CHECK OUT MY LOMOGRAPHY MAGAZINE INTERVIEW/REVIEW! www.lomography.com/magazine/348582-jamie-maldonados-portraits-scanned-with-the-digitaliza-plus-and-digitaliza-max ... So cool getting to do this!
@MattHooker2 жыл бұрын
this was a very helpful video. I'm planning on building a stand for mirrorless camera scanning, and was considering this system
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Awesome! I think building a stand is a smart idea. When I got my camera stand, it was about half the price they're selling for now. I think the best thing to do other than keeping it level is the ability to have the camera out far enough from the base of the riser that you can fit your light/scanning equipment under it well. If that makes enough sense ... ha. Thank you!
@Grumskiz25 күн бұрын
I got the digitaliza+ for camera scanning and I'm having mixed feelings about it. To me, the light source seems too weak. I have to crank up the ISO on my D810e quite high to be able to shoot at F/11 with reasonable shutter speeds. Despite the copystand, I'd prefer to not have to do long exposures for every frame. For my 35mm scans, I prop up the film holder onto a different light table, which works alright for me. For 120, unfortunately I can't do that, because holder and light source can't be separated. I also never use the 36x24mm frame mask. I need some unexposed border for my inversions anyway, and the frame mask just seemed to introduce heavy vignetting, though that might be user error...
@JamieMPhoto24 күн бұрын
The light definitely could be brighter, but I'd also consider shooting at f/8 or f/5.6 ... I find that it's usually ok to shoot up to half a second or so before sprocket hole light flares becomes an issue. Just have to use a release cable or self-timer. i started scanning with a D800 and the light table was I don't think much brighter than what at least came on the Digitaliza+ I tested. I have been basing my exposures off of the film rebate (another good reason to have it exposed) by getting a little density in it, usually at a point where it stops flashing as overexposed on the histogram? Also, I support shooting at f/8 or 5.6 because you'll be closer to the optimal sharpness of most lenses, which I think can often occur as soon as f/4?
@Grumskiz23 күн бұрын
@@JamieMPhoto I plan to shoot more 120 anyway, so I guess I'll have to try some more settings soon :)Technically yes, my lens is supposed to be at it's sharpest when set to F/5.6, but IIRC this also means more vignetting. I wanted to give myself some wiggle room for slight curvature in the negative, so I went with the F/11 suggestion I've seen in the NLP forums. And yes, I base all my settings on an unexposed section of film and work with the self timer and it's been working fine!
@MrMacroJesseSky2 жыл бұрын
I think this will be good for faster scans. I have a Nikon 8000 ED which will give the best scan quality possible at home, but it’s SLOW. Tried DSLR scanning, the colors were always off. This can be a great option for quick scans, and use the Nikon for bigger more important images
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
I had used a Coolscan ages ago, and that was my impression, too: Nice scans, but forever slow. Haha. Negative Lab Pro really cemented my belief that camera scanning is the best approach at home for most people. The DigitaLIZA is definitely great for speed+quality with versatility and a good price. Thank you for watching and commenting!
@Christian_from_Copenhagen2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for this, we have a vacation coming up and it feels like the perfect time to save on scans and try camera scanning at home. This setup seems very beginner-friendly (and affordable) compared to the alternatives. My only worry is that it'll actually work out and lead me to trying medium format (since medium format scans feel prohibitively expensive in my area) 😅
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Heh ... uh oh! I feel like medium format is still fairly affordable with the right choices. But yeah ... not sure about the situation you'd be trying to shoot it in. And this is an ideal beginner setup! You can put your camera on a tripod and get to work just about out of the box. You're welcome, and thank you for watching and commenting!!
@ilesjazz2 жыл бұрын
I really enjoy your videos (watched 3 today) . I'm no expert but you have a really distinctive style with your photographs. I would love to do film photography but I can't really afford it so I'll stick to my Panasonic tz70, which is enough for me. All the best, Richard.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Definitely do what works best for you! Film might be fun to do as an occasional treat, and black and white can be much cheaper. But definitely what matters most is just making photos you want to make, no matter what medium. Thank you for watching!!
@ilesjazz2 жыл бұрын
@@JamieMPhoto No problem, thanks for posting all these great videos. P.s. I do have an old canon film camera ( not a great one) but I'm not sure if it works. Maybe I'll try it one day.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
@@ilesjazz You're very welcome!! And it doesn't take much ... so I say give that camera a chance and go for it! I'll be glad to give any advice that might help.
@henri5952 жыл бұрын
Is this light source full spectrum? Every portable light table I've tested for scanning lacks a lot of color reproduction and it shows on scanned images.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
I'm going to guess it probably isn't full spectrum, but also my Negative Supply basic panel is supposed to be full spectrum and I didn't think to do a direct test with it. I did not notice unevenness or color cast, though, but I do wish I had better means to test for that. Thanks for bringing that up!
@maxencelemoine4190 Жыл бұрын
i'm a little concerned about the magnet on the 120 negatives. They are directly on the neg, that's right ? I want to try this device for my 6x12 but if the magnets touch the negatives and leave marks, it is a big no...
