Film finished - more LEICA pics

[LaFoto]

After months and months and months, I finally finished off the film I had loaded into the Leica in summer of last year when I first meant to test the Summicron 50mm 1/2.

It took the lab 4 instead of the usual 2 days to produce the prints, and then I could throw away more than half of the 36 prints. They had put a slip into the envelope which said the film container was defected somehow, hence there was light leakage in most photos. :roll:

Somehow it seems like the "must-finish-this-film-at-loooooong-last" photos came out best, so I will dump them onto you, whether you wanted me to do so or not :greenpbl:

1.

Nice house in Zeven ... those of the monestary (nice building!) all had light leakage. Grrr

2.

The so-called "Kristian-fir" in our garden ... my first-born son's first hand-chosen Christmas tree (with roots), some 20 inches high back in 1988, and it moved house (gardens!) with us in 1999, after which we had to prune it considerably so it would survive, but now it has grown into a proud tree!!!

3.

Sumac against the sky

4.

Sumac shadows on the wall

5.

Testing the 50mm-lens's bokeh

6.

The only photo taken in summer (first on the roll, actually!), my friend's boy - indoors - window-light only.

So there. 6 pics to show out of 36... It is an ok result, I think.

 

[CanadianMe]

Just love the way the colour shows in them, very nice pics. Just love the first one, nice layers of objects in the photo. The rest are as good. Film does have a certain warmness and vibrancy without all the PS and other editing you do with digital.

 

[Battou]

Leica.... in summer of last year, In a camera like that a roll should last all of about fifteen minuets. J/K I know, you are predominately digital but I just had to

Very impressive shots, How where these scanned?

Did you get a new scanner, get the old one working or have them scanned in lab?

I love the DOF in five.

 

[LaFoto]

Well, it is the same scanner that I have now had for the past three years and a bit. The one that no longer recognises negatives as what they are, although it is equiped with a ... whatever it is called that shines through slides and negatives.

So these are the scanned prints.
In order to overcome the scanner problems, I had to apply unsharp mask to bring back the sharpness I have on the prints.

And the last (of the little boy) was too brightly scanned (we have established that also the scanner has a light meter and goes for "middle values"), so I had to bring back the blacks (which are as black as they now show, something one might want to discuss as "flaw"?).

Plus I had to clone out a good many dust specs from the scanning, though I wiped the glass and wiped and wiped ... mostly so in the last photo on all the black.

 

[Battou]

Well, it is the same scanner that I have now had for the past three years and a bit. The one that no longer recognises negatives as what they are, although it is equiped with a ... whatever it is called that shines through slides and negatives.

So these are the scanned prints.
In order to overcome the scanner problems, I had to apply unsharp mask to bring back the sharpness I have on the prints.

And the last (of the little boy) was too brightly scanned (we have established that also the scanner has a light meter and goes for "middle values"), so I had to bring back the blacks (which are as black as they now show, something one might want to discuss as "flaw"?).

Plus I had to clone out a good many dust specs from the scanning, though I wiped the glass and wiped and wiped ... mostly so in the last photo on all the black.

It looks like you have some pretty good glass in the scanner, Usually I can spot the degridation to (all) color present in most scanned prints. These however look quite good from here. Glass is tremendously difficult to keep free of hair and dust (also note, Small hair to the viewers left of the little one in the last one.) especially if one has cats. The best thing to do is wipe between every scan, both scanner glass and print.

On top of that it would seem you have a lab that actually knows what they're doing (unlike me ) and not blowing out skys and mid grey blacks.

 

[ksven]

I loveeee number 5.

 

[spiffybeth]

4 and 5 are great!!!

 

[LaFoto]

Thanks .
The scanned prints don't do the real prints justice, though, still don't... I like the one of the boy, given that it was taken indoors, on 200 ISO film, with no flash, just window light. I'll give the print to his mother tomorrow. I think she'll like it.