/p/ - Photography » Thread #2994242

[333 / 103 / ?]

Anonymous Tue 03 Jan 2017 13:20:01 No.2994242 View View Reply Original Report

This is the Film General Thread, aka FGT.
It's a place for you to post your film snapshits without flushing them down the Recent Photo Toilet.
>just posting in the FGT doesn't make you gay, unless you own more than 3 different 35mm cameras
It is OK to ask about gear in this thread.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO film scanning04801 s cin srgb.jpg, 783KiB, 1250x703

Anonymous Tue 03 Jan 2017 17:37:35 No.2994342 Report

Quoted By: >>2994520 >>2994660

This is HP5 at 100 in stock Xtol in 4x5. I'm looking for something with finer grain but similar tonality. I can't find Pan F in 4x5. Can anyone speak to FP4 in Xtol?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lowres1.jpg, 448KiB, 1000x810

Anonymous Tue 03 Jan 2017 18:57:44 No.2994390 Report

Quoted By: >>2994393 >>2994933 >>2996023

Dumping some recent 4x5 stuff from the west village.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lowres2.jpg, 414KiB, 810x1000

grant Tue 03 Jan 2017 18:59:20 No.2994393 Report

Quoted By: >>2994933

>>2994390

2/3

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Jan 2017 23:50:57 No.2994520 Report

Quoted By: >>2994609

>>2994342
Do you want finer grain or less sharpening artifacts?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 01:57:01 No.2994609 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994520
Finer grain so I can increase the sharpening artifacts where it counts

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO EPSON002.jpg, 581KiB, 2049x2513

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 02:34:33 No.2994630 Report

Quoted By: >>2994631 >>2994867

So I don't know too much but I want to learn how to improve my photography so I will dump 4 pics I took on my Polaroid SX-70. I'd appreciate advice (specifically about setting exposure would be great) and I was wondering about what are some good instax film cameras I should look into (Polaroid film is too expensive).

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO EPSON001.jpg, 635KiB, 2054x2530

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 02:35:36 No.2994631 Report

Quoted By: >>2994632 >>2994867

>>2994630

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO EPSON003.jpg, 529KiB, 2042x2495

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 02:36:38 No.2994632 Report

Quoted By: >>2994633 >>2994867

>>2994631

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO EPSON004.jpg, 483KiB, 1896x2401

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 02:37:41 No.2994633 Report

Quoted By: >>2994867

>>2994632

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 03:48:20 No.2994660 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994342
Acros works really well in xtol. Fuck ton of latitude.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 05:33:58 No.2994700 Report

Quoted By: >>2994704 >>2994720

is it safe to post /gear/ questions here?

recently got a nikkormat ft2 and i cant get the back open, no matter how hard i pull on the release knob. is there some trick to this or am i fucked?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 05:36:49 No.2994704 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994700
foam/sealing around the door might have turned into really sticky goop, may have to gently pry the back open.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO film168_b.jpg, 53KiB, 520x357

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 05:53:02 No.2994708 Report

Quoted By: >>2994720

Okay so my grandma gave me this cam when I was in high school and have been using it ever since. I take candid shots of my friends mostly and landscape shots. I lost my camera over the summer at a music festival. I want to approach photography more artistically and get into it more seriously. I want to use film still because I like the look of it. My question is, what film cam should I pick up next? I was thinking of something like pic related as well as a polaroid or instamax. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 06:21:59 No.2994719 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994242
>>just posting in the FGT doesn't make you gay, unless you own more than 3 different 35mm cameras
Kek.
I own at least 3 of each popular slr mount...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 17091276288_61fd62f5d7_b.jpg, 195KiB, 800x500

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 06:24:05 No.2994720 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994700
Don't intend to sound patronizing: did you push the release button on the bottom?

>>2994708
Literally anything would be good if that was the camera you have experience with. For a cheap and great similar camera look for the original olympus stylus (aka olympus mju) with the 35mm f3.5 fixed lens.

Buy really, go to any thrift store and buy whatever camera looks good to yiu. Try to get a fixed focal length with a f3.5 aperture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 08:54:52 No.2994816 Report

Quoted By: >>2994961 >>2994962

Gear question: What do you guys think about Zenits? Thinking about buying a TTL or something like that

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 10:12:46 No.2994838 Report

Quoted By: >>2994933 >>2994947

Even when you take away grain, film seems to have a quality to it that digital photos lack. What is it exactly that gives it this quality?

Tipsy R !!ciXydgyXy2X

Tipsy R !!ciXydgyXy2X Wed 04 Jan 2017 11:04:24 No.2994867 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994630
Good composition, sepia tone adds a great sense of age to the photo.

>>2994631
Poor subject but nice bokeh for a instant camera.

>>2994632
Second favorite, need to nail focus on the barn next time.

>>2994633
Least favorite but the yellow boarder made me kek.

If you're shooting on the SX-70 there really isn't much you can do aside from setting the dark/light exposure wheel on the front accordingly. Practically all of the shots you posted are exposed properly and unless you are in extremely low light/blinding light the dial can stay neutral. As for an Instax camera, you can take the expensive route and buy a TL70 or go cheaper and get a Lomo'Instant (Wide)/Mini Neo 90.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 12:52:38 No.2994933 Report

Quoted By: >>2995020

>>2994838
Highlights that aren't blown to fuck seven which ways.
>>2994393
>>2994390
He's back. What emulsion did you try out this time?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 13:12:08 No.2994947 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994838

as stated, a natural rendition of highlights, aka. detailed and full of nuances.

also, the other day, after testing a film camera for infinite focus i shot a lot to a bunch of buildings i have in front, with a film camera and digital one. one thing i realised is that varying but subtle weather conditions cant be identified as different by the digital camera, its like it forces itself to deliver a clear and uniform picture, no matter if set to "neutral" or in the raw itself. whereas, with the film camera i got a some sort of amplifying effect, a sunny and bright day looked super defined, then the same day with a subtle variation of colors and humidity looked very different with a specific blur to everything i couldnt find in the digital pics.

its like film is sensitive to more factors (beyond UV) than a digital sensor, and im not talking about gain type sensitivity (iso).

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ec.jpg, 131KiB, 640x434

!kurwaRB7YU Wed 04 Jan 2017 13:50:41 No.2994961 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994816
Don't. Every Zenit has the same 1/30-1/500 speed shutter, 66% final image area covering dim viewfinder, bulky heavy metal body and abysmal ergonomics. The TTL's lightmeter arrow is difficult to see in dim light so using it outside generic daytime bright conditions isn't confortable.

There is a lot of similarily priced m42 bodies that offer way more functionality. The Zenits are funny for what they are but for actual day to day use you'll just be gimping yourself.

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ec.jpg, 131KiB, 640x434

!kurwaRB7YU Wed 04 Jan 2017 13:52:47 No.2994962 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994816 #
Don't. Every Zenit has the same 1/30-1/500 speed shutter, 66% final image area covering dim viewfinder, bulky heavy metal body and abysmal ergonomics. The TTL's lightmeter arrow is difficult to see in dim light so using it outside generic daytime bright conditions isn't comfortable.

There are a lot of similarily priced m42 bodies that offer way more functionality. The Zenits are funny for what they are but for actual day to day use you'll just be gimping yourself.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lowres3.jpg, 558KiB, 792x1000

grant Wed 04 Jan 2017 15:46:40 No.2995020 Report

Quoted By: >>2995022 >>2995421 >>2995454 >>2995471

>>2994933
These were all 2014 expired provia rated at 80.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 15:55:23 No.2995022 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995020
That comfy light.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 20:01:46 No.2995234 Report

Quoted By: >>2995255 >>2997191

Its pretty difficult to take portraits with medium format. The DOF is so damn narrow you have to stop down at f8 just to have your subject in focus.

Do you medium format shooters pretty much only shoot 400 film and up? So much speed is lost just in aperture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 20:35:57 No.2995255 Report

Quoted By: >>2995259 >>2995260 >>2996061

>>2995234
MF shooters use off-camera lighting and flash metering, and set the backdrop up so that there's only "all of subject in eye-cleavingly sharp focus at f/11" and "failure". It's not 35mm, and the f/2.8 standard lens won't get any faster.

Oh, also ISO 100 is more common because of max sync speed.

Also, as a rule portraits are almost never shot wide open. Go down to at least f/4 on 35mm, f/8 on MF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 20:44:22 No.2995259 Report

Quoted By: >>2997780

>>2995255
Well since I dont have flash what Ive been doing lately is stopping to an absolute minimum of 5.6, but usually 8 or 11.

My Pentax67 has a metered prism which works well most of the time but I often use a handheld meter if the scene has a lot of range in light.

Took me more rolls than I like to admit before I realized open apertures were not kosher with medium format.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 20:45:24 No.2995260 Report

Quoted By: >>2995264

>>2995255
Forgot to ask what you meant about ISO 100,

You mean people are using 100 so they can utulize their flashes better?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 21:01:15 No.2995264 Report

Quoted By: >>2995294

>>2995260
Yeah. Takes less flash power to outdo background exposure at the 1/500 max sync speed of a 'blad leaf shutter. On Pentacks and USSR stuff though it's something awful like 1/30s or 1/60s, so to do fill-flash portraits outside you'd need ND filters and a whole lot of flash juice. Anyway, low ISO helps because the background contribution will be less at that aperture and sync speed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Jan 2017 22:01:07 No.2995294 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995264
Another slight dissapointment with MF is theres still more visible grain than I anticipated with 400 speed film. Maybe Im just looking at underexposed shots.

Gonna shoot at least a roll today of portra and conditions are great so maybe Ive figured out my gremlins. Last time I shot it had to be in the shade :/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 01:20:45 No.2995421 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995020
amazing
how do you meter?
just started getting into night photography and the biggest struggle seems getting the right exposure.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:13:52 No.2995454 Report

Quoted By: >>2995469

>>2995020
how the fuck is there no grain at all

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO skyline96.jpg, 386KiB, 800x507

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:16:19 No.2995458 Report

Quoted By: >>2998211 >>2998761

shitty pic from nye...... exposure all sorts of fucked up and the cloud cover did not help at all

cinestill 800

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:26:16 No.2995461 Report

Quoted By:

I've got a couple of rolls of TMAX 400 which expired in 2004.

My questions are A. How do I shoot this? and B. How should I develop this?

Thanks

grant

grant Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:39:24 No.2995469 Report

Quoted By: >>2995470

>>2995454
4x5. 1000px. ISO80.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:40:39 No.2995470 Report

Quoted By: >>2995473

>>2995469
yeah i was just complimenting you m8... great shooting

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:41:01 No.2995471 Report

Quoted By: >>2995473

>>2995020
How much'd you pay for your provia?

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2017-01-04 at 7.49.2 (...).png, 4MiB, 1858x1492

grant Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:45:38 No.2995473 Report

Quoted By: >>2995477 >>2995485

>>2995471
expired, but I think it was about $60 for 10 sheets in 2013. I was still in school, so student discount. I loved Astia so much, I'm fuckin pissed off it got discontinued like six months before I got a stable job.

>>2995470
love bru.

