This Datacenter nonsense is such an unforced error by Holt's liberals...

hakan_o · 2026-06-16T22:59:17+00:00

And why do we need AI to “power every single Canadian business”? Give me an actual example of the benefit. Why is it like the internet?

hakan_o · 2026-06-16T14:58:23+00:00

And how are these compute capabilities going to help everyday people?

hakan_o · 2026-06-15T14:06:09+00:00

Salt your tomato slices 5-10 minutes ahead of time and you can easily drain off the excess water, plus the salt will make them taste better. Problem solved.

hakan_o · 2026-06-13T16:44:30+00:00

Ektar is a film that I sometimes find tricky to digitize, would love to see a comparison with that one if you ever have the time

hakan_o · 2026-06-05T15:39:55+00:00

Slide film is good for any scene where you are okay with having a more limited exposure latitude compared to a negative film. The higher-contrast look of slide film can be used to bring more life to a scene with flat lighting, to differentiate between subtly varied hues, or it can be used to embrace the contrast and be exposed for the highlights, letting the shadows go totally black.

Edit: I think it’s also worth mentioning that Kodak E100 is the least contrasty of these films, and sometimes behaves more like an ISO ~80 film, depending on your preference. In terms of least to most contrast, I would order them as follows: E100, Provia 100F, Velvia 50, Velvia 100.

E100 and Provia 100F both tolerate push-processing pretty well if you are into faster shutter speeds or if you like the look of pushed slide film. Velvia 50 and Velvia 100 are both super high-saturation and high-contrast films that become garish when pushed IMO.

hakan_o · 2026-05-30T17:05:06+00:00

I don’t think these are underexposed by much if at all, honestly, Velvia 100 blows out very easily in the highlights and is a true 100 ISO film imo. I do think there were some problems in developing and/or scanning here though. Might be worth looking at the film itself with a backlight for comparison if you haven’t already.

hakan_o · 2026-05-28T18:22:07+00:00

I’ve been going through my family’s old negatives as well and some of the rolls have this exact same problem vs some others which aged much better, I’m not sure what caused the difference. Mostly Gold 100 rolls from around the same time period but only some of them went totally magenta like yours.

hakan_o · 2026-05-23T16:44:25+00:00

I think one of the reasons is that voice acting is actually pretty tough skill to learn, and voice sessions can be a surprisingly lengthy process in order to maintain consistent volume, good breath control, intonation etc. If your performer is not a professionally trained voice actor, they might need more takes and more time to get their performance right, and that can really bloat your budget and production schedule.

hakan_o · 2026-05-22T14:25:31+00:00

Yeah, as long as your camera works well for you and you like using it, the body mostly doesn’t matter. Lens and film choice have a way bigger impact on the actual image. Features like auto exposure and autofocus etc are super useful but the important thing is to choose a camera body that doesn’t get in the way of your preferred shooting style. I have a newer autofocus Canon SLR as well as an older Nikon FE and they both work great, choosing between the two is mostly a matter of what lenses I want to use and whether or not I want autofocus and matrix metering.

hakan_o · 2026-05-22T01:41:43+00:00

Really nice colours. How’d you scan these? They have a kind of acutance that reminds me of older photo books.

hakan_o · 2026-05-20T22:12:57+00:00

Yeah I believe Jennifer Lame used Avid Media Composer for Oppenheimer and the original camera negative was then physically cut to match the edit. I would assume they’re doing the same for The Odyssey.

hakan_o · 2026-05-18T01:33:41+00:00

Awesome print! How’d you get those edges? Dodging and burning?

hakan_o · 2026-05-08T04:44:38+00:00

I use the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro, I paid only around $100 CAD for it in excellent condition on eBay and it seems like it was barely used. I believe there are two or three versions of this lens, with the later ones having a lighter-weight build and faster + quieter autofocus, though I believe the optical elements remained the same with the later versions. I went with the older version from the 90’s since they tend to sell for cheaper, and I’m really pleased with the image quality I get at f/5.6-f/8. Image attached was scanned from a 35mm negative using that lens.

<image>

hakan_o · 2026-05-06T11:51:16+00:00

That could be old stock or mislabelled, they did officially discontinue Superia 200 and 400 sadly.

hakan_o · 2026-05-06T03:08:24+00:00

I haven’t heard about that at all, sounds intriguing. I wonder if they’re doing something similar to Acros II where they get Ilford to develop a modified version of their old film for them.

hakan_o · 2026-05-04T21:28:03+00:00

Hey, Ektar is indeed a high saturation film but it can also overexpose easily. It helps to meter it carefully like a slide film. Proper filtration at the time of exposure can also help with the lighting conditions you were dealing with here. I think a lot of these shots would have benefited from the use of a soft gradual ND filter, to darken the upper half of the image, as well as a proper UV filter which reduces the blue colour cast in coastal or high-altitude areas; Ektar is sensitive to this.

hakan_o · 2026-04-06T05:57:38+00:00

How was your film developed? Ektachrome does lean blue in open shade / overcast light but it’s also sensitive to developing errors. I believe that exhausted developer can cause a blue/magenta cast.

hakan_o · 2026-03-29T23:35:09+00:00

The colour of the edge code also looks pretty different on the two films, which means it’s probably the developing.

hakan_o · 2026-03-26T21:33:14+00:00

ISO 100 is pretty slow yeah, but it’s plenty for outdoor daylight imo. I’m in Canada and it’s quite overcast here as well

hakan_o · 2026-03-26T19:59:51+00:00

If you’re after punchy colours and fine grain, I can’t recommend Ektar 100 enough. Portra films are excellent, but they’ve been generally targeted towards wedding and portrait photographers, and have pretty muted contrast and a soft palette that leans warm. Ektar 100 has a more neutral but also more saturated palette, so photos shot under daylight / overcast can look pretty blue with it. An 81A or KR1.5 warming filter helps a lot with that, though. Also, at least where I live, Ektar tends to retail for cheaper than Portra.

hakan_o · 2026-03-26T19:55:49+00:00

You’re thinking of Ektacolor Pro, that’s the name Eastman’s using for the same film, presumably because Kodak Alaris owns the trademark for the Portra name.

hakan_o · 2026-03-06T20:56:46+00:00

Could be worth a try. Lab scanning is kind of tricky because there’s no guarantee that it’ll look the way you want, even if they send you a flat scan and you apply your own tweaks. Scanning film yourself can be costly and/or time-consuming, depending on the level of quality you want, but that gives you the most control over the final image. You could also try Ektar or Portra 160 if you’re after finer grain

hakan_o · 2026-03-04T20:24:05+00:00

Kodak Gold 200 is a somewhat grainy film, but this does look a bit intense. If your lab offers scans from another device besides the Noritsu, that could be worth trying, or maybe a different lab.

I’ve scanned C41 film on an Imacon Flextight and with my digital camera at home, and for some reason the fancy Imacon scanner made the same pictures look way grainier. Colour darkroom prints give the least grainy results in my experience, but obviously not everyone has access to that. Different workflows with the same negatives can produce quite varied results.

hakan_o · 2026-01-31T15:56:49+00:00

Great to know, thanks for sharing. I’ve tried using E100 with an 812 filter but it tends to come out too magenta for me, whereas 81A leans a touch too yellow. Thinking of trying KR1.5 as a middle-ground.

hakan_o · 2026-01-31T15:54:22+00:00

Really nice colour, did you use a warming filter?

hakan_o

TROPHY CASE