/p/ - Photography » Thread #4419436

[325 / 152 / 1]

515KiB, 2740x2740, 639730428d11c81a14ae3ea6_RB.jpg

/fgt/

Film General Thread Mon 31 Mar 2025 23:37:12 No.4419436 View View Reply Original Report

This is the Film General Thread. Post your film photos or film gear questions in this thread.
>it's not gay to post in the /fgt/, unless you shoot anything other than an image stabilised superzoom on a plastic slr
Previous thread - >>4414668
Marie Kondo Edition - Which camera sparks joy in use? (yes I stole this thread question)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 18:21:33 No.4421958 Report

Quoted By: >>4421960

>>4421695
>>4421696
i love rodinal for being cheap and bulletproof, but like your images, i too have trouble with the streaking that looks like bromide drag almost or something like it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 18:42:03 No.4421960 Report

Quoted By: >>4421968

>>4421958
>>4421694
agitation, are you using inversion or what method are you using? also why 1:50 instead of 1:25?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 19KiB, 540x91

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 18:42:05 No.4421961 Report

Quoted By:

>>4421936
I think i found the reason.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 18:43:11 No.4421962 Report

Quoted By: >>4421971

>>4421956
you’re slowly realizing that shooting film adds nothing to the final image. nothing. its all achievable digitally. there is no special soul and metaphysical/spiritual and authenticity sperging schizo shit is just that, schizo shit

shooting film is for people who enjoy the arts and crafts session that comes after finishing the roll and LF camera users (the digital version is like $20k)

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot 2025-04-12 at 14.01.03.png, 1MiB, 1739x1070

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 19:03:34 No.4421968 Report

Quoted By:

>>4421960
not the anon who posted the photos above, but i've tried 1:50 and 1:25 with inversion and suggested timings and it seems like it's random. i'm not too too bothered by it to be honest, i think if it's anything i really wanted to keep and was important i'd just buy a bottle of dd-x, but it is curious that i cant pin down the reason if the technique and dilution is the same. i'm guessing different film probably is more affected and maybe the temps play in.
picrel, edited to extremes you can really see the "banding".

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 19:25:15 No.4421971 Report

Quoted By: >>4421976

>>4421962
It's physical and digital isn't and that's all I need to know to say you're stupid

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 20:05:04 No.4421976 Report

Quoted By: >>4421987

>>4421971
There's nothing that actually matters in your statement

Connect PC to canon photo printer, now digital is also physical

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 21:11:25 No.4421987 Report

Quoted By: >>4421993

>>4421976
its always a digital image or a printed facsimile of one. I can optically print from my negatives and never once touch a computer

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 85KiB, 1483x456

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 21:41:46 No.4421990 Report

Quoted By:

Is some film just not compatible with some developers or is the manufacturer being a little greedy? I have halve a liter of rodinal standing around and i already have made positive experiences with what is, to my knowledge, the same emulsion on a different filmbase. Should i just wing it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 21:41:57 No.4421991 Report

Quoted By: >>4421995

>>4421942
>>4421950
>>4421951
>kids these days and their special snowflake developers
>all ye need is d-76, just ask yer shop they'll know what to do [:wink:]

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:04:53 No.4421993 Report

Quoted By: >>4421998

>>4421987
>physical electrons: >:(
>physical silver atoms: :O
no matter what all photography is human technology built on simple physical principles. all negatives and raws are inferior copies, all enlargements and jpegs are copies of copies. call foul on an adc there, call foul on a special filter layer here. the question is, why would anyone doubt them? people can fake LF negatives with modified photolithography equipment, but no AI has generated a believable raw file… yet.

certain film formats and cameras have their advantages (who makes a 10-20mp ff camera the size of a contax t2? who makes a 200mp 4x5 inch sensor?) but fanboying and legitfagging is stupid sorry

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:12:34 No.4421995 Report

Quoted By: >>4422027

>>4421991
You jest, but I was talking with some old hands about film developing and they told me that back on the day they did it with Dektol. I asked why and they just shrugged lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:18:19 No.4421998 Report

Quoted By: >>4422001

>>4421993
reality has value and film photography is a physical process that captures a physical representation of a moment in time via an irreversible photochemical process.
>b-but you could fake a negative!
I see the scene, I take the photo, I develop the film, and I do what I will with the images I create whether that is optically printing them or digitizing them for the sake of convenience.

you take a digital reading of a scene and trust that software will reconstruct it roughly as you saw it, and then further edit it with more software, until finally you have what amounts to a computer rendering of one impression of what might have once been real.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:20:53 No.4422001 Report

Quoted By: >>4422005

>>4421998
>reality has value
Digital photography is every bit as real. Don't be such a fucking retard.