Pic semi related, just got back from a six day trip to Detroit and back. Only 8x10. Flat scan, slight curve for screenshot. Shot 35 8x10 C41 and 16 BW.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:49:21 No.2995477 Report

Quoted By: >>2995480

>>2995473
>35 8x10 C41
jesus .. much respect what are you shooting on?

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2017-01-04 at 8.38.3 (...).png, 2MiB, 1344x1094

grant Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:54:09 No.2995480 Report

Quoted By: >>2995482 >>2995485 >>2995514 >>2995516 >>2998175 >>2998176

>>2995477
Fuji IT-N mostly. Rated ISO1.5. Also four sheets of fresh Portra 160, for stuff like the attached, which I just didn't have the patience to wait out a 45 second exposure and stress about the camera shaking from wind. I also shot two sheets of Ektachrome, just to be rid of it and have another empty film box for downloading. For black and white I shot Fuji Full strength green scale HRT xray film rated ISO100.

Pic is just a screenshot of the flat scan again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 02:56:55 No.2995482 Report

Quoted By: >>2995490

>>2995480
Please give a newfag some tips

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 03:00:46 No.2995485 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995473
>>2995480
fuck me I love the tonality of large format. please post more if you've got them

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2017-01-04 at 8.46.5 (...).png, 4MiB, 1906x1534

grant Thu 05 Jan 2017 03:10:21 No.2995490 Report

Quoted By: >>2995492

>>2995482
With large format? Just shoot as much as you can afford. I've noticed expired film stays more consistent with larger stock, compared to shooting outdated 35 or 120. Get a good large format textbook. Using the View Camera by Steve Simmons is one of the two I bought during college and I keep it in my backpack with my camera, so I can always reference stuff. Hasn't been of much use lately but you never know.

I've also said this a lot before but I'm a trash person when it comes to consistency in most regards. My black and white chemicals are mixed all fucked up, I don't think I've ever developed two rolls the same, and I for sure don't have a thermometer. BW is just too easy to really hose. I don't optically print because I would kill myself.

When I was at the lab today some woman asked why I still shoot it, and I explained its like playing a piano. A 35mm frame is like a vertical piano, a 120 frame is like a grand piano with black keys as well. 8x10 is like a grand piano with five hundred keys. I shoot the film and manipulate digitally.

Alex Burke has some great tips on his site. Learn scheimpflug and bellows compensation. And remember, no matter what, when you get the negs back, you missed complete focus on all of them because we all suck here on /p/.

Another flat scan. Wilkes-Barre, PA.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 03:16:05 No.2995492 Report

Quoted By: >>2995493 >>2995495

>>2995490
I meant in general, but thanks. I'm newfag with photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 03:19:07 No.2995493 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995492
ree, get out, etc.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2017-01-04 at 8.55.1 (...).png, 2MiB, 1070x1360

grant Thu 05 Jan 2017 03:20:46 No.2995495 Report

Quoted By: >>3002651

>>2995492
Get one of the John Hedgecoe books. The photographers handbook is the one I liked. His digital books and the books about specific stuff (Shooting landscapes, portraits, etc) were a bit too cheesy. Look at lots of other photographers work. Read a wikipedia page about something you like and follow all the links to other places, and find something there to go photograph. All these images and the whole road trip centered around the new creation of "urban prairie" where nature retakes previous inhabited spaces. I tried to stay as far as possible from urbex and ruin porn tropes and also expand on the idea of the decline of rust belt america.

Somewhere near Sandusky, Ohio.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 04:14:53 No.2995514 Report

Quoted By: >>2995515 >>2995549

>>2995480
beautiful

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 04:16:03 No.2995515 Report

Quoted By: >>2995549

>>2995514
Really?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 04:16:33 No.2995516 Report

Quoted By: >>2995549

>>2995480
Fuji-it-n is great what sort of gear are you using? I am stuck on 35mm and 6x7............ always wanted to get into large format

grant

grant Thu 05 Jan 2017 04:52:21 No.2995549 Report

Quoted By: >>2995857 >>2998180

>>2995515
They all need a ton of work, these are flat scans. >>2995514
thanks
>>2995516
Fuji IT-N is what it is. Sometimes for no reason I just get a wack color cast on a random sheet. My 8x10 is a Deardorff and I use a Turner Reich 12inch and a 240 and 360 Schneider Symmar. I also have a Wista 4x5, which I shot the neon stuff with.
Get a crown graphic or similar graflex. Cheap and reliable. Not a lot of movements but if you hate it, you can sell it for what you paid. 10 sheets of portra is $3.50 a sheet on bh right now.

Also, if anyone wants to buy a full Bronica GS-1 kit, 65/100/150 lens grip, etc etc let me know, I need the money muy pronto.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 06:50:34 No.2995621 Report

Quoted By:

How should I expose/develop Tri-X that expired ~12 years ago? It hasn't been cold stored and I live in a reasonably hot country

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 13:16:52 No.2995812 Report

Quoted By:

Goddamn that 8x10 stuff makes my Pentax 6x7 feel tiny.

Oh well, at least I can carry it around without owning a car and shoot without a tripod. :(

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 14:35:11 No.2995857 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995549
I only shot fuji it-n at 35 so thanks for clarifying .. porta seems to be solid at any size. Thanks for the tips on the gear ; and sorry i cant help you out with that bronica if this was two weeks ago i would have personally bought it but i just got another enlarger and an xe-7 last week. ..you'll be able to sell that no problem if its in good shape . best of luck; i hope to see more of your work on here in the future

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO windshield.jpg, 313KiB, 799x515

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 14:44:40 No.2995861 Report

Quoted By: >>2997058

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 18:07:08 No.2995955 Report

Quoted By: >>2995971

Shot a bit of film years ago and feel like shooting again
Was thinking about getting a medium format but I really feel like jumping straight up to a 4x5

Will probably pull the trigger on a Speed Graphic this week.
Has anyone used one of these?

Based on the info given, I have typed this considered response:

Based on the info given, I have typed this considered response: Thu 05 Jan 2017 18:38:10 No.2995971 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995955
Yes. Go for it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0152.jpg, 175KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 19:16:57 No.2995988 Report

Quoted By: >>2996639

First time shooting B&W some XP2 400.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0161.jpg, 143KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 19:18:33 No.2995990 Report

Quoted By: >>2996639

2/4

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0158.jpg, 218KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 19:22:06 No.2995992 Report

Quoted By: >>2996000 >>2996639

3/4

Probs my favourite from the roll.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 19:36:24 No.2996000 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995992
This one is cool

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0160.jpg, 159KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:13:04 No.2996021 Report

Quoted By: >>2996639

4/4

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:14:45 No.2996023 Report

Quoted By:

>>2994390
Nice tones

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:24:27 No.2996027 Report

Quoted By: >>2996028 >>2996114

Can anyone recommend a decent cheap scanner? I can't really spend more than £100 but want something which will give me better results than lab scans (excuse me but 4MP is not hi-res).

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSLRScanning.jpg, 455KiB, 2138x795

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:27:08 No.2996028 Report

Quoted By: >>2996039 >>2996060 >>2996079

>>2996027

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:43:25 No.2996039 Report

Quoted By: >>2996048 >>2996057 >>2996110

>>2996028
I really don't want to DSLR scan. It's more work than I have time for and needs more shit than I can have room for.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO SuperiaP55512.jpg, 733KiB, 1080x1080

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:48:53 No.2996048 Report

Quoted By: >>2996062

>>2996039
Sounds like you don't care about your pics anyway and that lab scans are more than sufficient for your purposes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 20:58:55 No.2996057 Report

Quoted By: >>2996060

>>2996039
>I really don't want to DSLR scan. It's more work than I have time for
once you're set up, it's faster than a flatbed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:01:04 No.2996060 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996028
>>2996057

He asked for a scanner. Why do you guys keep forcing with that meme ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:03:21 No.2996061 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995255
>Go down to at least f/4 on 35mm

I usually stop down to f/2.8, why should I go to f/4 ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:03:40 No.2996062 Report

Quoted By: >>2996090 >>2996110

>>2996048
I care about my pictures, I just don't want to spend excessive time and money (the gear listed in the earlier picture would definitely cost way more than a dedicated scanner seeing as I don't own a DSLR).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:15:31 No.2996079 Report

Quoted By: >>2996110

>>2996028
does that retarded fucking setup really seem like it would be a reasonable option for most people?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:25:31 No.2996090 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996062
an epson v550 or v600 covers 35mm and medium format, youll be fine with either.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO emotional_Leica_M-D_back_1024x10 (...).jpg, 215KiB, 644x1396

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:46:11 No.2996110 Report

Quoted By: >>2996117 >>2996427 >>2998268 >>2998461

>>2996079
>>2996062
>>2996039
Hey, wow, it's everything you need to produce better film scans than any working professional ever had access to for less than a McD's casual takes home in a week...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:50:13 No.2996114 Report

Quoted By: >>2996244

>>2996027
Plustek 8100. They're about £150, might be able to pick one up second hand.

Much better than fucking around with an SLR. You can scan it as RAW up to 7200dpi.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:54:33 No.2996117 Report

Quoted By: >>2996128

>>2996110

where's the tripod or copy stand?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0168.jpg, 249KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:56:19 No.2996119 Report

Quoted By: >>2996121

Some snapshits from my newly acquired Yashica T3. Have a fallen for the meme?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0164.jpg, 196KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 21:57:58 No.2996121 Report

Quoted By: >>2996126 >>2999150

>>2996119
The autofocus isn't that reliable and the lens can be a bit soft and vignettes at times. Although I think that's common with tessar lens?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0163.jpg, 324KiB, 960x640

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:00:02 No.2996126 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996121
I like the scope on top but I think my Nikon L35AF was just as good of a camera before it broke.

I paid £70 for the T3, I could sell it for £100. Should I flip it and get something else? XA?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:00:58 No.2996128 Report

Quoted By: >>2996135 >>2996427

>>2996117
You don't really need one, it's easy to jerry rig a means of holding a camera still.
>and my interest in searching "tripods" on ebay is so low I walked into a store and spent a grand on a fucking gitzo, i'm not going to do that to myself for the sake of this thought experiment

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:03:55 No.2996135 Report

Quoted By: >>2996149

>>2996128

holding the camera still is absolutely the most important part, though. you're talking about grain-sharp focus at a focal distance of inches.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:15:20 No.2996147 Report

Quoted By: >>2996148

As a general rule in film photography should I meter the shadows and then overexposure slightly?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:16:27 No.2996148 Report

Quoted By: >>2996150

>>2996147

Depends on the film. For negative film, yes. For black and white film, generally, but it's not so crucial. For slide film, expose for highlights.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:16:51 No.2996149 Report

Quoted By: >>2996156

>>2996135
Cutting a hole in a sturdy box, pointing the camera through it, and securing it with blu-tac, would be a far more effective solution than any tripod.
Tripods don't hold the subject too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:18:33 No.2996150 Report

Quoted By: >>2996154

>>2996148
How many stops should I overexpose by with colour negative?