@JamieMPhoto Жыл бұрын
I saw no evidence of marks from the magnets, and they were not particularly powerful. I never left a negative in overnight, so maybe it would be different, but I don't think they pose any major risk unless maybe you try to drag the film through it closed.
@Shurkan22 жыл бұрын
Does anybody know the CRI score of the light panel?
@eyewandersfoto2 жыл бұрын
Great stuff man. Been with ya since that first vid. :) Not a bad little product they've come up with here. Though it appears to me that 6x9 is not a possibility??? That's unfortunate if so.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Well, awesome! Thank you!! It's been a journey? haha. And hmm ... yeah, it does look like 6x7 is the max size. You'd have to resort to stitching for 6x9, but at least it's a pretty good setup for making that relatively easy to align.
@eyewandersfoto2 жыл бұрын
@@JamieMPhoto You were the first vid I can ever remember watching that explained what you were doing well. I only experimented with it personally and kept my Pakon and flatbed. But when I caught wind of Negative Lab Pro (2 years later? I cant even remember) that's when I was "in". :D Re: 6x9... Yeah I suppose that's fine, but man hate stitching for everyday scans.... Though for a roll of 6x9 it's only 8-frames. I may pick this up just for the portability of the thing, and that base does indeed look intriguing. I'm using two different 3D printed carriers for both formats for several years now and they're fine but have their irritations/challenges.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
@@eyewandersfoto I can relate! I've used even more stuff than I put in that intro, too. ha ha. I do enjoy being able to scan 120 without stitching it, even though I do the Sony Pixel Shift thing ... but I can process those all at once, so it's not a major pain now that I figured that out. I do love the extra size/detail you can get from stitching, though ... but I consider it something like drum scanning: The regular scans are probably fine, but if you get something you really want to make huge, then stitch that. And thank you for the kind words! So glad I've been able to present things with a little clarity.
@eyewandersfoto2 жыл бұрын
@@JamieMPhoto For sure. Totally agree. Honestly I used to be a lot more particular but I've sorta trained myself to calm down and just blow through rolls so that I have decent web-OK scans, a high-quality proof sheet almost I guess (and I scan at lower res too)... then if there's something I really want to get a good one of I'll go back and get it specifically, making stitch if something I really want. I've just talked to a lot of folks that stitch medium format as par for the course, and I've gone the opposite direction. I even keep my basic quick scans in JPG nowadays after I invert. HERESY! Sorry not sorry. lol I just realized I got on great that way with the 3000x2000px output from the Pakon for most of a decade so essentially try to replicate that filesize and ease with my "everyday" workflow now. If nothing else the modularity and adaptability of cameras-scanning keeps proving itself again and again.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Wow, yeah, the process that works for you is what's best! I definitely stress less about saving things in JPG, especially since a larger JPG will almost certainly be nearly indistinguishable from a TIFF or PSD, at least to most people.
@SCervanters2 жыл бұрын
The Lomo Metropolis with flash is properly good. Question about the DigitaLIZA: Sometimes I work with rollei IR 400, and the negatives are always incrediblly thin. Do you think it will still roll through fairly easily, or would i be better off using a different technique? Love the video. Always great work. Shot #7 at 3:45. Very Very nice. Those colors with the sunflare chef's kiss*
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Thank you!! I really appreciate it.The thing negative should go through well, especially since that film I think dries extremely flat from my memory? The only time I had issues was with some extremely curly ultra expired film I developed for a friend. It was both thicker and naturally looped tightly. I was still able to coax it through and could probably do so faster now. I hope that helps!
@pitmanra2 жыл бұрын
The usual use of carnival is for night shots, what with all the lights. Here you changed things up and made good use of golden hour.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Thank you! I really want to find an ultra bright carnival that's lit up at blue hour ... I'll definitely keep trying.
@blabla123452002 жыл бұрын
what an informative video! some of the scans had a rather noticable colour cast. i think it worked in your case but it's something I like to avoid myself. do you think this colour cast was to do with your developing process or perhaps the CRI of the digitaliza backlight?
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
Hey, thank you! I actually think the cast was a lot of bouncing light in the corner of that handball court. I was shooting a flash and the light was pretty intense, too. Her skirt was not only stark orange, but also very reflective. The light itself is quite neutral, though I don't really know its CRI rating. I probably could have corrected it with a bit more work, but I usually only go so far for video edits since I feel like most views wind up the size of postage stamps or with the quality of mashed potatoes on other connections. ha ha.
@blabla123452002 жыл бұрын
@@JamieMPhoto thanks for the info! It might just be down to the lighting & gold 200. I've found gold 200 to have some cyan cast in the highlights when shot with flash. I'd really like to see someone use one of those CRI checking devices on the Digitaliza+ as Lomography doesn't publish the numbers.
@JamieMPhoto2 жыл бұрын
@@blabla12345200 That would be interesting! I'd definitely want to test it in more that spot since there was so much light bouncing around. I need to get some devices like that ...