Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Hi all UHH members.

I just pulled my old Pentax K1000 camera off the shelf and have decided to try shooting some landscape with it. I am thinking of using the Kodak Ektar 100 film. This is sort of a science project for me. I will be taking the exact same landscape photo with my Canon digital just to see the difference. Fun Fun Fun. Nothing like a good science project.

My real question is how is this film developed and if I get a good photo, how do I get maybe an 11x 14 or so for my wall? I only remember the old days I would get a photo to put in an album.

So any and all suggestions are welcome.

Thanks
Keith S

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

For development of Ektar color print film, you might contact TheDarkrom.com in San Clemente, CA. They have done very good work for me.

jmccl Loc: Western Shore of Utah Lake

www.thedarkroom.com can do it for you.

Keith S Loc: Federal Way, Wa

Thanks, I will look that up.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Whether Darkroom or another source, get their high-quality / high-resolution scan that provides megapixel JPEG files that rival the output of your digital camera. Costs more, of course ...

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Drive over to Moonphoto in Seattle. That film processing lab has a fantastic reputation, and it is near you. Forget the Darkroom... their services are rather expensive, plus you will have to deal with shipping.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

That’s a good time to be selective. Get a lower resolution scan (or just 4x6 prints) of the roll and pick the best images for the high quality scan.

Shutterbug57

I use www.thedarkroom.com and get their best scans. It’s $9/roll, but the quality is great and no dust. If you want them to print them, they will or you can on an inkjet (from the scans) or darkroom (from the negs).

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

People are suggesting getting the negs scanned, but I think a true comparison of film vs. digital would be getting darkroom prints from the film to compare with digital prints from the digital camera.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Why you want to do this baffles me. I loved film and the darkroom but except for many fond memories and the great education they gave me, digital is so much better. Let us suppose for a moment that you decide film gives a better result by whatever criteria you have, are you really willing to drop digital and go back to film?

Contrary to one suggestion, I would not scan a print or a negative. If you shoot film, then print film. Otherwise, your interpretation of the results will be frustratingly ambiguous.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

And that's cool.




For you and that depends on your criteria for evaluating what is better, others have different criteria and come to the opposite conclusion.



Did this several years ago and have never been happier. I've saved THOUSANDS of dollars by not having G.A.S. like I did (and see folks do) by "moving up" to the next digital box AND bonus...I have more fun and like the results more than digital.



I do agree. Get Moon Camera to do a proof sheet of the negs and then have a few prints made of the good ones.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

This is the answer.


They do processing and real wet prints.

Largobob

Let me take a whack at that one, abc1234. I am an advanced hobbiest who shoots mostly digital (D500 and D810) with top quality FX glass. I also recently purchased two Zenza Bronica GS-1, 6x7 medium format cameras, with a full set of their original 'PG' lenses, grips, speed light, and accessories. You ask why? Because it is gratifying and they produce incredible images. In it's day, Bronica's were used by many professionals. There is nothing quite like shooting film to put one on their best photographic behavior. No burst mode...no pixel peeping or LCD screen review...no autofocus, no advanced metering, and no image stabilization. You can't 'spray and pray.' You either get it right or not. Understanding proper photographic technique greatly increases the likelihood of a pleasing image. It isn't the convenient road to take. Sorta like choosing to smoke a pipe, I guess.

Good quality film is readily available. I send my exposed rolls to 'TheDarkroom' for processing and scanning. I get the negatives back, AND a scan of those negatives on CD....generally within a week. I also have and use an Epson V600 scanner, which produces amazing digital conversions of my film images. So, now I can choose to print from the negative the old fashioned way... or I can take the digital images into my favorite post processing software and modify them to my heart's content. Wow...what new opportunities !

Anywho...I understand the 'itch' to shoot film. I hope Keith S. pursues his passage back into the world of film as well.

Shutterbug57

Different strokes ... for me, I only moved from film to digital for volume/work flow reasons. When my kids were playing sports, I was the team photog/web master. Digital was the only real option, so I went that way (D70s & D200). I currently have nice digital gear - D500 & X-T2 with related lenses. I still prefer to shoot my F100 or M645. The difference, for me, is shooting a camera versus shooting a computer. I find that when I am shooting digital the convenience of having too much info, especially with the EVF, let’s me be lazy. The M645 is manual everything. If I get the shot, it’s because I thought through all the aspects and made decisions. If I am looking at a histogram in the WYSIWYG EVF, while that is convenient, it takes away some of the ownership of the result. Chimping with a DSLR is much the same.



“So much better” is a subjective assessment. For you it may be so while for others, not so much. If a digital-only workflow floats your boat, great. Other’s boats may float differently.



Why does this have to be a binary choice? I shoot digital, hybrid (film & scan) and full darkroom. Which I chose has to do with what is being shot and the result I am looking for.



I am not sure why what you would do necessarily dictates what others should do. You don’t want a hybrid work flow, ok, don’t use one. I’m fine with that. There are times where such a workflow make sense to others. If it’s all about the final image, who cares how you get there? I agree that if you are trying to figure out the darkroom, comparing a scanned & processed image can be frustrating, but then again, if that is your vision, having such a print on the darkroom wall gives you a bogey and challenges you to figure out how to get there.

In the end, shoot what you like and process the images how you like. Heck, some folks even shoot digital and print in the darkroom.

Bobby123

If you ship your film for processing, be careful of X-rays. It used to be that FedEx X-rayed whenever they felt like it and UPS did not. I'm not sure of the current status.