Photography
              "Thank you for visiting. This is our website library.
          Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above."







Sponsored Ads:


WHY YOU USE THE RIGHT FILM!

Pages : [1] 2

Kara
August 4th, 2004, 11:17 PM
Otherwise the pictures you take will end up with tons of grain and look like crap :lol: Oh how good it could have been :roll:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Karalee/landscapes/haybailsXYZ.jpg

I know Im just asking for it from you digiholics with this post. I can hear it already,

"If you had a digital camera film wouldnt be a problem"





Edited cos Im a dork and didnt resize it. Funny how it looks less grainy now.

Tim L. Walker
August 4th, 2004, 11:54 PM
"If you had a digital camera film wouldnt be a problem"

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 12:11 AM
Thanks for that Tim :P

lucian
August 5th, 2004, 12:51 AM
Kara:

Except for the graininess it looks fine. How about going into photoshop and adding a texture like canvas or using this for a watercolor.

Try that and see if that can enhance a pretty good landscape.

Tim L. Walker
August 5th, 2004, 01:21 AM
Yeah, watercolor would look awesome for this photograph. :D

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 01:25 AM
Ill give it a go but you guys know what Im like when it comes to photoshop :lol:

GerryDavid
August 5th, 2004, 01:29 AM
I know Im just asking for it from you digiholics with this post. I can hear it already

Ya know, if you had a digital.......... *smirks*

"If you had a digital camera film wouldnt be a problem"

Depending on what digital you got, if you boosted the iso you could get a picture like this or something, hehe.

Whats the iso of the film you used and what brand? It could have been the developers fault to for over developing or using the wrong chemicals for that brand. :0). Each brand has a special developer and most places like walmart or something uses just one since it would take to much time to change the chemicals all the time, not to mention costly.

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 01:36 AM
I had fuji superia 400 in my camera and didnt realise it. I had about 5 rolls of 100 in the fridge and one damn roll of 400 and I didnt bother to look :oops: - the worst thing is most of the shots on that roll were really good - save for the grain :roll:

GerryDavid
August 5th, 2004, 01:40 AM
Well fuji is a brand name, and you can usualy get away with 400 film, unless your cropping tight.

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 01:47 AM
It was near dark, I didnt do too much cropping - Im actually suprised all my pics came out considering it was 8.30 PM

Tim L. Walker
August 5th, 2004, 02:04 AM
How does the origianl look vs. the scanned image?

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 02:37 AM
I didnt get any prints, I just had them scanned and put on a kodak disk, ends up being a little bit cheaper, then if theres something I really want ill take it and have it printed.

Nothings gonna save it but a reshoot :lol:

RobW
August 5th, 2004, 02:43 AM
I've been using the Superia 400 for a couple night shots and they didn't have that much grain. Actually it's barely noticeable if at all on 4x6's

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 02:44 AM
I wonder if its me then :-? I was doin some bracketing - do you think that woulda made a difference with it?

RobW
August 5th, 2004, 02:48 AM
I doubt bracketing would make much of a diff in the graininess, unless maybe if it's overexposed or something.
My old Minolta doesn't do night shots well anyways, that damn mirror is too freakin heavy and shakes the whole camera :lol:

lucian
August 5th, 2004, 02:49 AM
Is this cropped? How much of the original negative is this?

The next question is the resolution. Did you chose the highest resolution available on the disk or did they just go with a lower res than Kodak?

Another thing you might try is FILTER>DESPECKLE. This may get rid of some of the grain but it will also soften the image.

Again I think you should try this image with watercolor or texture. You might be able to turn this into gold with a special effect like that.

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 02:53 AM
The res is just 72 dpi, and obviously a slight crop. It doesnt look as bad in photoshop :-? Im gonna go try that out tho lucian.

lucian
August 5th, 2004, 02:57 AM
When you crop, pick a size (i.e. 4x6) 2 300 dpi.

Then see how that looks. The scan they made for you should be at least 3 MP and if so 3MP should make a decent 8x10.

I seem to get better results from cropping than from resizing.

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 08:22 AM
I used the paint daub filter in PS and came back with this on the original image.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Karalee/landscapes/paintdaub.jpg

Did a slight color adjustment cos it looked a bit purple.

Tim L. Walker
August 5th, 2004, 08:59 AM
Hmmm... that's a little too water-colored... maybe try a painting effect?

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 09:03 AM
Watercolor dont like that image :( it comes out really dark, but I changed the original first one I posted - I didnt resize it properly :lol:

Tim L. Walker
August 5th, 2004, 09:06 AM
Hehe... try some other effects... there must be some cool things you can do with that one. ;)

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 09:23 AM
Rough pastels on texturised paper :-?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Karalee/landscapes/texturiser.jpg

The paints are not liking me.

Tim L. Walker
August 5th, 2004, 09:24 AM
I kinda like that one, actually! :D Maybe put a wooden-type border around it or something. ;)

Kara
August 5th, 2004, 09:27 AM
Yeah cos I KNOW how to do that :-?

Im a ps idiot remember :lol: anything I do in it is merely accident.






Sponsored Ads:


Xecuter 3 Mod Chip ||| Houston Sports Tickets ||| Buy Shares ||| Repair Bad Credit ||| Xbox Mod Chip