Grainy Reflections

Pentax ME Super ?

Pentax K1000!

There you are!

So, as promisedā€¦
11.dng (25.3 MB)
Of course, licensed under a Creative Commons License.
My version of it can be alredy found on my website.

Your second one with an old postcard vibe:


dt302.grainy.II.negative.11.dng.xmp (22.9 KB) darktable 3.0.2

2 Likes

Darktable


11.dng.xmp (9.7 KB)

Rawtherapee + Photoflow

exported neutral from rawtherapee with only an exposure boost
11.dng.pp3 (12.5 KB)

In photoflow Iā€™ve used the Gā€™mic interpreter for the negative inversion like it was recommended in one cineon pdf
http://www.dotcsw.com/doc/cineon2.pdf

negative->density-> log exposure-> linear rgb

-fill i=(i/255);density=log(1/i)/log(10);log_exposure=(density/0.6)-(685/1023*2.048/0.6);(10^log_exposure)*255

11.dng.pfi (21.6 KB)

Blue filter in Gimp

4 Likes

Thanks for the ā€œMonte Cervinoā€ :slight_smile: .


11.dng.xmp (19.6 KB)

1 Like

I never hardly ever get to work on negative, Itā€™s freshly different, thanks for the opportunity :slight_smile:


I tried to stay on the soft side and moderately grainy ā€¦
13.dng.xmp (11.0 KB)

1 Like

Youā€™re very welcome!
If you never tried analog photographyā€¦ well, be careful if you want to, itā€™s a very deep tunnel :grin: But itā€™s a different world altogether, from the scouting, through shooting, to the print :wink:

Iā€™m glad to see so many nice replies to my second one.
I like them a lot.

And Iā€™ve seen that all of you thus far have experienced these very dark spots popping out on the right, as if some trees were completely black. I took some extra step in my editing to blend them in with the rest of the picture. They are a bit distracting to me, I donā€™t know where this effect is coming from, but itā€™s already like that in the negative (sort of fully white trees).
I wonder if itā€™s an effect of the film, that maybe is not sensitive to what reflected from thereā€¦ It was the first roll of this film I ever shot (Kentmere 400).

1 Like

Yeah, that was a problematic areaā€¦

I donā€™t have any experience with scanning negatives, but could this be a scanner issue? You mention using Kentmere film for the first time, could the scanner need other initial settings than those you normally use?

With this scanner, when set in raw mode, there is basically nothing you can set, a part from the double exposure (scan twice to do noise average). Even the exposure is basically fixed.

Anyhow, Iā€™ve scanned maybe around 100 rolls with this scanner, but this was the first time I scanned a Kentmere, so thatā€™s why I ā€œblamedā€ the film itself.

EDIT: as further investigation, I took a quick picture of the film itself with the X100V :smiley:


To me it seems that these extra dark features are already in the film capture itself.

Yeah, this isnā€™t a scanner thing, seems obvious once you look at the negative :slight_smile:

True. I still havenā€™t decided if this is an interesting film or notā€¦
(and Iā€™m amazed how good a picture of it I could just quickly snap with the Fuji X100V handheldā€¦ why do I even bother with the scanner? :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:)

So all you really need is a tripod and a cable release? :slight_smile:

yeah, why not? :grin: