[Leica] More with the Rolleiflex

[jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)]

Lluis,
Maybe the problem is not so much with the post processing, but the digital
medium itself? As I know for sure, your film output translates very well
into darkroom prints! I am also thinking of changing to Capture One because
of its superior handling of Fuji files, but the thought of learning,
in-depth, of another intricate, complex piece of software has really put me
off till now! :-)

My personal view is that digital output has a much smoother, and far more
controllable tonal curve. What is more, the RAW file is akin to unexposed
film that can be processed a million times for various outputs, making it
far more flexible, and forgiving of mistakes, than film. I am not a big fan
of the grungy, grainy look for its own sake - if that is the way the end
result turns out, so be it, but I probably am not going to add grain the
size of golfballs to achieve a "Tri X pushed to ASA 1600" look in my
digital files, in the mistaken impression that only that is true B&W. Both
are different mediums with different characteristics, and so be it. The
same caveat holds for digital printing vs darkroom printing as well.

That said, to each his own, the diversity of views, and civilized debate of
the same, is what makes it fun!

Cheers
Jayanand

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 3:37 AM, Lluis Ripoll via LUG <lug at leica-users.org>
wrote:

> Hi Jayanand
>
> Thanks for looing and for your comment, concerning your comment about the
> output I have to comment that my negatives have a correct density normally
> between 0,65 and 0,70 and they print well on the darkroom, the effect you
> comment could be done for
>
> a) Your and my Monitor differences: I don?t think so
> b) The scanning process: I use a cheap scanner Plustek and I adjust the
> contrast and brilliance individually for every negative, usually give a
> small curve of contrast
> c) The editing: I know you are an experienced and good photographer and
> you are not referring to the ?clinic? aspect of some of the digital
> pictures, even so they are always more ?clinic? than with film. As you know
> I mainly use Capture One V10 what is in my opinion better than LR, but also
> in his standard settings produce more detail or ?Presence? than LR, many
> times I have to decrease this up to -10% or -20%, when I edit the same
> picture with both there is a big difference, normally LR looks more
> ?clinic? and with smooth tones than CO, maybe this is the reason about the
> look you comment?. What do you think?
>
> Cheers
> Lluis
>
>
> > El 1 maig 2018, a les 4:39, Jayanand Govindaraj via LUG <
> lug at leica-users.org> va escriure:
> >
> > The second one for me. I still prefer the tones of your digital output to
> > your film stuff, which ends up on my monitor as being harsh and
> > contrasty....
> > Cheers
> > Jayanand
> >
> > On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Lluis Ripoll via LUG <
> lug at leica-users.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Similar dressed (I have added this one on the album of my already
> >> published project ?Double-Double?)
> >> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/Double-Double/
> >> 2018F040201.jpg.html>
> >>
> >> Three Ladies in Pl. Catalunya
> >> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/Medium+Format/
> >> 2018F040204.jpg.html>
> >>
> >> Alone in a Bar
> >> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/luisrq/Medium+Format/
> >> 2018F040210.jpg.html>
> >>
> >> Rolleiflex E, Zeiss Planar 2.8/80mm, Ilford FP4, Xtol Stock, the two
> first
> >> with Yellow Filter
> >>
> >> Thanks for looking, your c&c are welcome
> >>
> >> Saludos cordiales
> >> Lluis
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>