AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

and I think it was sort of old. The colours were really hard to get right, and I'm not sure I'm there yet. I was testing out a Minolta 35MM that a friend gave me, and a Bronica ETRS that I have just purchased. I would like some feedback about the individual images - the colours, density, etc., and where the images are quite similar, your preference and why (if you will, please).

I'll admit to really liking all three of the images of the path, but only want to submit one. I've been waffling A LOT on which one to use.

THANKS!

Portra 160 in Bronica, early AM light with thin clouds

(Download)

About 20 minutes later, brighter sun, slightly different angle

(Download)

Ektar 100 in Minolta. Late morning

(Download)

Ektar 100 in Minolta. Slightly different view of path.

(Download)

Ektar 100 in Minolta. Shot at the same spot as the 3rd one, but with different settings and some minutes later (sunlight different).

(Download)

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

I envy you the Bronica ETRS I have an old Bronica S I still shoot sometimes.

First, on my monitor at 100% they all seem a little soft. On No 1 I like the saturated sky and water (I shoot Velvia 100). On No. 2 the cliffs take on beautiful color. No. 2 my choice of these.

No. 3 and 5 I see nothing wrong with colors and saturation seem appropriate. I'm just not sure what the purpose of the shots were except to test the film.

No.4 Wow what happened to the sky. The first thing I saw were those weird blue-green spots in the trees then the sky. Strange color from the same camera, lens and film that produced No. 3 and 5. Probably has something to do with age and storage of the film?

My choice is No. 2

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Thanks so much for the detailed comments. That's just the kind of feedback I was hoping for. I had a lot of trouble controlling the oranges on both films.

NJFrank Loc: New Jersey

Jack seemed to sum it up pretty well. I love two two.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Thank you, Frank. Nice to hear from you.

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

This is my second time to reply to your pictures. I hit the wrong button and lost all my comments.🤤

First lake scene has an unnatural blue color for an inland lake. When comparing to your second shot that for me looks exactly what I would expect especially in the foreground. The bright sun has allowed so much more detail in the mountains. I think it is spot on for a bright sunny day.

The path Photos
The first one has very natural colors, not over or under saturated. Something is going on in the upper right green leaves. I think they are in the foreground and out of focus but at the same time extremely bright and soft edges to almost a double image. Now that I think about it some more maybe wind shaking them as the shot was taken.
Second one is my favorite. I like the contrast and the bright golden leaves. My eyes take me to the sky in the upper left thinking it is over saturated blue but only that area. I am thinking this is SOC and not to be adjusted post process. If so I think it is very acceptable.
On the last shot while viewing on my computer using the download picture it looks like camera shake or wind shake. It's looking flat and missing contrast.

You can take this for what it's worth seeing I haven't shot film in 30 years and my opinion is without current film knowledge. You asked and thought if it helps good if not fine.
Jim

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Very nice. Though, I tend to agree with Curmudgeon on most of his comments.
--Bob

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Thank you, Jim. I really appreciate your response. Sorry you had to redo it!

First off, it's a river, not a lake. Don't know if that makes any difference or not. And the colour of the water in the first is pretty close to reality. I actually like better the mountain in the second and the water in the first, but can't have everything.

Re the path pics, there actually is a weirdism about the leaves. I have no clue! I was hoping someone would know what happened. I actually TRIED to correct the sky in the second path image, and that's the best I could do. You should have seen it before!

I'm learning that the film I've been hoarding in the fridge for all these years probably isn't worth loading. And I'm learning that my eyes probably aren't good enough to do the focusing! I don't recall if there was a breeze or not, but the 35mm camera had autofocus. Apparently it isn't the best??? It sure didn't focus as well as my Canons.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Thanks, Bob. I do appreciate your comment. I'm afraid that I'll have difficulty focusing with the Bronica. My eyes simply aren't that good any more. The best I got was "close but no cigar."

Cwilson341 Loc: Central Florida

Lovely series. I love the woodsy, natural feel of the path shots.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Thanks so much, Carol. That particular area is quite natural. The wisdom of the botanists at that arboretum is to allow the natural beauty to remain.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

On the images you are having color difficulties, try adjusting the magenta channel. Often that works for me when I'm editing scanned film - while tweaking magenta, suddenly all the colors just fall into place.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Thanks. I've sort of given up on them, thinking the film had gotten too old. It looked too yellow to me, so I was working that angle. I'll try the magenta.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

Bronica is a great choice and medium format is really fun to shoot. I had one for about a year; but sold it and bought a Hasselblad. The only real difference I noticed between the two cameras, is that the format for the Hasselblad is square. The Bronica produces a rectangular negative.

I really like the colors and the composition of the water and the cliff in no. 2

The sky is a bit strange in the forested path photos. I noticed that with some of my negatives. I thought that I had missed the exposure and tried too hard to fix it, which caused the colors to be strange. I think, however, that it has more to do with the film. I use Kodak Extar because of the colors. Are you doing your own developing? I think you are going to enjoy shooting film. It will never replace digital completely for me; but I do like the process.
Erich

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I'm looking forward to doing a lot more with this camera. I've used Ektar for decades. It shoots nicely and scans well.

Thanks for your kind words. I like the mountain better in the second. I like the water better in the first.