Punjab part 2 – with the Contax G2 and 3 Film selection By Ibraar Hussain

46 Comments

1. wonderful portraits, and the colour from slide film is still unmatched – I’ve gone digital for the high-iso etc but still love to see chrome getting used, good on you. thanks for sharing!

2. Bring on those Rolleiflex photos with the Rollei film ! Process some yourself and get the rest done professionally . Cant wait !

   • I’ve done em all myself! Don’t use a lab to do BW. 🙂

3. Thanks guys for the comments and critique – much appreciated.
   A few points.

   The Astia has indeed blown out – it was an out of date film and it couldn’t handle the strong light – I was let down by it as having shot Kodak E100vs I expected Astia to have less contrast and perhaps some more tolerance – but it didn’t and There is a colour cast too.
   Viewers can check out my other submissions for examples of E100vs (and some Velvia).

   The Silvermax with Rodinal. It’s a bit ‘grey’ and light but I pride myself on being able to express the whole range of values from 0 to X on all my BW work, which is evident here.
   I didn’t want to increase contrast or burn in parts too much as detail would’ve been lost eg on the serving girl and the old gent. If you check my normal film stuff you’ll notice the results are more pleasing there.

   Some faces have blown out with too much contrast but that’s the fault of the Orange filter I experimented with and not the film. Don’t see any more blow outs, I’ve intentionally dodged and lightened some backgrounds to make the subject stand out.

   The Ektar, sure people have superb results and with the correct profiles things would be easier – but it’s all too much effort for me, I prefer my Ektachrome e100vs and as you can see from my last years Punjab and other articles here I can use it effectively,
   I’m not keen on scanning C41 – in my previous galleries I managed to get some good results with Agfa Ultra 50 and 100 which are C41 but seemed to be easier to scan!!!!! Of course I also had the lab scan some.

   The 90 G Sonnar is a superb lens and used carefully and not wide open the results tend to be more nailed with the G2.
   I however prefer the 45 Planar and my results with it have been far more pleasing and regular so will stick to old faithful next time.

   Overall the Ektar and Astia took me out of my comfort zone and I was able to experience and enjoy these new films. The Silvermax was also an experience and is in itself not as pleasing as what I’m used to, I’m sure Adox own Silvermax developer would’ve improved things.
   And the use of the 90 was also part of the experience and learning curve here and an enjoyable experience with some very pleasing results (when focussed).

   Ultimately most of these are snaps – bar the portrait of the old gent which I arranged and it’s all part of the fun I have with photography- ( travel, subjects, compositions, technique, equipment, gear and processing ) and I always like learning from others here along with trying to inspire others.

   I use Vuescan with my 35mm and have never used Silverfast.

   Thanks again, next up I will be sending Steve some BW Rolleiflex photos shot with tried and tested Rollei Retro 400s and first time for me Rollei Pan 25 which has given me a vital lesson in technique.

   • Just ti add.
     It does take guts to submit pictures to this website, and by submitting below par pictures one must then be prepared to face criticism.
     I want you to know that the criticism has been extremely positive and enlightening.

     I will give Ektar another go, and will try Portra again.
     I need to get to grips with scanniong and to be able to do it properly – I think scanning is tedious and if not quick and effortless I;d rather shoot Digital!

     The G90 is a superb lens and will try it again paying more attention to the focus area – but will try stopping down (though I must admit I will most likely shoot the majority with either the 45 or 21 as usual).

     And I haven’t been too happy with the BW results – too flat and ‘grey’ – I think I should stick to Film I know how to shoot and develop properly, but I will try some different Adox and Efke Film in the future – it’s all part of the fun!

     Thanks again

     • I would like to ask, “What are you saying with these images?” Just what exactly should we be seeing because the stop and stare at my camera approach just isn’t telling me anything about them or you as a photographer. Are they meant to be unique and unusual because to any seasoned traveler they aren’t. You stop them or ask to film them, you make an image and then you spend many posts discussing scanners and film. How about intent. Let’s talk about why we are looking at these people. What informs my opinion about them or these images? Poor technique aside, I just don’t find them to be that interesting among all the possibilities available in such a fascinating country. Portraits should convey more then just a subjects appearance, they can also illustrate class, social status, lifestyles, economics, humor, passions and love. These folks just seem ok with being filmed but what were they doing before you met them and how are these stronger than the life they were living before you arrived. I guess I mean to say they have been removed from their daily context and I have to wonder what life was like there for them before we photographers paused them.
       Cheers

