shitty neg scan dump

File: Color2017-1002.jpg (265KB, 485x805px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 485x805px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:12 16:17:38

File: Color2017-1008.jpg (318KB, 651x1073px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 651x1073px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:12 16:18:02

File: Color2017-1016.jpg (364KB, 658x1073px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 658x1073px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:12 16:18:22

>>3075809
it's the same tower as Drake album cover ?
Your pics are great, I saved the first one, makes me really comfy

Jesus fuck mate, spend at least a minute to clean your fucking negs and vacuum your room.

>>3075801
>>3075804
>>3075819
Really dig these colors. What film were you using?

>>3075801
that first photo OP, is really good!

and these

>>3075819
>>3075822

>>3075801
any chance on a higher res for this?

The only time I've seen color scans with dust like this was when I had film developed at the Lomography store. Doesn't your scanner have a Digital ICE mode?

>>3076002
Nope that's Vancouver in the picture not Toronto
>>3076006
yeah I know I did but they seem to attract dust like blow attracts hookers
>>3076097
I believe this is Agfa 400n or something
>>3076142
Thanks bru
>>3076143
Yeah I can mega it, it comes in a fuckin huge res
>>3076151
I have no idea, this is my schools Epson scanner, this is with dust reduction setting on.

>>3076143
https://mega.nz/fm/FjgQ3CAD

When I scanned negatives as scratched as these, I just enjoy them and forget about trying to fix any that Im not super attached to. The automatic dust/scratch fixer just shits on you pics and doesn't do any better than a healing brush tool would.

>>3075815
I like this

>>3075801
>>3075815
Very nice, only photos ITT worth looking at though

>>3076498
Or like

use a scanner with IR dust removal. Works great.

>>3075801
These photos are actually pretty gorgeous, but please can you post them at at least double the horizontal resoluton? They're the size of a postcard on my screen and I'd really like to appreciate the detail. You can also compress them much less too. (If you posted the first 2 along with 1024, 1005 and 1011 at greater than 1440p and max jpg quality or PNG I would be grateful.)

>>3076550
Yeah, I have a plustek with the ir scan, and it ends up adding a bunch of time to every scan and does a mediocre job fixing the scratches. It not magic, the computer algorithm is just guessing based on what is nearby. Sometimes it gets it wrong.
If you really want to show off the pics and print them or whatnot, I would go back and scan them again, with the ir and or go through it and fix it yourself by hand. You will probably get better results doing it yourself, but it takes forever. I wouldn't bother with ir scanning because it will take twice as long for every shot. Just my opinion

>>3076585
Maybe it depends on the scanner. On my Coolscan and on my Epson V500 the IR dust removal works very well.

>>3076338
thanks man

File: img004.jpg (2MB, 1869x1932px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1869x1932px

Contributing

>>3076635
bronica?

>>3076637
Mamiya C3

>>3076338
>https://mega.nz/fm/FjgQ3CAD
OP, sorry to say that isn't the link to the photo, its to your mega directory. Go to: right click the file, update link, and it should provide you with one.

>>3076638
really? looks so un-mamiya. 80mm?

File: img003.jpg (2MB, 1869x1914px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1869x1914px

>>3076640
105mm, I was experimenting around with long exposures

>>3076338
>https://mega.nz/fm/FjgQ3CAD

this doesnt link to anything lol

File: slides002.jpg (358KB, 1159x769px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1159x769px

Gonna dump some slides that I scanned today aswell

File: slides003.jpg (246KB, 579x910px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 579x910px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:17 21:19:02

File: slides004.jpg (237KB, 669x1052px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 669x1052px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:17 21:19:07

File: slides005.jpg (330KB, 1052x705px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 1052x705px

>>3077066
>>3076639
>>3076630
>>3076338
https://mega.nz/#!osUWkDST!Fkqgb56rAflBTanmpkrZ9s-yqTjtXirbu5pWvtJZSUc
There you are.

File: slides006.jpg (349KB, 708x1077px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 708x1077px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:17 21:19:23

File: slides007.jpg (349KB, 708x1052px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 708x1052px

This and >>3078084
are my favorite of the roll

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:05:17 21:19:32

File: slides008.jpg (291KB, 1052x708px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1052x708px

I was shooting most of these at an abandoned farm I found whilst hiking drunk as a motherfucker at 5am.

File: slides011.jpg (622KB, 1229x813px) Image search: [Google]

622KB, 1229x813px

That's all until tomorrow folks, I'll scan some more negatives.

Also the ones that are on an angle are due to the scanner not my shooting.
Like >>3078089