Rollei 35 Roll #2

[Chris Dodkin]

I found a roll of FujiFilm Superior 200 print film in my cupboard - just 6 months away from expiration, so I figured I may as well throw it in the Rollei and then do a dunk and scan at CostCo to get the images back.

Took the Rollei with me on a walk at lunchtime, along the seafront at Oceanside - lovely day, blue skies and temps in he upper 60s - god I hate winter!

Exposure was set using the built-in meter - and given that it was F-Sunny, I went with 1/500 at f/11 ISO200 for all shots - easy!

Dropped it into CostCo on the way back - they are the only 1 hour place left near me - all the others have gone.

Back in an hour and my CD and negs were ready - contact print looked positive.

So here we go - may I just say that CostCo scans are dreadful when compared to the pro scans I've been getting, but they are cheap at $8, and fast - but I won't be going back as I feel the effort of taking the shots is wasted by a poor end result.

ESCUE

Watching You for 25c (Minimum focus distance test)

Mailboxes (PP in NIK Color FX)

Piggy in the Middle

Retirement Paradise

Three Five (Or 35 for Rollei 35)

The Three Bears

In-camera exposure was cock-on - Lens sharpness better at f/11 - contrast etc good as gar as I can tell from the butchered scans.

The hood I added to the camera did a nice job - as did the small soft release, which made the camera easier to use (for me any way)

I tried some from the hip street shooting, and got in focus people, but mostly with half of them out of frame

The 40mm lens is rather long for street, and I haven't got my visualization and distances dialed in yet - zone focus shows promise though - but the 1/500 max shutter speed will be an issue for covert shooting as you still get some movement blur from holding the camera as you walk.

I will try again with some B&W I think

 

[David Mitchell]

Nice shots and those are some sharp images

 

[Pete Askew]

A dame fine set for a lunchtime stroll Chris. And I like the colours a lot. A fine set of post boxes you caught there too.

 

[Beth Carter]

with the exception of the nuclear glow on the palm tree in #5 (guessing from the sharpening after scanning?) wonderful series. great tones, colors and, of course, comps. love numbers 2, 3, 4 and 6.

 

[Stephen McCullough]

Really like the textures. Particularly like 2 & 6. Colours and comp are great.

Sorry to hear about your struggle with winter.

I'll go shovel some snow now...

 

[Hamish Gill]

$8 is cheap is it?
What do pro scans cost and what sort of res are they... Just interested to compare against what I get ...

These are nice Chris, especially the 3 5 photo.

 

[Dave Moss]

I like 2 and 5 great series Chris

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Nice shots and those are some sharp images

Thanks David - when I looked at the DOF scale on the Tessar lens, pretty much everything from 10ft to Infinity is in focus at f/11!

- - - Updated - - -

A dame fine set for a lunchtime stroll Chris. And I like the colours a lot. A fine set of post boxes you caught there too.

Thanks Pete, I did walk four miles - so I had plenty to look at!

The mailbox shot nearly got me in trouble - there was someone inside that room looking out the window, and they spotted me shooting - I got a 'what are you doing?' shout

- - - Updated - - -

with the exception of the nuclear glow on the palm tree in #5 (guessing from the sharpening after scanning?) wonderful series. great tones, colors and, of course, comps. love numbers 2, 3, 4 and 6.

Thanks Beth - the glow was already there to some extent on the scan, but post processing really lit it up!

There's also terrible banding in the skies for that frame and others - as I said, low quality scans are cheap

- - - Updated - - -

Really like the textures. Particularly like 2 & 6. Colours and comp are great.

Sorry to hear about your struggle with winter.

I'll go shovel some snow now...

Thanks Stephen - what is this 'snow' you mentioned?

- - - Updated - - -

$8 is cheap is it?
What do pro scans cost and what sort of res are they... Just interested to compare against what I get ...

These are nice Chris, especially the 3 5 photo.

Thanks Hamish - the 'enhanced' scan at the pro lab is 3339x5035 pixels for 35mm and is $12 a roll plus dev cost - making a total with tax of around $20. (varies a little depending on B&W, color, slide film)

The 6x9 enhanced scan is 4815x7588 pixels


This is the same lab that the infamous Ken Rockwell uses for his scans - http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2008-09-new-2h.htm

Just happens to be a few miles from home - very handy!

 

[Brian Moore]

Nice set, Chris. Did you have to pay a quarter for that first one? (Seems only fair.)

 

[Hamish Gill]

That's a lot of cash though eh ...
My "pro" scans are not that high res, and I get a little bit of dust on the last couple of frames ... But they are a good res ... £2 with a cd

 

[Hamish Gill]

Aaaahhhh I found a great rockwellism in that link

Even with the old D3 and D300, it's faster for me to select these in the menus than to jerk it around in raw. I never shoot raw, except once every six months to remind myself of what a pain it is, and how it looks the same or worse than JPG.

supurb!

 

[Paul Lange]

Discounting the scanning its a nice set Chris, well worth being shouted at I'd say.

Raw looks worse than Jpeg! So that's what I have been doing wrong all this time.

 

[Chris Dodkin]

That's a lot of cash though eh ...
My "pro" scans are not that high res, and I get a little bit of dust on the last couple of frames ... But they are a good res ... £2 with a cd

Bargain Hamish - they've been looking sharp

Not worth breaking out he home chemicals for two quid