Thank you so much! Finally got into shooting 35mm film after years of wanting to get into it and so many times my pictures came back with the subject being completely blurry (but the background is usually in focus). I don't mind the process and I do get some great pictures here and there but I'd rather have 100% of the shots I take be good instead of only 10-25%.
Another tip would be to check your shutter speeds. Old film cameras typically don't have any kind of image stabilization, so you will need faster shutter speeds handheld than what you may be used to with digital cameras. Good rule thumb for each focal length is to not go slower than 1/(focal length of lens).
Great tip. I thought about adding it. But I figured most people who shoot film have experience with shutter speed and how they effect sharpness, but thanks for commenting for those who don’t! Tripod and a cable release and even better, mirror lockup if your camera allows! Edit: I’ve never heard of that rule. I shot that 135mm f4 shot at around 1/60 handheld. Maybe someone else will chime into this thread. 🙏🏻
@@morethanyoucaretosee At the moment film photography is the hip "new" thing for many younger people and they know absolutely nothing about shutter speeds and how it may affect their photos.
@@Verdoux007 Maybe I should have mentioned it! I tried to walk a fine line between giving advice to the amateurs without alienating the intermediate and pros, since my channel actually is primarily a older audience. @verdoux007 do you follow the *don’t go under the shutter speed of the focal length of the lens*, 1/(focal length of the lens) when handheld or have any comments about that? Thanks!
@@morethanyoucaretosee That "don't go under the shutter speed of the focal length" suggestion (I hate calling it a rule) is a great starting point for experimenting what you can get away with. My shaky hands usually can't handle slower than that shutter speeds unless there's a stabilized lens attached to my camera.
All of these things make little differences that add up, but the biggest increase to sharpness for me on 35mm was moving away from a flatbed scanner to a good dedicated scanner. Having the scanner be able to properly resolve the detail of the little 35mm negative combined with the tips in the video really make it worthwhile. I use the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 and it was worth every penny!
@@morethanyoucaretosee The Nikon LS-40 ED looks like a good option depending what the prices are like for you, make sure you can get all the attachments and accessories you want as they can be hard to find 20 years on. Check out the Minolta equivalents (like the Scan Dual III and IV) as they are often ignored and can go cheaper. The Nikon can do 2900dpi apparently which is pretty much what I use on my 5400 as the 5400dpi scans take quite a while and are a bit overkill for me lol. Best results for me have been to use VueScan and set it to Slide film scanning (no inversion) with 48bit TiFF and then bring those into Lightroom and invert and edit with Negative Lab Pro, much better colours than normal VueScan and the Black and Whites seem to have more latitude for tweaks. Sorry for the long winded reply, hope it helps!
I used to think I needed medium format for that sharp look, or for anything remarkable looking. Then I found out most movies are filmed on 35mm half frame... not even 35mm which I thought wasn't sharp enough - half of that size! Makes me look at my Olympus Pen a new way. At the end of the day it's all about composition and lighting.
I would also recommend a dedicated 35mm film scanner like the Plustek. I used a epson flatbed scanner before, which yields good results for medium format, but I was never happy when scanning 35mm
Thank you. Been feeling that the epson is not been doing my 35 negs justice. Seems to do alright with 50mm shots, but wider angles the images start to break apart. Thoughts on digital camera scans?
@@morethanyoucaretosee I’ve had the F3 and FA. Both amazing. I really like the matrix metering on the FA. Now I primarily use a Leica M6. But I will say, I take much better photos with an SLR. 😂.
@@mezayrapetyan131 I primarily shoot F3 and FM2 for 35mm, I have a bunch of other ones, but they don’t get used as much. I love loading up them both with two different film stocks and shooting them both at the same time. I have not shot with a Leica, friends of the channel have them. I’ve seen them in person. But never got to shoot them. I could see myself *maybe* getting one. But I do really love my F3 and FM2, and I’m not looking anywhere else. Those just fit my needs.
Dude, I needed this so bad! Thanks for the vid. I’ve shot digital for a long time and just recently got into film. I’ve been getting frustrated getting my shots back and them looking so disappointing. Now I know what to look at.