Should I treat BW C41 the same as colour C41?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:26:14 No.2996154 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996150

2/3 to 1 stop is the sweet spot. Really, you just don't want to underexpose. Go ahead and treat xp2 or whatever the b&w c41 is the same way.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:30:07 No.2996156 Report

Quoted By: >>2996158

>>2996149

Sounds like a terrible solution. Do you really think people are going to cobble together $300 worth of disparate used junk and then tape (sorry, blu-tac!) it to a cardboard box? Seriously?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:33:07 No.2996158 Report

Quoted By: >>2996160

>>2996156
Do they want good scans?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:34:08 No.2996160 Report

Quoted By: >>2996170

>>2996158

Do they want to spend too much money and have to deal with stupid, jury rigged workarounds?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 14247554_642665355892634_8331132 (...).jpg, 92KiB, 1012x676

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 22:52:39 No.2996170 Report

Quoted By: >>2996427

>>2996160
>shoots film in 2017
>taking a macro photo on a digital camera is too much effort
oh you shatbedders

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO double.jpg, 301KiB, 800x511

Anonymous Thu 05 Jan 2017 23:02:42 No.2996177 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 01:59:11 No.2996244 Report

Quoted By: >>2996445

>>2996114
>7200dpi
The 8100 has an optical resolution of about 3800dpi. Which is respectable, but falls short of what they advertise. What really sucks is that to achieve the 3800dpi optical, you have to scan at the 7200 setting. Thus each one of your snapshits will take 4 fucking minutes to scan.

I scan with an a6000 and I can set up my rig, scan a couple of 36 exp rolls, put the rig away and be ready to post process before you will have 6 shots scanned on that plustek. Bonus: I don't have to fiddle-fuck with outdated scanner software. Bonus: I have nice small ARW's that are easily cataloged and archived.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _IMG5224_pexp.jpg, 398KiB, 1200x801

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 04:11:32 No.2996350 Report

Quoted By: >>2996352

snapshits!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _IMG5120_pexp.jpg, 353KiB, 1200x805

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 04:12:34 No.2996352 Report

Quoted By: >>2996354 >>2996406

>>2996350

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _IMG5204_pexp.jpg, 367KiB, 792x1200

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 04:13:36 No.2996354 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996352

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO URBAN8.jpg, 470KiB, 1000x800

grant Fri 06 Jan 2017 05:43:44 No.2996399 Report

Quoted By: >>2996402

Ok here are some finals from my 8x10 stuff I did on the eizo today. Some had to be cropped a bit for various reasons and I stuck my generic 810 border on them.
1/3

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO URBAN18.jpg, 600KiB, 800x1000

grant Fri 06 Jan 2017 05:44:53 No.2996402 Report

Quoted By: >>2996404

>>2996399
2/3. Centralia, PA. Urban Prairie.

First one was somewhere south of Detroit on a lake off of Lake Erie.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Urban3.jpg, 459KiB, 1000x800

grant Fri 06 Jan 2017 05:45:57 No.2996404 Report

Quoted By: >>2996405

>>2996402
3/3
Somewhere east of Cleveland, Ohio en route to Pittsburgh along the 20.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO URBAN1.jpg, 485KiB, 1000x800

grant Fri 06 Jan 2017 05:47:52 No.2996405 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996404
one extra

Near the ice fishing spot south of Detroit in Michigan somewhere. Motor home park closed for the winter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 05:52:55 No.2996406 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996352
nice

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 06:53:01 No.2996427 Report

Quoted By: >>2996463

>>2996110
>>2996128
>>2996170
Dude just stop. Are you really too thick skulled to see that DSLR scanning just isn't an option for loads of people? First you say it's cheap then you realise it's three times as expensive as just buying a good scanner and try to tell me to spend more on something with worse results and a pain in the ass to set up. I asked for something very specific, stop shitting up the thread.

Thanks to the guys who suggested Epsom and Plustek, I thought the latter would be out of my budget but might be able to find one second-hand.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Long Clouds 4chan.jpg, 1MiB, 2100x1400

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 07:09:58 No.2996431 Report

Quoted By: >>2996433 >>2996434

took a couple out in western mass

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Through The Tower 4chan.jpg, 782KiB, 2100x1400

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 07:11:02 No.2996433 Report

Quoted By: >>2996434

>>2996431

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 07:13:19 No.2996434 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996431
>>2996433
whoops wrong thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 07:47:56 No.2996445 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996244
I don't scan at 7200dpi because you end up with gigantically pointless images. I normally do it as 3600dpi which gives me roughly a 20MP scan, takes about 10 seconds per frame.

I've tried DSLR scanning and it's too much of a fiddle to get right. Plus my DSLR is really old and only 10MP and doesn't have live view.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 08:23:45 No.2996463 Report

Quoted By: >>2996466 >>2996539

>>2996427
>just buying a good scanner
See, and it's my contention that there's no such thing south of a drumscanner, which you sure as hell aren't buying for $100.
As I've stated numerous times, my benchmark for reasonable 35mm quality is that a landscape-format shot be sharp at 1000px high, or about 8x10 in print.
And from everything I've observed, that is way beyond the capabilities of any shatbed or minilab scan, or those meme-tier plusteks.
Advanced prosumer tools like Meneltas or Coolscans or Flextights can meet that level of "sufficient" performance, but they are *slow*, require you to preserve in carbonite a P486 running windows 95, cost somewhere like $1000, and are still 25yo toasters waiting to shit the bed any day now.
Whereas a mid-range crop DSLR or MILC, macro lense and manual flash are all incredibly useful, worthwhile things to own in their own right, and combined with 5 minutes of your time and thought will kerbstomp the scan quality of literally every other option.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 08:53:29 No.2996466 Report

Quoted By: >>2996476 >>2996491

>>2996463
>As I've stated numerous times, my benchmark for reasonable 35mm quality is that a landscape-format shot be sharp at 1000px high, or about 8x10 in print.

Have you actually tried using any scanners? I can get those results scanning at 2400dpi which takes about 5 seconds.

DSLR scanning is a meme and you fell for it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO EMTriX39.jpg, 356KiB, 1080x864

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 09:15:03 No.2996476 Report

Quoted By: >>2996506 >>2996539

>>2996466
Now comes the part where I post scans and you post scans (but usually you don't), and it becomes clear that you're wrong, and we both move on with our lives.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 14424840_1249635251721482_137369 (...).jpg, 567KiB, 2048x1349

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 09:45:11 No.2996491 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996466
But in all seriousness, I really appreciate all these great plustek scans you post.
As a DSLR scanning cuck, I need to be BTFO on a regular basis to survive.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 10:41:02 No.2996506 Report

Quoted By: >>2996545

>>2996476
>GIMP

Opinion void.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 11:58:00 No.2996539 Report

Quoted By: >>2996571 >>2996578

>>2996476
There's no point comparing unless you're posting the same slide scanned with a dedicated scanner and a DSLR.

>>2996463
>See, and it's my contention that there's no such thing south of a drumscanner, which you sure as hell aren't buying for $100.
Can you stop telling me what I want? We get it, you have a DSLR and time and space and money to invest in scanning. I don't. I've been explicit in what I'm after and why your response won't suit, just stop sperging out shitting up the thread.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1441812745564.png, 161KiB, 630x700

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 12:06:38 No.2996545 Report

Quoted By: >>2996578

>>2996506

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1987_Toyota_Corolla_(AE82)_CS-X_ (...).jpg, 66KiB, 670x435

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 12:34:08 No.2996571 Report

Quoted By: >>2996627

>>2996539
But son, that car is for cucked faggots, and you'll wish you'd listened to me as soon as you're fully aware of what it means to own a car in the first place.
>shutup dad! i'm buying a c3 pluriel and theres nothing you can do about it! i'm sorry i ever asked for your help!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_8600mini.jpg, 381KiB, 1206x800

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 12:40:58 No.2996578 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996545
I bet he "filters" trips too.
>>2996539
>slide scanned with a DSLR
here you go

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 15:02:12 No.2996627 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996571
No, what you're saying is
>Why spend 2000 on a mid-range Ford when you can spend 4000 on this VW camper? Well, when I say VW camper I mean an old rusted chassis. The components will only cost about 2000 and you can fix it up in a couple of months with the right tools and expertise. It'll go just as fast and has more storage space even though I know you're just going to be using it for urban commuting. What's that, you aren't a total loser and don't have the time or space for it? Well tough, I'm going to continue to be an obtuse cunt because I'm too autistic to understand that different people have different needs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 15:16:20 No.2996639 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996021
>>2995992
>>2995990
>>2995988
so you're in Manc too, nice.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 20:51:56 No.2996845 Report

Quoted By: >>2996913

Give me some tips on giving the negatives to a photo place to scan them for me.

I'm planning on getting a film scanner in couple of months, but until then I want to give some things for them to scan.

Are they gonna butcher everything?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 06 Jan 2017 21:46:18 No.2996913 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996845
I've tried many times in vain to explain to them how to remove their autoadjustment and compression features. Just think of them as previews until you get your scanner.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 00:44:15 No.2997058 Report

Quoted By: >>2997228

>>2995861
B O K E H

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 08430006.jpg, 876KiB, 1024x1039

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 02:28:01 No.2997117 Report

Quoted By: >>2998262

Does anyone here like the lo-fi/lomography shit?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 08430001.jpg, 899KiB, 1024x1039

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 02:29:05 No.2997119 Report

Quoted By: >>2998262

I hate my photos

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _0015556.jpg, 255KiB, 1000x750

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 02:31:04 No.2997124 Report

Quoted By: >>2997128 >>2997163

About to bucket process 100' of 16mm

I don't know what the film stock is or how old it is so I'm thinking a test strip at10min in Rodinal 1-50

I wasn't too fussy about what ISO i shot it at, just went f16 for sun and wide open indoors

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _0015553.jpg, 114KiB, 1000x750

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 02:34:32 No.2997128 Report

Quoted By: >>2997163

>>2997124
the bucket with 15L of dev and 10L of fix ready to go

Tipsy R !!ciXydgyXy2X

Tipsy R !!ciXydgyXy2X Sat 07 Jan 2017 03:23:27 No.2997163 Report

Quoted By: >>2997188

>>2997124
>>2997128
Wowzers! How did you enjoy the H16? I bet the functionality of it is a bit more complex than say a K3 but that turrent mount and general aesthetics must be a big seller for most owners.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 03:43:15 No.2997180 Report

Quoted By: >>2997184

As someone who has used a Canon 8400f, Epson v600, v650, v700, and a Nikon Super Coolscan 9000ED...MILC scanning trumps all of them in terms of speed even after accounting for the ~3-5 minute setup time. I can scan 2 rolls of 120 in the time it takes to scan 1 on any Epson scanner.

In terms of quality it blows them all out of the water except the Coolscan.

For whatever reason dust on my scans is also much, much less of any issue MILC scanning vs flatbed scanning. Which means less time spent cloning stamping files.

I haven't touched my v600 with betterscanning holders since I started MILC scanning. If someone already owns a decent dslr/MILC I highly recommend grabbing a macro lens and camera scanning vs buying some shitty flatbed. The one exception would be some dedicated 35mm scanners in the $300 price range if all you shoot is 35mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 03:45:47 No.2997184 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997180
That should read v550, v600, v700**

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _0015558.jpg, 135KiB, 1000x750

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 03:50:16 No.2997188 Report

Quoted By: >>2997480 >>2998601

so far the clip tests are not encouraging

>>2997163
it's pretty rad.
it functions pretty much like a manual still camera / rangefinder. you need to rotate the turret to focus or focus by distance.
a big consideration when shooting though is that it only has 30sec on the spring (newer models have more time)
it is kinda exciting to shoot knowing that every second is $$$.

