can't belive is film

[EastCoastHucker]

Hi..
FINALLY I'm satisfied with the result of film on a CD.
I took this roll to be develop at B&H and than took the negatives to CVS (yes, CVS) and AMAZINGLY the results were VERY GOOD.
Took them with my Nikon F90X 200iso film (don't remember the set up but most likely the A. was 8)
This two photos are 100% untouched.
Comments all ways welcome.

[Greg McCary]

That looks much better..
Greg

[livin4lax09]

very nice, except for that one white spot on the second photo.

[SmartWombat]

two white spots

[Ronnoco]

two white spots

4 plus white spots.

Ronnoco

[rzozaya1969]

4 plus white spots.

Ronnoco

what white spots???? that's your mouse pointer over the pic

[Mr Yuck]

How do you see 4 white spots? I only see 2 on image #2.


#1 is my favorite. Excellentfully done. (Yes I said Excellentfully)

[mpreece]

Nice! Like the 1st one the best.

[starriderrick]

The first one is sweet. :O)

[GB1]

They kick butt. I wonder if there is anything to the fact tha they were shot on film vs digital?

GB

[OmahaAdam]

They kick butt. I wonder if there is anything to the fact tha they were shot on film vs digital?

GB

Anymore, at least around Omaha, its getting hard to make a comparison. Took in a roll of 120 b&w to a local lab - the negatives were developed then scanned and printed, making the on-paper comparison uncomparable to a digital photo printed out.

In this case I don't think there is anything to the fact that they were shot on film since we're seeing digital results which are only as good as the scanner. The only thing to be pointed out would be the nuances of the film used, ie greens in Velvia 50, versus the lack of those nuances with digital.

[OmahaAdam]

I should add that I like both images. The veins with the leaf make the first shot for me. Though its a neat illusion in the underwater shrubbery where there's no water glare - is that an unintentional self portrait? Too bad the roof peak of the structure in the second photo is a hot spot. The texture of the rest of it is lovely

[milhouse]

Both photos are neat but the top one is my favorite. You manage to catch the flow of water over the leaf perfectly. It is very interesting. And what a difference with the processing from your other pictures using CVS.

My super market has a film drop-off processing center. Besides their labs, there is a send to Kodak Processing and Kodak CD option. Not that there’s anything wrong with what you have except a few white spots that are easily removed, but if there is a weak point along your whole processing/scanning now, it would still be using CVS for any portion. Their equipment is just not up to and maintained to professional photographers standards.

[almo]

Hi..
FINALLY I'm satisfied with the result of film on a CD.
I took this roll to be develop at B&H and than took the negatives to CVS (yes, CVS) and AMAZINGLY the results were VERY GOOD.
Took them with my Nikon F90X 200iso film (don't remember the set up but most likely the A. was 8)
This two photos are 100% untouched.
Comments all ways welcome.

This just goes to show that film is still awesome. I just wish it was not such a hassle.

[trog100]

very nice.. more so the first one..

trog