IMO, there are a number of things to consider. For instance, the film must be flat. Hence, proper loading is essential for manual loading and that is assuming that the camera is not at fault. Note that Hasselblad has matching, hand-calibrated inserts for its backs. Also, older lenses with minimum lens coatings should have a UV filter and a proper lens shade. Lastly, don't judge film sharpness against digital, especially using the older manually focusing aids. While there are tips such as using a tripod/monopod and mirror lockup, but these aren't practical for general shooting. Thus, proper camera handling techniques and knowing one's gear are essential. While 1/focal length is a good starting point, but one should establish one's own minimum shutter speed for each lens. Also, one can consider using a chestpod, human tripod, string monopod, leaning against a solid object, etc.
I imagine you are a experienced photographer. Zone focusing might be your best bet, when you can’t trust your eyes. Just does not allow you to shoot too shallow of a aperture, at least with any confidence. Best of luck, and keep shooting!
Just a doubt: something that bugs me, it's that for example, at 1:21, why is the lightining the same? to me, the f/1,8 should be lighter is it wrong to think this way? thanks!
Thank you man. I have question for yoy. I like BW photos, but I always hvave a lot of noise and grain and i don' t know how to invoid this. Is this a problem because of film, or my skills. Thank you in advance
Your best bet is to shoot a low iso film. And don’t push your film in development. Stay 400 iso or less. The less iso, the less grain you will see. Definitely give your film enough light, that will help as well (Don’t underexposed too much)
I got back my scans, and immediately I feel the photos seem cloudy. Minor tweaks in Dehaze slider helped me get back the sharpness and contrast I desired. Is there anything I'm doing wrong? Shots even at f8 seem to have this cloudy and muddy overcast look to it. Can I do anything differently to avoid this?
Just a little correction to a very common misunderstanding: You don’t get the same depth of field with a longer lens because the lens is longer, you get the same depth of field because you step further back. If you stand at 10 meters from your subject and take a photo at f/2.8, it’ll have exactly the same depth of field regardless of if you use a 100mm or a 15mm lens.
Complaints related to film sharpness are in the majority related to scanning/digitizing issues. Many things can go wrong in this critical step. Result is that many think the lens is not good enough etc. I highly recommend to review the best scanner glass - film plane distance for sharpest scanner focus with flatbed scanners. Scanner resolution above 3600 dpi doesn't bring any additional gain in sharpness. Unfortunately best scanning methods are not well documented in scanner manuals - this information is scattered all over the place in forums and videos but hard to dig through for beginners.
I believe Nick Carver had a video covering this. Thankfully, most beginners send there photos off to a lab and won’t face this hurtle til after they decide to go all in and scan or develop at home.
@@morethanyoucaretosee since external labs have become quite expensive to develop film and for scanning, many venture to do this at home. It took me weeks several years ago to set up my scanning workflow to get the sharpest scans.
my biggest problem with my 35mm scans is just a simple lack of any saturation i scan to tiff at 2400 i guess ill try some tweaks with my scanner idk 🤷🏽
Dang you talk about a lot of interesting talking points in the video production industry! We like what you do, keep it up. Anytime you're in Scottsdale let us know. If you want, direct message us @dmakproductions on Instagram and we can chat. You kill it!
I think this has to do with some older M42 lenses or other lenses/bodies that you manually stop down before taking the photo. If you meter for f/8 and set your lens to f/8 then the viewfinder will be dim and setting it to wide open makes the viewfinder brighter making it easier to focus before setting back to f/8 and taking the shot. Most if not all newer cameras automatically stop down the lens when you take the photo even my 1960's Russian Zenit's do that as long as the M42 lens has a pin on it. The pin gets pushed by the shutter mechanism stopping the lens down before it takes the shot and opens the lens back up after being depressed.
