Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Shot on Film

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Miami, Fl
    Posts
    76
    Threads
    23
    Thank You Posts

    Default Shot on Film

    Shot this at the local pond today with a Nikon F5.
    Fujicolor Super X-tra
    Iso 400.
    Nikor 300mm f/4+ TC1.4
    f/5.6
    SS 1250.
    Developed at the local drug store and scanned to 3000x2000 jpg.
    Imported into LR, Red Color cast adjusted.
    Exported into photoshop. Birds masked with Remask.
    BG Denoised with High JPG setting.
    Birds Denoised with Low JPG setting.
    Topaz Detail applied to the birds.
    Saved as tiff file.
    Imported back into LR and cropped.
    Name:  Roll-001-1-17-14-71-HighRes.jpg
Views: 76
Size:  342.1 KB

  2. #2
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Miami, Fl
    Posts
    76
    Threads
    23
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    This is the original file from the scanner.
    Name:  Roll-001-1-17-14-71-HighRes-2.jpg
Views: 64
Size:  373.3 KB

  3. #3
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    9,587
    Threads
    401
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    No offense -- but I'm going to play devil's advocate here. What advantage did film give you? Couldn't you get a comparable 3000 x 2000 JPEG with a decent smallish camera with digital zoom, and maybe a RAW file in the bargain?

  4. #4
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Miami, Fl
    Posts
    76
    Threads
    23
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    No offense taken Diane. When I was a teenager I used to drool over the Nikon F5. I ran into it for a good price and for 300 dlls I have a professional SLR that is built like a tank.
    This was my first roll of film I have shot in the last 15 years so it is a little bit of an experiment. The scan resolution is not the highest and it was not done at a very sophisticated place so I am still hoping for significant improvement in image quality over this.
    We will see but regardles, the smell of the film and holding the film canisters brought back a bunch of memories.

  5. #5
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    48
    Threads
    6
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Joaquin, I prefer the repost with warmer wb and more habitat as I feel the OP lacks of detail.

  6. #6
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    9,587
    Threads
    401
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I do understand the nostalgia about film and film cameras, and might consider it for some kinds of "artistic" work. One place I think film has an edge is how it handles the tonalities around very bright areas such as you sometimes find in sunsets. And tiny tree branches against blue sky don't turn blue. But nice as some tonalities might be, to go beyond projecting a slide you're still having to digitize an already raterized file.

    It would be interesting to hear a discussion of the pros and cons.

    I have a friend who is a very high end digital printer and his drum scans were about $60 each. (He used to do Galen Rowell's printing but they were talking about moving it in house a couple of years ago -- don't know if that has happened.)

  7. #7
    BPN Member Sandy Witvoet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    926
    Threads
    27
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Great to see you take on that challenge, Joaquin! And, it surely is a challenge.... I think we lost a lot here in the conversion to the web/digital ...not seeing any detail in either the blacks nor the whites. Superb comp tho!
    Really happy you posted this...will look forward to seeing more!
    www.mibirdingnetwork.com .... A place for bird and nature lovers in the Great Lakes area.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics