Film, darkrooms and the past....

9designs2

9designs2

9designs2

Soldato
Joined
5 Jan 2003
Posts
3,523
Location
Somewhere in the middle
Been tempted lately to go back and restart traditional film photography :eek:
Partly because I found I still have 20 rolls of film in the fridge, all now out of date, but being kept cool I hope will still be useable. :(

I rattled an old roll of Fuji slide film off yesterday to test it..... Working with film again was good, of coarse I have no idea if I shot 36 frames of rubbish or a couple of keepers....

I have all boxed up a complete darkroom kit, and now in my current house a loft I could easily make one end into a darkroom...... Will I ever find time to use it, that is the dilemma, digital has made me lazy and a casual photographer.

Also I'm tempted to purchase a film scanner again, sadly not a used Nikon as the prices have gone through the roof. The new Plustek 8200 looks tempting.

Still like the film route, scan to 7200 dpi, having shot with Carl Zeiss lens gives more detail and information than I'm going to get from my 5D.....
For Black and White into the Darkroom.....

The hobby seems to have gone with digital, it seems more of a throw away commodity and pass time.
But it's hard to compete with the dust free results and photoshop corrections so easily available on a PC....

Nostalgia or a worthy trip ?....... Does anyone else still get their fingers wet ?
 
I do it with the OH occasionally, though really we're just starting out. I've done one B&W 35mm myself, she's done a 35mm and a 120. We do have a projector but I'm getting a Canon 9000f to scan the films, as it'll be much easier to see which pictures are good for enlargement.

Would you just be doing the film, or enlarging too? C41 or B&W processing? For film, I've read C41 is easier, though I have no experience with it.

On the extra detail front, you might be surprised by the result.
 
Well I proceed a roll of Ilford Delta100 last night, despite it being a 2 years out of date, and the chemical possibly more so, but new in an unopened bottle, ... all came out well :). So I can steam into the remaining 19 rolls !!!

I've done my own dev and printing for close on 30 years !!! (I started young ;).... Black and White mainly.
Have done a little C41 dev for XP films ..... and I have an E6 kit for some rolls of slide film.

I use to print in the darkroom as well, but when film scanners came along I ended up doing both, and then just scanning.... Had a Microtek Artix4000TF, 4000 dpi, sold it a few years ago with the intention of getting a Nikon scanner.... but never got round to it, and the DSLR took over.

Feeling motivated, for now, to build an area in the loft, and get the enlarger back out of the box...... Some 12x16" or 20x16" prints are good challenge...

Agree, scanner is good as well to help pick a few favourites and do general pictures, then save the best ones for the darkroom enlargements....

I thought digital would killed it all off, but I see the local town is still running darkroom classes, really surprised me.......
 
Bit of a thread bump.

Just been shooting a lot of 120 Medium Format Film this week on my trusty Mamiya C330s TLR and I'm now sat here in a scanning suite on a friday night scanning in a personal documentary project.

And...i just love it. :D

I love film. Shooting, Processing it myself and scanning is really just such a rewarding process for me. Every single image just means so much when doing it this slowly. Portra 400 is very nice also!

May even colour print some images in the darkroom next week sometime if all goes well funds permitting!

P.S. Medium format large aperture bokeh....PHWOOAR
 
Yes it's much more rewarding isn't it..... I've looked so many times at MF kit, problem is I'm a Contax junkie, a 645 kit still fetches big money.... Then a more sensible option would be a Bronica.
Also MF film scanners have gone through the roof, a Coolscan 9000 goes for over 2K. Hense I going for Plustek 35mm only scanner. I also don't have a 120 neg holder for my Durst M370.... Or suitable lens..... All becomes a big investment for a play.
 
9designs2 said:
Yes it's much more rewarding isn't it..... I've looked so many times at MF kit, problem is I'm a Contax junkie, a 645 kit still fetches big money.... Then a more sensible option would be a Bronica.
Also MF film scanners have gone through the roof, a Coolscan 9000 goes for over 2K. Hense I going for Plustek 35mm only scanner. I also don't have a 120 neg holder for my Durst M370.... Or suitable lens..... All becomes a big investment for a play.
Click to expand...

