/p/ - Photography » Thread #3061020

[314 / 90 / ?]

688KiB, 1440x810, cropped_header_1492093562055.jpg

Film General Thread

/FGT/ Fri 21 Apr 2017 08:13:30 No.3061020 View View Reply Original Report

>Old Thread >>3057660
>This is the Film General Thread: "What's your favorite film and why" Edition.
>This is a place to post about anything film related. Processing, scanning, developing, gear, etc is all fair game. Let's fill this thread with images so please include an image with your post.
>Have fun! Remember, there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
>Any post without an image attached should be ignored because the poster is obviously incompetent.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 08:28:16 No.3061027 Report

Quoted By: >>3061359 >>3065022

Threadly reminder that HP5 is shit! Utter shite!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Portra400VC_003.jpg, 718KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 11:35:51 No.3061069 Report

Quoted By: >>3062245

Photo from the roll in the OP

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Portra400VC_002.jpg, 721KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 14:25:10 No.3061139 Report

Quoted By: >>3061144 >>3061161 >>3061251 >>3062245 >>3066342

Thoughts? I want to like it but don't.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 14:29:49 No.3061144 Report

Quoted By: >>3061475

>>3061139
Let's say it that way: you probably could not do better with this scene as subject. I like the colour balance but that's probably the only positive thing in a standalone photo like this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 15:19:41 No.3061161 Report

Quoted By: >>3061475

>>3061139
the weeds in front of the car is hella distracting, i kind of like the tones, and the triangular space give a nice sense of depth, but i think it wouldve been wayy better with a slower film.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO a38b3358d9ba8ef72dba6086418c1ea6.jpg, 24KiB, 330x248

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 15:45:29 No.3061166 Report

Quoted By: >>3061237 >>3061248

Alright /p/, what kind of chemicals do you use, how long do they last and how much do you pay for them ? Do you reuse the fix and the stopping bath ?

Personally, I use
D-76 powder (1 L) : 5,80€
Tetenal Acetic acid (1 L) : 7€
ILFORD Rapid Fixer (1 L) : 14€
Tetenal wetting agent (0,25 L) : 4,60€
ILFORD Multigrade for paper (1 L) : 17,60€

I'm trying to know if I'm getting ripped off or not.

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2017-04-21 19.01.28.png, 260KiB, 1920x1143

!kurwaRB7YU Fri 21 Apr 2017 17:01:58 No.3061223 Report

Quoted By:

>I'm trying to know if I'm getting ripped off or not.

>Tetenal Acetic acid (1 L) : 7€
>ripped off or not

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 17:27:11 No.3061237 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061166
acetic acid is just vinegar, might as well get white vinegar from the grocer for cheap

You can try and source the fixer industrially, its just sodium or ammonium thiosulfate

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 17:39:00 No.3061248 Report

Quoted By: >>3061251 >>3061442 >>3061925 >>3061965

Weather's been fucking nice today, /fgt/s. What've you been shooting? I caught some mossy rocks and shit on 100TMX, Jupiter-8 w/ yellow filter (yeah, it'll never outresolve 400 speed film, sofucknwhat), gonna develop them later tonight.

>>3061166
I'm fairly sure that HC-110 would be cheaper than D-76, per film; euro price for that is like 24€ per litre which does 50-130 rolls depending on dilution. 7€ for a litre of name-brand stop concentrate isn't all that bad.

Get an eyedropper for the wetting agent, or you'll waste it because of overapplication; I've taken to pouring a tiny bit into the cap, then pouring it back into the bottle, and letting the spill run into the dev tank. That's how little it takes, like half a millilitre for a two reel Paterson tank.

Unless you burn through them very quickly, buy multigrade dev (all liquid Ilford chems, really) in half-litre bottles. Rapid fixer concentrate goes bad in about a year, same for multigrade developer, regardless of whether you've opened the bottles or not. Wetting agent won't spoil.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 17:43:24 No.3061251 Report

Quoted By: >>3061475 >>3061965

>>3061139
With the industrial background, and that style of apartments which I love, I think if the terrain, and if the lens options you had were what I wish you had, it could have made for a better picture.
Also, maybe it's the scanner or something, but why does it look not that sharp for 6x6?
And maybe it's the lighting but it feels like a digital raw pre chromatic aberration.

>>3061248
So unmotivated I haven't even taken three rolls of c41 to a lab.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 18:06:52 No.3061267 Report

Quoted By: >>3061270 >>3061305

whats the deal on reusing chems. Shouldnt the reaction get slower and slower everytime you dev a roll and pour the stuff back in there, requiring more dev time for each one?

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Fri 21 Apr 2017 18:11:18 No.3061270 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061267
Exactly how you described it, although some devs/chems have such an excess of the active substance (at lower dilutions, of course, i.e. stock xtol) that the first few devs require the same times, before you need to start compensating.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 18:22:26 No.3061279 Report

Quoted By: >>3061288

What are some good film photography youtubers?

!P3141593qY

!P3141593qY Fri 21 Apr 2017 18:22:27 No.3061280 Report

Quoted By:

How long do stock developer solutions keep once while opened?
I know rodinal keeps for years, but what about the others? Any personal experiences?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 18:33:44 No.3061288 Report

Quoted By: >>3061310

>>3061279
I watch; Negative Feedback, EduardoPavezGoye, Matt Day

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 18:52:26 No.3061305 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061267
For devs, what kurwa said. For fixer, extending the fixing time by a minute every 10 rolls per litre (with t-max counting 3x) and discarding at 25r/l tends to work well enough. Any longer and the fixer won't be strong enough to completely clear the film.

One thing you can do is two-bath fixing, with old crummy fixer doing 60% of the work up front and fresh young stuff finishing the job after. Problem with this is that it turns a 3m30s fix into 3m30s and then another 3m. Results are really good though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:00:49 No.3061310 Report

Quoted By: >>3061319

>>3061288
>Negative Feedback

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:04:38 No.3061313 Report

Quoted By:

anyone want to go half on some fixer?

https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Ammonium-thiosulfate-analytical-reagent-99-_60517312661.html?s=p

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:18:02 No.3061319 Report

Quoted By: >>3061322

>>3061310
what about it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:19:54 No.3061322 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061319
>>3061319
He's fucking trash and his street photography video is terribly embarrassing

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:30:11 No.3061328 Report

Quoted By: >>3062781

I've tried HP5 and XP2. What's FP4 like?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rose.jpg, 2MiB, 3523x5255

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:34:07 No.3061331 Report

Quoted By: >>3061332 >>3061336

First roll of Superia 400 ever

Still trying to figure out the scanning process and white balance stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:36:52 No.3061332 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061331
what did you shoot and scan this with, there is CA and softness out the ass

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 19:41:59 No.3061336 Report

Quoted By: >>3061441 >>3061694

>>3061331
yeah it's pretty bad.. shot with a Minolta SRT-101. I'm trying to figure out if it has to do with my scans. Scanned with a Sony Nex-7 which is not ideal since i only have a zoom lens with an extension tube. Pretty new to all this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 20:16:07 No.3061359 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061027
I only use their panf film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 22:02:47 No.3061416 Report

Quoted By: >>3061417

What is the best bw film for first time?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 22:04:59 No.3061417 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061416
Tri-X

The answer is always Tri-X

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170422_010803.jpg, 3MiB, 4160x2336

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 22:11:32 No.3061419 Report

Quoted By: >>3061432 >>3061440

My first film camera. Any tips? Also bought a roll of kodak Tmax 100 and fuji fujicolor 200

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 22:38:53 No.3061432 Report

Quoted By: >>3061440

>>3061419
Go out and shoot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:02:26 No.3061440 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061432
>>3061419
This go shoot. No tips. Youre a beginner so just pump some rolls out, go for a walk, ask some friends to do portraits, grab a cheap flash do some night shots, just have fun, fuck around, get out there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:03:14 No.3061441 Report

Quoted By: >>3061694

>>3061336
>Scanned with a Sony Nex-7 which is not ideal since i only have a zoom lens with an extension tube.
Sorry bro, that lense combo won't cut it for film scanning. You need an actual prime macro lense, or at the very least an enlarger lense or 50/2.8 and bellows.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO BinnaburraEOSITN00003.jpg, 423KiB, 1080x1350

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:10:07 No.3061442 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061248
I've been shooting IT-N and Reala on a tripod in the forest with an EOS 100.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4.jpg, 370KiB, 667x1000

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:14:36 No.3061447 Report

Quoted By: >>3061449 >>3061451 >>3061475

haven't got any replies in last thread so might as well go again:
got my first roll (fuji c200) developed today. scanned with rather cheap scanner from my uncle (some medion from aldi that seems to have really uneven backlight).
my father after seeing these pictures said that they look really washed out and out of focus.

where might be the problem, film? scanner? or it's just me taking shitty photos and trying to blame equipment?

other photos are here:
>>3059953
>>3059956
>>3059961

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:16:43 No.3061449 Report

Quoted By: >>3061450

>>3061447
To me it seems just overexposed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:17:48 No.3061450 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061449
all 4 of them?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:18:33 No.3061451 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061447
You didn't get any replies because you've obviously already identified the problem, you fucking moron.
Potato scans suck.
Use not a potato to scan them.
Also, negative scans require work to look good.
You will need to learn how to use the curves dialog box in your editing software.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Apr 2017 23:58:22 No.3061475 Report

Quoted By: >>3061476

>>3061144
Well it's going to be in a series I'm working on in this industrial area. End goal is a 30ish image book.

