Here are the Pictures from Blue Moon

Check out the difference between these two first images!! They came back from the same roll and the same lab, Blue Moon. Could this be the difference between shooting the 400H with proper exposure vs. underexposing the film? I have heard that you can overexpose, but never underexpose because you won't be able to save the image. I think this might be an example of the difference perhaps. The darker picture with icky color happened later in the session, so I don't think I compensated for losing the light perhaps.

Again, the scans looked better than the prints! Blue moon was insistent that their prints were better than the scans because they print from the negative instead of from the scan, but the scans looked better to me. I can't show you the prints here to compare, but they were very similar, but slightly dingier too.

These sets of three are a study in the scan (far left), the scan with my editing, and my digital equivalent. Even thought I have a lot of kinks to work out with this system, I am hopeful once again that in not too long of time, I can get the film to look amazing to me. Amazing enough to eventually switch over. I am really digging the film image I took with my tweaks applied to them. In the top set of three, I think the image is a little under exposed, so it was harder to get the colors to look right, maybe?

Here are my thoughts on exposure. So, the photographers I adore all overexpose their film and when I did it, it just looked to contrasty to me, I am liking this a little better. When I shoot so close to a proper exposure, though, it is very easy to underexpose if the light changes a little bit. In the first test shoot, I was shooting 1.5 stops over, and this one was right on. I think I might try overexposing .5 stops. It doesn't seem like that stop difference should make that big of a difference, but I think it might.

I just talked to Jake at Blue Moon

Do you like how all my posts start with "I just..."? Kind of funny. So, Jake from Blue Moon explained some things about the way the lab works there. I can tell that they take a lot of pride in their work and they process of the film. They print their proofs from the negatives and he explained that a lot of labs print proofs from the scan, which takes away from the look of film. That is very interesting. I wonder how Richards does it. They are definitely more expensive and actually they are very close in price with Richards. If I send them one roll of 36 exposure color neg film, it will cost about $32 (26+shipping which I think he said was 6)to get it developed, print proofs, scanned, and shipped back to me. At Richards, I am looking at 18 for the developing and scanning, 4 for the proofs and 9 for shipping, that totals $31. Richards is actually cheaper!! They take about twice as long processing, though.

I felt like Jake at Blue Moon was more approachable than Bill at Richards. He explained to me a lot of details about the process and invited to come to the lab since it is my first order and see the results and they could answer any questions that I have. Richard's is good about that too, it was just a good experience and I have a feeling I will probably go back and forth trying to figure out which lab I like better for a while.

I just sent some film to Blue Moon

Last evening, I shot a roll of fujifilm 400H with the new Canon 1v. While I was shooting, I used my digital as a light meter to tell me what settings would give my film camera a nice exposure. I shot the roll to expose properly instead of overexposing like I did with that last engagement session, so we will see how it turns out. If you would like to see what I got with my digital camera, the images are posted here:
http://www.missy-cochran.com/2009/06/09/jessi/

I just got my Canon 1v!

It has arrived in the mail! The film camera that is compatible with all of my EOS lenses! I just downloaded the manual at http://www.instructionsheets.com/mfg/c/canon/canon_eos_1v.pdf and I am a huge proponent of reading the manual. Read the manual, then ask questions ;) I also ordered a bunch of films to try out and will be posting my results on this blog. I will be taking it out for a test drive this evening since my little sister has offered to model for me.

I just met another local photographer pursuing film!

Ryan is attending the Film is Not Dead workshop I am going to this summer and we have been emailing each other trying to set up a time to get together and chat. His wife shoots weddings with him and he is just overflowing with excitement about growing his photography business. He is totally obsessive which I can understand perfectly! Their little family came over for dinner with us last night and we BBQ ed in the rain since our power went out.

Anyway, Ryan was telling me about a local lab is trying out called Blue Moon and they are a bit more expensive than the quick stop, but they seem like they would be willing to work with him to create a profile that is just for him with results he will love every time. It would be amazing to have a local resource like this since Richards is so far away and also more spendy than Blue Moon.

I just got my pictures back from Richard's Photo Lab and Didn't LOVE then!

I keep hearing all the amazing film photographers out there say that I just need to send a few rolls to Richard's Photo Lab and I will be blown away. I was hoping for just that and building it up in my mind for weeks waiting for the So. California lab to send me my proofs back. My husband won't buy my surprises for any occasion because I always build it up in my mind so much that it is always a let down when I actually get the gift. For the same reason, I didn't love the pictures. They were all right, but I was building up some magical result that is probably not very realistic. Yes, I did cry a little over the proofs that looked just a little to dingy to me. Now a week later, I can finally look at the CD they sent me of the scans. I actually like some of the scans, so I shouldn't complain any more. Also, I did call Richard's and talk to them a little while and now I feel really silly because it's the proofs I really really didn't like, but the scans are okay. Hmm. Here is the comparison between my digital work and the film images I took at the same session.

Let me know what you like better...

On this one, my film picture is blurry on the people and hard to compare with justice.

I think my digital skin tones are a little flat, but I am not totally digging the film either


I like the digital color better


I like the digital color better


I think my digital overall needs a little more red, and the film one is blurry again. I shot all the film with the Pentax 645 medium format camera I borrowed from my grandpa. All the film was shot with the Fujifilm 400H and shot aperture priority 2.8 and ISO set to 160. When I didn't love the proofs because they looked too contrasty and too saturated with color, Bill (from Richard's) suggested I shoot at ISO 400 instead of overexposing. He said that overexposing film always makes it more contrasty and more saturated.