Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by onrelas, Feb 9, 2008.
Nice you should get in touch with jars on here incase he has bits left over from his kit.
My kit is still complete Jack, I'm still not sure whether or not I want to let go of her
PM seen ncsa
PS. It's all fun and games until a 6x8 reflex mirror starts flapping around!
I'd be sad if you sold all of your gear!
ditto! Lets go shooting some film this winter before its all sold?
ncsa - Looks the goods mate! Nothing says boss like a 6x8 SLR with a bit of tilt going on!
Thanks for taking time out - great pointers...
Got the roll back today and at least I know the back is light proof... strobe exposures are ok... natural light needs a more work on reading the hand held meter
Cheers - yes I like the look of it, very unique..
Of course I do not have a scanner .. any suggestions?
Second hand Epson v700 if you can find one.
Not the best but good for 120 and will do you for now
Microtek make some good scanners.. I paid $175 for my i900 second hand and its absolutely awesome... No drum scanner but when I wet mount my 4x5 negs I have no qualms printing up to 32x40" and I've made a 50x17 from 6x17cm
Got back some Flextight scans yesterday of some 6x17 frames. All I can say is HOT DAMN. Lovely sharpness, detail, colours, tones etc.
Looks good ncsa. I bought a V700 second hand for $450 about 12 months ago to scan my 617 slides. It does what I want it to. I haven't had any prints yet. I figure if I want something really big Ill send it away to be scanned on something better.
The largest I've printed from an Epson V700 scan from 617 has been 100cms across, the print was alright, the original photo doesn't have a lot of detail in it though (a lot of the shot is a waterfall). I've also got a few that are ~60cm on the long side as well, and they are okay as well - that said I wonder if they would show better detail even at that size with a better scan.
Here is a comparison at 100% both scanned at 3200dpi:
No prizes for guessing which one is the Flextight and which is the V700 scan.
The original image is this one (V700 scan):
The close-up is a crop of that mound just right of center in the frame.
Yes I guess a V700 will be ok as looking at FH scan the difference is significant - I guess the $20K for a Flex says it all...
I'll be on the lookout now ...
I use Martins V700 and get decent results up to 60 inch. I've compared the scans to a few of the older Imacon scanners and there is noticable difference -but a 60 inch scan scaled down to 30/45 inch looks OK printed. When larger prints are required, the trannys are sent away for a drum scan.
Good light, and a well exposed tranny make the scans that much better
See some images here;
They are probably good enough results at that size Kane, but I reckon if you were to compare the two side-by-side it'd be quite a difference in print - unless you're printing on canvas. But then whats the point of shooting 617 if you're printing it on canvas
The detail/sharpness of the scans is not the only difference either, the Flextight scans in terms of colours look so much better. I got back Flexible File Format (3F) files which are basically raw files from the scanner, so you can load them up in Flexcolor and manipulate them like you would a digital camera raw file.
I'm not about to rush out and sell my V700, as I'll use it for doing initial scans and for putting stuff onto the web, but for anything I consider special I'll take to get a Flextight scan done as well, because the difference IMHO is worth it. Vanbar charge $30 / frame for 6x17 scanned at 3200dpi - and quite a bit less than $30 if you have a VIP card with them.
If you're going to get something printed large and framed, even just once, the cost of the scan will be the cheap part of the process.
Agreed. Especially for limited runs or ones that you are going to sell a few prints of (or want to have printed in your own place).
Pretty reasonable price for the odd frame
^^ Thanks Ok the V700 is good for proofing and anything special then outsource for a higher scan.
I acquired a special lens for this Fuji.
Fuji vs Sigma by ncsabkk, on Flickr
3.2 vs 1.4 by ncsabkk, on Flickr
In terms of DOF it seems to work like the canon 85L - 1.2 - 1.4
That is hawt
I think one of the reasons the colour is better, is the better sharpness. Since local areas aren't so blurred into each other, there is less reduction in local colour difference.
Both the print, and the frame is going to cost you more individually than the scan.