>>3061161
Yeah...I couldn't get any higher unfortunately. Tripod was maxed out! What do you mean by it would've been better with slower film? I would've exposed it the same. Do you mean it would've been better with less exposure? That shot was 60 seconds @f4.

>>3061251
What lens option do you think would be better? I only had my 50mm and 150mm with me that night. And honestly, I think my 80mm would've been perfect. Planning to go back and reshoot using that. Quick and dirty proof scans are probabky why it doesn't seem sharp. That, and I think I should have stopped down another stop. The background is slightly out of focus.

>>3061447
The photos are pretty boring and are bad scans. I'm sure the negatives are fine.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 00:01:56 No.3061476 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061475
i just meant that a slower film has higher resolution and less grain..

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 01:00:30 No.3061513 Report

Quoted By: >>3061520 >>3061523 >>3061568

Do you guys home develop your color film, or take it somewhere?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 01:07:21 No.3061520 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061513
I take it to a local place.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO crane.jpg, 2MiB, 1330x2000

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 01:17:32 No.3061523 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061513
Do it at home, got fed up with piss poor scans and scratched negs, and I like learning new things anyways. no rgrts

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 02:28:47 No.3061568 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061513
If you can develop B&W you can develop C41. It's no more difficult, just different.

Cost effective too - you can get ~20 rolls out of a 1L kit

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 02:41:30 No.3061572 Report

Quoted By: >>3061573 >>3061575

What's the best way to get color rolls developed ? New fag here

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 02:43:50 No.3061573 Report

Quoted By: >>3061590

>>3061572
Take them to somewhere that develops film??

Preferably a proper photo lab but it's not gonna matter that much for your first rolls

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2c0b6e55da7a16413fe41f755c35964f.jpg, 77KiB, 800x482

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 02:45:41 No.3061575 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061572

Drop them off at your local drive thru photo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 03:57:59 No.3061590 Report

Quoted By: >>3061592 >>3061610 >>3061617

>>3061573
Aren't they expensive?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 04:01:50 No.3061592 Report

Quoted By: >>3061593 >>3061838

>>3061590

Varies wildly by location. Here it is $6 to get a roll developed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 04:07:43 No.3061593 Report

Quoted By: >>3061598

>>3061592
Where at ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 04:15:36 No.3061598 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061593

Yodobashi Camera
>http://www.yodobashi.com/ec/store/0083/index.html

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 04:34:39 No.3061610 Report

Quoted By: >>3061838

>>3061590
thedarkroom is like $21 a roll(shipping included) for high quality scans and they send your negatives back to you. good deal if you ask me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 04:59:26 No.3061617 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061590
For c41 I go to a local place.
I pay like 2.50 or 3 for developing only.
The guy has a machine so it's cheap, fast, and reliable.
Other labs around town ship it or take longer, so it's not as nice.
Also the guy is cool enough to not force people to buy scans, which happens with other labs.
Color is not hard, but it's not as piss easy as B&W.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2.jpg, 810KiB, 1871x744

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 07:06:24 No.3061694 Report

Quoted By: >>3061699

>>3061441
Stop telling people this bullshit in every thread where it's mentioned, why are you trying to get people to spend more money when it's not necessary? Pic related is a 100% crop, no sharpening, scanned with a 50mm + extention tube on apsc. Now if you want to tell me this "won't cut it" or is "unusable" or some other bullshit along those lines, then you're wrong and a fucking retard.

>>3061336
The more time and effort you put into the scanning setup, the better results you will get. I place the film on a light table with some glass on top to keep the film flat, then set the camera on a tripod and manual focus on the grain. Find out with aperture your lens is sharpest at and use that (probably f8 - f11), you can even stitch together photos to get better results.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 07:44:30 No.3061699 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061694
Amazing! Noticeably less contrast and sharpness on an APSC corner (or mid-frame, if you're scanning with a FF sensor) at a diffraction limited aperture!
Now in fairness, your scan's sharpness is probably fine for most purposes, I'm sure. But any real macro lense will be better, and by a margin that any A-B comparison would be no contest. And that's before we look at CA, vignetting, and distortion. And as I mentioned above, this is only on a crop sensor. AND this is again only for your particular lense, whatever that is. Sure all double gauss fast 50's have some degree of similarity, but they're nowhere near as predictable as a set as 50 macros or tessars.
I give people that advice because if you're going to spend money to acheive a purpose, you should do it once, correctly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 15:22:17 No.3061838 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061610
>>3061592
Wth, I pay €3 for just the negative development. €7 for negatives+10x17cm prints and a CD with the scans. The scans aren't that great and I rarely like all photos from a roll so I usually just get the negatives developed

!JlKEroVwAM

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 18110753_10212673742057468_86008 (...).jpg, 65KiB, 959x960

!JlKEroVwAM Sat 22 Apr 2017 15:35:22 No.3061839 Report

Quoted By: >>3066035

New Camera!

Olympus XA 2 loaded with some TRI-X 400.

Bought from Cameras. ETC in Newark, Delaware.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rl9mcN.png, 442KiB, 769x962

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 16:28:30 No.3061856 Report

Quoted By: >>3061954 >>3061989 >>3062072

Had this cheap dusty Olympus Mju I for a while now, liked to have it always in a pocket or laying around in my car.
Two days ago I wanted to put in a scuffed expired film where the film leader was a bit crumbled. It got stuck at winding so I tried to pull it out, did the best I could to not break anything but I had to pull a bit harder at some point because it seems like something was stuck.
So the problem is that it won't load anything anymore, the loading/winding sound is a bit weird, kind of crackling and well it just won't load the film. The display is showing me the "E" for empty/error.
Google just shows me retarded forum posts.

So well now theres something broken obviously and I have no idea what else I can try, tried to clean the winding mechanism, tried to push in film manually, tried different films.

Just now I realized that this metal piece that seems to push the film onto the winding thing is a bit bended, could this be the problem? I tried to bend it the other way but it doesn't seem to work, is it safe to screw the mju open? I've read that it has lots of miniature parts which easily get fucked up if you open it.
Would someone maybe take a picture of his mju on that spot or does anyone know that problem? Since from googling this it seems like there are quite some people with that problem and unfortunately the price at this moment is too high for me.

Anyone care to help?

>tl;dr
>put scuffed film into my camera
>scuffed film got stuck and I had to manually remove the film
>had to pull a bit at some point
>that probably broke something
>don't really know what it is.

posting this here because
>Error: You cannot delete a post this old.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 08960035.jpg, 246KiB, 1000x663

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 17:50:37 No.3061880 Report

Quoted By: >>3061881 >>3061895 >>3062248

recents
olympus xa and disposable

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 08960026.jpg, 296KiB, 1000x858

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 17:51:53 No.3061881 Report

Quoted By: >>3061883 >>3061893 >>3061895

>>3061880

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 08980008.jpg, 252KiB, 904x1000

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 17:53:05 No.3061883 Report

Quoted By: >>3061884

>>3061881

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 09010015.jpg, 514KiB, 800x1000

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 17:54:59 No.3061884 Report

Quoted By: >>3061886 >>3061895

>>3061883

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 09010005.jpg, 422KiB, 922x1000

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 17:59:52 No.3061886 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061884

!JlKEroVwAM

!JlKEroVwAM Sat 22 Apr 2017 18:23:38 No.3061893 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061881
love the colours on this a lot

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 18:29:32 No.3061895 Report

Quoted By: >>3061958

>>3061880
>>3061881
>>3061884
What film

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 19:59:24 No.3061925 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061248 here.

Finally developed 2 rolls of 100TMX in HC-110(b), 7 minutes at 20°C. They look quite thick while wet. Maybe should've gone for the 6 minute recipe instead. We'll see how this stuff scans. But the flowers I shot in like June 2016 look fucking gorgeous, on the neg at least. Love dat Zuiko glass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 20:19:48 No.3061934 Report

Quoted By: >>3061944 >>3061954

For DSLR scanning, do I want the coolest backlighting on the film as possible?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO vlcsnap-2017-04-05-16h38m25s129.png, 191KiB, 512x384

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 20:39:49 No.3061944 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061934

>he fell for the DSLR Scanning Meme

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 20:56:12 No.3061954 Report

Quoted By: >>3061989

>>3061934
Yeah Cyan back lighting helps balance out the orange colour cast from colour negative film but it can obviously be corrected digitally.

>>3061856
I could be wrong but I think on the bottom of the camera if the case is removed there is a film advance gear that is prone to stripping (it's plastic) and If film is pulled out with out the camera releasing (rewinding itself) then it will fuck that gear and now film probably doesn't advance. I'd bin it, get another, compact cameras are shit to work on, nearing impossible imo. unless someone has experience here to say otherwise.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 08960010.jpg, 2MiB, 3129x1741

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 21:01:13 No.3061958 Report

Quoted By: >>3062094

>>3061895
Kodak ultramax 400

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 21:05:19 No.3061965 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061251
bruh go drop um off.

