting that the F60 might have, such as being set to overexpose, but I'm guessing that won't be the case. I've no idea why you would shoot with the lens wide open as the photos you've posted don't really suit a very narrow depth of field. It's hard to tell from the ones posted, but how about taking a digital photo of some of the negatives against a white light? This might give us an idea of how pale or dark they are, then we could maybe be able to give some more advice?
 
Peter B said:
First thing I would do is to check for any custom setting that the F60 might have, such as being set to overexpose, but I'm guessing that won't be the case. I've no idea why you would shoot with the lens wide open as the photos you've posted don't really suit a very narrow depth of field. It's hard to tell from the ones posted, but how about taking a digital photo of some of the negatives against a white light? This might give us an idea of how pale or dark they are, then we could maybe be able to give some more advice?
Click to expand...

jonbeeza said:
I know most of you said not to bother taking notes, writing settings down etc, when shooting film. But I did take notes, and I can see, most of the over exposed photos, where when I used the 50mm 1.8D lens wide open. I may try another roll at some point, probably some street shots at f/8 and see if that gives any better results.
Click to expand...

Indoor photos were at f/1.8 outdoor were f/8.
 
I was using Tamron at 300mm, some were still over exposed even at f/8 . Camera was at 0 exposure comp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top