Sometimes you get better results from scanning the print rather than trying to scan a negative, especially if you have a prosumer type flat bed scanner (as I do). I dust the prints with a swiffer before I scan them to get all the lint off.
For a good time: try this with the Holga. Set the film counter on 16 rather than 12 (on the back, make the arrow point at 16). You wiill get 16 exposures that are sort of montaged onto each other at the edges. Pretty cool. Hard to print sometimes though.
--shannon
On Nov 7, 2007, at 12:34 AM, B P wrote:
I don't think I'm good at film, Bob, but thank you. :) I think I'm clumsy and lucky. And sometimes when I'm reading everyone's posts here, I feel like I'm reading a foreign language! The fact that the Holga is rudimentary is probably why I like it. It's simple. You point, you shoot, you may or may not get something you like and if you don't, it's the camera's fault. I hadn't printed anything in a darkroom for nearly three years so that's why I'm so excited. I'm just happy to be taking long playful chemical baths in a darkroom again.
I smell like fixer! Yippie!
Oh, I decided to try another way of creating a digital image from film besides scanning so I took digital photos of the darkroom prints and posted those too. I don't like the way they look. You can see lint and the papers texture. For the life of me I don't remember how I used to get copies of my prints online. Maybe I just didn't care much if they looked as good as the prints. I don't remember. But how are you all creating digital images from your analog prints?
Becky Lynn
On 11/6/07, Bob Rosen <afterswift@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: I scanned a couple of the negatives from the roll of film that I put through the Holga and posted them at: http://picasaweb.google.com/peeperphotos --Becky Lynn
=================
Hi Becky,
You're so good at film, you even imposed a handicap on yourself (the rather rudimentary Holga) and came up with first rate B&W images. Four stars.
Best,
Bob