       • Thanks man.
         The thing about photography and each individual’s sets and style – one either likes it or is indifferent or dislikes it. You fall into the latter 🙂
         What are these
         What an I “saying”?
         Nothing !
         These are “portraits” of people from the punjab. They’re obviously from there or thereabouts, and one can grasp something about them by just looking them in their face or eye at their environment or clothing. These aren’t ‘street’ pictures, they took a lot of time and effort to ask them for permission, if I had candidly ‘snapped’ they would’ve beat the fuck out of me for being rude for taking pictures of their women and for being a sneak. One has to be careful in such places. And I’d love to see you try to take pictures in Pakistan.
         Anyway these pictures aren’t great and yes some technique is off especially exposing for the slide film.
         I’ve more or less explained that these were tests of the film along with everything else.
         I’m curious to know what other technique here is poor?
         Thanks.

       • Well, Martin, as expected, like my winning lottery ticket your response didn’t arrive.
         Typical gutter snipe, smart arsed comments followed by the obligatory vanishing trick. DO me a favour mate, next time put a sock in it

4. Have you tried a professional lab for scanning your Ektar films? There are good labs in US and Europe. They all use Fuji Frontier or Noritsu scanners. These machines are made to maximize output rather than quality (especially resolution is bad with 35 mm film), but they deliver really nice, deep and saturated colors with Ektar films. You can’t really compare with what you get from a scanner like the Plustek.

   It is of course possible to edit each image scanned by a home scanner and obtain similar colors, but it is a quite time consuming job.

   some references from this website:

   http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/03/12/how-to-shoot-kodak-ektar-100-film-by-marlon-richardson/

   http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/12/19/friday-film-the-mamiya-645-pro-various-lenses-and-films-by-fiftyasa/

   http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/05/09/film-friday-incredible-india-by-fiftyasa/

5. Good set of images, looks like you had good time. Why haven’t you used Portra (160 or 400) if your primary target was portraits? I agree that ektar is not the best for people, usually I get skin face to red, but some people adopt to it somehow.

   • Thanks man.
     I know Portra to be superb for Portraits. But I also wanted some of that rich colour and warmth I get with Ektachrome and thought Ektar may give me it – but it didn’t.

     • Each of us have favourites. I never (yet :)) tried slide film. For me – Portra 400 has colour punch if exposed / developed / scanned correctly. Most important thing is that you enjoy what you do.

6. Ibraar,
   It’s not the 90mm lens which is a problem, it’s the way that the CAMERA deals with it! The lens itself is great. As you know, there’s only a tiny area in the viewfinder which the camera assesses, and if there are no really contrasty edges within that teeny central area, then the camera‘s autofocus can’t clearly decide how far to extend or retract the lens.
   Before using that 90mm I practise with no film in the camera – honing my technique to be sure that I get enough contrast in that central focusing area. Then, afterwards, I don’t get problems when I’m shooting it for real.

   And, with an ..autofocus or manual focus.. adaptor on a Sony A7(s), that 90mm is absolutely wonderful! ..All of those Contax/Zeiss lenses are (especially the superwide 21mm on the A7S).

   Delightful pictures as always, though (to me) it’s an utter shame to use black-&-white and to lose all that colour!

   • Thanks David, really appreciate your advice as always man.
     I was quite careful with looking at the range within the VF but even so focus was off. I took some other pictures where the wrong eye was in focus or the chin!!!! I guess stopped down it’s better.

     I can imagine the lens is stellar with the Sony A7! At least focus peak lets you get it right!

     • I woke up in the middle of the night thinking “..he can’t get satisfactory C41 (colour negative) images, and he buys his film at West End Cameras..”

       I gave up having my film processed there – although it’s a nice little shop, with a fair selection of film and equipment, and charming people – because the results just look (..in prints and scans..) so dull and sludgy, whereas the identical film (“Lomography” ISO 800 ..repackaged Kodak, I think ..all bought from the same source, but not West End Cameras) looks so sparklingly brilliant when processed at other minilabs. So – I don’t want to libel them, but I’ve had arguments with them about the processing – it may be that they’ve used old or exhausted chemicals ..I mean, why would they fill up with new chemicals if they don’t have much throughput?

       Maybe you’ve had yours processed at West End ..or perhaps you go somewhere else for processing. But I’ve had results – from the same film – processed in Munich, in some little town in Italy, in Graz in Austria – and they’re all 200% better than W E Cameras’ results. And it’s not simply their scanning: even if I re-scan their processed film with an Olympus or Plustek OpticFilm scanner, everything still looks dull and muddy.

       I’ve just sent a roll to Nik & Trick at Folkestone ( http://ntphotoworks.com ) and I’ll let you know if that turns out well or not.

