/p/ - Photography » Thread #2853521

[55 / 18 / ?]

77KiB, 1920x1279, b2r1yt0vjvy4bchtto3h.jpg

PolyFez Wed 01 Jun 2016 21:50:04 No.2853521 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>2853527 >>2853528 >>2853565 >>2854881

Hey /p/, what do you think about the idea of a device that has the ability to turn any 35mm film camera into a digital camera?

http://bokeh.digitalrev.com/article/the-pseudo-film-canister-wants-to-turn-your-analogue-camera-digital

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/pseudo-film-canister#/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2016 21:52:46 No.2853527 Report

Quoted By: >>2853539

>>2853521
The creator is either completely clueless or a scammer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2016 21:53:59 No.2853528 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853521
I think it's complex, technologically very difficult, and a final product is necessarily less easy to use, and worse quality, than just getting a digital camera. Especially with a lot of "retro styled" digital cameras coming out these days.

Timing the shutter with the sensor, battery life, space constraints, heat dissipation, the necessity to make a different cartridge for different shaped/designed bodies, etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2016 21:56:04 No.2853531 Report

Quoted By:

>Micro Four Thirds or ASPC

lmaooooooooooooooooooo

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2016 22:16:51 No.2853539 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853527
The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Anyway, I hope all these college dropout ''''''''''''designers''''''''''''' begging for money on their scam projects fucking get a clue, and die.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2016 23:07:40 No.2853565 Report

Quoted By: >>2853693

>>2853521
Nothing new.
They have been trying that since the 1990's.
Always fails miserably.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DIGITAL-MODUL-R_front_640w.jpg, 104KiB, 640x537

Anonymous Wed 01 Jun 2016 23:33:26 No.2853579 Report

Quoted By: >>2853693 >>2855716

People have been doing this shit for YEARS and every time it flops or just falls into vaporware hell.
Just get a Leica R8/9 with the DMR if you want a 35mm that can pull double duty.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 01:06:10 No.2853624 Report

Quoted By: >>2853625 >>2853627 >>2853647

wouldnt the part of the canister with the sensor have to be as thin as a roll of film to fit properly?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 01:07:47 No.2853625 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853624

yup, unless you modify the camera, which is stupid. its a fucking scam.

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w Thu 02 Jun 2016 01:13:38 No.2853627 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853624

Not with my film cameras, no.

I'd still never buy one, though.

PolyFez

PolyFez Thu 02 Jun 2016 02:10:34 No.2853647 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853624
Yea and from the look of the concept images. It looks like it would not fit in with cameras that shot half frame like the Ricoh Auto Half or Canon Demi

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 02:24:39 No.2853654 Report

Quoted By:

sure hope it success
but i wont invest

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2016-03-20-10-52-44.png, 969KiB, 2560x1600

!kurwaRB7YU Thu 02 Jun 2016 03:32:26 No.2853680 Report

Quoted By: >>2853754

finally a reason to post this again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 03:57:23 No.2853693 Report

Quoted By: >>2853747

>>2853565
>>2853579

It has been successful with medium and large format though. Hasselblad has a really good digital back that goes on any of their old film models. But these are expensive and no one on /p/ could ever afford them

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 06:29:27 No.2853747 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853693
Yes, but those cameras are designed to be modular in a way that very few 35mm cameras are.
The mount for a film back on a hasselblad or Graflex is as standardised as the lense mount, thus the one product can be adapted to many different cameras.
The only standardised elements of 35mm camera design are the cartridge and frame size, and those things have no connection to the meter or shutter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 06:57:30 No.2853754 Report

Quoted By: >>2853788

>>2853680
let your friendo know his tie is nice but his blazer is loud, exhibitionist crap

royal blue? why is he dressing an extravagant black man?

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Thu 02 Jun 2016 08:05:35 No.2853788 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853754
>nitpicking an irrelevant portion of the pic
I knew I couldn't just crop out the relevant portion of the screen, depriving the mandatory stalky anon of deconstructing every bit of the screenshot. Bless your soul, never change /p/.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO bz8cl8lmsyol53ws4zxr.jpg, 50KiB, 1400x925

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 15:55:10 No.2853987 Report

Quoted By: >>2854152 >>2854486 >>2854912 >>2854923 >>2854925 >>2854928 >>2854930 >>2854932

This is the equivalent of drawing a car, writing "COMPLETELY SOLAR POWERED" on it, showing it to investors