>>3061248
weather's been shit, been shooting while working out in rural areas. Got some prints to make today, gonna be doing that and maybe shoot a bit later today/tomorrow.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 21:25:21 No.3061989 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061856
Yep, by pulling the film out you fucked your camera. see >>3061954
It has a rewind button for a reason m8.
The good thing is, in spite of the memes, these are still essentially disposable.
Just go find another one.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 22:37:45 No.3062072 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061856
Yep, you fucked a gear (they're all plastic). Throw the camera in the bin and buy another.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 22:54:11 No.3062086 Report

Quoted By: >>3062089

>tfw cant find dark room equipment and developer chemicals ;-;

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:01:38 No.3062089 Report

Quoted By: >>3062090

>>3062086
do you live in uganda? all you need is a bag for loading the film into the canister, the rest can be done in daylight

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:03:42 No.3062090 Report

Quoted By: >>3062091 >>3062096 >>3062198

>>3062089
Quite similar, Mexico, there are no negative proyectors anywhere, chemicals arent sold anymore (altough I do have a book with several chemical recipes) but pretty much nowhere, not even on the Internet, have to buy import from the US

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:05:01 No.3062091 Report

Quoted By: >>3062093

>>3062090
black and white or color?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:06:14 No.3062093 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062091
For both iirc, it's the Darkroom Cookbook on pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:09:03 No.3062094 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061958
damn w2c qt

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:10:02 No.3062096 Report

Quoted By: >>3062097

>>3062090
>have to buy import from the US
It's a few KM away.
There is no wall.
What's stopping you, you lazy fucking beaner?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 22 Apr 2017 23:10:54 No.3062097 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062096
Yeah nothing, just need to save up

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 03:15:55 No.3062198 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062090
Donde vives?
Guadalajara, and CDMX should have chems available in stores afaik.
Ya no vivo ahi desde hace un chingo asi que no te puedo ayudar mucho, pero si hay quimicos.
Try mercadolibre, or google quimicos fotografia mexico or revelador pelicula mexico, something like that, there are still places around.
Also, for darkroom, just use the bathroom. A common tip is to take a hot steamy shower in the morning, windows closed, door closed, let it dry. The steam will have cleaned the room of dust flying around, just make it lightproof (100%) with heavy cloths, tape, or whatever. You can use it then to load the film into the reel, works equally good to let the film hang and dry since it'll be dust free and you can make your mess there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 03:20:41 No.3062199 Report

Quoted By: >>3062209

So I have a Minolta XGM and recently it hasnt been firing when I go to take a shot. Any ideas why this is? The batteries seem fine since the light meter works and when I test fire it without any film it goes and goes but when there is film sometimes it just wont fire.
Is there a feature that prevents a shot if the camera thinks it will be over or underexposed? because thats the only thing I can think of. That or its dying

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 03:32:18 No.3062209 Report

Quoted By: >>3062249 >>3062253 >>3062256

>>3062199
What's up with minolta posters and their dying cameras lately?
Answering your question, it may be the gear in the film advance, it may not be engaging properly, advancing properly, or something like that.
Make sure to crank it all the way through.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lmaoo.jpg, 1MiB, 2000x2000

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:13:58 No.3062242 Report

Quoted By: >>3062262 >>3066009 >>3066014

>>3061020
What the fuck is up with Lomo film, did they actually fuck up and use a backing that had chemical bleeding lmao. (or is it me)
P.s. this shits pretty old too

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:22:10 No.3062245 Report

Quoted By: >>3062433

>>3061069
>>3061139
You spent all this money to shoot some shitty barn or whatever, why? Literally nothing interesting here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:28:37 No.3062248 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061880
Boston is the most faggot city on the east coast, no lie. Literally no redeeming qualities

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:32:11 No.3062249 Report

Quoted By: >>3062253

>>3062209
>What's up with minolta posters and their dying cameras lately?
Lol Ive noticed the same thing

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:42:57 No.3062253 Report

Quoted By: >>3062255 >>3062257

>>3062249
>>3062209

They are pretty popular with noobs because they are dirt cheap and have a fucking full auto mode where all you have to do is focus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:49:35 No.3062255 Report

Quoted By: >>3062257

>>3062253
>full auto mode
Ive surprisingly never used that.
My camera was cheap though. When money stops being tight I think Ill spring for something nicer.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO EMTriX03.jpg, 220KiB, 1174x800

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 04:52:10 No.3062256 Report

Quoted By: >>3062591

>>3062209
>What's up with minolta posters and their dying cameras lately?
I think that what's happened is that we really have memed /p/ into becoming a film board, however it's only those who chose to get fucking Meneltas as their first cams that are eating big bags of dicks.
Also worth pointing out, two of my dev customers shot Menelta, one SRT, one HiMatic(?), both are broken.
Menelta=Trash, pls like and share.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 05:04:59 No.3062257 Report

Quoted By: >>3062266 >>3062267 >>3062273

>>3062253
>full auto mode
I thought the point of getting old slrs for noobz was that they would learn to expose manually.

>>3062255
I think SRT101s are better, if you already bought something else other than the 50mm that probably came with the body, in case you wanna keep the system.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 05:15:50 No.3062262 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062242
Why buy that over priced garbage at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 05:20:10 No.3062266 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062257

>want to learn to expose manually

No, most do it for MUH-FILM-COLORS.

I think part of the problem was Minolta was the cheapest option back in the day, so every one and their mother picked one up. Most of these were probably treated very poorly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 05:27:58 No.3062267 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062257
>I think SRT101s are better,
They aren't. The shutters lose time, stick in their gates, run the curtains at different speeds, get cracked and fungusy, the meters lose connection with reality, the aperture feeler on the body gets gummy/loses its spring, the mirrors delaminate. They're just not high quality cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 05:44:04 No.3062273 Report

Quoted By: >>3062284

>>3062257
Yeah I got a 50mm lens that came with it and a 45mm Rokkor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 06:03:01 No.3062284 Report

Quoted By: >>3062286

>>3062273

Pick up the 35-70 f 3.5. It is a fabulous lens, even on a modern camera.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO MD3570.jpg, 135KiB, 800x579

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 06:19:06 No.3062286 Report

Quoted By: >>3062293

>>3062284
This guy?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 06:27:34 No.3062287 Report

Quoted By: >>3062433

>buy mju ii
>something fucks up and it misfocuses every 3rd or so shot

Feels bad man. I should just go back to an XA

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 06:43:47 No.3062293 Report

Quoted By: >>3062298 >>3062300

>>3062286

Yea, make sure it is the macro version.

Review here:
>https://phillipreeve.net/blog/minolta-md-zoom-35-70mm-3-5-review/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 06:55:29 No.3062298 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062293
Cool, its a pretty lens for sure. Ill have to keep an eye out. Whats a good price to snag one at?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 06:58:43 No.3062300 Report

Quoted By: >>3062302

>>3062293
Oh link says 80-120, thats about what im seeing on ebay.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 07:07:22 No.3062302 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062300

Yea thats about it. Seen one or two slow as $60 recently, but not the greatest condition.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170423_220317_907.jpg, 446KiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 13:48:53 No.3062433 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062245
It's part of a larger series I'm working on. And since when is ~$8 a lot of money? I just ate $8 worth of strawberries son.

>>3062287
As much as I love the mjuii, they're getting to the age where buying one is pretty sketchy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 15:16:11 No.3062480 Report

Quoted By: >>3062528

Found some old 35mm cameras from my parents and started shooting up some film the past couple of weeks, but i'm not sure where to develop the film. My local CVS charges about $14 per 24 exposures. Walmart is a bit cheaper but they charge a development fee (woman on the phone didn't know how much the fee was).
I'm wondering if it'd be worth it to just ship the rolls to a lab instead of trying somewhere local. I'm from Houston Tx if that helps.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 16:42:19 No.3062528 Report

Quoted By: >>3065710

>>3062480
Black and white you do yourself.

Color you have the choice of doing it yourself with a ~50 dollar investment or paying out the ass

do you have a dslr or scanner?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO spring cleaning.jpg, 633KiB, 1024x773

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 18:02:43 No.3062591 Report

Quoted By: >>3062689

>>3062256
hmmm...
i have SRT 100/101/201 and XG and they all work fine.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 21:00:39 No.3062689 Report

Quoted By: >>3062695

>>3062591
>and they all work fine
, he said, while posting a picture of literally the ground in front of him that was out of focus.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_9830.jpg, 727KiB, 1536x2048

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 21:09:21 No.3062693 Report

Quoted By: >>3062712 >>3062745

Just picked up 5 rolls of this goodness at a beautiful camera shop in SF. All of them are 11+ years expired, should I compensate +1 stop when using them?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 21:12:22 No.3062695 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062689

Just cause his cameras work doesn't mean he is competant.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 21:42:53 No.3062712 Report

Quoted By: >>3062770

>>3062693
No.
Compensate 1/3 of a stop maximum.
Slide film if stored correctly lasts a long time.
With very expired slide it's best to develop yourself, so you can adjust exposure and dev perfectly.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Fuji64T_001.jpg, 1MiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 22:43:02 No.3062745 Report

Quoted By: >>3062756

>>3062693
If they had it in a fridge/freezer shoot it at box speed. If not I'd add +1. I just shot some 64T exp in '97 at 32iso and it came out great exposure-wise. Had a NASTY color cast due to improper storage though. Pic related (colour corrected)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Apr 2017 23:13:22 No.3062756 Report

Quoted By: >>3062768 >>3062787

>>3062745
Wouldn't it have a bad colour cast cause it's tugsten film not day light?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 00:11:21 No.3062768 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062756
Not if you have color correction filter

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 00:14:50 No.3062770 Report

Quoted By: >>3062774

>>3062712
I always develope slide films myself. Those film do not looked like they are stored properly in a freezer, but the average temperature in the SF Bay Area is ~60F, so I am not sure if I need any compensation. Even the owner of the shop suggested me to sacrifice one or two rolls to test the exposure compensations which I am definitely not going to do. Those films are too hard to come by for that kind of purpose.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 00:32:27 No.3062774 Report

Quoted By: >>3062775

>>3062770
Well them just expose it at 50 and develop one roll at a time, and adjust afterwards.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 00:35:10 No.3062775 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062774
That should work. Thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 00:57:04 No.3062781 Report

Quoted By: >>3062787 >>3062899

>>3061328
It's gorgeous. Certainly better than HP5.
It's strange how little people talk about FP4 really, because it's really a very good looking film.
I haven't tried pushing it, though, so I can't tell you how it works for that.
You should definitely buy a few rolls.
Delta 100 and 400 are both very nice as well. I prefer Delta 400 over HP5.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 01:16:50 No.3062787 Report

Quoted By: >>3062794

>>3062756
Not if you shoot it under the right lights.

