More images from the film lab (aka, the darkroom)

[480sparky]

Having nothing else to do Sunday, I struck out early to try out a couple lenses I received Saturday for the Shen Hao 4x5.... a Camulet 210mm f/5.6 and a Nikkor 90mm f/8.

Here's what I've processed so far:

Never did put the 90 to use... mostly used the 210mm!

 

[daisyish]

Wow love that staircase shot. It is so sharp and clean.

 

[timor]

Nice work ! Scans from prints or negatives ? Staircase seems a bit or over exposed or over developed. It looks to me, like the highlights are blocked a bit.

 

[480sparky]

I'm still wrestling with getting the scans (from negs) to comply with my wishes. They density of the negs looks correct, but the contrast of the scans is all across the histogram. I haven't nailed down a method of bringing both the shadows up and the highlights down without losing one or the other.

It's just gonna take some time until I can characterize my film/developer/time/temp/scanner/software method.

 

[timor]

Scan twice, or three times and make HDR.
Wet printing might be tricky. Too complicated for masking it will require not only low contrast but also soft developer. Sometimes negative, which look right is not right at all in printing. All depends on opacity of the highlights. What film was that ? And what developer ?

 

[480sparky]

Ilford Delta 100. DDX for 11:30 at 70F.

 

[timor]

T-grain. All developed together ?

 

[limr]

I'm still wrestling with getting the scans (from negs) to comply with my wishes. They density of the negs looks correct, but the contrast of the scans is all across the histogram. I haven't nailed down a method of bringing both the shadows up and the highlights down without losing one or the other.

It's just gonna take some time until I can characterize my film/developer/time/temp/scanner/software method.

You've got the CanoScan, right? Are you using the advanced settings? You can make adjustments, pick white/black point, adjust curves, adjust color and white balance, etc, before even scanning. I'm still deciding how much I want to do before the scan and how much after, but I do know you can do quite a lot of adjusting before the scan. I'm not at home now, but if you don't already know how to get to these controls and are interested, I can post some screen shots later.

 

[Derrel]

My goal is usually to make the lowest-contrast scan I can, so I can bridge the highlight/shadow range and get detail in both areas, then adjust the image for contrast later, so the tone curve I apply in the scanning software is a very "soft" one. But agreed, these do seem to have blocked highlights in the stairs and the parking structure images. You will probably be able to figure something out.

Have you tried scanning as "color positive"? That works splendidly for me, and gives me deeper bit depth (but I have different scanner software) than my scanner's B&W settings.

 

[480sparky]

I've tried scanning as a color positive, but the scanner refuses to scan the entire negative. I am on the Advanced settings, and choosing the eyedroppers to set white and black points works well for one, but not the other. I use the black eyedropper to set the black point, and the white gets completely blown out. I try to correct that by using the white eyedropper and I end up with a black or white image. Not black and white... black or white. Hardly any grays in between. (I should write a book.... One Shade of Gray)

I'm not gonna mess with them any more until I can dunk some prints in the darkroom. My goal is to shoot for wet prints. I'd rather invest my time in 'getting it right' there as opposed to adjusting my field & film-developing techniques aimed at digital scans.

 

[timor]

I'm not gonna mess with them any more until I can dunk some prints in the darkroom. My goal is to shoot for wet prints. I'd rather invest my time in 'getting it right' there as opposed to adjusting my field & film-developing techniques aimed at digital scans.

That's very good perspective, but even so negative might be exposed and developed for specific type of paper, or, one should have stacks of different papers as the contrast they can deliver varies. Even with VC papers, from different manufacturers. RC papers do not even react to different developers as usually they have developing agents embedded in emulsion. (Part of bad opinion about them.) In general less contrasty negatives are easier to print, but they should be also easier to scan.
I am interested, how would be your wet printing of this negatives, especially the staircase.

 

[480sparky]

......., but even so negative might be exposed and developed for specific type of paper..........

I understand that. That's why I'm not too concerned with any scans until I characterize the entire process to produce a wet print I'm satisfied with.

 

[limr]

I've tried scanning as a color positive, but the scanner refuses to scan the entire negative. I am on the Advanced settings, and choosing the eyedroppers to set white and black points works well for one, but not the other. I use the black eyedropper to set the black point, and the white gets completely blown out. I try to correct that by using the white eyedropper and I end up with a black or white image. Not black and white... black or white. Hardly any grays in between. (I should write a book.... One Shade of Gray)

I'm not gonna mess with them any more until I can dunk some prints in the darkroom. My goal is to shoot for wet prints. I'd rather invest my time in 'getting it right' there as opposed to adjusting my field & film-developing techniques aimed at digital scans.

Yeah, I've not had much luck with the eye droppers, but using the little arrow sliders on the graph works better - easier to fine tune the greys.

(Heh...One Shade of Grey...clever )

 

[480sparky]

Eydroppers or sliders... they do the same thing, one is just faster than the other. The eyedroppers get me to black or white in less time than the sliders. Same result, though.

 

[limr]

Eydroppers or sliders... they do the same thing, one is just faster than the other. The eyedroppers get me to black or white in less time than the sliders. Same result, though.

I had done this anyway because I was curious, but I am scanning film right now anyway so I figured it would be a good time to do a comparison.

Here is the straight scan of a shot:


When I try using the eye droppers, I end up with a fairly high-contrast image and either darks are too dark or the highlights are blown.

Here is the same image using the sliders on the graph to create lower contrast:


And just because it was mentioned, here it is a color scan with Fade Correction on Low:


Side by side:



In Corel, I applied the same basic steps and levels (the eye dropper and then the shadows/midtone/highlight adjustment tool to fine tune) for the first two, and I did nothing but greyscale the color scan in the case of the third image. Here are the results, side by side (same order):



Probably better to look at them larger to see the differences in the adjusted images.