       But minicabs (“minicabs”? ..minilabs – darn this spell-checker!) are not all the same, and it’s well worth trying several, to compare one against another, till you find a good processor who delivers great results. (With digital, of course, one has no-one to blame but oneself!)

       • haha!! No no, I haven’t ever used WEC for processing. I use Forest Photographic in Walthamstow and they’re pretty good.
         But thing is I can’t compare them to elsewhere as the last time I had any film developed from somewhere else was when i used to use FujiFIlm’s own lab in Leeds (mail order) but I mostly shoot Slides (I process the BW myself).
         The negatives look alright, it’s just scanning which is a problem – some scans are also strange with wht I can only describe as ‘spotting’ as if a layer of emulsion has been chipped away – a problem with the lab perhaps.

         Do let us know how you get on with nick and trick too!

         And do you have a website or flickr perhap?

         • “..Do let us know how you get on with nick and trick too!..”

           It didn’t go well with Nik&Trick. I rang them to find out how to pay, and the phone rang and rang. I eventually spoke to Trick (Richard) who said they’d ring back and ask for a credit card number when they’d got the film. I sent it ‘signed for’ – as that’s what they insist you pay for as the return postage.

           Not having had a phone call four days after they’d received it, I rang again to ask how long it’d take to process, and if they wanted my card number. No reply. And no reply, no reply and no reply.

           I emailed them to ask how long, and if they wanted my card number, suggesting that they got an phone answering machine, that I would be happy to send them a really good one, and that this wasn’t really the ‘customer friendly postal service’ which they advertised.

           Whoops! Nikki replied that now (..sulk, sulk..) they weren’t going to process my film, as my email had upset her, she was going to post it right back to me, and I should take my business elsewhere!

           I tried to persuade her to process it, as she’d got it there to hand, but although she “would take on board” my comments, and “..we do take on board that perhaps we should be more upfront about timescales..” she was adamant that she was posting it back, and wouldn’t process it.

           It seems – to me – that their outfit is more of a hobby than a proper business (..they don’t have a processing machine, apparently, and do it all by hand, and while doing that they can’t answer the phone which is upstairs, as they do their processing downstairs..) ..so there’s my result of trying Nik & Trick. They went into a ..er.. “huff” and a tantrum because I said that I’d heard nothing from them and they might consider installing an answering machine.

           But, as the Americans say, “your mileage may vary”.

       • We-ell, I’ve replied to me, instead of to you, Ibraar, to prevent this column getting too narrow and unreadable!

         I’ve just hauled my Plustek OpticFilm 7600i scanner out of my workroom to do a couple of scans; one of some C41 colour film, and one of an old Kodachrome slide – using (a) Vuescan ..nice and simple, looks like a Mac program, great results.. and (b) Silverfast v8.5 ..terribly complex with all sorts of tweaks and options, looks like a PC program, should give great results, but (even with the built-in explanatory videos) rather longwinded to use.

         Two programs; same scanner; completely different C41 (negative film) results: the Silverfast scan looks very blue, the Vuescan scan looks pretty good – and the original pic was taken indoors, under poor (tungsten?) lighting, with unknown-brand (outdoor) film. In other words, it needs diligence and repetition to tweak negative-film scan settings to get acceptable, and consistent, results ..especially with a variety of different films.

         The Kodachrome scanned easily and acceptably – as the characteristics of Kodachrome are well-known to all the scanner-software writers, of course!

         My colour vision is pretty weird (‘vivid’ green-blue turquoise looks pretty much grey to me, and I confuse some red and green), so what I see may not be what others see anyway. It generally helps, of course, to have a calibrated screen – I checked my Mac laptop screen a year or so ago with a Spyder, and it seemed to be spot-on to the Apple specs ..but a scanner (and printer) need to be set to the same specs, of course, to get consistent colour all thro’ the scan-to-screen-to-print process.

         No, I don’t have a Flickr page ..though I do have a SlickPic page, but ..I just see after checking a moment ago.. that I’ve never uploaded anything to it!

         I don’t post my pictures online for others to see and comment on, as I have no interest in what other people think of my pictures: unless I shoot specifically to illustrate an article, or to give technique examples to others, I take pictures simply for my own pleasure and delight, so I don’t give a hoot what other people think of them!

         I do make a Blurb books every now and then; every Christmas for my Beloved ..pics of where we’ve been, and what we’ve seen, and what we’ve done ..but many of them are, perhaps, “abstract”-ish ..in that my pics aren’t just straightforward reproductions of whatever’s in front of the lens, but I go for shapes, colour, feelings ..maybe I can upload a couple to SlickPic and link to them from here, to give you an idea.

