Need your thoughts

Sam

I am posting this without any back story and want to know what ya'll think about it.

Thanks!!

sara505

I like the photo, but the grain in the sky is distracting.

sara505

Now that I've heard the back story and am looking at it with my glasses on, I like it a little more.

Stumblebum

I like the light, comp, and sense of mystery! Part of me thinks that if some character was in it, it would fill nicely. But then part of me thinks that emptiness is creating mystery.....making you think where we are headed.....what is next!
I like it!

Juano

Stumblebum wrote: »

I like the light, comp, and sense of mystery! Part of me thinks that if some character was in it, it would fill nicely. But then part of me thinks that emptiness is creating mystery.....making you think where we are headed.....what is next!
I like it!

Good comment. I like the shot, but something is bothering me... I can't quite put my finger on it. But I like it and the PP too.

Sam

OK....the back story...................

Sara called and asked about various methods of scanning film negatives.

After our conversation I dug into a box of old 35mm film negatives from a motorcycle trip I made across America. I thought I would see how well my Canon f9000 scanner would do with negatives.

This was one of the first negatives and was a random pick. The camera was a simple 35mm film point and shoot. I was and am pleasantly surprised at how well the scan came out.

The image is a shot I took while George, my high school buddy, and I were getting ready to go fishing early in the morning on his boat in the Delaware Bay.

I am happy with the memories and find the old negatives and scanner might open up some new avenues to explore.

Sam

Stumblebum

Canon f9000! Is that top quality? Any recommendations? I have a giant container full of negatives.....none of which has a print as they got rained on long time ago......that would be fun exercise!

Juano

Wow it worked out beautifully!

Sam

Stumblebum wrote: »

Canon f9000! Is that top quality? Any recommendations? I have a giant container full of negatives.....none of which has a print as they got rained on long time ago......that would be fun exercise!

Taz,

No the Canon f9000 is an older scanner and only cost $200.00 new. I am very happy with it, but realize the negs I have are not top quality so the results I got on on the first try meet my needs. I would have to experiment to see what the difference is if I scan a GOOD neg using the highest setting optical setting of 9600dpi rather than the 2400dpi I used for this one.
If you have a ton to do I would recommend looking into one of the Epson dedicated negative scanners. A half decent one will run in the $900.00 plus range. Also look up wet scanning.

Sam

AlexShark

Stumblebum wrote: »

Canon f9000! Is that top quality? Any recommendations? I have a giant container full of negatives.....none of which has a print as they got rained on long time ago......that would be fun exercise!

I have Canon 9000F Mk II. It is good, reliable, and easy to use once you set up the preferences. The scan quality is OK. Good bang for the buck.

Problems:

1. It is slow. For the giant container you might consider paying the pro scan services.
2. It does not integrate very well with Lightroom (at least on Mac).

Sam

AlexShark wrote: »

I have Canon 9000F Mk II. It is good, reliable, and easy to use once you set up the preferences. The scan quality is OK. Good bang for the buck.

Problems:

1. It is slow. For the giant container you might consider paying the pro scan services.
2. It does not integrate very well with Lightroom (at least on Mac).

I don't use the scanner a lot so I just export to whatever folder I want then import into Light Room as a separate operation.

I personally would have an issue of sending out my negatives to a third party. I would rather take the time to do it myself and have control over the negatives.

Having your negatives scanned by a third party is not cheap ether.

I have been very happy with my scanner but wouldn't want to try scanning a large quantity of images or negatives.

Sam

Stumblebum

Sam wrote: »

Taz,

No the Canon f9000 is an older scanner and only cost $200.00 new. I am very happy with it, but realize the negs I have are not top quality so the results I got on on the first try meet my needs. I would have to experiment to see what the difference is if I scan a GOOD neg using the highest setting optical setting of 9600dpi rather than the 2400dpi I used for this one.
If you have a ton to do I would recommend looking into one of the Epson dedicated negative scanners. A half decent one will run in the $900.00 plus range. Also look up wet scanning.

Sam

Thanks Sam!! I needed that info! That is pretty hefty....900 bucks...I would have to budget for it! If you do scan something you like at higher resolution, kindly share!

AlexShark wrote: »

I have Canon 9000F Mk II. It is good, reliable, and easy to use once you set up the preferences. The scan quality is OK. Good bang for the buck.

Problems:

1. It is slow. For the giant container you might consider paying the pro scan services.
2. It does not integrate very well with Lightroom (at least on Mac).

Thanks Alex! I want LR to work on Mac in conjunction with scanner.

AlexShark

Stumblebum wrote: »

Thanks Alex! I want LR to work on Mac in conjunction with scanner.

The way I solve it:

The easiest for Canon s/w is to simply stick the scans in a folder. So I define this folder within Lightroom as a part of the catalogue. Then I scan a bunch and sync the folder within Lightroom. It works cool, just not as cool as I would have wanted to, like tethered camera, for example. But the #1 issue is the speed.

JonaBeth Russell

I love the image, including the little bird atop the dock post. Before reading the backstory, the only thing I could find that bothered me, if you will, was the slightly out of level horizon line. And with that said, it's not enough 'bother' to me to even warrant correcting. I've been shooting a lot of panoramic beach sessions lately, so I'm a little sensitive to horizon lines, that's all.

I dig the grain in the scan, too. Keep at it.