Some portraits with my ME Super


Karl

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 17:28
Got my ME Super down from the loft and took a few portraits of friends and family.
I was very impressed with the depth of contrast and grain - I think it makes digital look a little bit sterile in comparison, so I'm going to keep on using this camera for B/W work, I had forgotten what great results film can give.

All shot on FP4 with 50mm f1.7 lens.

1.



2.



3.



4.


Last Edited by Karl on 19/09/2011 - 17:33

bwlchmawr

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 17:41
Film, eh? That first one is excellent. Great detail and contrast.
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05

ChrisA

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 17:51
What did you scan (negs or prints?) and what with?
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

Karl

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:02
Thanks Andrew.

Chris, negs were scanned in and I worked on them a little in Photoshop.

aliengrove

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:04
bwlchmawr wrote:
Film, eh? That first one is excellent. Great detail and contrast.

+1. Love that first shot. I like the 2nd one too, unusual use of DOF.
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook

Karl

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:06
Thanks alien, I was aiming for the dog tags

trickletreat

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:16
Really like the skin tone in number one, and a good subject, but for me number 2 is excellent and well taken.
Is it possible to recreate this grain with pp using silverex or similar?
Nigel

ChrisA

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:23
Karl wrote:
Chris, negs were scanned in and I worked on them a little in Photoshop.

Thanks. Do you mind saying which scanner you used?
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

Karl

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:24
Well the thing is Nigel I am not sure but I have also thought about it. Perhaps anyone with experience of Silverex etc could shed some light.

However, as I said these results have really got me interested in using film again, I love the quality you get with it.
I have also noted that these have turned out pretty grainy for a 125 asa film.

Karl

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:26
Chris, I don't have a scanner so I paid for them to be done at a local photography shop in Ilkley. I would assume they have a commercial quality piece of kit and at 3 for a roll of film I am happy for them to do it.

They were scanned at 300 dpi

ChrisA

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 18:41
Karl wrote:
Chris, I don't have a scanner so I paid for them to be done at a local photography shop in Ilkley. I would assume they have a commercial quality piece of kit and at 3 for a roll of film I am happy for them to do it.

Ah ok. I'm interested since I have a Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED, with which I've been gradually working through my collection of about 10,000 negs from my pre-digital years.

3 for a roll of 36 is pretty good value actually - do they do it before cutting the roll into strips?
Quote:

They were scanned at 300 dpi


I sincerely hope you mean 3000 dpi !!

The Nikon scans at 4000 dpi. It also generates images that are quite grainy at the pixel level, which was why I was interested in your comment about your 125 ASA film.

I find it's quite easy to remove the grain, if not completely then to a level where at normal enlargements it's more or less invisible.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Last Edited by ChrisA on 19/09/2011 - 18:47

Karl

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 19:33
Chris - I am told they were done at 300 dpi. Don't know when they cut the film.

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 19:49
Karl these are fantastic. I agree, they've a lot more character than digital. Not just the grain and tones, the dof is nicer too.

Perhaps your lab scanned at a higher resolution, and output the files at 300dpi. That would be too low a res to scan something as small as a negative.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

Joe S

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 20:09
These are great and a good example that good things can be achieved on a limited budget. #2 is by far the most exciting of the lot, imho.
Hi. My name is Joel and I'm a travelholic.
Stolen kit: Pentax K7 #3428965 and Pentax FA 43mm #0028350

womble

Link Posted 19/09/2011 - 20:21
I like the unusual focus point of number 2, and number 1 is pretty good too.

I'm surprised how marked the grain is. My Neopan 1600 (RIP) images have less than that, although in this case I think the grain contributes to the atmosphere of the images.

You can mimic film quite closely with Silver Efex Pro but I still prefer to use the real thing. At the moment, I don't really have a choice as the K20D is off at the repairers.

K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.