/p/ - Photography » Thread #4482671

[143 / 53 / 1]

/fgt/ - Film Photography Thread

Anonymous Fri 14 Nov 2025 00:47:13 No.4482671 View View Reply Original Report

Wetplate Edition

Please post film photos, talk about film photography, film gear like cameras, film stocks, news, and tips/tricks in this thread.

Also talk about darkroom practices, enlargers, photo paper, techniques like dodging/burning, tools, and equipment related to enlarging, developing, and printing.

Thread Question: What alternative processes would you like to try?

Previous thread: >>4476005

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20251020-kodakret_umax (15).jpg, 3MiB, 2048x1365

Anonymous Tue 18 Nov 2025 23:43:13 No.4483889 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483888

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 02:17:54 No.4483900 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483785
you made the effort to prepare and post something artistic so no problems my negroïd

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO H Street-009.jpg, 1MiB, 2400x3000

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 02:28:24 No.4483905 Report

Quoted By: >>4483917

Can anyone suggest a printing service? Looking for 18x24 for now - but may branch out to other sizes soon.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO low light fisherman.jpg, 2MiB, 2948x4181

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 02:33:21 No.4483907 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483844
>>4483226
Just because I want to be fair, here's some negative aspects of the H35 because I've put about 10 rolls through it so far.
You really should have an iso 400, as I've experienced iso 200 is really too low light sensitive to use it indoors or near sunset, due to this limitation you need to be cognizant of lighting and shadows, etc. In my experience iso 400 allows you to take more light in and actually take some night shots with the flash at close distance. See: >>4482901
You need to have a steady hand, especially in low light conditions; I'd chalk this up to the shutter speed being fixed and slow. If it's near sunset, point into the light source and hold firm. See: >>4483210 and pic related. Admittedly, I have a fair amount of blurry street photos but that's also because I literally shoot from the hip a lot of the time.

I could give a lot of positives but I decided this post should all be negatives just to be fair to the naysayers who say it's not worth it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 03:11:02 No.4483917 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483905
mpix, they have a 25% sale right now. They have 25-30% sales pretty often so if you're not in a hurry you can just wait for one.
I like the metal prints, they're expensive but they look amazing and you don't have to frame them

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 07:52:30 No.4483936 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483857
ok but where the dickens do I get Pyrocatechin in Europe

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000095630021.jpg, 2MiB, 1565x1037

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 09:07:40 No.4483948 Report

Quoted By: >>4483955

>>4483847
I don't get why this keeps happening. THis was took on a sunny day. The camera I wear was set up properly. A lot of the pics have the weird artefacting/fuzziness in the black areas which I don't understand. I just want to take nice photos, why's it so hard?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 11:07:41 No.4483955 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483948
pay no mind to the scan, what's the negative look like? It does look underexposed but could also be a bad scan or bad dev or exhausted chemicals

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ilford.png, 187KiB, 479x323

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 15:04:44 No.4483969 Report

Quoted By: >>4483975 >>4483977 >>4483988 >>4483989 >>4483993 >>4483996 >>4484000 >>4484001

I wanna know what film stocks or ISO anons tend to favor the most.
Please just tell me what you like using and maybe why if you can be bothered.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 15:46:40 No.4483975 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483969
Fomapan 100
simple as

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 15:57:18 No.4483977 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483969
HP5 which is an easy pick honestly. But Kentmere 200 is intriguing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 16:44:34 No.4483988 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483969
Velvia if I can find it at a reasonable price, Ektachrome if I can't.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 16:46:34 No.4483989 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483969
Found myself mostly shooting a collection of slow-medium speed B&W these days. Shit's cozy. My favorite whenever the lighting allows is Pan F.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image_0028_edit1.jpg, 5MiB, 2789x2225

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 17:11:59 No.4483993 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483969
TMX and Portra

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 17:41:09 No.4483996 Report

Quoted By:

>>4483969
The only 2 film stocks I need:
- APX / Kentmere 400 pushed 1 stop
- Kodak ColorPlus

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 18:34:25 No.4484000 Report

Quoted By: >>4484062

>>4483969
i still haven't decided honestly
I like foma 100 or 400 in medium format but foma 200 or 100 in 35mm
I haven't really liked any of the illford films as much but I use rodinal mostly so that might be part of it

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 18:51:42 No.4484001 Report

Quoted By: >>4484062

>>4483969
Pay no mind to these other basedboys going on about different films, just use whatever is the cheapest, any significant “character” differences are a coping spook

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20251119_135114.jpg, 3MiB, 2984x3574

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 22:09:04 No.4484022 Report

Quoted By: >>4484023

Had to wait on some stuff to get back to wetplates, but I am so back.
Test shot to see if my silver bath was going to produce acceptable images. Underexposed, but I think it is kinda cool.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20251119_135259.jpg, 2MiB, 3704x2752

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 22:11:24 No.4484023 Report

Quoted By: >>4484024

>>4484022
Then I spent the rest of my time figuring out cloud shots. Extremely addictive and tricky to do. Needs very fast exposures.

