- This topic is empty.
To Process or not to Process ? That is the question . . .
-
Ok I have put 3 rolls of film through my holga.
The first roll was so, so . . . https://www.photographyireland.net/viewtopic.php?t=28133
the second roll was a bit of a disaster, inside the film chamber and the take up chamber
were two blocks of foam to keep a bit of tension on the film. One of them fell out when I was
loading the second roll and the other got wound into the film on the take up spool :lol: :lol: :lol:
but I didnt realise it untill I loaded the 3rd roll and found a big bump in the roll, so it got exposed,
dont know whether to spend €3.50 on developing or €8.95 on dev and printing ?anyway got the third roll develloped and I must say there is an improvement from the 1st but
I am of two minds as to whether I should give them a boost with the old digital processing?KODAK EKTACOLOUR 120 ISO160
Here is the original pic which I think is just lacking something, fine it came out of a holga,
So I added a grad . . .
Still not happy so I added a split filter . . .
Probably a bit much, mixed it up a bit . . . for me not bad!
I have been battling myself over and back all day wondering, should I be processing
the images like this? should they be left as they are? why so I even care just do what you want to do!Does everybody do a bit of boosting on the comp or in the darkroom?
well if you’re working off a scan, then you’re working off a digital file,
and you might as well have the same view about ‘anything goes’ as everyone else-I mentioned elsewhere about the benefits of using colour negs for b/w conversions within a digital workflow,
so you can look at a negative as a start off point for anything you want to achieve.Some digital effects enhance a picture,
others just point to themselves,
and become the picture,
so knowing what you want to do is as important as knowing how to experiment-Strange then, that with this picture, almost any version, all I want from it is just to be closer to that wonderful machine-
and no amount of processing will do that…In my opinion, of course-
Great post JB. Well said.
It’s a pretty good picture to begin with, but as Joseph said, being closer to the machine would be nice…however the mountain looks great as well, so I’d still like that included. As for the processing…some of them give it a ‘cartoony’ kind of look, to me at least. It looks great if you were going for something like that.
I think if you want to process and boost etc., fine…go for it. At the end of the day it’s just about making an image you like the look of.
Those bits of foam fell our of my Holga ages ago, don’t worry about it.
Sometimes the film can be a bit loose, that’s all.
What I’ve been doing is just deveoping the neg, which I then scan.
Some of hese scans get a fair bit of work and some I don’t go near.
Depends on the image really.
Some images benefit from the work, some don’t need it at all, and some suffer from being worked on.
I agree with bingbong, it’s all about creating a nice image, doesn’t matter how we get there really, the end product is all that matters.Thanks Guys.
What im doing at the moment is getting the
film developed and then scanned to disk at the lab
so yes my workflow is digital.What I like most about the holga images is the kind
of 70’s or 80’s feel to the images but I like to boost
them towards more aged colours, dont know if aged is the right word!I like to polaroid look too so kind of trying to achieve that to some point.
I did get closer shots of the machines on the 5D but with these
ones from the holga I wanted to capture the surroundings as weel as the
machine, also I liked the clutter of bits and bobs around, i think it tells
more of an atmosphere. but I do understand the need to get in closer.I think the second one of these is my favourite. I also think I like this better than any of the ones in the documentary section.
How does it look at a bigger size? Have you printed it?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
