Open Photography Forums  
HOME FORUMS NEWS FAQ SEARCH

Go Back   Open Photography Forums > Digital Camera Discussion > Medium Format & Large Format Cameras

Medium Format & Large Format Cameras Digital and Film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 18th, 2009, 06:46 AM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default Shooting film: e6 or cNegs?

I got a Hasselblad -it is waiting for me in my NY apartment and I will get it in July since I live in Bolivia (long story)--

It is a 500 C/M that I want because I never could and now I can, (instead of the Alfa-Romeo GT Veloce that I want and will never have) and, very importantly, to use it in the "unplugged" way. Probably similar to having an electric guitar (Nikon D300 PhaseOne P25) and this, an acoustic guitar.

The question is: if you where going to shoot film for scanning. Do you use transparency or negative.

I know that in film times we used to shoot transparency for pro. work, but now, with so few labs available I would probably incline for cPrint negs. that could be scanned or printed...

By the way, what lens do you think this is on the moon? a 50mm f4 Distagon?

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 18th, 2009, 06:53 AM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

.. Do you know that 12 Hasselblads where left on the Moon to make space for rock (mmm a rock or my Hasselblad mmm, rock).

I suppose anybody could just go get them and put them on eBay...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 18th, 2009, 09:41 AM
Alain Briot Alain Briot is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardobarreto.com View Post
.. Do you know that 12 Hasselblads where left on the Moon to make space for rock (mmm a rock or my Hasselblad mmm, rock).

I suppose anybody could just go get them and put them on eBay...
Leonardo,

You can do both negs or transparencies. Transparencies are easier to color match since you can see the original colors. With negs you have to remove the orange cast.

It also depends on your scanner. With the Imacon/Hasselblad I get a lot of grain when I scan negs so I eventually standardized on transparencies. With Epson flatbeds I get far less grain, but then the resolution and dynamic range and detail level are all below that of the Imacon/Hasselblad scanners.

Negs have a larger dynamic range, but that can be compensated by shooting Fuji Provia or, better, Sensia (if you can find some) that have a larger dynamic range than Provia. Provia is out if you plan to scan since you can easily increase contrast and saturation in Photoshop.

And, regarding the moon, I think there's cheaper ways to get Hasselblads these days besides getting the ones left over there ;-)

Alain
__________________
Alain Briot
Fine Art, workshops, books: Get 40 Free eBooks when you subscribe to my newsletter:
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 18th, 2009, 11:07 AM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

I have no scanner, but I'm thinking about the Imacon that they have for rent at MyOwnColorLab in Manhattan.

I would probably not mind so much about grain since this would be the look of analog photography, and dynamic range is a good thing to get in return specially since you don't have an LCD to check histograms with the old 500 CM ...

Since this is not for work, color can be interpreted when removing the negative cast.

Do you have a favorite cNeg brand for landscape?

Thank you for the advice
Leonardo

I know you can get cheap Hasselblads, I got one myself ... but the ones left on the moon may sell well on eBay

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alain Briot View Post
Leonardo,

You can do both negs or transparencies. Transparencies are easier to color match since you can see the original colors. With negs you have to remove the orange cast.

It also depends on your scanner. With the Imacon/Hasselblad I get a lot of grain when I scan negs so I eventually standardized on transparencies. With Epson flatbeds I get far less grain, but then the resolution and dynamic range and detail level are all below that of the Imacon/Hasselblad scanners.

Negs have a larger dynamic range, but that can be compensated by shooting Fuji Provia or, better, Sensia (if you can find some) that have a larger dynamic range than Provia. Provia is out if you plan to scan since you can easily increase contrast and saturation in Photoshop.

And, regarding the moon, I think there's cheaper ways to get Hasselblads these days besides getting the ones left over there ;-)

Alain
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 18th, 2009, 11:12 AM
Alain Briot Alain Briot is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,423
Default

Leonardo,

Actually the grain from negs I got with scans far exceeded the grain of chemical prints. It was much more pronounced. It looked different and, I found, unpleasant. The solution was to use a different scanner (flatbed).

I don't have a favorite neg film. Plus, it's been so long since I last shot negs I'm not sure my advice is still relevant. I used a lot of Kodak Portra 160NC in 4x5 format. There's few neg films available for 4x5 so my choice was "simplified" because of that. Low contrast and low saturation, which is good since all this can be adjusted to taste in CS4.