35mm a low quality amateur format????? who says that? oh wait, new young hipsters that are just "discovering" film.... thats who. 35 mm is HIGHER quality than the majority of all the Digital cameras out there. You dont start equaling the quality of the 35mm film frame until you hit around 50 Megapixels in digital. And for the subject of unsharp film images, the answer is extremely simple. if you want super sharp images with film you NEED to shell out the cash and buy the flagship Pro level lenses. you will never get sharp images without buying the expensive lenses. I get that you are trying to help people, but your knowledge is really really limited and because of that you are not really giving good advice and accurate info. It would be best for you to hold off on giving advice until you have more experience and a broader knowledge base.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #30 ДВА В ОДНОМ [Один человек]• Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nrXy15orKhY/mqdefault.jpg)
A bit of a technical video today, but I hope it helps you!
Thank you so much! Finally got into shooting 35mm film after years of wanting to get into it and so many times my pictures came back with the subject being completely blurry (but the background is usually in focus). I don't mind the process and I do get some great pictures here and there but I'd rather have 100% of the shots I take be good instead of only 10-25%.
Another tip would be to check your shutter speeds. Old film cameras typically don't have any kind of image stabilization, so you will need faster shutter speeds handheld than what you may be used to with digital cameras. Good rule thumb for each focal length is to not go slower than 1/(focal length of lens).
Great tip. I thought about adding it. But I figured most people who shoot film have experience with shutter speed and how they effect sharpness, but thanks for commenting for those who don’t!
Tripod and a cable release and even better, mirror lockup if your camera allows!
Edit: I’ve never heard of that rule. I shot that 135mm f4 shot at around 1/60 handheld. Maybe someone else will chime into this thread. 🙏🏻
@@morethanyoucaretosee At the moment film photography is the hip "new" thing for many younger people and they know absolutely nothing about shutter speeds and how it may affect their photos.
@@Verdoux007 Maybe I should have mentioned it! I tried to walk a fine line between giving advice to the amateurs without alienating the intermediate and pros, since my channel actually is primarily a older audience. @verdoux007 do you follow the *don’t go under the shutter speed of the focal length of the lens*, 1/(focal length of the lens) when handheld or have any comments about that? Thanks!
@@morethanyoucaretosee That "don't go under the shutter speed of the focal length" suggestion (I hate calling it a rule) is a great starting point for experimenting what you can get away with. My shaky hands usually can't handle slower than that shutter speeds unless there's a stabilized lens attached to my camera.
@@Verdoux007 That's awesome. Well glad to know it works with your workflow and I hope some beginners see this and take your advice.
All of these things make little differences that add up, but the biggest increase to sharpness for me on 35mm was moving away from a flatbed scanner to a good dedicated scanner. Having the scanner be able to properly resolve the detail of the little 35mm negative combined with the tips in the video really make it worthwhile. I use the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 and it was worth every penny!
It’s funny you say that. Just was looking for another scanner tonight. Have any insight on the Nikon LS 40 ED? Thanks for your comment!
@@morethanyoucaretosee The Nikon LS-40 ED looks like a good option depending what the prices are like for you, make sure you can get all the attachments and accessories you want as they can be hard to find 20 years on. Check out the Minolta equivalents (like the Scan Dual III and IV) as they are often ignored and can go cheaper. The Nikon can do 2900dpi apparently which is pretty much what I use on my 5400 as the 5400dpi scans take quite a while and are a bit overkill for me lol. Best results for me have been to use VueScan and set it to Slide film scanning (no inversion) with 48bit TiFF and then bring those into Lightroom and invert and edit with Negative Lab Pro, much better colours than normal VueScan and the Black and Whites seem to have more latitude for tweaks. Sorry for the long winded reply, hope it helps!
I used to think I needed medium format for that sharp look, or for anything remarkable looking. Then I found out most movies are filmed on 35mm half frame... not even 35mm which I thought wasn't sharp enough - half of that size! Makes me look at my Olympus Pen a new way. At the end of the day it's all about composition and lighting.
Solid video! 35 shooters definitely miss out on the sharpening feature.