And by color cast, I meant massively green over the whole negative. The frames are green, everything is green as hell. Very obviously an effect of age and improper storage.

>>3062781
Shooting my first roll of Delta 400 right now! Pulling it to 200 since I'll be developing in Preceptol. Thst, + using a red filter has me shooting it at 25iso. Curious to see how it will look.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 01:37:47 No.3062794 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062787
I see, that's unique, all green.

You'll love delta 400 though. It's one of my favourites, it's very versatile.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 04:11:17 No.3062899 Report

Quoted By: >>3062936

>>3062781
>It's strange how little people talk about FP4 really
That's because it's 2 stops slower than hp5 without being any sharper, and takes 8 years to develop.
That said, it's good for broken or meterless cameras, because of its massive latitude.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_9022.jpg, 875KiB, 1500x1000

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 04:51:24 No.3062936 Report

Quoted By: >>3062941 >>3062952

>>3062899
i memed myself into buying a bulk roll of FP4 and really regret not getting delta 100 or HP5 for the speed because i honestly cant tell the difference in the grain and sharpness between hp5 and fp4

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 04:55:57 No.3062941 Report

Quoted By: >>3062971

>>3062936
How are you developing it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 05:15:08 No.3062952 Report

Quoted By: >>3062971

>>3062936
What it does have going for it is the wide tonal range though, it's ideal for portraits because you can use big lighting ratios, and really tune your final image in post

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 05:35:55 No.3062971 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062941
ID-11 stock, looking to get XTOL for finer grain, and hopefully sharper looking images
>>3062952
i really like using FP4 for printing on silver, I find the higher contrast useful for not having to use filters up the ass and running into huge exposure times, but im just surprised that for the 2 stops you lose, you gain almost no difference in terms of grain and sharpness

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 05:59:44 No.3062980 Report

Quoted By: >>3062983 >>3063282

Superia Xtra 400 looks grainy as fuck.

It is like ISO6400 on my DSLR.

Is it supposed to be like that?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO download_20170424_145849.jpg, 1MiB, 1840x1232

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 06:00:55 No.3062983 Report

Quoted By: >>3063070 >>3063180 >>3063370

>>3062980

Cool, and I forgot my example.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170124_212442_104.jpg, 63KiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 08:53:30 No.3063070 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062983
Looks about right. If you want buttery smooth images don't shoot 400iso film.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_2109 - Edited.jpg, 159KiB, 1002x1082

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 15:11:55 No.3063165 Report

Quoted By: >>3063421 >>3063439

A young 14yr anon wants to join in photography.
His mind was blown by the Instax film I took of him.
So I'm gonna start him with one roll of Kodak
A cheap plastic rugged golden half frame camera
and an instant send mail out to the darkroom.
Should I give him a better camera or not?
I don't fully trust the kid with high gear so I'm making him start small.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO XGMS400317 21.jpg, 1MiB, 857x1280

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 16:01:29 No.3063180 Report

Quoted By: >>3063440

>>3062983
>Camera Software Google

That looks like some garbage lab scan. Pic related is Superia 400 scanned with Plustek.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 17:37:31 No.3063196 Report

Quoted By: >>3063208

What is FP4 like?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO bw_comparison_400_long.jpg, 508KiB, 1423x1000

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 17:59:56 No.3063204 Report

Quoted By: >>3063205 >>3063219 >>3063276 >>3063376

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO bw_comparison_400.jpg, 491KiB, 1419x1000

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 18:01:00 No.3063205 Report

Quoted By: >>3063219 >>3063276 >>3063376

>>3063204

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 18:14:55 No.3063208 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063196
Fairly contrasty, good tonal range, doesn't tolerate bad exposures as well as HP5, and dries flatter than any film I've ever used. I feel like it has a roughly comperable amount of grain to 400 speed films, but it's definitely much less coarse.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 18:37:59 No.3063215 Report

Quoted By:

which film is better:
ilford pan 400 or ilford hp5+?

BurtGummer !!1cdp+8vuoOY

BurtGummer !!1cdp+8vuoOY Mon 24 Apr 2017 18:49:21 No.3063219 Report

Quoted By: >>3063276 >>3063380

>>3063204
>>3063205
XP2 is fucking crispy sharp

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 19:07:48 No.3063224 Report

Quoted By: >>3063296

Need a light meter app

Any suggestions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 19:58:12 No.3063246 Report

Quoted By: >>3063370

>>3061020
what good film compact can I get to start with film?
I want something like XA2 but the ones in good condition are over 90 bucks. I just want something half good, cheap and portable.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO setup_film_comparisons.jpg, 256KiB, 668x1000

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 21:07:48 No.3063276 Report

Quoted By: >>3063376

>>3063204
>>3063205
Fucking camera shake in practically all of these.
>>3063219
Have you ever shot XP2?
It's not very sharp really.

This is a shit test. Pic related, what he describes as a "sturdy" tripod. Plastic trash, at full extension, with a fucking memeya dangling off the extended centre column and cantilevered out on a ballhead that's no doubt crying for help.
No doubt he doesn't even know how to use M.Up on his RB either.
And then HC-110 for everything.
And then shatbed scans.
>oi vey

!P3141593qY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 04_26_slavnik_bukve2_edit.jpg, 1MiB, 1000x1333

!P3141593qY Mon 24 Apr 2017 21:14:30 No.3063282 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062980
superia xtra 400

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 21:27:57 No.3063296 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063224
LightMeter Free
works ok

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170305_191532_522.jpg, 293KiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 22:54:33 No.3063370 Report

Quoted By: >>3063372

>>3063246
They are going for that much now? I typically sell them for $65. I could probably source you one for ~$50 shipped. /P/bro discount.>>3062983

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 22:55:48 No.3063372 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063370
Didn't mean to quote that second person.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 23:10:13 No.3063376 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063204
>>3063205
>>3063276

What a waste of film anon ...

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Mon 24 Apr 2017 23:18:47 No.3063380 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063219
Well it's a chromogenic C41 process film lined up with a bunch of 400 speed bw emulsions, little surprise it performs better. Doubt he developed it, unlike the rest. Fuck knows how tmax or the rest would look if souped in optimal developer combos etc etc yak yak.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 24 Apr 2017 23:22:38 No.3063382 Report

Quoted By: >>3063414 >>3063478

what are some color negative films that look really good when overexposed to hell and back?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 00:24:54 No.3063414 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063382
All lol.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 00:46:58 No.3063421 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063165
buy him an a6000 you fucking cuck

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO treefoetus.jpg, 121KiB, 667x1000

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 01:30:39 No.3063437 Report

Quoted By: >>3063478

Well shitdicks, /p/. 100TMX in HC-110(b), 7 minutes 20°C. Like all the negatives on this roll scan so that most of the stuff is in the thick bits, and when I drop them down with a curve, the image loses all contrast. Shot with a 3x yellow filter (B+W brand).

Agitation was 30 sec initial w/ rod, then 10 sec at every x:00. Recipe from MDC, which said 6-7 minutes in dilution B. Developer was slightly cool, perhaps 19.6°C, at start.

Notably there was a second roll, which it yielded a couple of adequate shots (pic related, someone carved a late-term foetus into a tree stump), but the sea of flowers under early afternoon sun was similarly fucked for contrast.

Is this film a bitch? Or is it making me the bitch?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 01:33:54 No.3063439 Report

Quoted By: >>3063470

>>3063165
Post the instax pic.

Also i think this is sweet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 01:37:05 No.3063440 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063180
his scan looks much better than yours lol

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 33956287405_e355a31e9b_z.jpg, 85KiB, 640x403

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 03:01:52 No.3063470 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063439
Thank you, I didn't scan the Instax of him but this is the other pic that he got intrigued by.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO aidanaidanweb.jpg, 2MiB, 1010x1500

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 03:37:26 No.3063478 Report

Quoted By: >>3063497

>>3063382
pretty much any colour neg that isn't Ektar will look good overexposed

pic related is Fuji C200 overexposed 1.5 stops. I've even gone as far as overexposing Natura 1600 4 stops with no ill effects

>>3063437
T-Max has a reputation for being difficult to develop compared to other

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 03:45:15 No.3063480 Report

Quoted By: >>3063593

Anyone have any experience shooting aerochrome?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 259892851_6a353d4153_o.jpg, 133KiB, 800x533

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 04:03:55 No.3063486 Report

Quoted By: >>3063494

I shot my first roll of Superia 400 the other day and it was fun. Only thing is, I had exposure issues in low-light and indoors.

So I picked up a roll of this Natura 1600.

My question is, how will this roll perform? It says for night use, but can I get away handheld? Can I still use it on a sunny day? Or will it be a mess?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO natura-web (1 of 1).jpg, 611KiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 04:23:58 No.3063494 Report

Quoted By: >>3063549 >>3063616

>>3063486
You can rate it anywhere from 400-2000 and develop normally and get good results

This is Natura at 800. It works just as well in daylight

Also meter for the shadows, as a general rule when shooting negative film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 04:26:16 No.3063497 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063478
I want stuff to overexpose 4~6 stops

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 06:48:46 No.3063549 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063494

>You can rate it anywhere from 400-2000 and develop normally and get good results

Thanks. I was just wondering if it wa sso sensitive my camera would shit itself trying to meter iso 1600 film in daylight.