Digital sensors are analog devices. They count the photons that pass through colored filters. A raw file contains these counts. That's it.

They are also significantly higher resolution, lower noise, and have larger color gamuts than equally large film. A $5000 GFX100S consistently outdoes most real world full res 4x5 because diffraction doesnt change with format, people just typically enlarge larger pieces of film less which hides it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 14KiB, 961x76

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:28:56 No.4422005 Report

Quoted By: >>4422008

>>4422001
Analogue on average has better resolutions than digital and the best of the best is unachievable with digital. Show me a 500 megapixel sensor with a size of 35mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:31:44 No.4422008 Report

Quoted By: >>4422011

>>4422005
What these grifters never show you:
Real world proof of a 500mp image
The little * that brings you down to the "at (unrealistic figure) contrast", because film's resolution is directly dependent on subject contrast and nothing in a real scene actually achieves that
The little *2 that brings you down to "at ISO 12"

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 42KiB, 1223x120

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:37:01 No.4422011 Report

Quoted By: >>4422014 >>4422016

>>4422008
How do you prove a analogue product online? Most you can show are charts, same goes for digital btw.
Also they are not shy about the light needed. And this film needs a special developer or it gets too contrasty so "at high contrast" makes sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:38:18 No.4422013 Report

Quoted By:

best case scenario most color negative film (~12 stops DR) in 6x9 is ~60mp, low speed (and very low DR, even smaller color gamut) slide film is maybe maybe a hair over 80mp. adox cms 20 is about double, at iso 12.

on a test chart across the room. real subjects get significantly softer. shadow detail is nonexistent.

if you want to pixel peep film and engage in resolution contests you are setting yourself up for an aneurysm. technically, film is dogshit. it's not a high end medium until you are autistically shooting 4x5 with modern technical cameras and modern lenses at their ideal apertures. 35mm is just close enough to a canon 5dii's quality and can fit in some very small and light bodies with long lived batteries.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:39:21 No.4422014 Report

Quoted By: >>4422016 >>4422017

>>4422011
Again, these grifters have never shown proof of a real world photograph equaling "500mp". All they have to do is take TWO photos, one with CMS 20 II, another with a rented H6D-400c, and clearly demonstrate the film resolving finer detail.

Two photos, and they can not show it.

because it is not real.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:42:25 No.4422016 Report

Quoted By: >>4422017

>>4422011
>>4422014
just shut the fuck up mongoloids, god another fucking day of your fucking autism ruining a thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:43:38 No.4422017 Report

Quoted By: >>4422019

>>4422014
>uhhh all the little shop size needs to do is host 500 megapixel images on their shopping size.
Do you know how retarded that sounds?
Not even digital manufacturers do this.

>>4422016
yeah 'nuff bait for today

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:49:22 No.4422019 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422017
>make crazy claim
>it would take too much bandwidth to prove it :(
to date even 80mp for 6x9 color slides is dubious, if not blatantly optimistic

film is not shot for its resolution or technical superiority 99% of the time. in fact, most people here shoot it for its LACK of resolution and the more constrained range of colors it records giving a more painting-like impression.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 451KiB, 816x788

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 22:51:47 No.4422020 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 23:35:18 No.4422025 Report

Quoted By: >>4422026

500 megapixels sounds like a lot until you remember that a 35mm frame has ~80 billion silver halide crystals and thus is actually in the gigapixel range for resolution

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 23:49:31 No.4422026 Report

Quoted By: >>4422028

>>4422025
That's just the halide crystals however. Chemicals have an enormous impact on how sharp the result will be.
Also they actually do have some images uploaded https://www.adox.de/Photo/films/cms20ii-en/cms-20-images/ but as stated previously and as on the site capturing analogue(especially of this caliber) is impossible on digital.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 23:50:57 No.4422027 Report

Quoted By:

>>4421995
back in the day it was more about what you could get your hands on or what was easiest to homebrew. if it produces an image, it's good enough!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 12 Apr 2025 23:56:31 No.4422028 Report

Quoted By: >>4422040

>>4422026
>make wild claim
>cant scan a portion with a microscope to prove it
protip: its because its mush

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Apr 2025 00:55:55 No.4422040 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422028
you don't get it, the molecular-scale variances in crystal structure just add to the resolution!!
digital can never hope to compete with its merely finite resolution

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P_20250413_132120.jpg, 272KiB, 2048x1536