It’s a game changer! 🙏🏻🙏🏻
I would also recommend a dedicated 35mm film scanner like the Plustek. I used a epson flatbed scanner before, which yields good results for medium format, but I was never happy when scanning 35mm
Thank you. Been feeling that the epson is not been doing my 35 negs justice. Seems to do alright with 50mm shots, but wider angles the images start to break apart. Thoughts on digital camera scans?
@@morethanyoucaretosee as a true film photographer I don't have a digital camera 😂
This just inspired me to get a 135mm lens! Great videos!
That nikkor 135 2.8 is a phenomenal lens. Great tips! I think stopping down, and using a tripod really improved my 35mm photos.
I know! It’s a great one! I assume you are a Nikon user than! Which one do you use?
P.S. : Thanks so much for commenting!
@@morethanyoucaretosee I’ve had the F3 and FA. Both amazing. I really like the matrix metering on the FA. Now I primarily use a Leica M6. But I will say, I take much better photos with an SLR. 😂.
@@mezayrapetyan131 I primarily shoot F3 and FM2 for 35mm, I have a bunch of other ones, but they don’t get used as much. I love loading up them both with two different film stocks and shooting them both at the same time. I have not shot with a Leica, friends of the channel have them. I’ve seen them in person. But never got to shoot them. I could see myself *maybe* getting one. But I do really love my F3 and FM2, and I’m not looking anywhere else. Those just fit my needs.
Dude, I needed this so bad! Thanks for the vid. I’ve shot digital for a long time and just recently got into film. I’ve been getting frustrated getting my shots back and them looking so disappointing. Now I know what to look at.
Dude! That’s awesome, glad I can help!
Agree with everything you said man. Nice vid and subscribed!
Wow. That feels good! Thanks so much!!!
Enjoyable video. Thank you.
RS. Canada
Interesting tips!
Two min in. Great video already.
IMO, there are a number of things to consider. For instance, the film must be flat. Hence, proper loading is essential for manual loading and that is assuming that the camera is not at fault. Note that Hasselblad has matching, hand-calibrated inserts for its backs. Also, older lenses with minimum lens coatings should have a UV filter and a proper lens shade. Lastly, don't judge film sharpness against digital, especially using the older manually focusing aids.
While there are tips such as using a tripod/monopod and mirror lockup, but these aren't practical for general shooting. Thus, proper camera handling techniques and knowing one's gear are essential. While 1/focal length is a good starting point, but one should establish one's own minimum shutter speed for each lens. Also, one can consider using a chestpod, human tripod, string monopod, leaning against a solid object, etc.
Thanks for the tips. My aging eyesight is making it very difficult to accurately focus even using the split circle.
I imagine you are a experienced photographer. Zone focusing might be your best bet, when you can’t trust your eyes. Just does not allow you to shoot too shallow of a aperture, at least with any confidence. Best of luck, and keep shooting!
Great video! Subscribed.
Love to hear it! Thanks man! 🙌🏻
Good tips man
Thank you!
Just a doubt: something that bugs me, it's that for example, at 1:21, why is the lightining the same? to me, the f/1,8 should be lighter
is it wrong to think this way? thanks!
I adjusted my settings for the image to be probably exposed. Adjusted shutter accordingly.
Thank you man. I have question for yoy. I like BW photos, but I always hvave a lot of noise and grain and i don' t know how to invoid this. Is this a problem because of film, or my skills. Thank you in advance
Your best bet is to shoot a low iso film. And don’t push your film in development. Stay 400 iso or less. The less iso, the less grain you will see. Definitely give your film enough light, that will help as well (Don’t underexposed too much)
@@morethanyoucaretosee Thanks man! I will try!!!
I got back my scans, and immediately I feel the photos seem cloudy. Minor tweaks in Dehaze slider helped me get back the sharpness and contrast I desired. Is there anything I'm doing wrong? Shots even at f8 seem to have this cloudy and muddy overcast look to it. Can I do anything differently to avoid this?
Dm me your scans on @morethanyoucaretosee on insta, I’ll take a look at them.
@@morethanyoucaretosee That would be of immense help. Will do, thanks a lot!
Just a little correction to a very common misunderstanding:
You don’t get the same depth of field with a longer lens because the lens is longer, you get the same depth of field because you step further back.
