-
• #20227
Don't all have the same offset. Its only the medium format stuff with problems looking at it again, 35mm rolls are fine. Its almost like they scanned two images and badly overlapped them
2 Attachments
-
• #20228
So I emailed filmdev to ask/complain about the scanning issues. They reckon its a problem with their Frontier. They're going to rescan all the images (100+) on the Noritsu at medium resolution for free
-
• #20229
Yeah that definitely looks more like a scanner being nudged (or something up with the scanning) than camera shake.
-
• #20230
Good.
They do look quite trippy though
: ]
Like you need some special glasses to view them properly and then boom, they become 3D -
• #20231
Haha trippy but not in a good way! Would rather them get my photos right first time. Think I would rather save up and try Palm in future. Filmdev is cheap but I think that does show in the photos a lot of the time
-
• #20232
Filmdev is cheap but I think that does show in the photos a lot of the time
I think it's plain they don't do any checks on the scans.
Those scans shouldn't have gone out, regardless of price and turn around. -
• #20233
This isn't an isolated case for them either. I've had problems with their scans before, and have found lately while going through negatives I've had processed with them that there a quite a few with fine scratches on them.
-
• #20234
Much better scans received this morning. Happy with their customer service but would be nice if they could get it right first time. GW690, Portra 400 or Ektar
3 Attachments
-
• #20235
Now that first one does look like motion blur
:-P
-
• #20236
Haha just a bit. 45 minute exposure!
-
• #20237
Happy with their customer service but would be nice if they could get it right first time.
Yeah, they've been very good at trying to sort things when they've fucked up with mine previously. I tend to just send them C41 test rolls through unknown cameras now, they're cheap and fast so I can tell if there's any light leaks etc
These where from a test roll of C200 through a Pentax K1000 that someone donated to me, and they're actually the best quality scans I've had from filmdev.
3 Attachments
-
• #20238
Killer colours. Killer portrait.
-
• #20239
Has anyone got examples of Aperture scans? Looking to compare to medium scans I've had from Filmdev
-
• #20240
Is it possible that a camera body could cause slow aperture blades, not the lens? Got an ME Super and the aperture blades are super slow to close down on dry firing, but seems to be fine on my MV body. Real shame if this is the case as the viewfinder is super clean
-
• #20241
Lovely stuff, as mentioned amazing portrait!
-
• #20242
The Temperature House shot is superb
-
• #20243
Is it possible that a camera body could cause slow aperture blades, not the lens?
Yeah, sure.
See the little thing on the lens (A) which closes the aperture blades is moved by the little thingee in the camera (B) so in other words if (B) is sticky (A) won't move quickly /smoothly!
1 Attachment
-
• #20244
Cheers !
-
• #20245
Is it easily fixable? A case of firing the camera off a bunch of times? Real shame as I got a good deal on the body
-
• #20246
As @supersalad expertly demonstrated, it could be either. Should be easy to find out which one though by working the levers manually, both should snap back instantly. Should be a fair bit of resistance on the body lever also.
I'd still guess at it being gunk on the aperture blades in the lens causing problems, with perhaps the MV body lever having a bit more snap on stop down.
-
• #20247
Is it easily fixable? A case of firing the camera off a bunch of times? Real shame as I got a good deal on the body
If it's the lens its easy enough to get access to the aperture blades to nuke with zippo fluid if you want to try yourself. Need a lens spanner to unscrew the front and rear element groups.
-
• #20248
Ok I'll test the lens seperately and the ME body with a different lens when I'm home tonight. Thanks for the advice :)
-
• #20249
shame as I got a good deal on the body
can probably guess why now
: ] -
• #20250
eBay auction listed it as fully functioning, so I had the same info as every other punter bidding. Oh well, can always return if I can't sort it
This does not look like motion blur / slow shutter speed.
It rather looks like a double (flash) exposure - it's like two distinct images, superimposed, offset slightly.
Do all frames look like that (have the same offset)?
Could imagine this happening with multi-pass scanning.