In a nutshell, I would say - scan old negs and transparencies but don’t bother will scanning 35mm film (B&W or colour) for new work - it’s a whole load of extra hard work for inferior results. If you really want to work with film, use at least 6cm x 7cm, then you start to get a chance of rivalling a D850 image.
2 Likes
From that point of view, the two key thoughts being “work” and “inferior results”, I now agree with you. For anything “serious”, I have changed my mind, or maybe I should say that you have convinced me that digital is more powerful, easier, faster, and will out-perform anything I might want to create with 35mm film. You win that discussion, and my “illusions” have turned out to be just that, “illusions”.
I have no desire to buy a new 6x7 camera. And starting to think that the D850 can outperform any camera I now own. I could buy a D850 body for $3,000. Or I could wait for the D880 with around 60 megapixels, coming out soon. Or I could get Nikon’s newest Z7 for $2,500 with almost 50 megapixels. A year later, they’ll all be replaced, who knows, maybe with 100 megapixels. I don’t want to play that game any more.
I feel that by far, my biggest limitation is ME, not my cameras. I’m learning from all of you, and improving, but it will probably take years to get even close.
In the meantime, I will probably continue to mess around with my film cameras, just for enjoyment, with no thoughts of out-performing my digital cameras. I’ve changed my mind there. I used to think film could achieve performance results as good as digital - not any more. But to me, they are still enjoyable to use.
I’m not sorry I bought the Plustek - I still have negatives and slides from most of my life, of things that no longer exist, which have been stuffed away in storage, and I’ve probably lost or misplaced a lot of them. With what I’ve learned here, I can bring them back to life, better than before, and the more I do that, the more I enjoy both the doing, and the results. That’s what this thread was about, and while I know I have a lot more to learn, I’m already enjoying some of my old photography, when there was no alternative to film.
Thanks! …but for a while, I’m going to concentrate on digital, and doing the best with what I’ve got.
@mikemyers I started to read this thread and thought of my own attempts 12 years ago. I wish I had gotten so many useful help like the posters here provided with so much patience, knowledge and cool hints. Like Joanna, I also found VueScan and Silverfast (which came with the V750 to me) rather complicated and preferred the more simple Epson Scan app. The only thing I could add: I never intended to do very great scans of each negative, I just wanted to see my archives on a big screen and then eventually get some professional scans of pictures important to me.
I stopped it for various reasons, biggest was: Seeing all my mistakes I made in the beginning of learning was tiring and also a bit depressing, so I found “do I really want to see all that failures and attempts again?” I preferred to improve my digital skills instead.
But lately I changed camera systems, so a Z 7 lies around unused. I remember using a Pentax K-m and an old Kodak Carousel to digitize my 135 transparencies. So I made a negative holder for my 120 b/w and few colour negative films
and digitized them with a Nikkor Micro 60/2.8, quicker and better than before.
Using DxO PL (and before Capture One) to do the edit from negative to positive with a couple of presets turned out to be also rather quick. I first was inspired by the “film digitizing adapter ES2” Nikon offers for the D850 (which has a negative reproduction mode, but only to get out JPGs). Useless for 120 film, but a good inspiration.
My suggestion to avoid becoming frustrated with “old sins” is to work counter-chronological. Going back from the youngest to the oldest also will show all mistakes, but since I got better, it was like going back the track of how (and sometimes why) I got better, I didn’t need to become impatient (when is the good stuff coming?). And could quit any time but still got “the good stuff”. 9200 images form 12 years is not that many for today’s proportions, but at that time I had to work longer for a nice print. It was worth the effort, I saw some images I couldn’t recognize on the contact-sheets. And I could do the panoramas I shot nearly 30 years ago and never found the time to enlarge the images, cut them precisely and glue them on a wooden board.
…which looks like it’s based on an old hard disk and some nicely machined metal parts…
I think I know what you mean, and understand, but for me it was like getting a second chance to improve on something I did so long ago. I started out thinking “why didn’t I…”, but that was replaced by a feeling that I was in a time machine, and could bring those images back to life, better than they were before. PL4 (and all the amazing help from people here) made a huge difference. I no longer feel like I’m merely transferring my old negative to a computer, I now feel like I’ve got an opportunity to re-adjust things, that I never was able to do so many years ago.
You must be a machinist - I wouldn’t have a clue how to build the things you’ve built! I watched lot of videos, and read a lot, and decided that for my 35mm negatives and slides, for $500 the Plustek scanner would allow me to do everything. I already had an Epson V500 PHOTO, but the Epson software never got updated for the new macOS 64-bit, so I was stuck until I found VueScan. I saw VueScan as a simple tool to digitize my old images, but thanks to people here, I learned there was a lot more to it.
Maybe you can post some of your results here? There must be a huge number of people reading this, but you’re one of the first who wanted to “jump in” and join us.
Exactomundo 
cast metal is a good base and not too hard to machine. Also, I found the analogy interesting: a hard drive, worn out after a couple of years and the films with 30-40 years keeping their information, readable without any electrical/digital power devices…
is a link to some of the images I still like.
You’re right, working on old negatives and knowing what we know today can be a very pleasant surprise. I never saw all my pictures on a 27" iMac with 5k Display 
Next project will be to go for the 135 films but for that my setting will change. Instead of Z 7 with 60 mm Macro I’ll go for an old X-T2 with a 65 mm Laowa Apo Macro. 24 MP are more than enough for 24×36 mm. And the negative holder will get a transport wheel 
What can I say but, Wow!!! Simply stupendous album.
Not to mention some of your other albums I also looked at. I see you like your architectural shots to be “squared up”. Something I tend to do, due to my background with view cameras with movements.
And I love the landscapes. I will have to go back and take a longer look.
Thank you very much for putting a smile in my face. 
I also used to “try a bit” with a Sinar of a friend and I retried lately with the Z 7 adapter to a Cambo Actus G but for more DoF I rather prefer focus stacking, although it’s limits. And the handling of this tiny FF body is just not the same than using a matte screen and a 4×5" film holder. Going digital, I prefer DxO’s ViewPoint.
My LF gear is getting heavier each year and high res digital is getting much more interesting and, yes, as long as I remember to frame to allow for ViewPoint manipulations, it’s a real winner.
That’s the point I’m working on as well…
This is a very old non-AI lens that I’ve owned for perhaps 20 years, maybe more. I’m hoping it might allow me to do some of the things that Joanna can do, maybe not so easily, with a LF camera. It should fit into my Nikon Df once I pivot the small lever out of the way so the lens can fit the camera. It was made to work on my film cameras, back in the days of the Nikon F, and F2. It might even fit on my F4. I know it would damage my D750, but it’s one of the lenses I hoped would be useful again once I bought the Df.
…and don’t forget either that computers make our lives easier!
I dunno, for me computers are making everything I do more complicated and confusing, and I’m always trying for that little bit more. Fortunately, it’s all enjoyable, but what is “better”, sitting in front of a monitor for a few hours, or going out for a walk or a hike during that time?
Which was “more/less” complicated - using my Leica M3 (aperture, shutter, focus) or using my digital cameras (more choices than I can even list here…). With the M3, everything got out of the way, and I spent my time concentrating on the PICTURE. With my Leica, and even more so, my Nikon, by the time I consider all the variables, it’s too late to even capture the picture!
I love these threads and have been reading every word for months now. You have brought up many good discussion points and your questions have lead to lots of good info that I didn’t know or thought about from experts like Joanna and others. Entertaining and very informative. Thanks to you all!
If you can bear with me, here are some random rants and thoughts related to a couple of things talked about in these threads, probably not too interesting to most people but maybe a few others over a certain age range will identify with them.
I so totally agree with your sentiments on modern equipment.
I grew up in a small south Georgia town where I started doing photography in high school mainly for the fun of it; I soon found a place on the photo staffs of the high school newspaper and annual, and as an occasional backup/helper to the one of the photographers (there were only two) of the local town newspaper who covered high school sports. Later when I went to Atlanta for my mechanical engineering degree I joined the photo staffs of the college newspaper and annual for most of my time there. A long while after all that I retired.
At the time I had them I just never thought about how easy it was to use the Nikon F, Nikkormat FTn, Pentax Spotmatic, and a couple of others I owned (not all at the same time, good cameras were too pricey for that). Those cameras had more than enough to get the job done for what I did, and they did it right now… every single camera function was easily accessible and understandable. Never missed any shots waiting for the Nikons to boot up, because they didn’t boot up; only the Spotmatic needed a little startup time so it wasn’t the main camera for important candid/action stuff. I never missed a shot because I couldn’t remember how to change the ASA on the meter or how to check the depth of field. On the older cameras it was easy to change any of those settings because all those buttons and dials were just there in the open ready to pick on. The user manuals that came with the cameras were interesting to read when the cameras were new but the cameras were so simple and easy to use that the manuals stayed home instead of in the camera bag. For me, the hardest part to learn was how to get the right exposure. But as time went by a decent light meter, knowledge of how to use it effectively, and enough experience made it not too difficult to do a pretty decent judgment by eye of the exposure for almost any outdoor and many indoor scenes. In short, the equipment itself just never got in the way, the same as you say about your Leicas.
Oh, how different it is nowadays! Although late model cameras have infinitely more features and great technical advances they are getting more and more difficult to use. And the “best” modern cameras are worst for that because they demand at least some level of constant attention be given to themselves that would be better spent on seeing and recording the pictures at hand. For instance, it’s very easy to make an adjustment in one place that upsets something in another place because so many of the functions are dependent, interrelated, or automatic, and at the time you may not even realize what changing one setting is doing to another one. Heaven help you if, in a dynamic situation, you need to change the shutter speed, or aperture, or ASA, or even the dumb old self timer (just try to find THAT on a Canon R5 without the manual!)… the picture may be gone before you get the camera set even if you do everything right. Going to totally manual mode can work well in certain specific situations but in doing so you lose some very vital automatic functions that work very well. Custom programming some of the buttons can theoretically help but for casual users those are even more details to remember and unless you use the damn thing every day it’s easy to forget some of the control subtleties, and then there’s no option but to whip the user manual out of the bag, again. I don’t have a photographic memory and can’t possibly memorize every word in the nearly inch thick user manual so I very often have to stop and fiddle with the camera to get it to do what I want it to do, and sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t… arrrggghhhhh frustrating.
On the positive side, I do like mirrorless cameras, a lot! For me the greatest advantage of them is the way the “better” ones can achieve and maintain an uncannily accurate critical focus, with zero focus error from lens-generated focus shift on zoom lenses, anywhere and all across the viewscreen even on fast moving subjects. Yay, no more zoom lens tuning, it was limited in effectiveness anyway.
Right now I don’t see a way out of the hostile usability morass that the more capable full frame mirrorless cameras have been put into. I said capable, not “fully featured.” What I want is a good, reliable, tough mirrorless camera with a great focusing system like the latest Sonys, Canons, and Nikons; a great exposure system; easy operation (easier than what they have now) of all the most common controls; ~50 mpixels or so for the nice smooth color, sharpness, and detail that come from that big of a sensor with a good lens; a selection of great optics from OEM and others like Sigma; and not too much else. Last year I bought a shiny new Sony Ar7-IV, a great camera but with horrible user ergonomics. Wrong move. After a few months of utter frustration I got rid of it and got a Canon R5; a little better but not much. I wonder if one of the new Nikons would be better? The Fujis are close from what I read but still not a bullseye. Progress can be so frustrating and expensive.
And about your latest passion, B&W. The fine sharpness of Panatomix-X, the freedom and latitude (and grain) of Tri-X, the smell of D-76 and Acufine, the way the hypo made your fingers slippery, the Omega enlarger in the bathroom (in the photolab at college), the joy of a print (B&W, of course) in the tray turning out better than you had pictured… I just may join the fray and ditch color for a while just to see how B&W photography works again! Some of the B&W photos posted here just would not have the same impact in color.
Enough. Been reading too much Thom Hogan and Roger Cicala.
Interesting
Hmmm. I never have to wait for my D810 to “boot up”, it’s available for use as quick as I can move my finger from the on/off switch to the shutter release. But I can understand where you’re coming from with the compacts and hybrids.
I have a way around that. Treat it like a film camera - choose your ISO for the day in the same way as you would shoot film. On the D810, I simply press the ISO button and turn the main command wheel and it’s set. After all, you wouldn’t change film for every shot, would you?
I always leave the white balance on 5600°K, because that is the colour temperature of daylight colour transparency film.
Until I got into LF photography, I had a Pentax ME Super, so I tend to use the D810 in the same way is that. After setting the ISO, set it to Aperture priority, usually f/10, centre-weighted metering and leave it there for most of the time.
If I need to do something “special” like high dynamic range or night-time shots, I will just pop it into manual mode and either use the inbuilt spot meter or a separate 1° spot meter.
I could say that I never use around 80-90% of what the menus offer for everyday stuff, only occasionally popping into them for things like multiple-exposure shots and, well, actually, not much else.