If you do it right you get this amazing contrast that blackens the gray clouds. The sky was completely cloudy with sun peaking through the brightest areas.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20251119_135439.jpg, 2MiB, 2718x3176

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 22:16:29 No.4484024 Report

Quoted By: >>4484025 >>4484186

>>4484023
For reference this was shot at f9 and 1/30th of a second. My first shot was 2 seconds at f5.6.
I think this one is going to look really cool framed. I want to do a series of these for my wall.
The ephemeral nature of cloud formations mixed with a "one of a kind" wetplate like this gets me going.

Pouring a plate to taking the picture is around 5-6 minutes time and you only have 3 or 4 minutes to actually expose the plate before it dries out. It's really fun to step outside and see what the clouds give you and hoping to god your exposure was correct.

Thank you for reading my blog.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20251119_141907.jpg, 2MiB, 2930x3296

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 22:20:29 No.4484025 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484024
Last one.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO scans_019.jpg, 1MiB, 2072x3108

Anonymous Wed 19 Nov 2025 23:41:57 No.4484038 Report

Quoted By: >>4484041

Here's an old scan I only recently got around to editing. I've recently decided to get into more street photography and I want to know if people prefer aperture or shutter priority when doing this on film. I've got an AE-1 and I'm wondering if people have had good luck with this camera in the streets.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 00:16:46 No.4484041 Report

Quoted By: >>4484044

>>4484038
>santa Ana
Post hand lol all my Beaner family lives in Santa Ana

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO signal-2025-11-19-164511_002.jpg, 280KiB, 1538x2048

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 00:45:57 No.4484044 Report

Quoted By: >>4484045 >>4484061

>>4484041
i am a colonizer

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 01:24:26 No.4484045 Report

Quoted By: >>4484061

>>4484044
Haha nice one surprised any gringos still live in that are it’s all beaners and gooks. How old is you photo? Google shows that sign having a north gate market now. Makes me feel less bad about having photos from last year still to edit

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 02:52:47 No.4484061 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484044
>>4484045
thats clearly a beaner that doesn't get enough sunlight
t. beaner

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 03:02:37 No.4484062 Report

Quoted By: >>4484067

>>4484000
From what I hear (havent used it yet) HP5 and rodinal are a beeg grain combo, but I've not heard the same for any other film they make except maybe Delta 3200 which is a bit obvious when thought on.
>>4484001
Nah I just wanted to hear what people prefered. I've only recently gone down this rabbit hole and wanted personal insights. Funny I kinda want to try SFX 200 or Ortho 80 after reading about them.
Besides, I'm happy to motivate any engagement that isn't shitfllinging brandwars otb.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 03:29:59 No.4484067 Report

Quoted By: >>4484069

>>4484062
Well, SFX and ortho 80 are exceptions to my buy whatever’s cheapest point because they are actually physically different in how they react to light. Otherwise people saying FoMA looks different from Kentmere looks different from this looks different from that looks different from my granny’s cooch, it’s all the same bullshit that people do when they’re pixel peeping my Sony sensor better than your Nikon sensor better than your canon sensor blah blah blah. It’s all bullshit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 03:40:46 No.4484069 Report

Quoted By: >>4484074

>>4484067
All emulsions physically react differently to light. Compare spectral curves for various films and you'll see that. Compare charecteristic curves and you'll also find that the way the build density/contrast is also physically different. Cheaper films have thinner emulsions also.

Not saying you can't get similar results, but there is noticeable difference between something like foma100 and fp4 aside from the fact that foma is actually a 50 speed film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 03:48:04 No.4484074 Report

Quoted By: >>4484077 >>4484078 >>4484084

>>4484069
Sure if you’re a loupe viewing pixel peeping chuddie maybe there’s a difference. For normal people aside from film speed the differences are irrelevant. And I’ve got a fridge full of all kinds of film before someone cries poorfag. It’s like when people ask what the best mirrorless and the true answer is they’re all fine and they have been for a decade so it doesn’t actually matter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 04:02:27 No.4484077 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484074
Please forgive me anons, I posted that in horny anger that made me feel truculent, and now that I busted a nut, I take it back. We shoot film for fun after all, might as well play around with stuff. I do believe that for just casual every day use a roll of foma is good enough for almost everything, but you know I was over the line saying That no one should care about other films. Experiment away. I stand by my point about digital though fuck sensor wars. It’s all the same shift.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 04:31:54 No.4484078 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484074
The real truth is that if you only scan your film or are just taking snapshots it doesn't really matter for the most part. Cheaper films kinda suck for snapshots because you need to pay attention to exposure and scene contrast to not get garbage in some situations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 06:01:28 No.4484084 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484074
Many mirrorless are worse than DSLRs and the people who defend shit mirrorless typically either dont use them or only take photos of building corners on sunny days