If you stand at 10 meters from your subject and take a photo at f/2.8, it’ll have exactly the same depth of field regardless of if you use a 100mm or a 15mm lens.
Complaints related to film sharpness are in the majority related to scanning/digitizing issues. Many things can go wrong in this critical step. Result is that many think the lens is not good enough etc. I highly recommend to review the best scanner glass - film plane distance for sharpest scanner focus with flatbed scanners. Scanner resolution above 3600 dpi doesn't bring any additional gain in sharpness. Unfortunately best scanning methods are not well documented in scanner manuals - this information is scattered all over the place in forums and videos but hard to dig through for beginners.
I believe Nick Carver had a video covering this. Thankfully, most beginners send there photos off to a lab and won’t face this hurtle til after they decide to go all in and scan or develop at home.
@@morethanyoucaretosee since external labs have become quite expensive to develop film and for scanning, many venture to do this at home. It took me weeks several years ago to set up my scanning workflow to get the sharpest scans.
my biggest problem with my 35mm scans is just a simple lack of any saturation
i scan to tiff at 2400
i guess ill try some tweaks with my scanner idk 🤷🏽
best channel ever
helloo im new into photography, i just wanna ask. can i do something to make point n shoot analog camera more sharper?
Shooting with better film stocks, shooting with flash or areas with more light. And everything applicable in the video above
@@thomasliebl9273 okayy thanks for explaining to mee🙏
Here for the grain!
Haha. You the man! You’ve been here for that grain from the beginning!
dont forget for us broke beginners, on my ae-1 program i can use the 10 second timer and tripod instead of the cable release and tripod
It's impossible to spot any differences once UA-cam gets their hands on your video, but I'll take your word for it.
Hahaha, trust me, that came across my mind a lot when making this video.
It's amazing the difference in my own uploaded videos, but watch this through a UA-cam app on a 4k TV and be amazed at what comes back.
You had two cameras side by side apparently because if I cross my eyes and make a "magic eye" out of it, it's in 3D.
Dang you talk about a lot of interesting talking points in the video production industry! We like what you do, keep it up. Anytime you're in Scottsdale let us know. If you want, direct message us @dmakproductions on Instagram and we can chat. You kill it!
Because all good dedicated film scanners were not longer in production
Had a few comments saying a similar thing! I guess I need to upgrade from my flatbed!
Another trick is to focus and compose wide open, then stop down to take your photo.
Would you elaborate on how this helps sharpness or getting your focus right? Thanks!
Isn't that a trick for tackling focus shift?
I think this has to do with some older M42 lenses or other lenses/bodies that you manually stop down before taking the photo. If you meter for f/8 and set your lens to f/8 then the viewfinder will be dim and setting it to wide open makes the viewfinder brighter making it easier to focus before setting back to f/8 and taking the shot. Most if not all newer cameras automatically stop down the lens when you take the photo even my 1960's Russian Zenit's do that as long as the M42 lens has a pin on it. The pin gets pushed by the shutter mechanism stopping the lens down before it takes the shot and opens the lens back up after being depressed.
@@AleksUsovich Ahh! That makes sense, I do own a few M42 Mounts (Helios and others). Thank you for sharing.
is this bad advice for a newbie???
Try actually focusing d'uh. This is comedy.
I feel that.
Get that flag off the ground, thanks for the tips.
35mm a low quality amateur format????? who says that? oh wait, new young hipsters that are just "discovering" film.... thats who. 35 mm is HIGHER quality than the majority of all the Digital cameras out there. You dont start equaling the quality of the 35mm film frame until you hit around 50 Megapixels in digital.
And for the subject of unsharp film images, the answer is extremely simple. if you want super sharp images with film you NEED to shell out the cash and buy the flagship Pro level lenses. you will never get sharp images without buying the expensive lenses. I get that you are trying to help people, but your knowledge is really really limited and because of that you are not really giving good advice and accurate info. It would be best for you to hold off on giving advice until you have more experience and a broader knowledge base.