>Also meter for the shadows, as a general rule when shooting negative film.

Yea I learned that the hard way with my first roll.

It is the opposite with my dslr, easier to pull from shadows than anything else.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 08:29:17 No.3063589 Report

Quoted By:

Just picked up a braun paxette for $35 with the standard 45/2.8.
Seems pretty solid tbqh, and a lot smaller than my yashica lynx 14

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 17092854689_db08086dd2_b.jpg, 230KiB, 800x533

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 09:01:47 No.3063593 Report

Quoted By: >>3063598

>>3063480
Yes, what do you want to know? I used a yellow 12 filter

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 09:45:15 No.3063598 Report

Quoted By: >>3063599

>>3063593
How did you get yours developed? Will most labs be able to do the development?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 16656613204_ca2042b286_b.jpg, 151KiB, 800x533

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 09:56:43 No.3063599 Report

Quoted By: >>3063600

>>3063598
Took it to my local lab, which luckily does dip and dunk. You need an e6 dip and dunk lab. It's the only process that won't fuck yer shit up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 09:58:46 No.3063600 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063599
Cool ill find a reason to shoot some soon. Ive heard yellow and orange filters work but i opted for yellow in the end.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 11:08:59 No.3063616 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063494
>Also meter for the shadows, as a general rule when shooting negative film.

I find myself always metering for the sky or it becomes overexposed

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 12:40:59 No.3063644 Report

Quoted By: >>3063660 >>3063836

>buy fuji GS645S
>buy eyecup after plenty of research
>comes weeks later
>doesn't even fit

fuck.. how can I get a proper eye cup that fits for this thing?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Fuji64T_002.jpg, 1MiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 13:25:16 No.3063660 Report

Quoted By: >>3063694 >>3063919

>>3063644
I'll sell you one. You just gotta buy the whole g645s with it. For real though, I took mine off and never felt like I needed it.

Another 64T shot for ya'll.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:02:39 No.3063679 Report

Quoted By: >>3063682 >>3063688 >>3063983

>Don't live anywhere interesting to take pictures

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:03:30 No.3063682 Report

Quoted By: >>3063685 >>3063983

>>3063679

>live somewhere interesting
>everything has already been taken 1,000,000,000 times and nothing you can do is original

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO article-2691491-1FA1D94500000578 (...).jpg, 179KiB, 964x637

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:07:31 No.3063685 Report

Quoted By: >>3063689 >>3063983

>>3063682
I understand the flip side you presented but at least you can do the thing that's not original for your own enjoyment.
When you live in a shit area in Britain all you can do is either take pictures of terraced houses or a retail park

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 160924000051.jpg, 263KiB, 675x1000

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:09:26 No.3063688 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063679
Then hop on a bus and go somewhere interesting for a day trip.

I feel you, I used to feel the same about my area but I started to do two things:
>Walk around my area more and more, at different times of day, as much as possible to discover new places
which worked really well.
>Take the bus/train regularly to go to places around my area that I found interesting.

Hell, you'll be spending the better part of a Saturday for coffee, brunch and a new environment to shoot in. Doesn't sound too bad, and I live in Britain as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:12:11 No.3063689 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063685

No nature?

There has to be something interesting near by.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:21:03 No.3063694 Report

Quoted By: >>3063836 >>3063983

>>3063660
just the eye cup please
I guess I don't even need it, just bought one that should have fit from china for $2 and surprisingly.. it did not.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:56:01 No.3063704 Report

Quoted By: >>3063706

How/where is the best way to store film? I remember as a kid my mum left it in the fridge?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 14:59:33 No.3063706 Report

Quoted By:

>>3063704
fridge for frequent to medium shooting, freezer for long term storage

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 003.jpg, 680KiB, 950x633

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 18:36:24 No.3063775 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 20:56:37 No.3063836 Report

Quoted By: >>3064045

>>3063694
>>3063644
They eyecups are the standard threaded fitting for Nikon SLRs.
If you bought one and it "doesn't fit", it's probably because the rubber thread cover is still on the camera. Unscrew it to reveal the threads.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Apr 2017 23:36:01 No.3063919 Report

Quoted By: >>3063983

>>3063660
Nice one Andrew

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 17082262970_762b3b2dee_b.jpg, 164KiB, 800x533

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 01:26:28 No.3063983 Report

Quoted By: >>3064045

>>3063679
Not an excuse.

>>3063682
Not an excuse either.

>>3063685
Take pictures of people, shoot abstract shit, git gud at still life, do experimental light painting, take advantage of dat orange light pollution from your constant cloud cover. No excuses for

>>3063694
You did unscrew the eye cover first before putting to cup on right?

>>3063919
Thx bb

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 645.jpg, 472KiB, 1000x1778

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 04:14:34 No.3064045 Report

Quoted By: >>3064083

>>3063836
>>3063983

that's what I thought, and I bought this (pic related) and it sits on top of the viewfinder but doesn't actually attach. I can't unscrew anything from the viewfinder either I don't think.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 05:27:57 No.3064083 Report

Quoted By: >>3064085

>>3064045
You've just peeled the rubber off the old one, dumbass. Put it back on, and use it to help grip and unscrew the old one.
Is the new cup threaded on the outside?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 05:32:28 No.3064085 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064083
this is how the camera came.. I didn't take anything off.
yeah the new one is threaded on the outside.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 05:33:01 No.3064086 Report

Quoted By:

good

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO bentfilm.jpg, 64KiB, 1204x912

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 07:18:27 No.3064119 Report

Quoted By: >>3064139 >>3064168

Hi, I've a question : I home process my own film and sometimes, like yesterday, my films are bent. I'me using good clamps (made for this) and same hangers. I think I have this problem with old/expired films. Could it be that ? Do you have the same problem ?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170426_170951.jpg, 153KiB, 600x800

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 08:11:39 No.3064139 Report

Quoted By: >>3064157 >>3064168

You should have a piece that looks similar to this. This is my GA645 but the gs645 has the same thing. Looks like your camera came missing a part.

>>3064119
Has nothing to do with good/bad film. Put them under some books for a day or two.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20170426_011053.jpg, 2MiB, 3888x2588

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 08:12:14 No.3064140 Report

Quoted By: >>3064168

Starting "borrowing" Fujifilm Superia 400, got tired of paying for Delta 400. Realized that expensive film is a meme if you're not using high quality cameras.
I cross process the Fuji (Im a black and white fag) and am pretty satisfied, I like this shit tier film alot.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 21-4-17-0000.jpg, 829KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 08:30:09 No.3064148 Report

Quoted By: >>3064156

recently shot an editorial on Hasselblad 500 c/m (third time using it) with portra 400. Still need to work on my focusing and obv photoshop out the top right. Thoughts??

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 08:37:11 No.3064156 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064148
I like it, your model is fucking jacked and beautiful, although I would remove that pink sheet on the back if I were you, but it's still neat.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 08:48:06 No.3064157 Report

Quoted By: >>3064203

>>3064139
fuck.. any idea what that part is called so I can try and find a replacement?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO classeur.jpg, 36KiB, 1024x713

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 09:58:50 No.3064168 Report

Quoted By: >>3064172 >>3064173 >>3064205

>>3064119
>>3064139

I second what that anon said. My films often curl, and after I cut them, I put them under a large pile of books for 3 days.
Pic related, this what I use to sort my negs and, by extension, flatten them.

>>3064140
Can't you buy "cheap" BW film ? Where I live Ilford Pan 400 is dirt cheap.
What camera are you using ? I'm curious to know what cameras you consider high quality.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:03:43 No.3064172 Report

Quoted By: >>3064174

>>3064168
Hi ! I just had this problem with a pack of Kodak Pro Royal Supra 400 of 12 exp I bought on leboncoin. Sort of french craiglist. And It was bent. which is not great for scanning... I'll give a try of your solution :-)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:05:06 No.3064173 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064168
Fuck You were talking of Camera, not films. I used a Nikon 35Ti, and used the color film named before.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:09:24 No.3064174 Report

Quoted By: >>3064185

>>3064172

French fag here.
If you're looking for film cheaper than the retail prices, try mistergoodfilm.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO afternoonsun.jpg, 904KiB, 976x1500

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:18:10 No.3064177 Report

Quoted By: >>3065142

>tfw gorgeous afternoon sun / golden hour and you only bring B&W film

I fugged up

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:29:06 No.3064180 Report

Quoted By: >>3064183 >>3064203

Found a guy selling 5 point-and-shoots for $25, he doesn't know if they're working. The only thing is, one of them is an Olympus XA that seems to be in good shape. Should I take the risk?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:36:20 No.3064183 Report

Quoted By: >>3064194

>>3064180
If you really want to risk it because you may get a functional XA then go for it man, if not then it's not worth it.

Most point-and-shoots are a dime a dozen, you could easily spend the 25 dollars to get 10-12 random ones and have fun trying them out. Or, better yet, hold off and save up for a working XA.

But hell, this is coming from a guy that spent 20 euros trying to find a working Pentax Espio as a compact carry only to realize that it's gigantic and could kill a man if thrown hard enough. So take my advice with a grain of salt.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:45:57 No.3064185 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064174
Heu, J'ai moins cher avec digit photo...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 10:59:13 No.3064194 Report

Quoted By: >>3064201

>>3064183
I have an Espio. It's not pocketable at all, but pretty comfortable to use. Then again that's the camera we used to use to take family pictures, so maybe it's all nostalgia.

I didn't even consider how fun it'd be to try the other cameras. There's a no-name panorama camera thrown in the bundle that'd be an interesting experience. I'm definitely excited to take the risk now. Thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:09:19 No.3064201 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064194
Oh is it the Vivitar one or that other no-name ultrawide thing? Yeah buying plastic point-and-shoots for pennies and trying them out is great fun!

The Espio is comfy, I basically wanted to get it for the good lens performance even fully zoomed in but ultimately decided on finding a rangefinder over that.

There's this really great website where a British guy buys plastic p&s cameras and reviews them that you might wanna check out, I think you'll be able to find it by googling austerityphoto.

Good luck! Have fun with them either way.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO kazu19660708-img590x442-14920050 (...).jpg, 83KiB, 590x442

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:14:53 No.3064203 Report

Quoted By: >>3064208 >>3064210 >>3064218

>>3064157
Sorry man, no idea. Just flipped through the manual and didn't see anything.

>>3064180
Having bought a few bunk cameras untested, it rarely works out in your favor.

Speaking of which, just bought this lil cocksucker. Had an Ultra Wide and Slim long ago and loved it. Hyped to get another one. 22mm f8 lens with a fixed 1/125th shutter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:17:43 No.3064205 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064168
>Paying For Film
I use a cheap ass Samsung Point n Shoot for the time being, my GR1 got fucked while I was out in Yosemite. And just stopped by my local goodwill, not too bad of a performer for $10.
Good Cameras? Well it's all subjective, I'm very into point n shoots, I used to own a Canonet Gliii and a Leica R7, I eventually got annoyed at how big they were and I always found myself leaving them at home because I didn't want to carry them all night.
So "high quality cameras" to me are things such as, Minolta TC1, Leica Minilux, Contax T2/T3, Nikon 28ti, and all the other typical "point n shoot gods".
I'm very much a hobbyist but definitely not some amateur Lomographer.
I'm into that grimy no context street shit. So I figured since I'm not really going at this like a purist, why spend the money to feel like one.

I don't shit on anyone who's out here killing it though, I apreciate anyone who still shoots film. It's a dying culture, and I love it. In LA alot of film guys are pretentious as fuck, but sometimes you meet guys like me who do it cause they just enjoy it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:19:40 No.3064208 Report

Quoted By: >>3064210

>>3064203

>buying untested or junk cameras

So fucking tempting though.

Saw a super rare X-600 on ebay the other day for $40 which wouldn't fire the shutter.

Might be a quick fix, might not. Hard not to buy it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:25:45 No.3064210 Report

Quoted By: >>3064221

>>3064208
Right? I bought an F3 for cheap because "it wouldn't fire." It had like a 20-year-old battery and the seller didn't even know how to turn it on.

>>3064203
That's so cute.

jovimiya

jovimiya Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:32:50 No.3064214 Report

Quoted By:

Breaking News :
Do you utilize a pay_pal account.. because you can get an additional 950 a week to your paycheck only working on the laptop for three hours per day.
go to this page+_+_+_+www.2big-profits.com

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:37:31 No.3064218 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064203
Some dude made a Leica M-Mount lens out of this camera. Shit is cash

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 11:38:33 No.3064221 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064210

Yea, that made me wonder about x-600. Still up actually.

But seller is Japanese Camera store, so I doubt he couldn't figure it out....

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMAG1657.jpg, 1MiB, 1920x1075

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 13:57:29 No.3064262 Report

Quoted By: >>3064263

Got these two beauties the other day for $8 at a local thrift shop.
The Hanimex 35me is working fine but the light seals are completely destroyed. Also can't find a free manual for the Hanimex anywhere online.
Besides for the flash not firing the Olympus AF-10 Super seems to be in good working order. It also came with a cheap no name brand roll of 200 iso colour film 24 exp.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMAG1654.jpg, 844KiB, 1080x1440

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 13:59:26 No.3064263 Report

Quoted By: >>3064286 >>3064293

>>3064262
No name brand film, can't find any info about it online.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Dx135can.jpg, 7KiB, 316x253

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 14:55:19 No.3064286 Report

Quoted By: >>3064611

>>3064263
Does it have a dx code? You can use it to identify your film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 15:04:01 No.3064293 Report

Quoted By: >>3064611

>>3064263
Just shoot it man, I love these no name brand films because you don't know what to expect from them. The fact that you have no clue how old they are and how badly they got treated makes it even more exciting. And I'm not even one of those absolute faggots that like lomocrap.
Just overexpose one stop and you are set.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 16:01:34 No.3064326 Report

Quoted By: >>3064508

>tfw lucked out and managed to grab the last propack of Pro 160H in 220 from Bic Camera

Also brought back a pile of Natura 1600 and Acros plus a few cameras, a Pen Fv with the 38mm f1.8 being the most important. Can't wait to visit Japan again. Film is still doing really well there.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO strom.jpg, 922KiB, 2800x1987

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 18:58:03 No.3064391 Report

Quoted By:

Just got into film photography and realized I need a decent scanner. Are there any /p/ approved recommendations for a poorfag?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_0955.jpg, 1MiB, 1500x1125

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 22:49:54 No.3064507 Report

Quoted By: >>3064511 >>3064619 >>3065142 >>3065205

Did I do good for £50 ($65)?

Pentax K1000 (SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/2 & Auto Chinon 50mm f/1.7)
Olympus OM-1 (Zuiko Auto-W 28mm f/2.8 & F. Zuiko Auto-S 50mm f/1.8)
Olympus Trip 35
Agfa Silette SL
Walz Envoy 35
Ensign Ful-vue

All of them other than the Walz are in fairly good condition, not perfect but should be usable. The Walz has sticky aperture blades. The Pentax has an unused roll of Kodak 200 in it already.

Anonymous

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

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 22:51:03 No.3064508 Report

Quoted By: >>3064702

>>3064326
Ive never heard of Pro 160H. Can you post a photo of the box?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 22:56:39 No.3064511 Report

Quoted By: >>3064529 >>3064963

>>3064507
fucking killing it m8.
If I were you (and not me, because I'm a shameless hoarder) I'd whack everything bar the Oly kit straight back up on whatever your local merchanting site is, make your money back, plus a tidy budget for film, and enjoy shooting a truly patrician outfit.
>1 normal
>1 wide
>a best 100% viewfinder
>a best low vibration horizontal shutter

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO File_000.jpg, 1MiB, 1500x1125

Anonymous Wed 26 Apr 2017 23:20:30 No.3064529 Report

Quoted By: >>3064564 >>3064963

>>3064511
>If I were you and not me

You are me.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 10A_0068.jpg, 129KiB, 1536x1024

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 00:14:44 No.3064559 Report

Quoted By: >>3064560

I love Portra 400 because while the colors are prominent, they're not overly saturated. Also, skin tones are god tier with both 160 and 400.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 00:17:59 No.3064560 Report

Quoted By: >>3064568

>>3064559
Those colors are shit bro. The sky and concrete have a weird cyan cast to them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 00:21:03 No.3064564 Report

Quoted By: >>3064927

>>3064529
>a string of emojis that acknowledge our shared plight

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 00:33:28 No.3064568 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064560
Looks like a slight green cast to me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 02:01:50 No.3064611 Report

Quoted By: >>3064685

>>3064286
Yes it's dx encoded but it's in the olympus now so I won't be able to tell until I'm done shooting which will probably be later today.
>>3064293
Can't really overexpose on a point and shoot but I'll try my luck. When I got the olympus the shutter count was on 0 so I opened it up in my dark bag and the roll was around halfway shot. I'm guessing the people at the thrift shop opened the back up so it's likely the first half is all exposed, either that or it still has shots from the previous owner. If you're wondering how I got it out of the camera, it automatically rewound the film when I put batteries in it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 02:11:01 No.3064619 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064507
Fuck man just the Pentax on it's own is worth almost triple that. So lucky super jealous

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMAG1660-01.jpg, 700KiB, 1512x2016

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 02:43:23 No.3064641 Report

Quoted By:

Got this old lightmeter for $10 is it any good? I think the ISO dial is busted the needle doesn't turn at all when I change ISO speeds.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20160713_220235.jpg, 307KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 04:38:19 No.3064685 Report

Quoted By: >>3064696 >>3064749

>>3064611
For future referencing, 'hacking' the DX code is super easy. Been needing to do it with the remaining rolls of Ultramax I have because it's so shit at box speed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 05:20:26 No.3064696 Report

Quoted By: >>3064751

>>3064685
this is quite nice, but straighten your shit m8

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 05:51:01 No.3064702 Report

Quoted By: >>3064751 >>3064791

>>3064508
I assume it's 160NS

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 07:56:46 No.3064749 Report

Quoted By: >>3064751

>>3064685
Does dx code tell you about the maker of the film? I already know it's 24 exp. ISO 200. If not that's fine its made in japan so its bound to be good film

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 07:59:15 No.3064751 Report

Quoted By: >>3064775

>>3064696
Yeeee I gotta rescan that shit too.

>>3064702
That's what I'd think too.

>>3064749
Nah, doesn't tell you shit about maker. If it's 24exp, 200iso I'd bet ¥100 it's Fuji C200.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 09:00:53 No.3064775 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064751
Ah oh well guess I'll be in for a surprise when I get them developed

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 10:16:37 No.3064791 Report

Quoted By: >>3064845

>>3064702
160 NS is the Fuji New Portra.
Back in the good old days they had 160H and 160C, with C being the higher saturation version, Much like NC and VC portra.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 160NS_001.jpg, 541KiB, 1000x750

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 12:52:43 No.3064845 Report

Quoted By: >>3065065

>>3064791
Just got my first roll back. It's way better than Portra. Holy shit found my new c41 film.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 14:55:34 No.3064927 Report

Quoted By: >>3064934

>>3064564
>plight

Aye, I've ran out of shelf space. Seems that my maximum capacity is 57 cameras...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 15:14:34 No.3064934 Report

Quoted By: >>3065071

>>3064927
sell your biggest camera and buy 5 mju ii, suddenly you have 61.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170427_103730_448.jpg, 4MiB, 3583x2376

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 16:36:24 No.3064950 Report

Quoted By: >>3064951

I got some prints back today. Portra 400 I think

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170427_113002_177.jpg, 4MiB, 3583x2376

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 16:37:45 No.3064951 Report

Quoted By: >>3064952

>>3064950
Portra 400 I think again

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170427_112228_476.jpg, 3MiB, 3360x1888

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 16:39:11 No.3064952 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064951
Again, probably portra 400. Also on a Minolta x700 with a 50mm f1.7

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC01856.jpg, 2MiB, 2000x1233

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 17:12:06 No.3064963 Report

Quoted By: >>3064978 >>3065076

>>3064511
>>3064529
The first step is admitting the problem.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2017-04-27 at 19.34.51.png, 250KiB, 424x506

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 17:36:14 No.3064973 Report

Quoted By: >>3065015

>10 pack colorplus 200 for 24 eurosheckles.

Never used this film, is it halfway decent?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 17:46:17 No.3064978 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064963
>The first step is admitting the problem.
I see them bottles, you fuckin alcoholic

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO A010677-R1-16-16A-2.jpg, 482KiB, 1000x675

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 19:21:55 No.3065015 Report

Quoted By: >>3065016 >>3065026 >>3065030 >>3065058

>>3064973
I buy it for £1 a roll, here's some shits from an OM-10 w/ 50mm f/1.8 using it

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO A010677-R1-33-35A-2.jpg, 413KiB, 675x1000

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 19:23:11 No.3065016 Report

Quoted By: >>3065017

>>3065015

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO A010679-R1-15-14-2.jpg, 528KiB, 1000x804

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 19:24:16 No.3065017 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065016

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 19:40:56 No.3065022 Report

Quoted By: >>3065098

>>3061027
You're a fuckwit. HP5 plus is tops

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 19:51:01 No.3065026 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065015
I like it

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 19:56:48 No.3065030 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065015
>£1 a roll

Where?
Asking as a continental European.

Also it looks pretty okay for a budget happy shooty film.
Thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 20:29:08 No.3065043 Report

Quoted By: >>3065668

What do you think about this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGYsmgvLMOo

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 20:49:33 No.3065058 Report

Quoted By: >>3065073

>>3065015
1 quid a roll??? It's time to share your plug mate

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 20:54:19 No.3065065 Report

Quoted By: >>3065072

>>3064845
I meant conceptually. Of course it's better then Kodak, it's Fuji. I shot a wedding on the 160C last year, looked fantastic.
The groomsmen were in blue suits and they just popped fantastically and the skin tones were really peachy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 20:58:02 No.3065071 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064934
So few slave owners grasp this logic.
A prize buck can never do the work of 5 curs. They are just vanity items.
>inb4 mandingo fighting
m8, it's 2017, you can't do that shit anymore.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 20:59:02 No.3065072 Report

Quoted By: >>3065176

>>3065065
what if I'm shooting black people tho. (pun intended)
but actually, I wouldn't want a black subject "peachy"

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO A010677-R1-14-14A-2.jpg, 353KiB, 1000x675

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 20:59:49 No.3065073 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065058
Local camera shop b0ss

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 21:01:07 No.3065076 Report

Quoted By: >>3065438

>>3064963
>they own nifty drawer
>ebay lense caps for all of them
The 15 children all seemed well fed and neatly dressed, I see no grounds to recommend their removal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 21:17:06 No.3065098 Report

Quoted By: >>3065115

>>3065022
You're an arsebag. HP5 Plus is shite.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 21:28:10 No.3065115 Report

Quoted By: >>3065126 >>3065733

>>3065098
What is even the goal here?
Why do you do this?
Do you like actually, literally, work at Kodak and have some vested interest in Tri-X continuing to sell, in spite of HP5 being about 20% cheaper and actually superior for most users (hot tip buddy, people in 2017 want their film to dry flat)?
Will you even post a justification for your position, or are you just hoping to trump-roll the discussion buy being the loudest, stupidest and simplest?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 21:42:58 No.3065126 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065115
S/h/it's an obsessive shut-in, like those supposed opinion tourists who're constantly trying to start fight threads on /p/.

There's like one of two of 'em on this board, the other is a stalker of a particular tripfag. Dunno if it's some subcategory of sperging, but that one also can't leave any thread mentioning said tripfag alone, at all.

Welcome to 4chan, the Internet's toilet. Don't be surprised when people come here to lay down a fat smelly meth-induced backside sprog (360).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 21:43:36 No.3065127 Report

Quoted By:

So many weebs on this board
White piggus go home

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 22:13:17 No.3065142 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064507
Sell me the 28mm 2.8
>>3064177
That's looking great dude

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170427_214818_787.jpg, 90KiB, 1000x750

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 22:57:21 No.3065176 Report

Quoted By: >>3065315 >>3065349

>>3065072
A black subject wouldn't become peachy...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Apr 2017 23:28:29 No.3065205 Report

Quoted By:

>>3064507
Disgustingly good deal for 50 quid actually. The 28mm Zuiko goes at least for that much alone. I'm jealous.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 04:04:47 No.3065315 Report

Quoted By: >>3065995

>>3065176
Saw this on /r/analog
I'm a fan of your work

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 04:55:32 No.3065333 Report

Quoted By: >>3065380

so im not a good photographer i usually just use my iphone or my t3i. i want a film camera for a trip im going on with the gf and i want to take dramatic pics of her and the scenery. what can i get for kinda cheap that is easy to shoot?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 05:38:48 No.3065349 Report

Quoted By: >>3065370

>>3065176
needs straightening nigga

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 06:31:05 No.3065370 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065349
na I like it, it should be tilted even more, adds to the photo

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ddddd.jpg, 108KiB, 500x375

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 06:45:10 No.3065380 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065333
My go-to film camera is the Yashica FX-2. I picked mine up for like $15 at a thrift shop, and they are always on ebay. Ive found a number of lenses at thrift stores as well. its a great camera.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO s-l300.jpg, 17KiB, 300x225

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:25:54 No.3065400 Report

Quoted By: >>3065401 >>3065408

When everyone talks of "pushing" a film to 400 or whatever, they just mean treating it as if it is 400?

So they set their lightmeter to ISO 400 instead of whatever the film is, and expose like it says?

Does anything special have to be done during development? Can my local development place figure it out?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:29:46 No.3065401 Report

Quoted By: >>3065445

>>3065400
Why do you want to do it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:38:15 No.3065408 Report

Quoted By: >>3065445

>>3065400
yes, you'll have to extend developing times to compensate. when people talk about pushing, they usually talk about pushing black and white film, or pushing when home developing. some labs dont push at all as their machine is automatic, and if they do, youll usually have to pay more for that.

also, if youre being an obvious noob at film the guy at the counter will probably snicker a bit when you come in with your lil canister of portra 400 pushed to 800.

Pushing is often really more about controlling the contrast of your film, than gaining a few extra stops. you should really know why you want to do it, before bothering to do it.

black and white is another matter. for example, hp5 pushed to 800 in xtol is gorgeous, and its how you should shoot that film by default.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:52:31 No.3065411 Report

Quoted By: >>3065416 >>3065418 >>3065434 >>3065438

So whats a good 35mm film camera I can get with a light meter and some groovy aestetic thats not buttfucking expensive

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:57:46 No.3065416 Report

Quoted By: >>3065420

>>3065411
I wouldn't be surprised if that question is already answered both in this thread and the Gear Thread.

What's your budget exactly? I don't consider $500 to be "buttfucking expensive" but you might.
Is something like a Nikon F100 with a 50 mm f/1.8D lens too pricy?
(You want the vertical grip too. The grip is nice and it lets you use AA batteries)

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:59:08 No.3065418 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065411
Any fucking one? Pick a company, go to the wiki that lists their 35mm SLRs, Google them until one tickles your
a e s T h e T I c s

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 07:59:52 No.3065420 Report

Quoted By: >>3065434

>>3065416
100$ as far as 35mm goes

But 500 for medium format.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 09:35:24 No.3065434 Report

Quoted By: >>3065478

>>3065411
>>3065420
Like the other one, the F100 is a good option, and looks great imo, but it's not within 100 bucks I think, they usually go for 150 (yuros) around here, it's probably cheaper in USA so you might get lucky.
The F80 looks nice and is the (super cheap, but quality) alternative to the F100, it basically set the precedent to the modern nikon D line.
Both are very modern though, so if you want retro good looks get a steel body manual focus slr.
At that point just get whatever is there for cheap, they'll be probably sold with a 50mm and I guess that's all you need atm.
For MF for looks any box can be cute, the Mamiya 645 is smaller than most so it's not as terrible to carry and is cute and simple.
Any TLR can be had for that amount of money except maybe the Rolleiflex.
I would get a C220, it's a very pretty camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 09:53:42 No.3065438 Report

Quoted By: >>3065511

>>3065411
Anything will work.
>>3065076
I once ordered a bin bag from china filled with Nikon style pinch caps for 10 bucks.
I will never run out of them.

But I have multiple off those drawers and almost none of it gets used.

