Short test

2009, Photography

Today I scanned some older slides, Fujifilm Sensia 100, taken with my Ricoh GR1. All slides are from 1999 (yeap, ten years old) and were taken in the Rocky Mountains, Canada.

Although the scans were done with a flatbed scanner, and unfortunately not really sharp, I was amazed by the dynamic range and editing possibilities in Lightroom. Although all photos were color slides I converted these to B&W. This certainly tastes for more.

Jasper, Alberta
Canada by Wouter Brandsma
Waterton Townsite, Alberta
Canada by Wouter Brandsma
Banff, Alberta
Canada by Wouter Brandsma
Waterton Townsite, Alberta
Canada by Wouter Brandsma
All photographs by Wouter Brandsma

And for those who are still interested in a good serious compact camera and want to read some really good user reviews. Check out this Ricoh GX200 review by Cristian Sorega.

24 thoughts on “Short test

  1. I cannot reproduce these test since I do not own a scanner… But I played around with the sharpness in my dp1 files and dialed it down to -0.8 in SPP. According to many users this would represent zero sharpness applied. This certainly gives to look that I recognize here and in the rangefinderfora for example. Interesting!

    So this could give you a completly new direction?

    I Have to search for a good lens/prime for my analogue nikon slr?

    I love the last picture, maybe becasue it is soft? Strange… but funny!

    1. I am sorry Ronald, but I deleted the last one. It was just too soft and unlike the original slide which has a lot of detail, clarity and tonal range.

      An older fixed lens rangefinder camera, good film, and a good film scanner certainly would make a very interesting idea in my opinion.

  2. DR is one of the strengths of film over digital format. Glad to see your old works. What scanner did you use for the photos? They’re really a bit soft but look OK. I believe the slides look great. I haven’t taken any pictures with reversal film for a long long time. After seeing your photos, I’d like to try reversal film again probably with my TC-1. Thanks for inspiring me.

    1. I agree that the DR is phenomenal. I used a Canon CanoScan LiDE 80 for the scanning since I have no better scanner around. But you are right, they are soft. I will try to rescan them soon.

      Instead of print film I might be looking for reversal film too. I hear and read great things about the Fujifilm Provia 400, in particular the 400X seems to be a great film. The cost of developing is still very low and they should scan really well.

  3. Great to see some film shots. DR should be even higher on negative film, right?! The first shot for me is a “typical” Wouter shot which I like very much. But the deers (?) in the garden are great, too! 🙂

    I actually asked my dad to send me my (his :)) good old Canon AE-1 to Colombia because I´m missing film already. Too bad I never get around to scan it, but I found a lab here in Cartagena that will do development and scanning for about 3 euros a roll. The quality isn´t that good, of course, but not THAT bad, either.

    1. That is right Fabian. Negative film has even more DR, especially in the highlights. I hope the weather improves so I can start experimenting with film again. Good luck with film too.

  4. Wouter,
    I keep sweet memories of my film-shooting times. I love rangefinders and shooting with a RD-1 or M8 would be a lovely experience (if it wasn´t for cost or for the “ugly”crop factor).

    For some time I was shooting with a lovely machine that can be bought in Ebay for peanuts: Canonet QL17GIII . It sports a 40mm 1.7 lens that is actually quite good, simple operation, durable construction and a fantastic viewfinder. The camera is actually quite small for a film camera and is a joy to use. Highly recommended low budget-high quality camera..Oh, and the thing is beautiful!!

    Cheers, Erik.

    1. You are right Erik. A Canon Canonet QL17GIII or a Yashica Electro 35 (45mm f1.7) seems the way to go. Both cameras have very fast lenses and seem the perfect Sigma DP2 😀 A Konica Hexar AF or Leica Minilux would be great too.

  5. Wouter, the Konica Hexar AF is a dream machine, and the lens in that beauty is stellar (some people compare it very favorably with the Leica Summicron). The only problem is price…It´s amazing how well this camera has managed to keep it´s resell value, the last time I checked a good clean unit went from 450 to 600$!!

  6. Oh, by the way, I love that first image, the tones and the texture in the sky are gorgeous! (specially in the highlights). The tonal range is what film is all about (even when this come from slides that are not famous precisely for their latitude…).

    I love the “compact/small sensor” look, it´s gritty result and the inherent limitations came very handy for enhancing mood in certain situations and types of shooting, but I do miss the results I had when shooting film. (I don´t miss the scanning though, it´s a royal pain in the A.) 😉


    1. The photograph of the hotel wasn’t taken in Banff, but in Waterton Lake National Park just north of Glacier NP nearby Montana. A great place by the way. I did get some shots from Lake Louise as well, which I might post soon.

      LOL, typical Wouterism. I like that.

  7. Dammit! I was sure it was the Fairmont in Banff. It looks just like that. With more pine trees. And a river. And not that same color. And much bigger. Besides that, exactly the same.

    1. The Fairmont is a great location with the Bow River below and the gorgeous mountain view. But you should see this hotel Nathalie. It has a magnificent view on a blue lake surrounded by beautiful mountains. The atmosphere is really nice there.

  8. i have created a monster — LOL! or should i say, recreated?

    the more i shoot digital, the more i want film… the depth, the tonality, the sensuality. film is tactile, emotional whereas so many people value digital for it’s sterile perfectness…. i’m not dissing digital and will continue shooting with my beloved R-D1 — i will forever be learning and experimenting. but but but — i want film as well, for all the reasons i love it. i see no reason to confine ourselves by one camera, one format.

    in the end, it’s the shot that counts. no matter how you got it or what you got it on.

    1. LOL. I dislike sterile perfectness. I need emotions too. I have restricted myself for so long with one camera, but it feels like a burden now. It is too retrictive and I need different goals. Maybe it is the winter blues, but I like the usage of the GR1. It is fun, I like the sound of the camera, and the time to wait for results.

      And the results can be so great and unlike anything digitally. Go Cam, go!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s