         I’m making a Blurb book right this very week (190 photos) to send to my cousin, who’s in his eighties, and who introduced me to developing and printing back in 1954 (..the same year as the Leica M3 – which I got from my Beloved – was built; she gave it to me after her dad died ..it was his). The Blurb book is a “thank you” to Merton for introducing me to photography, and to show him how my style’s changed over the years ..to have become the somewhat odd photos which I shoot nowadays!

         I don’t know which Plustek you use, but mine has an infra-red (as well as visible) scan beam inside to search out and fix faults in film, and to auto-correct them (scratches, scrapes, missing emulsion) so if yours has that too, them I’m surprised that “..some scans are also strange with wht I can only describe as ‘spotting’ as if a layer of emulsion has been chipped away..” ..I’d have thought that the i/r scanning pass would have fixed that.

         Maybe I won’t post my pics to SlickPic but to some other domain of my own, and link to them from here, as I see no reason to grant someone else any rights to my photos. I’ll put up a few later today (if I have time) and I’ll then add a link to them (if Steve and Brandon allow) later today or tomorrow.

         I’m sorry I can’t help more, but I’ve found that acceptable results from C41 scanning involve trying, experimenting, adjusting, sticking with it, re-scanning, and making copious notes about which settings give the best results for which type of film (and shooting conditions), and that there is no -s-i-m-p-l-e- quick fix for getting perfect results every time ..though the simple Vuescan program comes fairly close – usually ..and for me!

         • OK – here are some pics.. http://www.edituk.com/Photos.html

         • David, thanks very much for your response, My Plustek is the cheapo one without the IR – so lacks the ability to do away with any defects or hair/dust. I will try the same Ektar in my Epson 4990 (very old now but a decent enough scanner I think).
           I only have a flickr to show my family and friends abroad stuff – it’s pretty bloated now so need to wipe most of the stuff off.
           I really shoot for my own pleasure, much the same as you, and it was nice seeing the montage of excellent photographs you linked! Thanks again!

7. mmm, perhaps the guilty is the scanner, I see several of them with the white balance toward the cold side despite they are taken in sunny days..
   Actually, speaking just about image quality and not composition, the Ektar ones look to my eyes much better than the Astia because the highlights are better conserved and the colors seems more faithful to reality, but that’s a subjective preference. The Jatt villager is my favorite portrait, quite natural and kind expression of the gentleman.

   • Thanks Francis. The guilty party is not the scanner but me!
     And the Astia are with a colour cast, being a film that is over 10 years out of date.

8. Hey Ibraar. Nice compositions as usual. I have to disagree with this statement:

   “The Kodak Ektar is a nightmare. I cannot understand why people use this stuff. In almost all respects it is Inferior to a decent E6 Slide film – the only reason to use this would be latitude and I had no need of such huge Dynamic Range. So this is the last time I will use this or any other C41 Colour Film (unless forced to)”

   I get outstanding results using C41 films, whether it is the cheapest (Fuji C200) to Portra 400. Ektar too!
   But they look nothing like the results that you obtained, so I have to think that something somewhere got messed up in your process. I too would have been really disappointed with those results.

   Here is a link to a recent posting on this site by Marlon Richardson using Ektar. The results are gorgeous:

   http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/03/12/how-to-shoot-kodak-ektar-100-film-by-marlon-richardson/

   Best regards
   Huss

   • Thanks Huss.
     I have not had much luck with getting C41 film right.
     I simply cannot scan C41 properly – and sure, it’s a deficiency with me rather than the medium.
     I’m sure with the right instruction I’d get it right.
     I’m a glass half full osrt, so if you can give me some tips on how to scan this apprently easy to scan Film properly, I’ll give it a go – with the discontinuation of my beloved e100vs I have not been left with much choice but to use it.

     • “I have not had much luck with getting C41 film right.
       I simply cannot scan C41 properly – and sure, it’s a deficiency with me rather than the medium.
       I’m sure with the right instruction I’d get it right.
       I’m a glass half full osrt, so if you can give me some tips on how to scan this apprently easy to scan Film properly, I’ll give it a go – with the discontinuation of my beloved e100vs I have not been left with much choice but to use it.”

       I’d love to give you scanning tips if I had any! I send most of my 35mm C41 out to my local Costco, who do as good a job as the pro labs I use at the same resolution level (3100 by 2100).

       Here’s a thread on rangefinderforum talking about my results using Fuji C200 C41 film, which at that time was the absolute cheapest Fuji film made. I paid $1.49/36 exp and still the colours are great (as can be seen in the images)

       http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147318

       • Thanks my friend. Will check it out.