ALain
__________________
Alain Briot
Fine Art, workshops, books: Get 40 Free eBooks when you subscribe to my newsletter:
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 18th, 2009, 11:12 AM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

Seams to be a 60mm Biogon

Hasselblad EDC (Electric Data Camera)
This is a specially designed version of the motorized 500EL intended for use on the surface of the moon, where the first lunar pictures were taken on 20 July 1969 by Neil Armstrong. The camera is equipped with a specially designed Biogon lens with a focal length of 60 mm, with a polarization filter mounted on the lens. A glass plate (Reseau-Plate), provided with reference crosses which are recorded on the film during exposure, is in contact with the film, and these crosses can be seen on all the pictures taken on the moon from 1969 to 1972. The 12 HEDC cameras used on the surface of the moon were left there. Only the film magazines were brought back.



Image and text redirectef from http://www.hasselblad.com/about-hass...e-cameras.aspx for the purpose of discussion. Image may be copy righted
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old May 18th, 2009, 11:14 AM
Alain Briot Alain Briot is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,423
Default

Leonardo,

The 60mm is a beautiful lens. One of my favorites. I continue to use my Hasselblad Cs but now with a Phase one back.

No viewfinder on the moon-Hasselblads!
__________________
Alain Briot
Fine Art, workshops, books: Get 40 Free eBooks when you subscribe to my newsletter:
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old May 18th, 2009, 12:16 PM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

They removed the mirror and secondary shutter as well as the viewfinder. They must be very lightweight. I wonder how they calculate distance and exposure. Is that square the shutter release enlarged for lunar gloves?
I also like the POLAROID filter with a nice lever for rotating and attached to a chain for it not to fly away in low gravity... I want one for my 50mm !
By the way. Does anybody know what is being taken to space this days?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old May 18th, 2009, 03:51 PM
Alain Briot Alain Briot is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,423
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardobarreto.com View Post
Does anybody know what is being taken to space this days?
Looks like a 35mm to me (from the current Hubble mission of May 2009):


__________________
Alain Briot
Fine Art, workshops, books: Get 40 Free eBooks when you subscribe to my newsletter:
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old May 18th, 2009, 05:15 PM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

yes, that looks like 35mm, but could be anything since it seams to covered in insulator...



This is Hasselblad, look at the PENTAX spot meter...

Is this a Hy6 M (Modified) ??



Nikon or Canon??



what about this one"not for public use"

(images redirected for non-commercial discussion. Images may be copy righted
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old May 19th, 2009, 01:45 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Leonardo, I'd try both, but I tend to shoot more colour neg when I'm using colour in the rf's. Portra 160 NC and VC and sometimes Ektar (which is now available in 120 also - very fine grain high saturation). I scan using a Nikon 5000 - somewhere between the epson flatbed and the imacon I believe.

Enjoy

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old May 19th, 2009, 08:10 PM
Jack_Flesher Jack_Flesher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardobarreto.com View Post
The question is: if you where going to shoot film for scanning. Do you use transparency or negative.
Both or either, depending on the situation, though I usually prefer neg for its broader latitude and higher resolution capability. Much has already been addressed, but I'll toss in my .02 for posterity.

Tranny: For overall scan-ability, relatively broad DR, fine grain structure and accurate color I prefer Astia.

Neg: Here all modern emulsions are very good, so it gets to best grain structure combined with a natural color palette IMO -- so I prefered Fuji Pro 160 and/or Portra 160 NC. If you can find any Vericolor that's been kept refrigerated, snap it up -- not the finest grain, but it's got a gorgeous pastel palette with huge DR!

However, were I still shooting lots of film, I would probably mostly shoot the new Ektar as it looks very impressive and is now available in 120.

My .02,
__________________
Jack
www.getdpi.com
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old May 19th, 2009, 08:48 PM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

Thank you, I should try the Ektar film and see what happens.

And now that we are talking about cNegs. film,

Do you think that commercial labs can develop the negatives? I suppose I can look for the best here and do some tests...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old May 19th, 2009, 09:40 PM
Jack_Flesher Jack_Flesher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardobarreto.com View Post
Thank you, I should try the Ektar film and see what happens.

And now that we are talking about cNegs. film,

Do you think that commercial labs can develop the negatives? I suppose I can look for the best here and do some tests...
Actually, C41 (neg) is pretty forgiving and hard to screw up, though I understand Ektar is among the most difficult. By comparison, E6 (tranny) is probably less forgiving. So yes, I suspect most any commercial lab can process C41 well, and there shouldn't be a huge variety in the result as long as the lab adheres to common good practices.
__________________
Jack
www.getdpi.com
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old May 19th, 2009, 11:44 PM
Mike Shimwell Mike Shimwell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardobarreto.com View Post
Thank you, I should try the Ektar film and see what happens.

And now that we are talking about cNegs. film,

Do you think that commercial labs can develop the negatives? I suppose I can look for the best here and do some tests...
As Jack says, yes - but you will probably want to scan yourself unless you find a good prolab. Auto corrected Fuji scans are not good in comparison to my own Nikon scans. Though people keep telling me thay can get good results I've not had any yet from outsourced scanning on Fujis and anything better costs a lot in the UK.

Ian Sitren does get nice scans from his lab thogh.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old May 21st, 2009, 06:05 AM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

The idea is to shoot and get the negatives developed and then scanned by me... also film can be printed the old fashion way....

In terms of prices, I think that Fujifilm Reala 100 is a bit cheaper than Ektar... but this two may be my choice..
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old May 21st, 2009, 10:55 AM
Jack_Flesher Jack_Flesher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardobarreto.com View Post
The idea is to shoot and get the negatives developed and then scanned by me... also film can be printed the old fashion way....

In terms of prices, I think that Fujifilm Reala 100 is a bit cheaper than Ektar... but this two may be my choice..
Reala is cheaper because it's a consumer film, not a pro film like 160... Ektar falls into the pro category too.
__________________
Jack
www.getdpi.com
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old May 21st, 2009, 07:06 PM
leonardobarreto.com leonardobarreto.com is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 953
Default

I will definitively give it a try, after all I will be using Hasselblad T* lenses...

I think I may get me the smallest Pelican case that could hold the 500 CM, 80mm and 50mm plus meter & film..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old May 31st, 2009, 08:58 AM
Erie Patsellis Erie Patsellis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 91
Default

Leonardo,
For a general carrying case, I use a Bass Pro Shops fishing reeel case. About $20 and will hold a 500C/M, a couple of lenses, a couple backs and meter/rolls of 120 film. Probably one of the few inexpensive photography things that actually work and don't cost a fortune. It even works with my EL, though it's a tight fit.

I originally bought it to carry lenses for my 4x5 in the field mounted on 4x4 lensboards, but in a fit of upgrading, went to Sinar cameras and newer glass. The Sinar boards won't fit, and a lot of my regularly used lenses are mounted in copal 3's that are a tight fit on a 4x4.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old November 19th, 2009, 04:44 PM
F.P. Harrell F.P. Harrell is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 12
Default

Shoot whatever allows you to make the kinds of images you want to make. Personally, I have very little use for slide film, but then again, I am a monochrome man. Still, I love the look I am able to get with 800 speed Fuji color negative film.

There are many variables that determine the particular flavor, if you will, that you get in an image:
the film, exposure, development, (and developer, with black and white), and, a thing not often discussed, the lens. Zeiss lenses are exquisite, in my opinion. That being said, I prefer the look I used to get with Portra 160 exposed through a 90mm Fujinon lens on a rangefinder to that yielded by the Zeiss glass.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old November 19th, 2009, 04:54 PM
Asher Kelman Asher Kelman is online now
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 34,783
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by F.P. Harrell View Post
Shoot whatever allows you to make the kinds of images you want to make. Personally, I have very little use for slide film, but then again, I am a monochrome man. Still, I love the look I am able to get with 800 speed Fuji color negative film.

There are many variables that determine the particular flavor, if you will, that you get in an image:
the film, exposure, development, (and developer, with black and white), and, a thing not often discussed, the lens. Zeiss lenses are exquisite, in my opinion. That being said, I prefer the look I used to get with Portra 160 exposed through a 90mm Fujinon lens on a rangefinder to that yielded by the Zeiss glass.
So do you have one of those Texas Leicas?

Asher
__________________
Follow us on Twitter at @opfweb

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old November 25th, 2009, 04:33 PM
F.P. Harrell F.P. Harrell is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
So do you have one of those Texas Leicas?

Asher
Unfortunately, I foolishly sold them off. I now have a couple of the Fuji 645 rangefinders. Great cameras with superb optics, every one.

As soon as I am able to move two of my Rolleiflex tlrs, I plan to acquire a third.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
35mm film workf(s)low for Asher and anyone interested Mike Shimwell Film, Platinum, Polaroid & other Analog media 8 April 2nd, 2010 02:48 PM
New Online "Radio" Show About Shooting Film Ian L. Sitren Film, Platinum, Polaroid & other Analog media 0 October 14th, 2008 06:55 PM
Shooting film again Mike Shimwell Layback Cafe 2 June 6th, 2008 01:30 PM
Am I missing something? Dean Jones Medium Format & Large Format Cameras 53 July 18th, 2007 12:56 AM
New Scanner? Will_Perlis Film, Platinum, Polaroid & other Analog media 12 February 15th, 2007 09:44 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:37 AM.


Posting images or text grants license to OPF, yet of such remain with its creator. Still, all assembled discussion 2006-2017 Asher Kelman (all rights reserved) Posts with new theme or unusual image might be moved/copied to a new thread!