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP4681.jpg, 4MiB, 3683x5211

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 07:56:39 No.4484089 Report

Quoted By: >>4484091

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP4659.jpg, 3MiB, 3569x5330

Anonymous Thu 20 Nov 2025 07:59:39 No.4484091 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484089

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Nov 2025 02:34:21 No.4484164 Report

Quoted By:

THERE'S A GOWLANDFLEX 4X5 TLR ON EBAY RIGHT NOW.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000244510020~2.jpg, 3MiB, 2873x4332

Anonymous Fri 21 Nov 2025 11:45:44 No.4484184 Report

Quoted By:

>>4482671
My F-1 is out for CLA after discovering a possible shutter capping issue.

I miss it bros I want it back.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 100S8651.jpg, 2MiB, 3000x2000

Anonymous Fri 21 Nov 2025 12:27:56 No.4484186 Report

Quoted By: >>4484261

kodacolor 100

>>4484024
sweet

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20251121_163640.jpg, 2MiB, 2810x3446

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 00:42:33 No.4484261 Report

Quoted By: >>4484265

Ambrotype. I found out that if you want to make a glass negative you need 3x exposure and roughly 2 minute development. If you're making ambrotype positives the exposure is the same as with tintypes. You mount with felt to give the image its blacks.

The colloidion has held onto the glass perfectly. I am happy. I may switch to ambrotype only because the image quality is even better. Washing glass is kind of painful, but we do anything and everything for image quality over here.

>>4484186
Ty! I've got the pic lacquered and will frame soon. Your pic is very comfy with kind of spooky darkness on the right. Nice.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO WETPLATE2.jpg, 1MiB, 1868x2297

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 02:08:33 No.4484265 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484261
Here is the scanned image. To scan these you place the emulsion facing up and then place a piece of black flocking on top of the glass plate then scan as a positive image. Not ideal but I think it's cool to share. I gave the plate a wash in distilled water, but next time I'll give it a short photo-flo + distilled water bath to avoid water marks. Tricky to keep these totally clean through the whole process.
Lighting wasn't ideal for this shot, but my f8 and 8s exposure was actually pretty close for what I was working with.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO nervous-pepe.jpg, 8KiB, 218x218

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 08:27:55 No.4484284 Report

Quoted By: >>4484285

Just realized my film isn't winding in my camera. The winding thing on the opposite end isn't moving. What do I do?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 08:49:55 No.4484285 Report

Quoted By: >>4484287

>>4484284
if it was never winding then you can just open it up and re-seat the film
then you can fall into a state of self-hate because you didn't actually take the best shots of your career because you were too stupid to check if it's properly winding after you fired off the first frame (this still happens to me)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 09:05:46 No.4484287 Report

Quoted By: >>4484288

>>4484285
I just opened the back in complete darkness and it feels like the film is loose on the spool.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 09:15:05 No.4484288 Report

Quoted By: >>4484289

>>4484287
lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 09:20:34 No.4484289 Report

Quoted By: >>4484291

>>4484288
Advice needed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 09:27:15 No.4484291 Report

Quoted By: >>4484293

>>4484289
I am assuming it wasn't properly seated and you didn't make any actual exposures
The film should never become lose and stop winding in the middle of a roll
Seat it properly, fire 2 exposures and there you go, happy shooting

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_3477.jpg, 2MiB, 4032x3024

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 09:37:01 No.4484293 Report

Quoted By: >>4484294 >>4484299

>>4484291
You can tell it was wound through the advancing spool several times over.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 09:41:15 No.4484294 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484293
never had that, weird!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 11:08:22 No.4484299 Report

Quoted By:

>>4484293
Ripperoni. Looks like it lost tension mid-roll and just fell free of the catching notches on the spool.
Even if you started rewinding the film, or knocked it or anything really, it isn't user-error unless you've bulk rolled the film and done a poor job or something.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Nov 2025 12:09:52 No.4484302 Report

Quoted By:

Why are old p&s cams so fucking expensive? I found a cheap but solid p&s that I like but a lot of them are more expensive than my SLR.

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/ - Film Photography Thread