9. Use the right profile and ektar is superb, which would justify the plustek 8200 with silverfast ai over the 8100 without colour profiling. I though the Astia looks muddier than the ektar. Silvermax shots looked blown out , try the Silvermax developer with it as adox intended!

   • Yep, the Astia – with the focus problems I had with the G90 and the out of date nature of the film with the colour cast have meant some Astia shots look muddy.
     The Film is over 10 years old.
     For all the faults of these (not very good) BW and colour images, Silvermax did not blow out because of any inherent issues with the development – it’s because of a) My post processing leading to some white cloth being blown – and b) the Orange filter which lead to some faces being ‘white’.. I doubt even Silvermax developer would save any extreme contrast from blowing some out.

10. Hermosas fotos, always a joy to see your work!

11. I find color film difficult to scan compared to BW.
    Nevertheless a very nice set of images.
    Thanks for sharing.

12. Hi, I love your black and white images- it’s nice to hear about exotic films .”Adox Silverman ” is a new film to me anyway.I cannot understand your antagonism towards Ektar though ! I have seen some nice images done with it. Seems to excel in strong light which you will certainly get in the Punjab and you have some nice examples here.

    I used to use slides when I shot exclusively with film years ago -loved Kodachrome but had a very poor rate of success with it. The few good images you would end up with when using Kodachrome were really brilliant so am a little nervous to go back to E6 – as they demand really accurate exposure.

    Nice images from an interesting selection of films -thanks VERY MUCH for the information !

    • I meant to write SilverMAX but prediction called it silverman!

      Kodachrome I’ve found is difficult to scan, not sure why, perhaps it has something to do with the nature of the slide – with the image almost being embossed.

13. I also agree about Kodak Ektar 100. It some of the mushiest detail film I have ever used along with flat colors. I found Fuji 100 C41 to have better color and detail than Ektar. Velvia 50 is my go to film. It always surprises me when G2 owners say they never use their G90. It’s one of my favorite lens on my G2. It never gives me a problem with miss focus and it’s always sharp. The only thing to watch out for is diffraction when you stop down past f5.6. At f8 the image degrades quickly. Thanks for sharing you photos. Ry

14. I love silvermax. Still have a roal in my freezer. And rodinal is the one and only!

    Nice work!!

15. Nice images. The technique is a bit off. The black & whites look too light on my computer ( Apple 30″ ) and the color shots ( mostly Astia ), the highlights are blown out. Anyone else see it this way?

    Otherwise I like the images and like every street photographer, I would love to go there. Maybe without my wife!

    • Thanks man.
      How’s the technique off please? (on the BW)
      Yep, Astia is blown in parts and colour is off.

      • If you’re going to scan, make sure that you use the least contrasty film. You can always add an S curve and saturation in Photoshop. But as you mentioned, get “ALL” the information on the scan and the rest ” can ” fall into place later.

16. the black and whites are amazing

    • Thanks!
      The Ektar ones look awful, I included them to shatter the myth about Ektar being such a great Film and photographic medium. Give me Fuji Reala 100 any day.

      • Funny how very different opinions and experiences can vary! I love Ektar. I actually find it and all other Kodak c41 films incredibly easy to scan (using a Nikon Coolscan 8000ed, linear raw scan, inverted with the Colorperfect plug in), yet I have a nightmare of a time getting the colours right with e6 scans, and troubles with shadow posterisation in b&w films!

        I’ve got to say, though, despite you disdain for ektar, your photos with it look great to me. And love the Adox b&w. Where would I be able to find some, by the way?

        • thanks man
          You can get the Adox Silvermax in Britain from Firstcall Photographic and West End Cameras too.
          Not sure about the States or elsewhere.

          I have the opposite experience, nightmare getting C41 right, and generally my beloved Ektachrome I seem to get what I want

17. Why does everyone take picture of old Indians or Arabs now days? It seems like this is a new trend in photography like they are exotic people in far away lands.

    • “These days”? I’ve been doing it for years, and have you heard of Steve McCurry? He made a very famous photograph once, of an Afghan Girl – many moons ago, and has set a trend ever since, wouldn’t call that “lately”.

      • Jeez, Photo, the guy went to the Punjab and you complain that the photos have too many Indians and Arabs. What did you expect? A bunch of Swedish girls in swimming suits prancing around the Punjab? I find your comment not only dumb but with a hint of racism.

    • Do these people have names? I suggest you actually make a human connection

      • Name’s aren’t important. These aren’t models, and are local people representing their local land and homes, and besides apart from two I don’t know their names.

Comments are closed.