I've been using a Coolscan 9000 to do my negs and it's fantastic. Trade off between speed and quality. Would love to buy one but at 2k they're way out of my budget.

Will scan on the Hasselblad Drum scanners for finals. :eek:
 
Last edited:
Kicking myself as couple of years back before they stopped making them a used one would sell for about a grand on eBay :(

You studying photography and they still teach darkroom skills in this digital age!:cool:
 
I should get some pictures really as the facilities are the best in the world probably.

Can hand tank develop black and white film yourself in the devving room or whack it through either of the 3 MASSIVE machines they have for free. Black and White, E6 and C41. I can offset the cost of Uni with putting tonnes of E6 through the machine! :p

There is a Black and white darkroom with nearly 30 enlargers. Colour with around 10. Can tray process black and white paper or just put it through the machines they have.

Massive finishing room fitted with lightboxes.

8 fully kitted Bowens Studios.

A scanning room with like 15 flatbeds, 8 Coolscans and around 8 Hasselblad "Drum" scanners.

A post processing room with 30 odd computers in.

And the best part about it, there is a photography store with just about any camera/equipment you'd need that you can loan out for free be it Large format, Medium Format, 35mm, Full frame Digi, crop digi, portable lighting, flashes, stands, softboxes, umbrellas.

They were having massive cutbacks last year but then the head of the photography department said "Nope" and bought a few 50mm F/1.2s, a load of Canon 7D's, a few 85mm F/1.2s and upgraded the studios to better Bowens lighting.

Film is very much alive here and it's becoming a fine art with people not using it anymore.

There is another Ilford Printing Masterclass this week which will be good. A Master Printer from Ilford travels down and gives us all the paper we need working up to a final print on Fibre Based paper which just looks gorgeous.

There are four different photography courses here, Marine and Natural History Photography (Animals), Photography (Arty), Fashion Photography and Press & Editorial Photography. I'm doing the latter and it's very good. I wanted to really do Marine and Natural History photography but I think the Press and Editorial Photography course will set me up better once I've finished next year.
 
The roll of Fuji slide film came back yesterday, looks like 36 shoots of nicely exposed film, not bad for being about 5 years out of date!!!
Detail in highlights and shadows looks great, huge dynamic range...... Just need that scanner now.
 
9designs2 said:
Still like the film route, scan to 7200 dpi, having shot with Carl Zeiss lens gives more detail and information than I'm going to get from my 5D...
Click to expand...

On most scanners you probably won't want to go above 2400dpi, beyond that the actual resolution doesn't increase. It's just making up data through interpolation. Which often results in lower image quality.

I've been home developing various black and white films, but i went to poundland the other week and picked up some Kodak 'Colour Plus', which i'm debating if i should try to soup myself. I can get enough Tetenal Colortec chemicals to do 8-12 films for around £20, which only really leaves the water bath...
 
PermaBanned said:
On most scanners you probably won't want to go above 2400dpi, beyond that the actual resolution doesn't increase. It's just making up data through interpolation. Which often results in lower image quality.
..
Click to expand...

Hmmm nope they are optical resolutions I was speaking of, dedicated film scanners not flatbeds. The Nikon's are 4000dpi, as was my old Microtek, the new Plustek are 7200 optical dpi.... I think at that level you have probably exceed what some lenses or films will resolve anyway.

Spec :-
Optical resolution: 7200x7200 dpi
Bit Depth: 48-bit color (16-bit channels) and 16-bit grayscale
Sampling: Multi-sampling capable
Infrared Scanning: Yes (for dust and scratch removal)
Buttons: Power, Intelliscan (launches SilverFast), QuickScan (launches PageManager)
Maximum Scan Area: 25.4x36.8mm
Light Source: white LED
Sensor: Color CCD image sensor
Interface: USB 2.0 Hi-Speed
 
There are two main resolutions of the scanner that you have to take into account. That of the CCD and that of the stepper motor (well, usually). What's the smallest distance it can move the sensor? They will be advertised as 7200dpi because that's the highest setting they have, but it doesn't mean that that's the optical resolution of the device. It means that it can interpolate up to that level.

