Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/04/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Some new Tri-X work, marginally scanned
From: photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 06:44:30 +0200
References: <2009C525-8346-4359-95F2-F815AE15440D@bex.net>

Nice but the doggie at the end wins!

Cheers,
Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/

YNWA









On Apr 7, 2014, at 5:17 AM, Howard Ritter wrote:

> I decided to take a film camera (M3, 50 ?lux, Tri-X) along on our trip to 
> London on the Queen Mary 2. Here are some of the results. And I finished 
> one of the rolls at home with an M5 that I wanted to check for 
> light-tightness and approximate shutter accuracy.
> 
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hlritter/Tri-X_001/
> 
> 
> The film was developed by a custom lab (Digi-Graphics) and I intended to 
> scan it myself but found that the film adapter for my earlier Nikon 
> Coolscan doesn?t work with the 5000, and the older scanner uses the 
> obsolete SCSI connector, so is incompatible with my current computers. I 
> took the developed film to a local photo store (they don?t develop B&W any 
> longer) for scanning and had them done at an advertised 2000 dpi, which 
> seems to be correct, as the files are ~6 MB. So the files look pretty 
> granular. Somehow it managed to scan a 36-exp roll in what seemed like one 
> minute; I have no idea how it does it so fast. I have just bought the 
> correct film adapter on eBay and I hope to make the files look better by 
> scanning the negs at 4500 dpi, equivalent to a 30-MB sensor.
> 
> Parenthetically, it?ll be interesting to see how the detail and resolution 
> in a good scan of a Tri-X frame compare to FF digital files of various 
> sizes. With this in mind, I took a picture of my standard target for such 
> tests, a house across the quarry, with the M5. I?ll post it when I get a 
> decent scan.
> 
> BTW, the kid (about 30 years old) managing the photo shop insisted that 
> Kodak had stopped producing Tri-X. And it took me several minutes of 
> careful explanation to convince him that he was incorrect in thinking that 
> larger pixels on a sensor make for more detailed photos. This is the last 
> surviving photographic store in Toledo. All they sell is accessories, 
> Lomography gear, C41 processing, custom prints, and studio time.
> 
> ?howard
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 



In reply to: Message from hlritter at bex.net (Howard Ritter) ([Leica] Some new Tri-X work, marginally scanned)