1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

what you do when you don't have a scanner

Discussion in 'Film Camera Forum' started by pdh, Oct 21, 2012.

  1. pdh

    pdh SC Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    I bought this yesterday:

    8105134668_2b0b79ecfb_m.

    It's a medium format folder as you can see ... but is it a compact? Yep, it's almost exactly the same size as an X-Pro1.

    On the back it says "Made in Germany. US Zone" so we can see it's no youngster ... 75mm f/4.5 lens by Steinheil of Munich ... double-exposure lock ... self-timer ... Pronto leaf shutter with top speed of 1/200s ... scale focus only ...

    I happened to have a roll of 120 (Neopan 400) from a pinhole experiment I was trying the other week, so I went over the common and took some snaps in the woods ... but I don't have a scanner for MF ... hmmm ... so I put the negatives in a 6x6 enlarger carrier, with a piece of opalescent Perspex behind it against a window, and photographed the negatives with my E-P2 + Tamron 90mm macro lens; then slurped the raw files into LR and inverted them. Had to push the contrast up a lot as this method of capture produces very very low contrast images.

    Some of my usual set of test scenes, nothing special ... but I like the "look" ...

    8108439436_fbc0894845_c.
    20121021-2 by _loupe, on Flickr

    8108441530_b0697abc26_c.
    20121021-6 by _loupe, on Flickr

    8108432931_638cee6ef1_c.
    20121021-5 by _loupe, on Flickr
     
  2. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    yes sir. That has the MF look that I Love. Can't wait to see more
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Adam Quek

    Adam Quek SC Regular

    88
    Oct 5, 2012
    Heh. This reminds me of slide reproduction with the lightbox.
    Nice results for the Adox (Golf 63 perhaps?).

    Don't quite like Neopan though. I want grains for film... :p
     
  4. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    I really love that second one.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. pdh

    pdh SC Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    As I understand it, Golf 63 = Steinheil f/6.3

    So this one is probably Golf 45 (as it has a Steinheil Cassar f/4.5)

    No good looking for too much grain in MF of course ...
     
  6. pdh

    pdh SC Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    yeah it's probably the analog bokehs ... or something ...

    but yes, seriously, it's got that weird 3d thing going on hasn't it?
     
  7. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    I was going to say that I loved that quirky bokeh, but then realized I might be opening a can of worms. I'll just leave it at I love it.
     
  8. pdh

    pdh SC Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    swirly
     
  9. ajramirez

    ajramirez SC All-Pro

    Jul 9, 2010
    Caguas, Puerto Rico
    Antonio
    These look great, Paul. I particularly like the first one. Lovely compositions.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Isoterica

    Isoterica SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 6, 2011
    Very creative Paul and you captured a lot of depth in these that even your imitation scanning couldn't remove, nicely done.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. pdh

    pdh SC Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    here's another ... but that's it until I get some more fillum, which won't be for another 10 days or so

    8108440924_d078a064c3_z.
    20121021-4 by _loupe, on Flickr
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    This is the stuff that I have never seen done properly with digital, but I don;t spend a lot of time looking at MF digital photos. Love it!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Lili

    Lili SC Hall of Famer

    Oct 17, 2010
    Dallas, TX
    Lili

    well seen and very well done
    i love MF folders
    i need to get my voigtlander perkeo II out
    you inspire me!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. pdh

    pdh SC Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    thanks Lili, Antonio, Luke, Kristen ...


    I think the "lightbox and digital camera" approach could be worth pursuing if I could get a strong enough and even enough light source behind the Perspex. I had a little play a bit later in the day using an enlarger as the light source, and got much better contrast and apparent sharpness than you can see in these, but there was also a "vignette"-type effect that I couldn't correct.

    on the other hand, I could buy another scanner.

    or start wet printing.

    or both.

    or i could get a job and stop spending my savings.