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 20:14:04 No.2854152 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853987
Is that some kind of a joke? I would literally get the security to bring him back after I kicked him out, only to be able to kick him out again!
That piece of shit does not worth a penny.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 20:29:28 No.2854165 Report

Quoted By: >>2854209 >>2854269

>buy sony a7 (any model)
> buy adapter
> vsco presets
> muh digital film camera

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Thu 02 Jun 2016 21:28:10 No.2854209 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854165

>using an adapter
>not buying Pentax FF or Nikon Df

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w

/\M8U5H !!zJbpV0948+w Thu 02 Jun 2016 21:31:30 No.2854214 Report

Quoted By:

Anyone ever see one of these in person back in the day?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_DCS_400_series

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 02 Jun 2016 22:31:28 No.2854269 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854165
you mean Mastin Labs

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO e-Film%20(%C2%A9%20Silicon%20Fil (...).jpg, 72KiB, 755x522

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 05:20:25 No.2854482 Report

Quoted By:

nevuh

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO digital_film-1.jpg, 32KiB, 660x412

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 05:21:28 No.2854484 Report

Quoted By:

been done

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO sensore-intercambiabile-fotocame (...).jpg, 61KiB, 555x441

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 05:22:29 No.2854485 Report

Quoted By:

befo

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 05:26:04 No.2854486 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853987
He couldn't even get a 3d printed mock up Seriously?

He also must be some sort of techno wizard if he thinks he can power even a micro 4/3 sensor with a single AAA.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO the p theory.jpg, 117KiB, 834x669

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 18:46:54 No.2854881 Report

Quoted By: >>2854884 >>2854901 >>2856541

>>2853521
Technical issues aside, it's completely useless.

You're getting literally every disadvantage of a digital camera (cost, short battery life, highlight clipping, dust issues) combined with every disadvantage of a film camera minus the 36 frames per roll limit. So the only person you can market this to is a rare hipster who's fond of his film camera but not fond of actual film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 18:53:53 No.2854884 Report

Quoted By: >>2854888

>>2854881

id totally watch a camera themed sitcom.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Auto no focus shiteta.png, 34KiB, 405x149

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:07:18 No.2854888 Report

Quoted By: >>2854900

>>2854884
unfortunately I can only give you camera themed harem anime

_Eddward !!I5vCqtr9aKG

_Eddward !!I5vCqtr9aKG Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:26:03 No.2854900 Report

Quoted By: >>2854913

>>2854888
Link to moar please?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:34:09 No.2854901 Report

Quoted By: >>2854904 >>2854911

>>2854881
>So the only person you can market this to is a rare hipster who's fond of his film camera but not fond of actual film.
Isn't that pretty much every hipster who buys film, pays someone else to develop it, and then only ever looks at it in the form of digital scans and never prints it? I would say that is a pretty large group, maybe even the majority of the people currently shooting film.

This film canister thing would have to come with built in VSCO filters and fake dust and scratches, though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:37:27 No.2854904 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854901
Do you do a lot of home development and printing of your Velvia and Provia shots?

Do you genuinely waste your time and space developing color print film, knowing that if you do it perfectly, it will be exactly the same as from a lab, and if you fuck it up, it'll be worse in every way?

Darkroom printing is great when you do six prints a year and give some to your mom, but many people today want to share their art with the world, and to do that, you need to have it on the internet. I know it's hard to accept, but it's pretty much time to give in. 2008 is almost here, the world is moving on, very happily.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:50:03 No.2854911 Report

Quoted By: >>2854915

>>2854901
They still care about >muh physical negatives and >muh colors though. Those people who are content with VSCO imitation are already shooting digital cameras.

>fake dust and scratches
You don't need to fake dust, it'll come naturally - film cameras weren't engineered with all of the modern anti-dirt measures like dust traps and airflow deflectors, and I doubt the digital canister can include any kind of automatic sensor cleaning feature.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:52:42 No.2854912 Report

Quoted By: >>2854940

>>2853987
>This is the equivalent of drawing a car, writing "COMPLETELY SOLAR POWERED" on it, showing it to investors

Except he doesn't have to convince real investors.

He just has to convince some retarded hipsters.
Wouldn't be surprised if this is a scammer who has dozens of these "ideas" just to collect the money.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:53:50 No.2854913 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854900
Photo Kano.
It's shit though.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO d6d42c25-7fad-446b-9318-f53ddfbd (...).jpg, 14KiB, 350x350

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:56:32 No.2854915 Report

Quoted By: >>2854917 >>2854919

>>2854911
Cleaning a removable digital back is easy.

The idea has 99 problems but dust ain't one.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1464814065582.gif, 137KiB, 659x576

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 19:59:15 No.2854917 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854915

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:00:41 No.2854919 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854915
Not if you get oil from the shutter on there though.

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1464896378431.jpg, 103KiB, 601x665

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8 Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:03:32 No.2854923 Report

Quoted By: >>2854945

oh look it's this thing again.....

>>2853987

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1464296611985.jpg, 132KiB, 652x573

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8 Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:04:39 No.2854925 Report

Quoted By: >>2854945

>>2853987

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2014-10-03 at 8.41.2 (...).png, 92KiB, 253x380

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8 Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:06:42 No.2854928 Report

Quoted By: >>2854945

>>>2853987

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1418442563643.jpg, 26KiB, 640x480

NatureGuy !!tg3hbUo06u8 Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:07:55 No.2854930 Report

Quoted By: >>2854945

>>>>2853987

PolyFez

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO obalol.jpg, 6KiB, 270x187

PolyFez Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:08:19 No.2854932 Report

Quoted By:

>>2853987

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:16:52 No.2854940 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854912
Not to mention that the Indiegogo has flexible funding, which more or less means "I know I won't reach my goal but give me money anyways".

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 03 Jun 2016 20:27:33 No.2854945 Report

Quoted By: >>2855709 >>2856350

>>2854923
>>2854925
>>2854928
>>2854930

what did he mean by this?

PolyFez

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO the-world-may-never-know.png, 93KiB, 485x366

PolyFez Sat 04 Jun 2016 19:42:33 No.2855709 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854945
I have no clue anon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 04 Jun 2016 19:56:34 No.2855716 Report

Quoted By: >>2856546

>>2853579
This is my first time seeing this. What are your thoughts on this? Does it work well? I can google for any number of reviews but I'm looking for real-world unbiased stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 05 Jun 2016 15:46:37 No.2856350 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854945
People are throwing their money away. There are so many problems with a successful one of these it just isn't going to happen. It's also pretty clear the guy who is going to 'make' this hasn't really given thought to what he's trying to do and has done nothing to address the serious issues.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 05 Jun 2016 20:19:05 No.2856541 Report

Quoted By:

>>2854881

If it was cheap (which I doubt it would be) there'd be a niche. My only small camera is a 35mm rangefinder, so for day hikes where I don't want to fill a jacket with film it might be nice. I only got the thing because it was inexpensive and fun though, so if an accessory would double/triple the price I might as well just get an X100T or something.

That said, it's not like I use more than a roll or two when I'm just out with friends. So even then it would be more peace of mind than anything. And crop factor would be lame. Noise would likely be bad, as well. Hypothetically I'd pay, I don't know, a maximum of forty for something like that. Maybe a hundred if I was feeling dumb and rich.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 05 Jun 2016 20:25:15 No.2856546 Report

Quoted By:

>>2855716
If you're insane enough to pay the price of a brand new D5 for a non-autofocus SLR with a ten-year-old crop sensor, you shouldn't be concerned by how well it works.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 06 Jun 2016 04:28:34 No.2856980 Report

Quoted By: >>2857036

Why are they still trying?
It's much cheaper to just get a film camera and a digital camera.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 13-open.jpg, 48KiB, 640x352

Anonymous Mon 06 Jun 2016 06:43:18 No.2857036 Report

Quoted By: >>2857152

>>2856980
The idea of turning a film camera into a usable digital camera has been a dragon many have been chasing since the 90s.

Of course early digital cameras by Kodak were just Nikon or Canon film bodies with a huge NiCad tumor, there was the Leica DMR, and digital MF backs, but these are all either heavy or out of the reach of the regular photographer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 06 Jun 2016 09:17:40 No.2857152 Report

Quoted By: >>2857188

>>2857036
They also had one important thing in common: they only fit one particular camera (or standardized camera line, in case of MF backs).

One can safely disregard any "digital film" project that purports to be universal as vaporware.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 06 Jun 2016 10:26:41 No.2857188 Report

Quoted By:

>>2857152
That too.

I think it could be possible in a decade or so to see a digital sensor crammed into a film camera with little to no modification needed if sensors, batteries, and processors progress like they are; but for now it's just not possible.
Also by the time technology catches up with the concepts, camera technology will probably have made whatever sensor and processor you could fit into a film camera obsolete.

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