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Sat 07 Jan 2017 03:54:58 No.2997191 Report

Quoted By: >>2998264

>>2995234

>Lrn2focus
>ISO 100

MF is the God Tier portrait camera, LF is the Legendary Tier camera for portraits. 35mm and below are for snapshitting unless they are Nikon or Contax those are Disciple Tier

focus isn't hard most MF cams have max f4.5 aperture, some 645 cams go down to f2 and f1.9.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 04:53:58 No.2997222 Report

Quoted By:

got an olympus infitiniy stylus. should i buy battery to use or just stick with canon sureshot?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _IMG5165_pexp.jpg, 264KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 05:15:01 No.2997228 Report

Quoted By: >>2997333

>>2997058
did someone say boke?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 05:20:39 No.2997229 Report

Quoted By: >>2997236

everyone going on about ektachrome makes me wonder, is there actually any point in shooting slide film if I don't jerk off in front of light boxes?

it's more expensive, more expensive to process, and requires stricter exposure?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 05:48:24 No.2997236 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997229
Honestly, the only reason I'm shooting a fuckton of it right now is that it costs the same as c41 for me. If it had the typical 2x+ pricetag compared to c41 I'd go back to never shooting that stuff.

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO och_christmas_tree.jpg, 261KiB, 828x1100

!kurwaRB7YU Sat 07 Jan 2017 10:25:15 No.2997333 Report

Quoted By: >>2997366

>>2997228
hey are we posting yearly christmas tree film bokeh?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 11:39:54 No.2997366 Report

Quoted By: >>2997372

>>2997333
Priceless

Did you just stick a filter round the lens?

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rsz_20161217_170039_richtonehdr.jpg, 288KiB, 900x506

!kurwaRB7YU Sat 07 Jan 2017 11:52:43 No.2997372 Report

Quoted By: >>2997417 >>2997478

>>2997366

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 13:25:51 No.2997417 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997372
Thanks for the chuckle m80

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO maxresdefault.jpg, 137KiB, 1920x1080

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 15:21:00 No.2997444 Report

Quoted By: >>2997449 >>2997450 >>2997466

I have a noob question. After loading the film how many shots before the non-exposed part of the roll is on? 2?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 15:30:06 No.2997449 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997444
Usually 2, take a safety shot in case.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 17738260861_03e8f534e8_b.jpg, 241KiB, 801x793

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 15:31:03 No.2997450 Report

Quoted By: >>2997455

>>2997444
Make sure you advance it with the back still open so you know for sure the film is caught. Once it's advanced a few times and is clearly secure, close the back. Then advance, fire the shutter, advance, fire the shutter, untik the shutter count reads '1'. Then you're all set!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 15:46:39 No.2997455 Report

Quoted By: >>2997457

>>2997450
Oh Crab Park

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 17071626307_52b102096a_b.jpg, 285KiB, 800x800

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 15:57:05 No.2997457 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997455
Bingo

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 15:57:15 No.2997458 Report

Quoted By: >>2998265

-14°C and it's a beautiful white night here

I'm going to go out this evening and hope my camera/metering/film doesn't die.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 16:20:36 No.2997466 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997444
Load your film in the dark and stop wasting frames.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO HAHAHAHA.gif, 573KiB, 500x281

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 16:38:12 No.2997478 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997372

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 16:40:00 No.2997480 Report

Quoted By: >>2997844 >>2998601

>>2997188

this is fucking awesome i want to get into moving film very badly. where do you source your chemicals?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1440983430885.jpg, 18KiB, 200x200

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 18:31:10 No.2997520 Report

Quoted By: >>2997601 >>2997717 >>2997746

Anyone here shoot with a Ricoh? I'm considering getting a GR-1.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 20:39:17 No.2997577 Report

Quoted By: >>2997590

Tell me about the 1l Tetenal kit /fgt/. I've been shooting slides occasionally and always loved it. My fav lab just stopped doing E6 and I just bought ~15 rolls of freezer stored Astia, Sensia, Provia and Velvia. So it looks like spring & summer will be all slides for me for color, but I also need to think about development since the lab isn't an option. And with that amount, why not just diy.

For background, I've developed black and white mostly but also C41 a few times. How hard is it compared to C41? How many rolls can the 1l kit do before it's exhausted?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 20:57:40 No.2997590 Report

Quoted By: >>2997597

>>2997577
If you can do C41 you can do E6.
It's a little more temperature sensitive but as long as you're not sloppy it will be fine.
My 2.5 liter kit says 30 rolls on the box, so I wouldn't be surprised if your 1 liter kit is good for about 12 rolls.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 21:04:55 No.2997597 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997590
Cool, so I might need to get something to keep the temperatures constant then. How we did with C41 was fill a plastic box with hot water, put the chemistry bottles into the water, and just added hot water to the box and mixed if the temperature of the chemistry started to drop. A bit ghetto but worked for C41 at least.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 07 Jan 2017 21:09:57 No.2997601 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997520
I own the gr1v and the gr21. They are basically like any other compact point and shoot camera. Be warned though they are very fragile and the motor and lcd just die on them and they cant be repaired anymore so be cautious. I love them though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 01:17:44 No.2997717 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997520
What is making you considering one?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:33:09 No.2997746 Report

Quoted By: >>2997751

>>2997520
They're great but they're fragile as fuck and no one can repair them. The 28mm lens on them has a great reputation for a reason.

For the money you could probably get a Minolta CLE + a non-Leica 28mm M-mount lens, which would be a pretty nice kit

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unnamed.jpg, 43KiB, 443x332

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:42:31 No.2997751 Report

Quoted By: >>2997754 >>2997767

>>2997746
You can get the ricoh lens in a screw mount so all the look and style of the gr without the fragileness of it. The lens will set you back 1200.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:47:01 No.2997754 Report

Quoted By: >>2997758

>>2997751
These lenses are on my "Would love to own but absolutely cannot justify the cash" list. It's very long.

The lens on the GR Digital's are just as good as their film counterparts, but unfortunately almost as fragile as well

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:49:51 No.2997755 Report

Quoted By: >>2997845

Gonna be developing my first roll of film in a couple of days (Acros in Ilfosol 3, weird combo I know)

Any advice to not fuck it up? It seems like a very easy process but I'm a reprobate clumsy fuck so if something can be messed up I'll probably find a way

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:51:36 No.2997758 Report

Quoted By: >>2997761

>>2997754
Most people buying it will throw it on a m mount so they clearly enjoy splurging on such items.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:54:04 No.2997761 Report

Quoted By: >>2997763 >>2997766 >>2997922

>>2997758
If you adapt L39 lenses to M mount are they still rangefinder coupled? Sorry if it's a stupid question, don't know much about Leica stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 02:58:04 No.2997763 Report

Quoted By: >>2997922

>>2997761
Yeah they are just buy the correct adapter and your set to go. All leicas have 28 frame lines so the gr lenses will pull them up with the correct adapter

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2017-01-08 13.59.58.jpg, 129KiB, 1073x1073

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 03:00:34 No.2997766 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997761

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 03:00:38 No.2997767 Report

Quoted By: >>2997773

>>2997751
Fuck ever spending that much on 'standard' lens for 35mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 03:06:54 No.2997773 Report

Quoted By: >>2997781

>>2997767
Seen the price of leicas 28 lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 03:12:46 No.2997780 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995259
"Took me more rolls than I like to admit before I realized open apertures were not kosher with medium format"
made me laugh for some reason.. thanks anon

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 18016273095_60f617967f_b.jpg, 170KiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 03:13:23 No.2997781 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997773
Yep, even more ridiculous. I understand gearfags gunna gearfag though. just can't helping thinking how one of those lenses could instead fund a very solid trip. I've done 1month backing packing trips shooting film the whole way for less than the price of one of those cocksuckers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:16:23 No.2997844 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997480
if all you do is B&W Neg, just use regular B&W chem

if you want to do a B&W positive it gets a bit trickier and dangerous, the reversal bleach can cause you serious burns. the chemicals are not hard to get but you will need to search them out. I don't have a source at the moment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:16:30 No.2997845 Report

Quoted By: >>2997853 >>2997867

>>2997755
watch a few videos of people doing the whole process. make sure you agitate enough during the first minute.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:17:27 No.2997847 Report

Quoted By: >>2997851 >>2997943

>>2994242
Help a shitty scrub out, /FGT/. I just bought a Canon a1 with the standard 50mm 1.8 lens for pretty cheap. The thing is, I can't get the aperture ring to do anything when mounted on the body, or off. I watched a video about "manual aperture activation" but it didn't help. The fuck do i do?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:19:08 No.2997851 Report

Quoted By: >>2997866

>>2997847
What do you mean you can't get the aperture to do anything? The aperture will stay fully open until you take a photo, and will then stop down to the aperture you select

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:21:51 No.2997853 Report

Quoted By: >>2997867

>>2997845
How much agitation do you suggest? First 30 seconds and then 10 seconds every minute?

As a side note, I'm having some trouble finding a consistent recipe for Acros in Ilfosol 3. Massive dev chart says 9.5 minutes at 1+14 dilution, but then others are developing at 7 minutes at the same dilution and getting good results. Any suggestions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:40:15 No.2997866 Report

Quoted By: >>2997943

>>2997851
I'm a retard. Thank you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 04:41:08 No.2997867 Report

Quoted By: >>2997888

>>2997845
everyone fucks up, I have been developing my own film for 15-20 years, ran a minilab for 6 years, and still fuck up from time to time.

normal agitation is as you noted here >>2997853 go with that and what massive dev chart says for now. as you go you can start playing with agitation and times (push / pull ect) to change contrast.

it's not hard and just be methodical about each step.

you'll be fine

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO noosa_roll1 (23 of 24).jpg, 3MiB, 1979x3000

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 05:08:48 No.2997888 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997867
Perfect, thanks. I'll post my results in the /fgt/ in a week or so.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 06:31:00 No.2997922 Report

Quoted By: >>2997948

>>2997761
yes they are and the adapter only alters the displayed frame lines and does not affect the rangefinder focus. so a 35/135 adapter will work with a 28 or 50mm lens, just will not show the correct frame lines.

>>2997763
>All leicas have 28 frame line
m3 only has 50-90-135
m2 only goes as wide as 35

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 07:53:02 No.2997943 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997866
>>2997847
Yes, but also the FD mount is a bit retarded in that it's very difficult to check the condition of an aperture without mounting it on a camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 08:15:55 No.2997948 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997922
Oh i didnt know that cheers i always wondered why the lens came with its own viewfinder.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 19:36:14 No.2998175 Report

Quoted By: >>2998178 >>2998269

>>2995480
Hey, I have a question as a fellow X-ray shooter: How do you meter for your shit? I've been shooting EB/RA Carestream single sided, and it's blown out like every fucking shot. I rate it mad low ISO, and still everything is overexposed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 19:40:02 No.2998176 Report

Quoted By: >>2998269

>>2995480
>Fuji IT-N
Shit, you're the interneg guy. I'm so jelly of your cheapo LF colour film stockpile.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 19:42:37 No.2998178 Report

Quoted By: >>2998189

>>2998175
>rates low ISO
>wonders why it's overexposed

[email protected]

[email protected] Sun 08 Jan 2017 19:45:55 No.2998180 Report

Quoted By: >>2998188 >>2998451

>>2995549
I have a Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5 camera I'd like to get rid of if anyone's interested. 450 CAD for 3 lens boards and a camera in near-mint condition, with 135mm Xenar lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 20:00:27 No.2998188 Report

Quoted By: >>2998289

>>2998180
should of posted earlier. I'm already in a bidding war on eBay right now.
What lenses you got?

