First step into Film and Med Format...

thepaulreid · Nov 15, 2011

Hi all,

I have been shooting digital for a while and have just bought my first film camera today (Christmas present to myself!)

eBay - The UK's Online Marketplace went for a Rolleicord because I love the styling (shallow?!) and I like the look of the photos with the 3.5 Xenar lens Vs the sharper 2.8 of the Rolleiflex. I also have a Pentax K5 for crisp modern looking photos, and I want that vintage look to my shots.

My plan is to buy a scanner to scan the negatives into my computer rather than sending off the films to get developed and printed.

What kit do I need to do this?

Also, I am hoping to shoot in colour. What film would you recommend for a nice washed out look? I like low saturation!

Thanks in advance.

Paul

compur · Nov 15, 2011

thepaulreid said:
My plan is to buy a scanner to scan the negatives into my computer rather than sending off the films to get developed and printed.

What kit do I need to do this?

A scanner with film scanning capability. But, the film will still have to be processed first.

Also, I am hoping to shoot in colour. What film would you recommend for a nice washed out look? I like low saturation!

Thanks in advance.

Paul

The only really "washed out color" film available today that I know is made by the Impossible Project for Polaroid cameras.

There really isn't a modern color film today (that will work with your camera) with a "washed out look" and there never was, really, except perhaps for the very first color films of the 1930s-40s which are long gone. You may have seen old color prints that appear washed out because their color faded over time and assumed they always looked that way but they were much brighter originally.

You might try using older expired color film in your camera. This will sometimes produce washed out or shifted colors but it's not predictable.

Many newbies to film have the misconception that film photography produces fuzzy washed out images. This is sometimes true if you are using a cheap camera or "toy" camera such as the Holga, etc. But, you may be disappointed in how sharp and vibrant the images your Rolleicord can produce if in good condition and used properly. :wink:

JosephKubik · Nov 15, 2011

If you want that "vintage look" I suggest processing it yourself and using wrong amounts of chemicals. Or use film that is about 10 years past its "develop by" date (seems to usually yield off colouring).

djacobox372 · Nov 15, 2011

That "washed out" look is typically processing without using bleach, "bleach bypass."

Derrel · Nov 16, 2011

EPSON has some flatbed scanners that come with so-called "transparency adapters", which are used with fairly large film holders, to hold the negatives or transparencies flat, and then the imaging scanner portion moves across the length (or width) of the negative, and a top-deck illumination lamp back-lights the film.
So...to get into this at an "affordable" level, the flatbed scanner with transparency adapter and medium-format negative holders is a key part of the kit you will want to have.

Here's an article that has some background and samples Epson flatbed scanners: 2450 Photo, with a little about the 3200

Many people are using the EPSON 3200 and the EPSON V700 flatbeds, which although not "state of the art", do pretty good work. I have a 3200, and its resolution and capabilities are up to the task of scanning film shot with 50 year-old "average" rollfilm lenses by amateur shooters. Have some fun with this endeavor,okay???!!!

thepaulreid · Nov 16, 2011

Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond to my post! I am much wiser now and guess I will have to get experimenting with different mixes of development chemicals! I dont feel right about digitally editing my film shots to get a certain effect, seems a bit daft...! I didnt consider that the old look of film photos could be down to the age of the photo -but this is obviously a factor. I will post my shots when I am in a position and probably do a comparison to my Pentax K5 to see if the shots have a different feel to them...

Proteus617 · Nov 16, 2011

thepaulreid said:
I dont feel right about digitally editing my film shots to get a certain effect, seems a bit daft...!

The purity of the SOOC image (straight out of camera) is a conceit of digital noobs. Even if you wanted to go pure darkroom there are multiple choices to be made along the way, each of which can be seen as a manipulation. Check out Steichen's Moonrise (1904), one of the greatest photographs ever made. It took weeks of manipulation in the studio. Have fun with the camera and don't get hung up on the purity of the process. If you are working with scanned film you really will at least some post-processing.

thepaulreid · Nov 16, 2011

Thats cool. I guess I will find out soon enough!! Also, do you recommend a light meter so I can calculate F number and shutter speed etc? Or should I just use the chart on the back of the camera?? Also, is ASA the same as ISO?? Cheers Paul

tirediron · Nov 16, 2011

ASA and ISO are the same thing value-wise. ASA was the North American term in the film days; ISO was the European term. For whatever reason, when digital came around, everyone went with ISO.

I would definitely recommend getting a light meter. MF film isn't horribly expensive, but it's pricey enough that you don't want to muck up too many frames.

Helen B · Nov 17, 2011

It's not quite accurate to say that ISO is a European thing - it is an international organisation, and ANSI (the American National Standards Institute) leads the technical committee for photography and cinematography.

Simplified version: Immediately pre-ISO speeds there used to be two main ways of defining film speed outside of the USSR: ASA and DIN. ASA was based on American standards (from the American Standards Association), and was arithmetic - ie double the film sensitivity and you double the ASA. DIN was based on German standards (from the Deutsches Institut für Normung, German Institute for Standardization) and it is logarithmic - ie double the film sensitivity and the DIN goes up by three degrees (a third of a stop is a realistic assessment accuracy, so a third of a stop is an increase of one - official ASA speeds go in third-stop jumps as well).

The ASA itself was known as ANSI after 1969, though the film speed name stayed the same.

The ISO (International Organization for Standardization), under the leadership of ANSI, produced international film speed standards in the mid 70's that used both ASA and DIN methods. 100 ASA film, which was 21° DIN, became ISO 100/21°. The DIN part is usually dropped where ASA was commonly used. The ASA part can also be dropped if you are accustomed to thinking in DIN. In the mid 80's the ASA film speed standards were officially superseded by the ISO standards. There is now an ISO for digital camera sensitivity.

Best,
Helen