Maybe I can offload some here for 'special price' if anyone fancies something.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 10:07:11 No.3065445 Report

Quoted By: >>3065459

>>3065401

I don't, just want to know exactly what it means.

I was googling about the Natura I just picked up and it came up alot.

>>3065408

>Pushing is often really more about controlling the contrast of your film
>you'll have to extend developing times to compensate

Thanks.

> the guy at the counter will probably snicker a bit when you come in

They snicker anyway. Especially after they develop my pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 10:39:18 No.3065459 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065445
>They snicker anyway. Especially after they develop my pictures.

I once got a compliment.

>S..s..senpai noticed me desu.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 11:22:18 No.3065478 Report

Quoted By: >>3065511

>>3065434
I'm the guy who recommended the F100 earlier.
I used an N80 before I got my own and now that you mention it that really is a very nice camera as well. They go pretty cheaply too.
You can get a grip extension for AA batteries for the N80 too, so you don't have to buy expensive camera batteries.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 12:11:45 No.3065511 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065438
Where are you? Do you have Zuikos other than 28, 35, 50, and Nikkors other than 50?

>>3065478
Yeah, the only thing missing is weather sealing but other than that it has all the features one might need. And since people tend to prefer the single F models, the 100, or the manual focusing ones, the 80 goes for like 20-40.
And true, the grip can be ideal if the other batteries are hard to find around, but that said they last a very long time (no flash used).

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 12:41:29 No.3065529 Report

Quoted By:

Just got a Mju I en Mju Zoom for 35 euros. I know the Mju I can have some AF problems but okay... Finally got myself a compact analog camera. I hate saying this, but sometimes I hate taking a big cam. For example, a while back I was sitting in the metro and 4 people in front of me were all fucking around with their phones. Pretty sad but one station had great colors which matched with their clothes. Really didn't want to take out my cam, turn it on, make noise and all that shit.

So now I can put it in my coat or whatever, that's good. Also nice for my nightlife photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 17:05:08 No.3065668 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065043
It's a camera spinning around for a minute with music in the background what else can I say?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 18:22:41 No.3065708 Report

Quoted By:

I'm a beginner and I'm thinking about developing my own film once that time comes, but I don't have a way to scan and print afterwards.

Would it even be worth developing on my own as far as cost if I have to send the film to get scanned and what not?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 18:26:39 No.3065710 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062528
no dslr or scanner

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 18:28:36 No.3065713 Report

Quoted By:

Best deals for buying film for beginners?

I'll typically be shooting outside in a lot of light, probably portraits of my friends or scenic/urban shots.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 19:14:52 No.3065733 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065115
>What is even the goal here?
>Why do you do this?
For people like you, ya utter nonce.
You're getting so wound up over a joke post that you're willing to type up a reply like this.

For that reason and that reason alone: I'm not going to answer your questions today.
btw, I have a great interest in Ilford itself.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image060.jpg, 1MiB, 677x1000

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 20:31:22 No.3065777 Report

Quoted By: >>3065779

Portra 400.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 20:35:01 No.3065779 Report

Quoted By: >>3065782

>>3065777
Boring.
Too much snow or sky.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image062.jpg, 975KiB, 1000x679

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 20:36:11 No.3065782 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065779

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image063.jpg, 1MiB, 1000x680

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 20:39:17 No.3065785 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image064.jpg, 1MiB, 1000x681

Anonymous Fri 28 Apr 2017 20:48:33 No.3065792 Report

Quoted By: >>3066443

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 02:57:49 No.3065995 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065315
Lol fags

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 03:01:21 No.3065997 Report

Quoted By: >>3066025

newfag here

how do you scan a film picture and get in on your computer? i sound like a grandma holy shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 03:54:22 No.3066009 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062242
what camera

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 04:06:14 No.3066014 Report

Quoted By:

>>3062242
It looks like you've used a textured diffusion material for your scan backlight.
This is a mistake, either switch to something with an even surface finish, or keep the diffusion material well out of your scan DOF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 04:25:36 No.3066025 Report

Quoted By: >>3066063

>>3065997
>how do you scan a film picture and get in on your computer?
>how do you scan a film picture
>scan
come on nigga, you just answered your own question

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tumblr_oop1p87B6K1w5pibgo2_1280.jpg, 234KiB, 1280x853

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 04:48:44 No.3066035 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061839
I recently got the same thing as my first film camera, along with a Canon Sure Shot Owl ($5 each at goodwill, not too shabby). They both have been shooting pretty nicely
pic related, belive i took this one with the xa2, could be wrong, i had both of them with me on this day

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 06:17:47 No.3066063 Report

Quoted By: >>3066077 >>3066151

>>3066025
but like what kind of...scanner?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 06:50:36 No.3066077 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066063
>what is google
a film scanner obviously, or scanning with a dslr

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 10:57:27 No.3066150 Report

Quoted By: >>3066152

Decided to try a new place closer to home to get some C41 developed.
Holy fuck, what a bad idea.
Four instead of six frame strip cuts, which will make it harder to scan, and dumb to store since the holder sheets are for six, not four, frame strips.
Two frames are scratched, film wasn't delivered in holder sheets unlike wherever else I get C41 developed.
Asked for contacts, instead of 35mm sized contacts, it's one of those bullshit card sized "contacts" (all frames in a card sized print). I can tell at least the exposure was right, but nothing else, fuck.
Never again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 10:59:03 No.3066151 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066063
Ideally, a decent scanner made for film scans.
Personally, I use an Epson V750 pro to scan film , but that's overkill for most film scanning.
(I like it because it lets me wet scan my large format negatives)

obviously you want to go within your budget when looking at scanners, unless you go the dslr route (assuming you already have one)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 11:00:06 No.3066152 Report

Quoted By: >>3066157

>>3066150
why the switch in labs?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO smena.jpg, 194KiB, 2048x1152

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 11:02:27 No.3066155 Report

Quoted By: >>3066399

can i put Fuji superia 400 in my Smena 8m? and what effect can i expect?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 11:07:10 No.3066157 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066152
I moved, so the usual place I go to is now an hour drive instead of the 10 mins it used to take before.
I'll just go back to the old one.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1.jpg, 954KiB, 950x633

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:25:45 No.3066259 Report

Quoted By: >>3066261 >>3066264 >>3066265 >>3066266 >>3066277

Need some advice. Just got some fujicolour superia 200 developed.

Most of the photos came out really nice, but one or two of them look extremely muddy and like someone put the Structure tool on instagram full blast. They're really painful to look at.

Any reasons why they came out like this and some didn't? Badly developed/lens fucked up or the there's too much going on in the image

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:31:01 No.3066261 Report

Quoted By: >>3066263 >>3066264

>>3066259
More importantly what happened to the right side?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:32:16 No.3066263 Report

Quoted By: >>3066264

>>3066261
Yeah I just noticed that. It's not in the print or the original scan file. Think I accidentally hit something in Photoshop when resizing the image

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:42:26 No.3066264 Report

Quoted By: >>3066265

>>3066259
>>3066261
>>3066263

Looks like you cloned the area to the left of that over.

as for the look of the film, I think its prolly a combination of the colors within the subject and settings you used in-camera

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:43:34 No.3066265 Report

Quoted By: >>3066270

>>3066259
>>3066264
Specially if you only see that on a couple of the images in the roll, that almost definitely means you fucked something up in-camera

do you have one of the better images to compare?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:49:34 No.3066266 Report

Quoted By: >>3066270

>>3066259
Are they labscans?
Or yours?
This happens to me too with fuji, the c200 I tend to use for snapshits.
I also have foliage that looks like this.
Although it also looks like it has extra sharpness/contrast.
Are your curves/levels clipping from one side?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO plshelp.jpg, 306KiB, 664x1000

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:57:02 No.3066269 Report

Quoted By: >>3066295

Some tips on scanning Ektar? First time with it.
I feel like I have to go hard on the contrast otherwise it comes washed out.
Also, getting the tones right is proving to be difficult, I already have to set some hard curves to bring the color right but I still can't nail the temp, or so I feel.
I'm also falling asleep, so I guess I'll try tomorrow, but I'd appreciate some protips for Ektar.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tmp_14395-1493484869896897929536.jpg, 439KiB, 533x800

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 16:58:04 No.3066270 Report

Quoted By: >>3066271

>>3066265
Not one of my best snapshits but it has foliage and stuff so probably the best image to use to compare. This one doesn't seem as muddy and sharpened to shit like the bad one.

>>3066266
Lab scans

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 17:06:04 No.3066271 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066270
It probably was a bit underexposed.
The same happens to me when:
It's a photo where green dominates.
Or I underexposed it.
It's a cheapo labscan of fuji which likes to have a green tint.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 17:29:17 No.3066277 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066259
Don't be a lab scan cuck desu

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 18:59:13 No.3066295 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066269
First tip to scanning ektar is don't fuck the exposure.

The blue/cyan channel/layer is particularly easy to blow if it's not spot-on, and then everything looks like shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 21:32:17 No.3066342 Report

Quoted By:

>>3061139
I like it. I like the triangle between the industrial stuff the motel and the weeds. Great lines gives it a good flow. It has a cozy feel with interesting content. I really like the colors too

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Apr 2017 22:53:54 No.3066399 Report

Quoted By:

>>3066155
You might break it with a 400, 50-100 should be safe, 200 is risky but considering it beeing this old you should be fine also.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Apr 2017 00:58:33 No.3066443 Report

Quoted By:

>>3065792
I like it

/FGT/

/FGT/ Sun 30 Apr 2017 03:22:34 No.3066503 Report

Quoted By:

New thread >>3066501

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

Film General Thread