[email protected]

[email protected] Sun 08 Jan 2017 20:00:43 No.2998189 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998178
I only did so on the advice of other lf photography folks for that specific film. They all rate it around 25 or some shit in daylight and they get better results. It can't be that I rate it at 25 myself in daylight.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 20:47:14 No.2998211 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995458
BUT THAT AESTHETIC THO

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Order.png, 105KiB, 695x635

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 21:25:21 No.2998228 Report

Quoted By: >>2998445

Anyone ever try the agfa or the ilford in this pic? just ordered all this stuff but not sure if i just thew money away on those two. .

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:07:26 No.2998254 Report

Quoted By: >>2998259 >>2998268

Can i do DSLR scanning with a 50mm 1.8 on a 60D or do i have to own a macro lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:18:16 No.2998259 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998254
You can do it with both of those but of course a dedicated macro lens will provide more detailed redults (getting way closer to the negative)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:21:09 No.2998262 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997117
no
>>2997119
good

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:24:15 No.2998264 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997191
>shooting MF wide open
>muh bokeh

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:26:10 No.2998265 Report

Quoted By:

>>2997458
what camera?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0366.jpg, 465KiB, 1000x1500

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:34:19 No.2998268 Report

Quoted By: >>2998321

>>2998254
You can't use the 50/1.8 unless you reverse mount it, or get macro tubes for it, and the results will be ordinary anyway.
If you are a poorfage, then a good enlarger lense, adapted to a bellows, adapted to your camera, is probably the most economical way to get excellent results, as in >>2996110
If you're not *that* poor, then a quick check of your local gumtree/craigslist equivalent will reveal that people are practically throwing away the Canon EF 100mm Macro these days.
You can find them for around $350, and they are a superb lense in every respect.
Pic related, shot with it, scanned with it.

Grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_9428.jpg, 279KiB, 1000x1006

Grant Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:34:35 No.2998269 Report

Quoted By: >>2998271 >>2998293

>>2998175
That could be your development as well. What's your method? Up until now I've used Fuji HRT Green Scale Full strength X-ray film, rated 100, developed 7.5 minutes in one shot D76. Really pissed off because when I got into it I was told by a guy I trusted that they didn't have single sided film, so I invested in manual dip n dunk stuff. Then I found out they have single sided Ektascan and shit, way easier for handling and stuff.

Do you tray develop? You may be over agitating or not diluting your chemicals enough. Also, remember that this is ortho film, which means it's not red sensitive, so blue skies are 100% BTFO. Try shooting a picture of a color checked and compare the tonalities to a digital picture converted to BW. I've never shot single sided which I think you have, but definitely seems like ISO 25 is low without filtration. Try 80 or 125.

>>2998176
I love it. Stressed I won't find any more. I've got less than 100 sheets left I think now.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO MOVIELAND-DELIGHT.jpg, 746KiB, 1000x800

grant Sun 08 Jan 2017 22:41:38 No.2998271 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998269
More Neon stuff. Vancouver.

[email protected]

[email protected] Sun 08 Jan 2017 23:22:16 No.2998289 Report

Quoted By: >>2998295 >>2998451

>>2998188
I have a few. I've got a Schneider-Kreuznach SA MC 90mm f/5.6 up for sale, as well as a 150mm Fujinon f/6.3, and a 240mm Apo-Ronar process lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 08 Jan 2017 23:27:52 No.2998293 Report

Quoted By: >>2998495 >>2998502 >>3000836

>>2998269
I was originally rating my shit at something like 25 in daylight, though now I use a wratten #44 over my light meter to approximate the sensitivity of the film. The manufacturer bounced my emails, so I can't find out exactly how orthochromatic it is. I'd like to know the spectral sensitivity exactly.

For development, I use a Jobo 2520 tank with the 2509n reel, 6 shots at a time. When I'm pushing for night shots, I do it in the tray. I stopped doing it in the tray a while back because all my negatives were coming out scratched to shit. It may have been that the trays in the communal darkroom were worn on the bottom, and thus abrasive, or I might have been overagitating. I kept getting that issue regardless of whether I changed my method, so I stopped.

I really really can't overstate how jealous I am of that colour film. I remember a few threads ago you said where you got it. I really want some for myself now. Because of the exchange rate, taxes and importation fees here in Canadaadadadada I can't really afford to shoot colour. I'd love to, though!

[email protected]

[email protected] Sun 08 Jan 2017 23:29:57 No.2998295 Report

Quoted By: >>2998451

>>2998289
I also have a Schneider SA 58mm XL. Not 100% sure I want to get rid of it, because it's the widest lens I can use without a recessed board, but I might take a good offer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 00:08:43 No.2998321 Report

Quoted By: >>2998538

>>2998268
I'm broke as shit.
The thing is my camera is an F2 with a 28mm and my digital is the Canon with the 50mm, if i had the same system going for my analog and digital i'd invest in a macro lens and all but i'm lost af atm and my priority is video so i have other equip (aka mic) to catch before getting more lenses.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 94070008.jpg, 4MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 00:10:51 No.2998324 Report

Quoted By: >>2998331

I'm somewhat new to this...
Nikon F3 Fujisuper

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 941200111.jpg, 461KiB, 1920x2896

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 00:18:24 No.2998329 Report

Quoted By: >>2998330

Some great photos here.
I have some Neon film pics from my last batch as well.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 941200100.jpg, 116KiB, 1024x679

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 00:19:28 No.2998330 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998329

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 00:20:57 No.2998331 Report

Quoted By: >>2998333

>>2998324
Forgot to resize, sorry.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 941200111.jpg, 106KiB, 800x1207

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 00:22:56 No.2998333 Report

Quoted By: >>2998502

>>2998331

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 01:38:10 No.2998390 Report

Quoted By: >>2998419 >>2998454

Won an auction for a Bronica SQ-A, 80mm PS, prism, and 120 back in good looking condition for $100. Seller cancelled my bid and relisted it for $200 starting price, $300 BIN.

What a cunt.

Won 10 rolls of Fuji slide for $25 though (6 Provia 100F, 2 Velvia 100, 2 Provia 400X).

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 02:01:51 No.2998419 Report

Quoted By: >>2998446

>>2998390
>Seller cancelled my bid and relisted it
ebay? sellers can do that? i thought it was a serious site.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 02:39:24 No.2998445 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998228
The AGFA is rebranded Fujifilm, it's a fine emulsion. XP2 is okay for a C-41 process B/W film, pretty sharp when I have used it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 02:39:50 No.2998446 Report

Quoted By: >>2998448

>>2998419
Nah, yahoo auctions. It's a shit site to be honest. Sellers can also extend auctions if a bidding war is happening at the end. When I first started using it I sniped a few winning bigs in at the last second only for the auctions to suddenly have 15 more minutes left.

Frustrating, but I've still been able to get some deals. Those 10 rolls of 35mm e6 surprised me by going so cheap. Looking at another 20 rolls of Provia 35mm hovering around $15 with not much time left.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 02:47:11 No.2998448 Report

Quoted By: >>2998456

>>2998446
>yahoo auctions

looked at it and its a japanese site, is that the one?

[email protected]

[email protected] Mon 09 Jan 2017 02:54:37 No.2998451 Report

Quoted By: >>2998456

>>2998295
>>2998289
>>2998180

If anyone wants the Graflex Crown Graphic 4x5 camera, or the Schneider-Kreuznach SA MC 90mm f/5.6 150mm Fujinon f/6.3, 240mm Apo-Ronar process lens, send me offers at my email address.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 03:00:56 No.2998454 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998390
I just won a pacemaker speed graphic on the eBay for 295. 311 including shipping

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 03:08:23 No.2998456 Report

Quoted By: >>2998536 >>2998650

>>2998448
Yep, that's the one.

>>2998451
One day I'll venture into LF...one day...

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 03:19:54 No.2998461 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996110

>$320
>could be a nice scanner of ebay for $250

bruhhh

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO hand.jpg, 735KiB, 993x1000

grant Mon 09 Jan 2017 04:02:12 No.2998495 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998293
call labs that have been in business a while, a lot of them still kept it because it was fuck all expensive back in the day. It's intended use was making negs from slides so you could have the saturation and color density of slide film but print on the much better color neg papers.

Yeah, I'm piss at developing but when I first doing it, I did it with trays. put a piece of glass from a cheap frame in the bottom of your tray, it helps.

Somewhere on LFPF theres a guy who said that you can't do double sided in Jobos, so I dont know about that. I also have never heard about using a filter over a meter like that.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO STUDIO1.jpg, 827KiB, 800x1000

grant Mon 09 Jan 2017 04:10:51 No.2998502 Report

Quoted By: >>2998523

>>2998333
where the fuck are they playing Showgirls, the Matrix, and Drive? holy shit what a mix.

>>2998293
sorry meant to add I have a roll of Kodak Edupe film, similar, in 35mm, and some 45 stuff that I will never get around to shooting more than six or eight sheets of. Add me on facebook and lets talk trade. I work in canada a lot and shipping in general isnt bad with a fedex business account
>business discounts.
I'm grant flanagan on fb, the dickhead with the hasselblad picture not the british alt right ginger guy.

Pic is more Vancouver neon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 04:46:48 No.2998523 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998502
>where the fuck are they playing Showgirls, the Matrix, and Drive? holy shit what a mix.
oh dang, I didn't even see that
>tfw ur nickelodeon goes beast mode

[email protected]

[email protected] Mon 09 Jan 2017 05:32:43 No.2998536 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998456
Hey, I already posted the price for the Graflex Crown Graphic upthread. My posted price includes its original 135mm Schneider Xenar lens. The 150mm Fujinon, which is essentially the 4x5 normal lens, goes for about 150 CAD. If you're paying in Ameribucks, it isn't that pricey.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 05:34:54 No.2998538 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998321
i scan with my pentax-m 50mm f1.7 and an extension tube, film fills the frame nearly 100% and the IQ is fine.

could it be better? probably. but the only expense to me was a $20 set of extension tubes. if you want to start scanning now for as little money as possible, it's the way to go.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _0015561.jpg, 205KiB, 960x1280

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 07:12:30 No.2998601 Report

Quoted By: >>2998649

>>2997188
the unknown 16mm film stock was doing strange shit in the rodinal so I ran some super8 through the batch. looks good so far.