And i mean, then you have to wonder when you're even going to need an image larger than 2400dpi, which i believe will be about 3400x2200 pixels (7.5MP). Is it worth the extra time? That's for you to decide. I mean the best course of action would probably be to take one negative you know is good quality and scan it at all of the settings, see for yourself what the differences are. If you ever needed a scan for say a massive print then you can just scan it again.

As for exceeding the resolution of the film/lenses, you're getting into dangerous territory there. Because we don't have any 'perfect' devices to use as reference it's incredibly hard to know what the limiting factor is. Not 100% on the maths here, but a 7200dpi scan of a 35mm neg would result in an A1 print size (at 300dpi). Kodak used to make massive ~5.5x18.3m prints i believe from a single 35mm frame to display at NYC's Grand Central Station. That's a much larger magnification. But then you could say that Kodachrome could have been a much better film.

There's just too many variables to make any sort of reasonable conclusions. I mean for starters what distance it's viewed from makes all the difference. But how often have you found yourself wanting to do something but being unable to purely because of resolution. And i don't mean cropping to a tiny part of the image that you had no idea was there when taking the actual photo :p

I guess what i'm saying is that for most people it is, and always will be good enough. Hell, for most casual photographers 3.2MP is good enough.
 
Well when it states "Optical resolution" forgive me for believing it and not expecting it to be interpolated... Same as Nikon claim 4000, and Minolta had one at 5400. Now I would agreed that could deteriorate if it has sloppy stepper motors and judders along, as you would end up loosing some sharpness.

I use to scan to 4000 with my old Microtek, so I know what sort of files that created.

I have no plan to scan everything, I only scan the frame I want to print or work with.... Negatives and slides are a better archive format than digital anyway ;)

What size is needed, easy one, 4961 x 3508 as a minimum, that is A3 @ 300 dpi...Which is what I work to for many years. Which close to a 12x16 inch paper I have in the dark room as well... Also have some 20 x 30 inch and trays to process it :)

Actually more because I'd like the option to experiment with something a bit bigger for the wall.
No point have thousands of pounds worth of Carl Zeiss glass if your not going to try and pull as much detail out as possible. ;)

Just watched a few scanners go on the bay.... for some silly prices :eek:
Still makes this Plustek look like a good deal.
 
Oh, yeah. It's a great scanner. As long as you don't do MF :p

I just don't think that scanning at the maximum resolution possible is necessarily going to get you the best image quality. I've just been using the flatbed part of an 'all in one' printer, which doesn't deal with anything particularly well. But it is free to use. I'm thinking when i get a bit of money i'll go for a V500.
 
Yeah if I go MF I'll get a top end Espon Flatbed, as I'm not shelling out 2K for Coolscan 9000 !!! :eek:
Yes Flatbeds do like to give you a slider that is "ambitious" with resolution. ;)
 
I just switched back to my old 35mm Minolta after scanning in hundreds of pics taken with it back in the '90s. The photo quality was just incredible compared to the shots I've taken with my little digital as I can't afford a proper DSLR yet. I have much more control over what I'm shooting, a better selection of lenses, and I don't have to wait for the stupid thing to turn on if I want to take a quick pic.

With the ability to develop film directly to CD or DVD now without the hassle of scanning in slides manually, it seems silly not to give it a try. Just a little more expensive of course.

What is the life-expectency of film these days? I hear that once Kodak depletes their current stock the film won't be available anymore. But Fuji, Agfa, etc. should still be around for awhile? It seems everything I read on the 'net these days is just speculation so perhaps there really is no definite answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom