Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Biweekly Shoot Out

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 11, 2005, 1:08 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
jsiladi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 587
Default

This photo was actually taken with a miniature speed graphic on 120 film. Printed in a home wet darkroom. It was however scanned and further processed in photoshop so perhaps it qualifies.. If not, I've always liked it anyway..

:| Jeff
Attached Images
 
jsiladi is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 11, 2005, 5:13 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
ferny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,866
Default

I don't know if I should say this here. They may burn me at the stake. :lol: I just got my first medium format camera. It's a cheap toy one from China called a Holga. It's more to the artsy side of photography rather than the great picture quality end. I'm getting a dev tank soon so I can develop my own b&w 135 and 120 films as well. One day, I'll get and enlarger and a proper darkroom to.

As for qualifying or not. When I wasn't a mod and posted a couple of scanned prints sometimes. I always asked if it was ok to post them and the stock answer seemed to be "If it's on your computer it's a digital photo.".

Nice vanishing point.
ferny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 6:10 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
jsiladi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 587
Default

I've seen the Holgas on the auction site but never considered one. Very inexpensive way to dive into medium format if you don't want to put out the cash for the more expensive film cameras. I've read (can't remember where), that they are particularly good for black and white.. If I may, when you get a tank, I'd recommend the Paterson tanks.

To keep this on the computer imaging theme, the photo was originaly printed on 8x10 color paper. After blowing a package of paper (at a cost of about $15 and the burned brain cells from sniffing the chemicals) trying to get the colors as I saw them that day, I decided to scan it and see what I could come up with. I must admit that my first attempts at correcting photos on the computer were lacking at best, this one cleaned up nicely. The actual one is over 500K so what you see is the cut down version used for emailing and posting..

:-) Jeff
jsiladi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 8:09 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
ferny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,866
Default

I've been asking around for advice on a tank. Patterson seem to be the ones normal recommended. All of them seem pretty much the same, but they have a good reputation so that's the one I'm going for.

Holga's are an acquired taste. Here are some galleries. The 120 S is the original. The 120 SF is the original version with a small flash built in. I'm not sure I'd recommend them as an ideal step into medium format. Take a look at the listed features. :lol: The original 120 S even had light leaks listed as a feature. I haven't put any film through mine yet. Haven't had ideal conditions for it.


Don't worry about not being the best photo editor around. We all have to learn and start somewhere. Some of us (me) never get anywher. :lol:
For net use 150kb-250kb is more than enough for a photo this size.
ferny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 1:01 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
jsiladi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 587
Default

I can see what you mean by aquired taste.. Too, it looks like once a full outfit is put together one could be well into a few hundred $$ (US).. Interesting to note that the flash for the little guy is more expensive than the camera :-)

There are several forums out there where one can discuss the merits of the paterson tanks.. I'll close my input here by saying I've had several brands, from cheap to expensive. Of all of them, including the Jobo I have, the paterson leaks the least (fluid) and is the easiest to fill and drain.. Oh yes, the plastic reels don't snag the film while loading.

Back to the original topic, Here's a better copy of the photo. Note that it's about an 8th generation jpg (a lesson hard learned in digital editing) so the quality isn't up to par with the original scan.

:| Jeff
Attached Images
 
jsiladi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2005, 2:05 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
ferny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,866
Default

I just won a Paterson system 4 with three adjustable reels on eBay for (including p&p) £10.50 ($19.72). Seems a good deal to me.

Onto the photo. :lol: It does seem a bit soft. But I'd put that down to scanning. Something I'm terrible at. Other than that, it seems fine. Of course I haven't got the original in front of me.
ferny is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:58 AM.