>>2997480
weather you go with the spaghetti system or a proper tank, you still get to deal with 50-100' of film

right now waiting for it to dry so I can untangle it and spool it. scratches and blots are all part of the spaghetti system

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Mon 09 Jan 2017 09:47:43 No.2998649 Report

Quoted By: >>2998666

>>2998601
>rodinal
Anon, how exactly did you develop this positive reversal film?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 09:52:08 No.2998650 Report

Quoted By: >>2998693 >>2998712

>>2998456
does it work only for japan residents or do they ship overseas? how are the shipping prices?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 10:33:52 No.2998666 Report

Quoted By: >>2998688

>>2998649
That'll be crossprocessing, producing a negative image. It's fine for scanning and making projection prints from edited footage.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 10:34:09 No.2998667 Report

Quoted By:

Does your local Wal-mart or Walgreens still do film developing?
What state/city?

The Wal-mart next to me still sends out for developing, as usual. But, they stopped doing 120.

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Mon 09 Jan 2017 11:56:22 No.2998688 Report

Quoted By: >>2998799

>>2998666
ok satan. what film stock are you using that doesn't have an antihalation layer that only comes off when bleaching, this would be great for my submini cams

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Superia400_016.jpg, 518KiB, 667x1000

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 12:15:03 No.2998693 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998650
I see lots of auctions that specifically say no overseas shipping. Not sure how common it is, or how much it costs. I live in Japan so I typically pay <$5.

Recent Superia 400 frame from a mju.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 13:20:25 No.2998712 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998650
You will gave to use a proxy service, 99% of sellers do not ship abroad or deal wirh dirty gaijin who speak unpure languages.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 14:56:18 No.2998761 Report

Quoted By: >>2998764

>>2995458
>cinestill
you got memed

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 15:20:11 No.2998764 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998761
na m8 its super fun too shoot with. the 50 is great stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 16:48:32 No.2998799 Report

Quoted By: >>2998802

>>2998688
I'm using Tri-x reversal 7278, it doesn't appear to have an antihalation layer.
>only comes off when bleaching
it does have a reversal layer that activates in the R21a Bleach Bath and then re exposed and developed again. But if you only do a dev, stop, fix process it works like a grainy, high contrast neg.

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Mon 09 Jan 2017 17:09:37 No.2998802 Report

Quoted By: >>2998808 >>2998815

>>2998799
>it does have a reversal layer that activates in the R21a Bleach Bath

I'm not sure you fully understand what terms you're repeating or how this film actually works. Where did you learn the stuff you just wrote about?

also; thanks for the heads up, didnt know this had a fixable antihal layer, that's great news if they use the same stock in 16mm reels. more action for my kiev30

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 17:16:55 No.2998808 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998802
no one really cares about your input, because you've never posted anything worthwhile
does that eat you up inside?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 17:23:08 No.2998815 Report

Quoted By: >>2998824

>>2998802
how this film works for reversal

1. Rinse in Water (1 min)
2. 1st Developer: D-19 + Potassium Thiocyanate (5 mins)
3. Wash (3min)
4. Bleach (2mins)
5. Wash (3min)
6. Clearing Bath (1 min) (i didn't use it)
-Turn light on for re-exposure- (2mins)
7. 2nd Developer: D-19 (4mins)
8. Wash (3 min)
9. Fix (6 mins)
10. Wash (5 mins)

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Mon 09 Jan 2017 17:30:18 No.2998824 Report

Quoted By: >>2998826

>>2998815
I know how bw reversal works, I've done it several times. rodinal lazy negative guy (dunno if you or someone else) said "it does have a reversal layer that activates in the R21a Bleach Bath", and that sentence is gibberish which surprises me given they work and are obviously experienced and confident with motion film processing. I just want to understand where they got the idea of "reversal layer that activates in x" from.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 17:45:33 No.2998826 Report

Quoted By: >>2998837 >>2998928

>>2998824
this is how it was explained to me by an animator years ago, if that's not exactly how the chemistry works, no big deal. All I care about is that it works.

sorry if this triggers your autism

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 18:07:47 No.2998837 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998826
>sorry if this triggers your autism
what doesn't trigger his autism? serious question

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 18:21:02 No.2998840 Report

Quoted By:

I wanna get a Cannon Ae-1 Program because I liked it several years ago when a friend was taking a photography class. Not really new to photography but I'm new to film and it seems like a simple enough introductory camera.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO arnio_famicom.png, 42KiB, 388x172

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 20:38:50 No.2998910 Report

Quoted By: >>2998933

Is film ISO the same as ISO in a digital camera? Are the exposure triangles comparable? In my head I cannot think of a reason why it would not be 1:1 but I only shot film when I was a kid.

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Mon 09 Jan 2017 21:01:10 No.2998928 Report

Quoted By: >>2998944

>>2998826
The concept of doing something without having a basic understanding of how it works and what happens when you carry out each step just seems foreign and outlandish, like trying to cook without knowing or being interested in what the ingredients you're using are, taste like, behave when mixed, how they matter in making the final dish, how they influence it. You can do it but show me a chef that does that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 21:04:54 No.2998933 Report

Quoted By: >>2999278

>>2998910
the iso number associated with a film emulsion is a measurement of that films physical sensitivity to light. In digital you are altering signal gain to change the relationship between exposure and sensor data. The digital iso settings emulate film iso settings so in practice you use them the same way (mostly).

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 21:13:24 No.2998944 Report

Quoted By: >>2998953 >>2999283

>>2998928
I just watched a doc on James Brown, he didn't know how to read music, didn't know anything about what key shit was in, and he didn't care to learn. it didn't matter to him, but the dude had soul.

knowing how or why something works is not essential to making it work

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 21:32:47 No.2998953 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998944
>trying to explain things to the autist
shhh
just filter him friend

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 23:46:42 No.2999087 Report

Quoted By: >>2999091 >>2999317 >>2999366

What camera is relatively high quality and low weight (preferably around 300g)? I want something to take backpacking, but don't want to ruin my ultralight rig. Any experience with film while /out/?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 09 Jan 2017 23:54:43 No.2999091 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999087
ah Fujifilm Klasse S

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 01:35:51 No.2999142 Report

Quoted By: >>2999174 >>2999451 >>2999474

Kodak wants to bring back Kodachrome

https://petapixel.com/2017/01/09/kodak-investigating-take-bring-back-kodachrome/

Holy fuck, that'd be so amazing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 01:49:28 No.2999150 Report

Quoted By:

>>2996121
rijksmuseum

I find Amsterdam really difficult to photograph for some reason

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 02:24:03 No.2999174 Report

Quoted By: >>2999345

>>2999142
>Holy fuck, that'd be so
...expensive that no sane person would use it, just like last time

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 02:50:14 No.2999193 Report

Quoted By: >>2999209 >>2999224

gonna shoot some large format soon.
want to start with BW and do some memescapes
is there a specific film you guys recommend?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 03:11:33 No.2999209 Report

Quoted By: >>2999224

>>2999193
Use anything you can find at a price you're happy to pay?
The size of the format makes grain a non-consideration. Modify contrast with your choice of filters and developer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 03:33:03 No.2999224 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999209
depends on the print size, just printed a 24x30' from HP5 and the grain was quite noticeable

>>2999193
ilford delta 100 for fine (tube or T) grain
ilford fp4 for fine traditional grain
kodak - I don't shoot kodak so don't know

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO brisbane-2.jpg, 568KiB, 665x1000

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 04:15:01 No.2999238 Report

Quoted By: >>2999363

Any Brisbane filmfriends on here?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 05:32:43 No.2999274 Report

Quoted By: >>2999366

any decent point & shoot zooms?

need one that doesnt vignettes too much,, dunno if thats possible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 05:35:48 No.2999278 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998933

Thank you for explaining, and checked for your efforts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 05:55:51 No.2999283 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998944
half that guy's songs sound the same and his backing musicians invented his style, this is like saying bo diddley wouldn't have benefited from learning music theory

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img120.jpg, 586KiB, 1798x1199

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:06:41 No.2999286 Report

Quoted By: >>2999287

Some more HP5 snapshits. I feel really excited when I'm taking these and when I'm developing them, then I look at what I've scanned and it's just...meh. Only a handful are every remotely satisfying.

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img113.jpg, 573KiB, 1199x1799

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:07:52 No.2999287 Report

Quoted By: >>2999289

>>2999286

I liked the shadows in this one. But uh, that's about all I liked about it.

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img114.jpg, 443KiB, 1199x1799

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:09:56 No.2999289 Report

Quoted By: >>2999291

>>2999287

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img102.jpg, 279KiB, 1199x1798

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:12:03 No.2999291 Report

Quoted By: >>2999292

>>2999289

Roommate.

"Why...do you want to take my picture?"

"Because you're a faggot, that's why."

"You're the one taking pictures of dudes."

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img106.jpg, 356KiB, 1199x1799

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:13:05 No.2999292 Report

Quoted By: >>2999293 >>2999297 >>2999365

>>2999291

Roommate's wife.

"Stop that! My makeup's all fucked up. Gosh."

Also, best way to clean dust off a negative? I swear to God the scanner was clean when I scanned these things.

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img127.jpg, 382KiB, 1199x1799

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:14:08 No.2999293 Report

Quoted By: >>2999295

>>2999292

also, I didn't realize the focus was off on this until just now. Hmm. Maybe I shouldn't try manual focusing. :/

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img126.jpg, 574KiB, 1199x1799

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:15:11 No.2999295 Report

Quoted By: >>2999296

>>2999293

Worthless Snapshitter

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img105.jpg, 520KiB, 1199x1799

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:17:04 No.2999296 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999295

and I'll conclude with some lame-ass footprints in the snow because you people don't deserve this shit inflicted on you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:17:55 No.2999297 Report

Quoted By: >>2999299

>>2999292
If you're using a laptop, move your scanner to the bathroom. Run the shower on the hottest setting for like 5 minutes, then thoroughly clean off the negatives and the scanner and get to work. The steam draws the dust out of the air, which is why people recommend you develop and hang film in the bathroom too

Worthless Snapshitter

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:20:59 No.2999299 Report

Quoted By: >>2999301

>>2999297

Really? That seems kind of odd. I'd imagine that much steam around a scanner or any kind of electronic equipment would be bad for it.

I got a can of compressed air. Maybe I should get one of those electrostatic what-the-fucks old women dust their houses with.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:21:58 No.2999301 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999299
just embrace shit on your scans bro, that way all the plebs know you shoot film.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO noosa_preview.jpg, 1MiB, 989x1500

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:24:26 No.2999302 Report

Quoted By:

A day at the beach, featuring a 28mm lens full of fungus and some shitty dollar-store film which I fogged by opening the back too early.

Came out alright though

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:35:58 No.2999306 Report

Quoted By: >>2999311 >>2999312 >>2999366

I don't get film, boyos. Why pay money to take shit pictures when you can take shit pictures for free with digital? Why waste the resources?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:42:20 No.2999310 Report

Quoted By: >>2999311 >>2999316 >>2999352

Think of film like vinyl records; it's technically obsolete, but people enjoy it for it's tangibility. Loading the film, winding the crank, developing in the darkroom and then seeing your images appear in front of your eyes for the first time are all magic feelings that digital can't reproduce.

