Show us yer film shots then!

Why is it other people's Portra 400 shots look fab and mine look crap? The colours on 1 & 3 look lovely.

:clap:
 
Harlequin565 said:
Why is it other people's Portra 400 shots look fab and mine look crap? The colours on 1 & 3 look lovely.

:clap:
Click to expand...

Do you scan them yourself? Colour scanning at home seems to be a minefield of faffing about. I have multiple ways of scanning colour negs and all of them involve some degree of second guessing myself as to whether they look “right” or not. I’ve found another method only this week when scanning some Portra 160. The last roll came out ok using Grain2Pixe, but these looked awful and I ended up using this technique with EpsonScan, which gave me results I’m really happy with. This is a surprise as I’d pretty much given up on getting decent colours using EpsonScan.
 
FishyFish said:
Do you scan them yourself? Colour scanning at home seems to be a minefield of faffing about. I have multiple ways of scanning colour negs and all of them involve some degree of second guessing myself as to whether they look “right” or not. I’ve found another method only this week when scanning some Portra 160. The last roll came out ok using Grain2Pixe, but these looked awful and I ended up using this technique with EpsonScan, which gave me results I’m really happy with. This is a surprise as I’d pretty much given up on getting decent colours using EpsonScan.
Click to expand...
Don't know if this useful but I scan using a V700 and Epson Scan, mainly with default settings, but with the very aggessive sharpening option switched off, Then I crop and spo, using the content aware tooly thing in Photoshop. Final processing is done in in Lightroom, I just find it easier to make the final adjustments here rather than in Photoshop. Finally I export the images to JPEG using an action in Photoshop. To complete the picture, I save the cropped, spotted TIFF files and JPEG's to a backup drive athen, eventually to DVD's.
You are right to say that it's a faff. I have come to this way of working simply because it works for me, but there could be more efficient ways of doing it.
I suppose you shoud be aware that I have an Adobe subscripition for Photoshop and Lightroom,
 
..and another now and then shot...erm the old shot had better verticals than mine :(

About 1956 and IMO that Triumph motorbike was one of the most beautiful bikes ever designed..when I was about 12 cycled to a dealer and it was in the front window and spent about a hour just looking at it.
f1e46aaeccfc07d5dc6bea2818ac7cfd.jpg

and today
c6MVK5R.jpg
 
excalibur2 said:
..and another now and then shot...erm the old shot had better verticals than mine :(

About 1956 and IMO that Triumph motorbike was one of the most beautiful bikes ever designed..when I was about 12 cycled to a dealer and it was in the front window and spent about a hour just looking at it.
View attachment 316296

and today
c6MVK5R.jpg
Click to expand...
That's quite remarkably unchanged!
 
ChrisR said:
That's quite remarkably unchanged!
Click to expand...

Indeed a bit boring and just the building by the motorcycle has been rebuilt. Just behind where I took the shot is a Tesco, well incompetent designers were building a new stronger tunnel over the main rail line and Tesco was going to be built on top...the tunnel collapse and thousands of tons of earth fell on the line, luckily a train braked hard to avoid the collapse and warned other trains so no one was injured. So my next project is to try and show a shot of the collapse (and Tesco initial framework) and if possible the same view today?????
 
Canon T90 w/28mm f/2.8. Maco TS Eagle IR Surveillance film w/red filter. Dev in Diafine and testing now concludes that for me, this film is really quite nice shot at 400 in bright sun with a red filter.
2020-04-23-macoeagle-eos1v-36.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top