/p/ - Photography » Thread #4278871

[321 / 122 / 128]

Film General Thread /fgt/

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 07:42:31 No.4278871 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>4278921 >>4279257 >>4279355 >>4279571 >>4280071 >>4281131 >>4282201 >>4282646

Snapshit edition

PREV THREAD: >>4275615

QUESTION to start the thread off:
>What's the best picture (or one of the best) you think you've taken to date and why? Feel free to tell a story if there is one.

/fgt/ daily reminder (courtesy by anon): one stop per decade is (generally) bullshit
>negative film ages better than positive
>black and white better than color
>slow films better than fast
>storage conditions (dry/cool) matter more than years
>Negative film is shot 1 or 2 stops overexposed and then PULLED in development so that you build more density in the exposure and develop less such that the fog is limited
>slide/positive film is shot at box speed or overexposed and pulled.
>if you home develop you can also use benzotriazole as a restrainer for the the first developer in E6 process

Useful links
>[massive dev chart] gives times for home film development
https://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php
>[film dev] shows results of development regimes
https://filmdev.org/
>[news & community links]
35mmc.com
casualphotophile.com
kosmofoto.com
emulsive.org
japancamerahunter.com

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 07:54:50 No.4278877 Report

Quoted By: >>4278885 >>4278886 >>4278894 >>4278927

Yesterday I went in a camera shop they were selling HP5 for £11. I've only been shooting film 3 years and I remember it being half that price, I have two questions:

How is it that when 35mm film is supposedly more popular than ever in the last 20 years is film now so expensive?

Will the price of cameras slowly go down as more people are put off shooting film?
I don't know if I would ever recommend shooting film to anyone anymore as it's too expensive, I still shoot because I have a lot of film lying around but otherwise it would only be for special occasions

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Roll1 (13).jpg, 278KiB, 1240x830

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 07:56:15 No.4278878 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000007120018.jpg, 4MiB, 2005x3024

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 07:57:23 No.4278879 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000038760032.jpg, 4MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 07:58:34 No.4278880 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Photo06_6.jpg, 2MiB, 2546x3792

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 08:02:43 No.4278881 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 08:38:15 No.4278885 Report

Quoted By: >>4278918

>>4278877
Tbh I think the hobby will be polarized more and more between budget shooters using cheap b/w and developing at home and portrafags who shoot rolls of color and send them off in bulk to the lab

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 08:51:56 No.4278886 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278877

It’s still not out of reach. 1 roll of Kodak gold in aus is $20, developing it is $10 so 4 rolls per month cost $120 which is cheaper than one night going out per month.

If you are shooting for fun I can’t see needing more than 4 rolls per month, what would you do with 120 photos per month? Upload 4 per day ?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LR_---_0069.jpg, 1MiB, 925x1387

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 09:41:25 No.4278891 Report

Quoted By: >>4278892

Shot some expired Konica Centuria 800 and just overexposed it for +3 stops, generally got really good results.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LR_---_0070.jpg, 1MiB, 1496x997

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 09:42:47 No.4278892 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278891

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 10:04:35 No.4278894 Report

Quoted By: >>4278911 >>4279081

>>4278877
>How is it that when 35mm film is supposedly more popular than ever in the last 20 years is film now so expensive?
It's inflation bro everything costs like 30 percent more than 5 years ago

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 10:30:09 No.4278895 Report

Quoted By: >>4278898 >>4278914 >>4278915

I would like to buy a travel camera which 1) lasts a long time 2) is compact for travelling. Should I even bother with film here?

It'll just be pictures for myself that I put into a photo album.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 11:06:42 No.4278898 Report

Quoted By: >>4278912

>>4278895
Canonet QL17 III. compact, well built, has lightmeter built in, easy to work with, fast lens with good IQ.
The only one issue you will have to resolve - battery, but it is not a problem at all

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 12:38:26 No.4278911 Report

Quoted By: >>4278913

>>4278894
It clearly isn't just inflation. Most 35mm film has doubled in the last two years. If it was inflation that would imply four years ago HP5 was £2.50

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 12:38:41 No.4278912 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278898
Cheers. About how much should I be willing to spend on it? I find them all somewhere between $100 and $200. Is it hard to get the right film for it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 12:41:10 No.4278913 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278911
i remember when colorplus still was available and it cost around 3$ in my poorfag currency. gold was around 5$. even foma got more expensive

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-08620-0033.jpg, 3MiB, 1818x1228

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 12:44:16 No.4278914 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278895
Definitely. If anything I would say travel is the best time to use film. 1. Because you have more disposable cash and 2. film has a nostalgic feel baked into it so you will enjoy looking back at them even more and 3. Snapshits just look better on film

The one drawback on traveling with a camera and it can be a major one is you can't waste photos on stupid shit like stuff you see in galleries or museums but stuff like that should be shot with your phone anyway

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net+(1).jpg, 58KiB, 799x538

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 12:46:40 No.4278915 Report

Quoted By: >>4279066 >>4281319

>>4278895
I wouldn't bother with film. At the very least just get one of the newer 35mm p&s and use it as a lil backup to a digital kit. Traveling with film is a pita

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 12:51:29 No.4278918 Report

Quoted By: >>4278919

>>4278885
Which is fucked because I'm sure most people start shooting film because the colours look so good.

I didnt start shooting black and white until a year into shooting film because I wasnt interested in it but now its all I shoot because I can develop myself (and also because it's cool)

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 13:43:07 No.4278919 Report

Quoted By: >>4278957 >>4279034

>>4278918
I started doing color dev at home recently. It's just as easy if you have a sous vide.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO crosswalk.jpg, 3MiB, 5144x4236

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 14:20:28 No.4278921 Report

Quoted By: >>4279068 >>4279087 >>4279483

>>4278871
New heights of laziness reached from copypasting even the former thread's starting question
>NEW QUESTION
Which photographic technique do you wish to experiment with someday?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 14:48:49 No.4278927 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278877
8 years ago a 36exp roll of colorplus was a couple of euros, now it's more than double that.
>I don't know if I would ever recommend shooting film to anyone anymore
I have rationalized my choice of shooting film as follows:
>I don't have sufficient interest to spend thousands upfront on a proper modern digital camera with good lenses
>however I still want to take high quality pictures in few relatively sparse occasions
>a great film SLR with a good fast prime is less than 200€, often even less than 100€
>I found a lab that makes prints optically, without a scanner, €19.50/roll for dev+print (10x15cm format)
>film included, it's less than 1€/picture
I do enjoy taking photos, handling an analog camera, fumbling with settings, the delayed gratification, the physical media, and all the meme bullshit we tell ourselves, but even all this aside, for me film makes more financial sense than digital.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO scan0004.jpg, 3MiB, 3663x2690

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 16:11:25 No.4278935 Report

Quoted By: >>4279175

ive my own sewage which eventually goes into an infiltration bed
spent chemicals has me worried about doing a lot of dev at home
especially the residual silver from fixing as it kills my sewage bacteria
i usually just pour the fixer directly down my toilet as it goes to a tank that the municipality empties a couple of times a year
are color chemicals bad?
what do you guys do with spent chems?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 17:31:58 No.4278957 Report

Quoted By: >>4278959 >>4279034

>>4278919
I did it for a few years. It's annoying as hell. Gotta bring chems to temp, agitation every 15s, and the chems go bad quite quickly. And then you still gotta deal with colour correcting the scand. Fug all that

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 17:47:28 No.4278959 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278957
It's cheap at least. Roughly 1 dollar per roll. I stand dev all my b&w so i feel you on the agit. Hah.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Minolta.jpg, 178KiB, 762x495

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 18:14:46 No.4278966 Report

Quoted By:

Haven't shot film for a decade, I found this point&shoot at the thrift store for 5 dollars. came with the original documentation, carrying bag, and two rolls of Kodak gold 200 that expired in like 2009. I'm having fun with it. It looks like it's basically unused and everything functions- unfortunately the date function stops at 2019 so I just removed the battery from it.

I got an Olympus Inifinity Superzoom 300 at the same time for 10 bucks, but I think it must have been dropped. It powers on, but zooming in too far and it binds up, and the eyepiece gets out of focus if you zoom at all. Not sure I want to bother testing film out in it if I'm not sure it works- A shame because the optics are very clean.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 19:24:59 No.4278981 Report

Quoted By: >>4278984 >>4278985 >>4278987 >>4278993 >>4279183

Is camera scanning a waste of time?
Even if I sink hundreds into hipster taxed crap like valoi or negative supply holder, can I even get results that match 20 year old Nikon coolscans?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 19:37:42 No.4278984 Report

Quoted By: >>4278993 >>4279091

>>4278981
You can get something with printable quality, but scanning film is really only for making digital contact sheets so you can organize your negatives for making prints in the darkroom.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 19:42:45 No.4278985 Report

Quoted By: >>4278993

>>4278981
Oh, camera scanning. If you get a good lense and good camera. You're getting into coolscan prices. Camera scanning is waaaaaay faster than any scanner less than like 10k for comparable quality. I think the noritsu film lab scanners will do very fast and good quality scans, but if you want to max out the dpi it will still take a looooong time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 19:54:37 No.4278987 Report

Quoted By: >>4278990

>>4278981
Camera scanning is ridiculously ahead of everything except for drum scanning now that we have FF pixel shift which produces noiseless, 0-interlopation files. It only starts getting questionable when you move up to 6x7 and larger films which can be higher resolution than any digital cameras under $2k.

35mm film ranges from 12mp for cheap drug store shit to 36-45mp for high quality low speed films. CMS 20 realistically would be fully scanned by 100-200 mp I guess, these are all figures where you just find vague grain shapes that arent worth looking at by scanning at a higher resolution.

Buy a sony a7rii and a 50mm macro, shoot said macro lens at f5.6, sandwich your film between a piece of glass, a black construction paper mask so only the negatives contents can be seen, and a diffused light panel, and use a cheap stand/tripod to hold your camera over that. Dooooone.

Maybe it was worse back when people were comparing a 5d classic to a flatbed

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 19:58:59 No.4278990 Report

Quoted By: >>4278992 >>4278993

>>4278987
Aside from resolution do you think that cameras can pick up the microcontrast/gradation of film as well as a drum scanner, or an actual darkroom print?

I think that's just as/more important when you get to like 2800dpi levels of scanning.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:06:54 No.4278992 Report

Quoted By: >>4278995

>>4278990
>Microcontrast and gradation
Definite this technically I want to watch you make a fool of yourself

Today's FF cameras range from 24 to 26 bits of color data and capture a gamut in raw that is very, very far beyond what layered film can get. Pixel shift mode makes them insanely OP. Fun film fact: If you can see any grain at all, you have passed the limit at which there is good gradation/tonality and are literally splitting hairs. It's like looking at the sub-pixel dots on your monitor.

The actual point of film for most people is that there is actually less color information, the film is pre-calibrated to a certain look and you do not radically change every single hue twist depending on which program interprets the raw, which is itself pre-cooked by camera firmware and can differ from model to model even with them all using the same signal chain. Its much easier to work with if you know so and so looks better for portraits.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO [3] Delta 100 - 120-Pano_medium_ (...).jpg, 4MiB, 5409x4460

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:14:00 No.4278993 Report

Quoted By: >>4278996 >>4279024

>>4278984
>>4278985
this
>>4278981
camera scanning, with a good camera and lense, is way more than enough
no, you won't get the "full resolution of film 1:1" unless you're basically drumscanning
my lab makes both camscanning and "scanner" scanning, and I prefer the camera one
they send me high res jpg as well as .dng files
The jpg photos are around 10mb each and 6000 x 4000
the .dng files are 683 x 1024 and around 24 - 26mb each
Literally no one needs more than this, it's fucking huge and has lots of details
Picrel's DNG alone is 128mB (medium format)
And if you wanna make prints, go to the dark room and do them properly
If you just wanna give your grandpa a portrait and don't want the hassle, send the edited .dng file to a fine art printing place and it'll look amazing either way
People gearfagging about this are the same ones who never take pictures
>>4278990
why the fuck do you need 2800dpi?
honest question
If you're printing something humongous you'll be seeing it from a distance anyway
If you wanna make fine art prints, just do it right and make it all in the dark room

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:18:57 No.4278995 Report

Quoted By: >>4278996 >>4279001

>>4278992
Weirdly aggressive. It was just a question. Sounds like someone needs to take a chill pill, maybe?

>>4278992
Mostly cause I want to see how nice my 4x5 prints are.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:22:33 No.4278996 Report

Quoted By: >>4278997 >>4279001

>>4278993
>no, you won't get the "full resolution of film 1:1" unless you're basically drumscanning
you will if you use 42+ mp pixel shift cameras well into medium format. the best 35mm film stocks are close to 8k bayer unless you are a line counter. a lot of people went out of their way to demonstrate this. it also matters if you use a clinically sharp mirrorless/rangefinder lens on film as well as your scanner. most SLR lenses are never, ever as crisp as mirrorless/rangefinder lenses, only sharp enough at f5.6+.
>film resolution people be like
>i'm at 10000x zoom and i can make out one extra blurry hair that looks more like a trail of grains
>and?
>muh resolution!

>>4278995
anyone who still says "microcontrast" deserves some aggression desu
fucking retarded made up word literally the rotational velocidensity of photography

its not real and never has been.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:25:25 No.4278997 Report

Quoted By: >>4279002

>>4278996
Using a "wrong" word you understood the meaning of made you incredibly mad. Here, take this chill pill. You need it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:33:15 No.4279001 Report

Quoted By: >>4279003 >>4279006

>>4278995
> I want to see how nice my 4x5 prints are
then either look directly at them or make dark room prints
Or have them drumscanned
Do you realized how fucking gigantic a 4x5 is? How big is your computer screen? do you wanna look at the photo itself or do you wanna zoom in a billion times to see a bunch of dots and confirm that film truly is made of a bunch of silver crystals?
You're gearfagging
Focus on making photos
Camscanning is good enough
For a 4x5 you'll have multiple images stitched together and a 2gb file or whatever
Do you truly need a 50gb image from a drumscan to see a picture of a cat in a sofa?
>>4278996
>you will if you use blah blah under a hundred specific conditions
then no
It's possible, but certainly not usual, to say the least
So we can basically say "no, you won't get 1:1"
The thing is: you don't need 1:1, as we seem to agree
Also yes, microcontrast is not only retarded, but literally an astroturf term used by Leica and their shills to compensate for their micropenises and lack of photographic habilities

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:33:27 No.4279002 Report

Quoted By: >>4279003

>>4278997
Everyone understands "microcontrast" has some vague meaning, but no one can ever define it, or point to any corresponding concept in the extremely well fleshed out field of optics and imaging, or even point to an image that illustrates it.

I believe it is low IQ people (common among photographers, absent among painters, hence it was a term invented by photographers) looking at photos taken with less sharp lenses, seeing a gradient instead of a series of lines, and believing the lens is "rendering" a bunch of microscopic details that are smaller than they themselves can see, when its actually so blurry it turns a bunch of small details like pebbles and pockmarks into gradients. So "microcontrast", which gearfags insist is a technical specification, is just "i like the way softer lenses look when photographing fine detail".

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:38:41 No.4279003 Report

Quoted By: >>4279011

>>4279001
Yes I do. I'm trying to actively learn, and checking my work, so pixel peeping is fine. Normally I don't really care. Content will always be more important than technical perfection.

I'm in the process of building a professional level darkroom right now.

>>4279002
Well, sorry for using a word you didn't like. Tonality/gradation/your weird phrase/microcontrast are all interchangeable in my ignorant mind I guess.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:40:43 No.4279006 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279001
>A hundred specific conditions
most of the top selling mirrorless cameras and some very cheap older ones have high MP counts and pixel shift sufficient for getting 1:1 detail from film and reaching its maximum enlargement potential. its not very specific, its borderline normal for anyone who has an FF mirrorless. An A7RII and FE 50mm f2.8 macro barely costs any more than a good flatbed and costs much less than a drum scanner.

let's not even discuss phones. Although they used a specialty lens and a very bright lighting setup, samsung was able to make a very good 300dpi billboard of a cat using the s23 ultra's sensor.

An anon here sumrised that he would only need 40-50mp+pixel shift to fully scan velvia 6x9 based on actually trying. You wouldn't have to stitch together more than 2 images for most 4x5 sheets, 4 tops.
>Do you truly need
Does anyone truly need anything?

Camera scanning has never been better or more accessible, and enables amateurs to access the equivalent of using the theoretical perfect enlargers and expensive expanses of photo paper.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:47:38 No.4279009 Report

Quoted By: >>4279011 >>4279021 >>4279026

I realize that lab grade drum scanner will be better than some hillbilly setup whether it's a camera or some chink scanner. There is no point to compare top product with whatever I can buy on a budget. It's like asking /o/ what car to buy and people recommending Ferrari vas Lambo. This is just stupid.

My doubt with camera scanning is that subtle film grain is almost always lost. I follow people on flickr who post good res scans and the image always looks "smeared" or "soapy" whatever it's called.
I don't know it they use shitty lens, bad holder, just stop down to f/900 or it it's just a nature of camera scanning.
I'll appreciate if anyone posts a scan that they consider good.
I have everything for camera scanning, only need to invest a bit more for a film holder. But I'm not sure if I'll get the pretty film grain that I'm after. Don't want to trow money away either, I prefer to save for a consumer grade scaner it it provides good results.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 20:53:18 No.4279011 Report

Quoted By: >>4279018 >>4279020 >>4279021

>>4279003
I get where you're coming from, but first of all your only chance at scanning things is through a DSLR anyway
At least there are no 4x5 dedicated scanners that I know of, so DSLR scanning is literally the only option apart from drumscanning
Not trying to be rude to you, but I was serious: you wanna see a great level of detail from you 4x5? look directly at it
Place it on top of a light table and grab a loupe, it'll be way better for catching this level of details
Apart from checking if everything is in focus etc. I don't see the benefits of gearfagging over the highest possible quality scans to your photography learning
What you need is "good enough scanning"
And I don't mean "well, yeah, that's good enough" like some half-assed scan
What I'm saying is that at some point it truly doesn't matter if you get a better scan because we're humans, not machines
Look at the PHOTO
that's how humans work
No one looks at a photo by Henri Cartier-Bresson or whoever the fuck and go "wow this photo is shit, I can't even see the individual grains when I zoom in 45 gazzillion times"
>>4279009
>subtle film grain is almost always lost
why does it matter?
I'm talking about having good scans and settling for it
If you're getting "smeared" images it's a shit scan though

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240130_131619.jpg, 906KiB, 2687x1800

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:19:49 No.4279018 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279011
The epson v800 has 4x5 holders. I agree that looking at the negatives is probably the best. I lost my loupe in the grass, and I'm waiting for my new rodenstock viewing loupe. Should be here soon. It is also a good skill to be able to "see" the image even if it is negative.

I guess it is gearfaggy in a sense to pixelpeep your 4x5 shots, but on the other hand you are wasting expensive film if you aren't at least trying to get near a technically perfect shot with LF. I'm getting there, but still have some work to go. The quality of LF glass and the large film really add another element to a print when you nail a shot.

It's kind of funny to think about, but very grainy prints also add a special quality that I really enjoy from film. Boils down to a stylistic choice depending on subject.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:21:30 No.4279020 Report

Quoted By: >>4279024

>>4279011
>> why does it matter?
Because grain is tiny, and is sort of a benchmark for being a good scan.
If we accept "you can recognize the face therefore it's good" as the minimum requirement, then the whole discussion is pointless.

If anyone has a good camera scanning setup, please post the samples. I want to see what is the practical limit of such setups

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:27:50 No.4279021 Report

Quoted By: >>4279024

>>4279009
the soapy shit is from resizing.
it even fucks with digital photos and i hate it.

the only thing i hate more is minilab scanners that add a ton of digital sharpening to the grain.

>>4279011
Broseph if I handed you a henri printed 6ft wide you'd think it was blurry as fuck and struggle to see the content up close but if i handed you a 6ft leibovitz print shot on a 100mp hasselblad you'd see the whole photo immediately. Different cameras are made for different print sizes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:28:51 No.4279023 Report

Quoted By:

would 16mp apsc be OK for scanning 35mm? Thinking about picking up a super cheap Sony nex 5 for shooting at night on a trip, would feel even better about it if I can use it for scanning negs in the future. Not worried about pixel peeping it'd mainly be for web/social media use

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:31:11 No.4279024 Report

Quoted By: >>4279029

>>4279020
no, you're getting it all wrong
That's exactly what I meant with "good enough"
Not "good enough" as in "half-assed", but like "this meets the basic requirements of excellence"
You were talking about **SUBTLE** film grain
On fucking FLICKR for fuck's sake
People don't usually post 250mb images on the internet
That's my point
Even if it was a large format with amazing glass and the finest grain imaginable and drumscanning and all that shit, it's still a Flickr image
You're not looking at the thing itself
You're looking at a compressed image from a social media platform
>>4279021
Yes, but that's my point: how many 6ft prints are you doing on the regular?
For those specific prints then go ahead and pay for a drumscan and fine art plotting
But for regular everyday photography DSLR scanning is more than good enough, as I've said before >>4278993
ipsis litteris:
>camera scanning, with a good camera and lense, is way more than enough

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LeoCollarGoodDS (1 of 1).jpg, 4MiB, 3168x3288

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:36:12 No.4279026 Report

Quoted By: >>4279029 >>4279159

>>4279009
Here are a couple shots I used my dslr for. The grain is resolved in both of them, so some may say it is good enough, maybe? I forget the film.

It is maybe a little nicer than my scanner at 2800dpi.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LeoCollarGoodDS (1 of 1)-2 (1).jpg, 3MiB, 3203x2135

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:38:35 No.4279028 Report

Quoted By: >>4279147 >>4279159

Previous was a 6x6 shot. Here is a very fine grain film 35mm shot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:46:29 No.4279029 Report

Quoted By: >>4279031

>>4279024
Yeaf fair point, I shouldn't chase the excellence witha cheap setup. But at the same time I see the difference from somethin like plustek, even on flickr. I'm just not sure if those people are doing sloppy job, or this is a technology limitation.

>>4279026
Thanks anon
Have you found a way to get rid of the dust? For exmple does wiping negatives with a sponge before feeding into the holder work?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 21:50:49 No.4279031 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279029
Blast with computer duster then pull through an anti static cloth is how an old timer taught me. I'm not dealing with that until I'm in the darkroom.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cs41-temp-compensation.png, 399KiB, 1708x1175

Anonymous Tue 30 Jan 2024 22:03:06 No.4279034 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278957
>>4278919
If you scan them and don't intend to ever make RA4-prints you can just dev it at slightly above room temperature

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 00:18:14 No.4279066 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278915
is that fucking 9/11??

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO infrared flash.jpg, 635KiB, 1000x668

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 00:21:00 No.4279067 Report

Quoted By: >>4279092

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 00:22:11 No.4279068 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278921
slow sync flash. Gonna try doing that as soon as my camera has new light seals!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 01:21:57 No.4279081 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278894
That amazing Biden economy... Fucking hell democrats are retarded. At least we don't have mean Tweets from Trump!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 01:56:47 No.4279087 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278921
>Which photographic technique do you wish to experiment with someday?
I have a roll of Rollei Infrared 400 that I have like 8 shots on that's been sitting in my closet cuz I don't want to lug around a tripod to take 30 second long exposures of trees in the winter

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 02:02:51 No.4279091 Report

Quoted By: >>4279094

>>4278984
sigh... i hope this is a troll

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 02:08:11 No.4279092 Report

Quoted By: >>4279143 >>4279144

>>4279067
holy shit I thought this was my gf's aunt
they look IDENTICAL
I thought I was having a stroke when I opened the image
Btw how do you do with the infrared flash? What do you use in front of the flash? a gel? a filter?
Can you tell me everything about your process, materials etc.? I have a roll of 120 infrared film, but infrared filters for medium format lenses cost prohibitive for shooting literally the only one roll I have

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 02:29:42 No.4279094 Report

Quoted By: >>4279141

Chemistry warming up for my first 6 4x5 color sheets! Excited.

Does anyone have any LF color shots they can share??