At least for me, I enjoy the actual process just as much, if not more than the photos I receive from it

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:43:31 No.2999311 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999310

meant for

>>2999306

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:43:46 No.2999312 Report

Quoted By: >>2999316

>>2999306
i enjoy the process.

also, i have the negatives of all the shit pictures my grandfather took back to the 1940s. 70 years from now ain't nobody gonna fuck with the raws of the shit pictures you take.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:46:15 No.2999316 Report

Quoted By: >>2999319

>>2999310
>>2999312

Ayy, I will admit they have a certain look to them... but they also just look old. When you notice something modern in the photo it is a bit jarring.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:48:55 No.2999317 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999087
Mju II

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 06:51:38 No.2999319 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999316
The old look is part of the reason I shoot film. I want my pictures to look like the giant box of old vacation photos my parents have.

Good quality pro emulsions like Kodak Portra 160/400 and Fuji 400h are surprisingly modern looking though. If you shot the same shot with portra and digital side by side you'd be pretty hard pressed to determine which is which unless you pixel peeped down to the grain level.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 07:00:12 No.2999325 Report

Quoted By: >>2999332

How long does mixed Ilford Rapid Fixer realistically keep for before exhausting? I made 1L from the concentrate, developed about 10 rolls of both 35mm and 120, and then moved and haven't used it in months. It's in a plastic bottle filled to the brim. I should just mix a new one to be sure, but just wondering. I know the concentrate keeps way longer than it says on the container.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 07:20:38 No.2999332 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999325
the fact sheet from ilford says that once the bottle is opened it should be used within 6 months

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 07:57:47 No.2999345 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999174
>...expensive that no sane person would use it, just like last time
No POOR person would use it, just like last time.
FTFY. Just because you can't afford your profession, doesn't mean that others can't.

Worthless Snapshitter

Worthless Snapshitter Tue 10 Jan 2017 08:15:08 No.2999352 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999310

I only have a film SLR, but I enjoy taking pictures. I'm no good at it, yet, and maybe I never will be; but the quality that I get from 35mm is better than what a point-and-shoot can provide me. Plus, there's something really gratifying about shooting and developing film.

I've seen things I wanted to snap a picture of, but thought: "Well, that's one out of 36 pictures I can't take. Is it really worth it?" And then I decided to be patient and wait for a better shot.

I'm still unforgivably bad at it but I'm far better now than when I was using just a cell phone camera for it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO NikonEMTriX42.jpg, 280KiB, 1117x800

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 09:10:14 No.2999363 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999238
Fuck off bro

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 09:11:21 No.2999365 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999292
Why does her face look like a shoulder of pork?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 09:11:56 No.2999366 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999087
Mju ii, XA, fuji klasse. If it were me id lean towards the mju ii due to its weatherproofing...but the xa would be a very close second.

>>2999274
Putting a roll through a Fuji Tiara zoom right now. Apparently the lens is stellar, though reviewers do mention vignetting on the 28mm side.

>>2999306
It's simply how I choose to 'waste my money'. Some people spend $10 a day eating out for lunch. That's more than 1 of film shot and developed for me. Meh, we all waste money one way or another. I don't shoot for any particular look. I shoot for the negatives and slides themselves.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 09:49:13 No.2999378 Report

Quoted By: >>2999379

Should I buy a really nice contax g1 body for $50? That enough if a margin to flip?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:02:11 No.2999379 Report

Quoted By: >>2999381

>>2999378
Yes, obviously. That's an incredible price. Find a lens to go with it and you're in the money

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Minolta_HP5_ID11_5_0014 (2).jpg, 106KiB, 505x768

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:13:54 No.2999380 Report

Quoted By: >>2999647 >>2999728

Reposting question from the gear thread because no answer:
Has anyone used the Yongnuo knock off 50mm or 35mm on a film EOS body? I'm interested in a very light plastic lens for a very light plastic body, but I've heard the Yongnuos don't play nice with film bodies (aperture and focus problems). The 35mm lens especially is the one I'm interested in but any input is welcomed.

Pic semi-related, plastic minolta SLR with a plastic AF lens. HP5 in ID-11.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:17:25 No.2999381 Report

Quoted By: >>2999382

>>2999379
>trusting strangers on the internet
Alright, bought it. What's a typical g1 + 45mm combo go for? Gotta figure out what price point to stay under for the lens to hopefully make at least $100 or so.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:27:36 No.2999382 Report

Quoted By: >>2999388

>>2999381
You could probably expect to sell the G1 + 45mm combo for $500 usd or a little less. In my market (Australia) Japanese sellers are selling the combo for ~$690AUD which is rougly 500usd.

The body alone is worth good money, you could relist it right now and make 3x what you paid for it quite easily

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1388762456452.jpg, 286KiB, 425x640

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:28:26 No.2999383 Report

Quoted By: >>2999384 >>2999451

Recommendations?

>medium format
>6x4.5 or 6x7
>under $800AU
>rangefinder or SLR (not a fan of looking down into a box to compose images)
>mostly if not all manual

Currently thinking of a Fuji GS645S however a little wary of its fragile lens mount.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:32:02 No.2999384 Report

Quoted By: >>2999390

>>2999383
Pentax 6x7 baby! You'll feel like a real man whenever you trigger the thunderclap that is the shutter. Alternatively you could buy something like the Bronica Zenza with the handle and eye level viewfinder? Or the RB/RZ67 with eye level vf?

Join 'Australian Film Photographers' on facebook, good deals on gear on there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:39:34 No.2999388 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999382
That's pretty damn great to hear. I'm seeing a bunch of 45mm examples for <$300 so it seems hitting a $100 profit shouldn't be too hard. Going to hold off and try to get the lens closer to $250ish.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:46:05 No.2999390 Report

Quoted By: >>2999392 >>2999397

>>2999384
Thanks for the facebook tip, I think a Pentax 67 + lens would be out of my price range however.
RZ67 has always been interesting to me and I guess with a prism finder it could be manageable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 10:52:09 No.2999392 Report

Quoted By: >>2999396

>>2999390
If you're considering the RZ, handle one first. They're not small, but they're good cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:00:15 No.2999396 Report

Quoted By: >>2999398

>>2999392
Should be ok as I'm expecting the weight moving to MF

I shoot mainly architectural/minimal based stuff, would the 90mm 3.5 or the 110mm f2.8 be more appropriate?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:02:06 No.2999397 Report

Quoted By: >>2999400

>>2999390
The weight if the RZ is aight with a WLF. Shooting it handheld with a prism is incredibly awkward though.

If it's gunna be on a tripod the whole time that's a different story.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:03:14 No.2999398 Report

Quoted By: >>2999400

>>2999396
I don't really shoot architecture but I would say wider is better.

What do you shoot with on FF/35mm?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:06:44 No.2999400 Report

Quoted By: >>2999401 >>2999406

>>2999397
what's awkward about shooting with the prism? it'll mostly be handheld and used for travelling also so the RZ over the RB for weight.

>>2999398
Normally I shoot 50mm on 35 but I tend to think it's a little too cropped, I've used 40mm~ and that seems to be a good sweet spot for me as 35mm can be a little too open.
However I've read the 90mm, being older, is a lot heavier and less intuitive and doesn't perform quite as well as the 110mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:10:44 No.2999401 Report

Quoted By: >>2999403 >>2999404

>>2999400
If you're gonna be handheld the RZ might not be right for you. It's big, and I mean big. In pictures it looks like Hassy sized but it's a large son of a bitch.

Lens wise, I think field of view should be your primary concern. Performance etc won't matter if you constantly find that you can't frame images as you see them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:27:11 No.2999403 Report

Quoted By: >>2999404 >>2999410

>>2999401
If the RZ is too big then what might you recommend?
True enough on the field of view though, I was originally going to go for a 65mm on a 6x4.5 which is around 40mm~ so maybe the 90mm on 6x7 is more appropriate.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:30:01 No.2999404 Report

Quoted By: >>2999410

>>2999401
>>2999403
jesus I just watched a video with a guy holding the RZ67, size of a small dog.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20160914_213735.jpg, 652KiB, 1536x1920

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:35:30 No.2999406 Report

Quoted By: >>2999414 >>2999430

>>2999400
>>2999400
>>2999400
With a WLF you can hold the camera waist level, pushed against your pelvis, and shoot while looking down. Your arms are at a relatively rigid position and your hands cradle the camera.

With a prism you're holding the 5lb+ camera in front of your face. Your arms are not able to be nearly as riding in this position, and your hand movement is a bit awkward. Go walk around your house with a 3/4 full gallon of milk occassionally holding it up to your face while cradling the bottom of it with your hands.

For real though, if youve never seen one in person try to find one locally to check out. Its not unmanageable with a wlf, but shooting handheld with a prism would suck. I know because I've done it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:39:17 No.2999410 Report

Quoted By: >>2999411 >>2999430

>>2999403
>>2999404
Something rangefinder based I'd say. The Fuji GF670 is really cool and quite portable, but no interchangeable lenses. Otherwise the Texas Leicas (Fuji 6x8 and 6x9 rangefinders) are great, but large.

If you're not too fussed on size, the Mamiya Universal Press could be an option. Very handhold-able, adaptable to almost any combination of film formats and lenses. Big and weird looking tho, but better to hold than the RZ.

Something like the Zenza Bronica or Mamiya 6x4.5 systems could be good too

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:42:42 No.2999411 Report

Quoted By: >>2999430

>>2999410
Adding to this: Have you considered TLRs?

The Mamiya C series TLRs are small and have interchangeable lenses if I remember correctly. Otherwise a Yashica-Mat 124g or Yashica 635 would suit your needs. The 635 is particularly cool since you can use both 120 and 35mm film in it

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 11:56:23 No.2999414 Report

Quoted By: >>2999422

>>2999406
>but shooting handheld with a prism would suck. I know because I've done it.
That's because you're too pleb to add a little more weight for a S P E E D G R I P.
It's the #1 accessory for shooting with a prism.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO MudslidesNeighbors.jpg, 109KiB, 800x534

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 12:23:36 No.2999422 Report

Quoted By: >>2999428

>>2999414
Well yeah, it's a camera that was lent to me. I'm not going to start buying accessories for it. How much more weight does dat der S P E E D O G R I P add?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 12:36:32 No.2999428 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999422
Not that much weight, about 500g maybe? The prism certainly adds the bulk of it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 12:40:51 No.2999430 Report

Quoted By: >>2999437 >>2999471

>>2999406
partly the reason I was leaning towards a rangefinder like the Fuji GS645S

>>2999410
GF670 is out of my price range, and the texas leica's are good but 6x7 is my max, I'd rather the extra shots per roll than using 6x9

I can get a Zenza Bronica ETRS for $450AU

"Zenza Bronica ETRS with non-metered Prism Finder, 40 and 75mm Lenses, new Oleson Focus Screen (ruled in thirds, centre spot, no split), has speedgrip, dark slide, 120 back, shutter speeds checked and are accurate in both lenses, new silver oxide battery."

not sure what the "new oleson focus screen" would be like but sounds like a reasonable deal, just not sure of the reliability and performance of it.

>>2999411
not a fan of TLR's sorry

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2 deer.jpg, 767KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 12:51:39 No.2999437 Report

Quoted By: >>2999442

>>2999430
Bronicas are solid cameras. Have had my SQ-A since 2005, no problems at all.

Here's a photo from 2006.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2017-01-10 at 8.57.5 (...).png, 363KiB, 498x654

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 12:58:53 No.2999442 Report

Quoted By: >>2999449

>>2999437
nice shot

here's the ad, is there anything I should be worried about here?
I live in the same city so I might go physically hold it and see what it's like.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Wang's Plant.jpg, 98KiB, 392x650

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 13:03:16 No.2999449 Report

Quoted By: >>2999479

>>2999442
Looks good man, snatch it up. I imagine you may eventually want to get a split screen. I hate using anything else personally. I think that camera would suit your needs really well though. Accessories are cheap as well. A few more backs won't set you back any cash at all if you decide to get more.

Grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_9393.jpg, 2MiB, 4032x3024

Grant Tue 10 Jan 2017 13:04:30 No.2999451 Report

Quoted By: >>2999649

>>2999383
Owned one, just sold it. Great camera. Had the mount gaff taped and the plastic bits around the rangefinder scotch taped on but for USD$250, little fucker worked great as a travel camera. Hotshoe for shitty flash and some Portra 800 for photos at NYC bars. Meter for walking around. Needs batteries though, even if you don't use meter. That kinda sucked. >>2999142
It would be really hard to get it right. The reason it had to be stopped originally was the cost of film due to EPA restrictions on chemicals, same with Polaroids. Literally pouring liquid death down the drain or into 55 gallon drums in the desert with those spent chems.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 13:42:58 No.2999471 Report

Quoted By: >>2999479

>>2999430
>Just not sure of the reliability and performance of it.
More reliable than any other MF SLR on the market, there are more parts for hasselblads but that's only natural considering it's a more popular camera. Less prone to breaking than Memeya and more popular than the Rollei cameras.
They were workhorses and honestly they're built for work. Give it a good CLA every now and then and you'll be fine.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 13:58:47 No.2999474 Report

Quoted By: >>2999478

>>2999142
What it would take? Holy fuck, it'd be a boutique film with an extensive photochemical infrastructure behind it. You'd shoot Kodachrome Neu and ship it to Kansas or die Schweiz, thirty bucks of overhead and twenty per roll for develop only.

Or maybe Kodak just goes ahead and develops a minilab solution for Kodachrome. Or a Kodachrome-alike that's got a less onerous process that isn't E-6 or C-41. But all of these are an enormous capital investment in a marginal product; it'd be far better for Kodak to develop a couple of variations of Ektachrome or even Ektar, than spend spend spend on a whole bunch of highly expensive shit to do, at the end of the day, very little in comparison.

It's just an executive waxing romantic about heritage and so forth, to drum up positive public interest. And far be it from me to shit on that (Kodak's still the t-max & tri-x company and the HC-110 company), but don't latch onto this and go into bated breath mode until new year's 2018. Kodachrome is an ever-more distant memory.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 14:05:50 No.2999478 Report

Quoted By: >>2999496

>>2999474
In my mind the method that most makes sense is to release a Kodachrome E-6 film. I don't think the market is at all big enough for an entirely new chemical process to be adopted.

If Kodak could replicate what made Kodachrome special in an E-6 process film then I think they'd be doing very well

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 14:08:01 No.2999479 Report

Quoted By: >>2999480

>>2999471
>>2999449
sounds good
he's asking $400AU now (~$300US) so even better, for that price it's probably worth giving it a go

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO KatyCPPhoola.jpg, 404KiB, 800x800

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 14:09:06 No.2999480 Report

Quoted By: >>2999497

>>2999479
Great price, get it before someone else does!

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 14:30:14 No.2999496 Report

Quoted By: >>2999521

>>2999478
>e6 kodachrome

it will look garbage like all their attempts to make a saturated and vibrant film (ektar and e100vs).

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 14:31:19 No.2999497 Report

Quoted By: >>2999523

>>2999480
what sort of francesca woodman is this

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 15:01:30 No.2999521 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999496
i think ektar is quite nice.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20160903_223551.jpg, 256KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 15:07:25 No.2999523 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999497
Never heard of her, cool stuff! Thx.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 30VHP533.jpg, 152KiB, 1192x800

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 21:18:03 No.2999647 Report

Quoted By: >>2999660

>>2999380
>>2999380
The non-IS 35/2 is cheap.
Also, if you'd consider a Nikon switch, their 35/2's are fucking everywhere.
Also, I shoot the 40/2.8 STM on an all plastic 300V (and this 30V), it's a joy. Fits in a jacket pocket, weighs nothing

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 21:24:08 No.2999649 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999451
>Literally pouring liquid death down the drain or into 55 gallon drums in the desert with those spent chems.
And? Fuck the desert.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 21:35:11 No.2999660 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999647
The real canon brand 35mm is cheaper than a lot of lenses, but still out of what I'm willing to pay for a film knockabout lens.

There's no switching, I currently use a compact digital camera, an FD mount 35mm SLR, and a film point and shoot. It's only after borrowing a plasticy 35mm SLR that I see the benefits, I'd be equally willing to go Nikon.

The 40mm seems nice though, similar price to the Yongnuos. I love that the lenses work equally well on digital and film.

Thanks for the response, when I get paid I'll start to look more seriously into it.

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img139.jpg, 336KiB, 799x496

ds Tue 10 Jan 2017 21:42:10 No.2999665 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img139.jpg, 336KiB, 799x496

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 21:43:29 No.2999666 Report

Quoted By: >>2999713

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img048.jpg, 494KiB, 800x504

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 22:10:56 No.2999670 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 10 Jan 2017 23:48:25 No.2999713 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999666
Nice bokeh and color there Satan

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 00:20:56 No.2999728 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999380
>Has anyone used the Yongnuo knock off 50mm or 35mm on a film EOS body? I'm interested in a very light plastic lens for a very light plastic body, but I've heard the Yongnuos don't play nice with film bodies (aperture and focus problems). The 35mm lens especially is the one I'm interested in but any input is welcomed.
I had a YN50mm that I got for pretty much free and my buddy has 35mm YN. Both lock up the character when you try to take a shot on an EOS 300, 5 and whatever other shite EOS camera he has.
Get the 35/2 IS, it's worth every penny.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 00:22:23 No.2999730 Report

Quoted By: >>2999893 >>3000084

hey, i've a gear related question.
i've spent months lusting after an MF camera. i put one roll through a Zenza Bronica etrs + 80mm lens a few months ago and loved the results.
the most affordable way to go seems to be TLR, and i'm thinking yashica.
would anyone recommend getting one with a built-in light meter? or is it worth it? they generally use discontinued mercury batteries and it would hike up my price by about 50€. (i'd be spending about 100€ on a yashica-mat without a meter and >150€ for a yashica-24 with a built-in meter). i think the cameras would be otherwise functionally similar (same lens, etc.).
does anyone have any input into what TLR to pick, other than the above?
and if i go without the meter, how best to meter, being aware i'm currently a student on a budget? cheap incident meter on ebay?
thanks!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 02:38:47 No.2999818 Report

Quoted By:

Have any of you used a 6x17 back on a 4x5 camera?
I'd like to try one on a speed graphic one day.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO thebull.jpg, 2MiB, 2000x1561

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 04:55:11 No.2999887 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 05:03:13 No.2999893 Report

Quoted By: >>2999987

>>2999730
>and if i go without the meter, how best to meter, being aware i'm currently a student on a budget?
presumably you have a phone. get an app.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 08:35:44 No.2999987 Report

Quoted By:

>>2999893
i do have a phone but it's a piece of shit samsung without an ambient light sensor so it can only do spot metring, and the app claims this isn't very accurate. i guess i can try out for a roll or two anyway.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 11:56:49 No.3000084 Report

Quoted By: >>3000099

>>2999730
You can learn to meter in your head fairly easily. Practise with a digital camera, start with Sunny 16 and get used to gauging the outdoor lighting conditions. You'll pick it up quickly and film is easier to expose than digital anyway so by starting with digital you're learning on hard mode then flipping to easy once you've got the hang of it.

In door lighting is harder, I do mine my memorisation desu.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 12:41:17 No.3000099 Report

Quoted By: >>3000115

>>3000084
>You can learn to meter in your head fairly easily.
interesting! thank you.
yeah, last time i was certain my images wouldn't come out well due to poor metering, but even after a darkroom accident which cost me most of two photos, the rest actually came out acceptably.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO whyoverexposeundermain-800x420.jpg, 58KiB, 800x420

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 13:40:28 No.3000115 Report

Quoted By: >>3000147

>>3000099
Film is much more forgiving. You definitely can still make mistakes, but even being off by two stops or more causes few problems. In general it's the opposite of digital in that you can overexpose without losing detail, rather than underexpose.

Have a read of this article, then go out yourself and see what you think. Get a decent grasp of what lighting conditions want what settings (by looking at the hardness of shadows for example) and play around.
https://petapixel.com/2016/03/29/exposure-affects-film-photos/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 15:15:14 No.3000147 Report

Quoted By: >>3000177

>>3000115
>https://petapixel.com/2016/03/29/exposure-affects-film-photos/
that was really interesting. i would like to also see them bump up the brightness on their scanner to see how much detail can be recovered from the underexposed shots, too, though.
i guess that means i've probably ruined the few rolls of kodacolor 200 i recently put through my p+s and shot at 800 then. i'm going to push develop them but looking at how their underexposed shots came out maybe i should stick to pushing b&w film...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 16:52:55 No.3000177 Report

Quoted By: >>3000379

>>3000147
Two stops will probably be a bit dark but salvageable, and you'll know for next time. Black and white is definitely more flexible though, not least because you can control the development (temperature, dilution, time, agitation, etc.). C41 is a standardised process so you develop it all the same. If in doubt you can always add an extra stop and you're not likely to harm anything. Lots of people swear by always metering their film slightly slower than box speed, say HP5 at 340. Personally I'd say don't get bogged down in minutiae. One of the nice things about film is that it divorces you from the final image a little since you have to wait to see it, it helps keep your mind on shooting.

Set it/forget it all day every day. I generally push all my film because I prefer faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Jan 2017 22:39:11 No.3000379 Report

Quoted By: >>3000539

>>3000177
>C41 is a standardised process so you develop it all the same.
i actually heard you can push develop c41, too, and the processing machine i have access to has this option! i only have its use for a few months though, it's in a club in my college and no one else has been brave enough to try it. once i graduate later in the year it'll go back to sitting there unused, fit a few more years, probably. i hear it was donated. hopefully i can pass on the knowledge of its use to a few people as it's probably incredibility valuable. it's fully automated (apart from losing the drum) and can do c41, e6 & b&w.
also found a durst paper processor lying in here, maybe i can also experiment with some ra4 before the year's out.

Grant

Grant Thu 12 Jan 2017 04:43:07 No.3000539 Report

Quoted By:

>>3000379
Pushing it is a lot more noticeable than BW. Less than E6 but still noticeable. I shot a lot of Portra 800 pushed to 1600 last year and if you metered it right, the only change was in grain.

grant

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO URBAN34.jpg, 671KiB, 792x1000

grant Thu 12 Jan 2017 19:48:33 No.3000836 Report

Quoted By:

>>2998293
yo! your inbox is full on lfpf but I mailed the film today to the Vermont address.

810 in Centralia, PA

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Jan 2017 12:40:24 No.3002651 Report

Quoted By:

>>2995495
the one i like most. Very good! The others are good too!

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