First image from Hasselblad!
Mar 30, 2024 15:58:37 #
jim quist wrote:
Now you have me wanting to buy some 220 film and start using my old hasselblads.
My friend at TCR said to not get any 220 - that it can't be processed. I found that odd. But he should know. There's always 120.
Mar 30, 2024 16:01:04 #
UTMike wrote:
Great results, Kathy!
Thanks, Mike. If I could use my Nikon scanner, I'd love doing this. I think the Epson is a piece of junk!
Mar 30, 2024 17:35:51 #
Reuss Griffiths
Loc: Ravenna, Ohio
It's a great image but isn't the color, etc., a function of the film not the camera. Can you get a digital back for the Hasselblad and avoid all the dust issues with scanning the film, negatives or postives.
Mar 30, 2024 17:52:43 #
AzPicLady wrote:
On Wednesday I took the new Hasselblad with a roll... (show quote)
Fantastic set!!! Kathy
Mar 30, 2024 18:14:41 #
Reuss Griffiths wrote:
It's a great image but isn't the color, etc., a function of the film not the camera. Can you get a digital back for the Hasselblad and avoid all the dust issues with scanning the film, negatives or postives.
Bob Malarz had contrived a digital back for his Hasse. Not sure for this model. For the time being, I'm going to enjoy film. And you're right about the colour.
Mar 30, 2024 18:15:23 #
Mar 30, 2024 18:58:57 #
therwol
Loc: USA
AzPicLady wrote:
On Wednesday I took the new Hasselblad with a roll... (show quote)
It's a beautiful picture. I'm puzzled by your need to clean up dust spots on a newly scanned negative. If there is crud on the film, then you need to find a new place to develop your film. If you're not able to control dust getting on the film in the scanning process, then you need to work on a routine that discourages it, blower, light brush etc. The Staticmaster brushes are quite effective, but they've gotten really expensive and have a limited life before you have to replace them or the Polonium inside. Don't forget that dust on the glass of the scanner will be picked up as well. You might consider having the film developer scan the negatives for you, but results may vary, depending on who you use.
A TIFF of that size would be about normal for a 6x6 negative, especially if you're scanning to 16 bit depth (48 bit color).
Mar 30, 2024 19:24:26 #
Mar 30, 2024 19:44:04 #
therwol wrote:
It's a beautiful picture. I'm puzzled by your nee... (show quote)
The cost of having TCR do a scan of the size I want is prohibitive. That's why I fight with my scanner. I clean and clean and clean, but they are REALLY cruddy. I honestly think there's dust inside the scanner!
Mar 30, 2024 19:45:02 #
PAR4DCR wrote:
Yep, I think you have found a keeper Kathy!
Don
Don
Thanks, Don. If I continue to use it, I'm sure I'll really love it! I bought some B&W the other day, so we'll try that out some day, if I can find an appropriate subject.
Mar 30, 2024 21:32:10 #
Mar 30, 2024 21:34:04 #
Soxgizmo wrote:
Great shot. Yes your camera is a keeper.
Thanks. I hope the fellow who sold it sees how good it is!
Mar 30, 2024 21:47:36 #
Mar 30, 2024 22:53:52 #
SWFeral wrote:
You live in Arizona. Dust is built into everything. Beautiful photo.
Thank you. And that is so true. When we were showing horses, we called it Arizona talcum powder.
Mar 31, 2024 05:16:41 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.