Anonymous Sun 13 Apr 2025 20:33:41 No.4422209 Report

Quoted By: >>4422213 >>4422214 >>4422238 >>4422260

My developer got MOTHERFUCKING MOLDY
What the actual fuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Apr 2025 20:41:45 No.4422213 Report

Quoted By: >>4422214 >>4422328

>>4422209
Develop with it. Maybe the result will be cool.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Apr 2025 20:51:43 No.4422214 Report

Quoted By: >>4422328

>>4422209
>>4422213
drink it, maybe you'll get superpowers

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP4402.jpg, 4MiB, 3579x3585

Anonymous Sun 13 Apr 2025 20:58:00 No.4422215 Report

Quoted By:

i always feel like I'm doing color film wrong. is this scan alright? i can't tell anymore

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 13 Apr 2025 22:17:37 No.4422238 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422209
You nutted in your developer

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 00:23:45 No.4422260 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422209
I nutted in your developer.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO [1] Digitalização (...).jpg, 4MiB, 4233x2870

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 01:40:29 No.4422268 Report

Quoted By: >>4422273 >>4422274 >>4422275 >>4422299

dear diary,
just wanted to share that I'm almost done setting up my darkroom
can't wait to start enlarging my photos and to have a proper space to develop my stuff instead of having to make do with my bathroom
maybe tomorrow or the day after that I'll have it all set up

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 02:26:09 No.4422273 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422268
thats cool, if only you had any good photo to print

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 02:31:01 No.4422274 Report

Quoted By: >>4422386

>>4422268
Thats cool. I'm looking forward to seeing prints of all your good photos.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 02:36:34 No.4422275 Report

Quoted By: >>4422386

>>4422268
Hell yeah anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 08:25:52 No.4422299 Report

Quoted By: >>4422386

>>4422268
Yeah i wish i had a proper darkroom. My family hates me occupying the bathroom for hours on end.
Hope everything goes well for you anon. Sounds amazing.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _DSC2454_02.jpg, 4MiB, 5371x3652

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 09:55:27 No.4422303 Report

Quoted By: >>4422320

Did some of my own developing and scanning, rodinal 1:25. its Kentmere400 pushed 1 stop.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 11:34:12 No.4422318 Report

Quoted By:

>>4419445
looks very nice but my autism tells me the diamond shape shouldn't be touching the edge of the frame
any graphic design bros here can tell me if I am stupid?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 11:41:15 No.4422320 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422303
nice texture and a bit surreal
looks like something out of a dream
I really like it
kids would call it liminal or something

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 12:38:11 No.4422328 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422213
I did, after running it through a coffee filter. Results seem mostly normal, though I didn't scan them yet. Maybe a bit more pale than before. But I'm not sure. I extended dev time by 10% just in case.
At least it was only one out of two parts of the developer. Not sure what it contains that could have made the mold grow. I mixed it about 7 months ago, and specs say it can last 12 months in a full bottle (it's in a squeezable one).
Anyway I hope that sulphur in the fixer and silver in the emulsion will kill the mold and keep it under control in the future.
>>4422214
Procrastination is my superpower.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 16:44:04 No.4422386 Report

Quoted By: >>4422425

>>4422274
>>4422275
>>4422299
thx guyz
>My family hates me occupying the bathroom for hours on end
that's precisely why I'm setting up the lab hahaha
just an hour ago I was boring a hole and hit a waterpipe though lol
the plumber will fix it tomorrow, so we'll be having a bit of a delay for our lab's opening

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 16:54:37 No.4422389 Report

Quoted By:

Is 7.56€ with VAT per 36exp roll of Color Plus a good deal? Should I stock up?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 21:19:01 No.4422425 Report

Quoted By: >>4422446

>>4422386
anon can afford a lab but not a stud finder of whatever.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 21:25:20 No.4422427 Report

Quoted By: >>4422451

newwwwwww

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 14 Apr 2025 22:51:50 No.4422446 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422425
well yeah, that's how labs work
you can afford them and then nothing else
I just yolo'd my way into this

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 15 Apr 2025 01:07:35 No.4422451 Report

Quoted By:

>>4422427
yeah, we know you are

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Apr 2025 20:09:37 No.4422469 Report

Quoted By:

>>4420399
that's not cheap, dumbass, it's 8 exposures and it's not even c-41
a regular 36 exp roll at that price per exposure would cost 24.30 europoor dollars, for which you could get 3 rolls of fresh c-41 film that hasn't been respooled.

>>4419436
I just bought some expired film. hopefully it turns out okay

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

/fgt/