Only if you allow yourself to be seduced into using the gizmos and whizzbangs.
Only if you use the automatic stuff. One word - don’t!
I have an answer to that too. Don’t buy cameras that don’t have external buttons and don’t buy mirrorless because, from what I can see, they then shove a ton of complexity on the LED viewfinder screen and it gets as bad as the rear screen.
I really like my D810 - modern, powerful and as easy to use as my Pentax ME Super and I don’t even need to look at the rear screen.
Until I have a pressing need to create prints larger than 24" x 32", 36Mpx will do just fine. For on-screen viewing, you really only need 33Mpx for 8K screens anyway. If I want larger, I have a wonderful Ebony SV45Te, which gives 300Mpx scans from 4" x 5" film and prints up to 40" x 50" without any interpolation.
If you want further convincing, you could always come over to France for a few days for one of my courses and I’ll show you just how easy it can be to use a modern, high resolution camera 
I know, I know. But when you can shoot high resolution RAW files with more detail than 35mm film and work on them with no chemistry, in a lit room, it might not be so romantic but, at least, I don’t have to rearrange the bathroom before and after a print session 
And when did you last get a decent 24" x 30" print out of a 35mm neg? 
Have a look if you can rent a cam before buying into a new system. While you might not get to know all the very details, you’ll know quickly, if you can handle the cam to do what you imagine.
1 Like
That’s the advice I also give to people asking for “what’s the best camera?”. The little additional cost is nothing compared to the loss of selling the wrong decisions…
As for the romantic moments in the darkroom: I can live without them very well today, but that doesn’t mean I wish I never had experienced these endless sessions inmidst the smell of developer and fixer.
@Joanna, what is wrong with using Auto-ISO and enjoy the freedom to create with the more expressive parameters like shutter speed and aperture? Especially with a tool like DeepPrime at hand? 
Why would I want to limit my possibilities? Sure, some cameras are limiting a lot by just being an ergonomically disaster. Epic menus with bizarre logic (if logic at all was involved by developing them), not helpful. Custom settings without being able to name or label them else than U1, U2, C blabla, gosh, I need my little brain for more than a catalog of settings.
If it weren’t for my dad teaching showing me how to print an image at the age of 11, watching it appear out of the blank paper in the developer, well, let’s just say I owe him more than I think he could ever have imagined. It was a small beginning, with a glass plate contact printed, but 56 years later, I’m still in love with the art of photography and find myself in the fortunate position of teaching others at our local club photo, as well as small private workshops. Did I enjoy working in a darkroom? You bet! Do I still want to? Well, actually, no. But I still get an amazing thrill watching expectantly as a beautiful large print appears from my printer - especially the B&W ones on Baryta paper.
As I said, I’m still quite old school and like to be fully in control. Choosing the ISO according to the light is also something of a self-imposed discipline which helps keep my awareness of light. Don’t forget, I still also shoot 5" x 4" film, which is limited to 100 ISO. I have simple rule for LF photography - if it moves, it’s going to be blurred
I don’t limit my possibilities. If a shot requires higher ISO, I judge what’s required and use it - then reset it to a more sensible default.
I too detest menus and limit my visits to rare occasions like setting the date and time when the clocks change. Apart from that, as I’ve said before, I can use my camera without even looking at the rear screen.
If you want to add 63+21, you wrote it on a piece of paper if necessary, and did it in your head. To do it on a computer, you need to turn the computer on, let it finish booting, search for, or open the calculator app if you know where to find it, enter the numbers, and get the sum. Most of the time, the computer just gets in the way…
Again, a lot of time being wasted (?) on extra stuff, when the most time should go into composing your picture. I noticed that fifteen minutes ago, as I spent much of my time taking a photo of a lake, in thinking about the exposure, when I should have been most concerned with the composition.
Amen!!!
With multiple cameras, this is even worse!!
I can’t comment here - I do enjoy my Fuji X100f, but I’ve never held a modern Nikon mirrorless in my hands. Currently I enjoy optical viewfinders more than digital.
Joanna has me wondering if I would be better off going back to digital for B&W rather than shooting film. I’m sure she is right, but I still find film fascinating, even when it seems frustrating!
I have also been doing this. No problems yet.
Something else Joanna has got me doing, or in this case, not doing!
Agreed - I’m happy with frame lines, and perhaps an indicator about my exposure, but when there is so much stuff being shown in the viewfinder, you don’t concentrate on the most important thing, your image and composition.