>>4279091
You could call it a troll. I'd call it more of a provocative joke with a hint of truth behind it. Were your jimmies rustled?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled17 (2) (1).jpg, 5MiB, 5103x4022

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 04:54:48 No.4279124 Report

Quoted By: >>4279133

Well here is one of the ones I can share. This is ektar. The downscaling has destroyed the quality of this image so severely I almost didn't share it.

It was a nice test shot, and I enjoy photographing things like this, so I'm happy. Probably should have used a 105mm lense instead of the 90. Next time!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled17 (5).jpg, 4MiB, 5232x4120

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 05:32:38 No.4279132 Report

Quoted By:

Sorry these pictures are kinda shit. My head wasn't in it today from some personal stuff. It's interesting how much your mood and mental state can alter your photography. I missed the exposure on this one because my light meter battery died before I could take a single reading. Used a phone meter and screwed it up. Every mistake can be a lesson. Gotta keep chugging along.

I have an interesting idea for a series of b&w macro shots I am going to start working on soon. It's a little corny, but I think it may be fun with the corrext execution.

Start with one singular object as your first image, second image has two things, third has three, etc. Until you get to a square number like 9 so you can frame them in a square. Each object used in the series will have something common between them. They could all be leaves for example. Should be fun.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 05:51:51 No.4279133 Report

Quoted By: >>4279252

>>4279124
I like the emptiness and distance from the 90mm, I believe the crop from the 105mm lense would take away from the photo

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 06:44:21 No.4279141 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279094
>Were your jimmies rustled?
They were lol

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04628.jpg, 2MiB, 3000x2036

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 06:54:01 No.4279143 Report

Quoted By: >>4279150

>>4279092
hahahahaha that's a good one. FR tho?

i actually taped the infrared hoya filter over a piece of cardboard with a circle the size of the filter cut out and put that over the flash - i know ghetto.
they have these too which i plan on getting https://store.camtraptions.com/products/infrared-flash-filters?variant=32285347086419

i've also heard that you can use a regular dark read gel filter, but you would have to use several layers.

photo was taken with the hoya filter over the flash

look up Kohei Yoshiyuki and Weegees infrared photos! they might inspire you to give it a shot c:

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 06:58:02 No.4279144 Report

Quoted By: >>4279254

>>4279092
ohh, you don't need the filter over the lens! when you're doing infrared flash photography with infrared film all you need is the infrared filter over the flash, the infrared sensitivity in the film will take care of the rest. it legit just looks like a tiny red dot of light because the filter is so dark.

i also pust my speedlight at the brightest flash available and that works

https://petapixel.com/2021/06/22/using-an-infrared-flash-for-stealthy-street-photography/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 07:09:43 No.4279147 Report

Quoted By: >>4279160

>>4279028
i dare say, everything about this one beats the 6x6 shot by a mile. beautiful shot

what 35mm camera are you using? looks sharp af

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 07:19:32 No.4279150 Report

Quoted By: >>4279360

>>4279143
It truly gave me a weird feeling of... misplacement? 4chan is not the place I expect to see my GF's aunt, it was so nonsensical it took me a couple of seconds to grasp it
They look identical, no joke
Even after looking more closely it still looks exactly like her
Anyway
What filter? 720nm?
And how do you calculate the aperture etc. when using the filter over the flash?
I'll look into those photographers!
I remember Nobuyoshi Araki's works on parks, shooting people having sex with infrared film
Only years later I understood that he was using an "invisible flash" with the filter over it

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 08:58:19 No.4279159 Report

Quoted By: >>4279252

>>4279026
>>4279028
I've been lurking a lot lately and I want to say I love all the photos of your dog.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 11 (1) (1) (1).jpg, 4MiB, 2874x2795

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 08:59:50 No.4279160 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279147
Contax Rts 3 with a planar lense. Very fun camera. The super fast auto wind makes it too easy to blast through a roll of film.

I'm pretty sure both pictures were taken with a planar lense actually, but different film.

Ty. I agree with you. The cute pictures get old pretty fast, but it's nice to have a handful in good focus like that one and this one.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO scan0012_03.jpg, 4MiB, 5650x3657

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 10:52:51 No.4279170 Report

Quoted By: >>4279171 >>4279192

i really enjoy doublex in rodinal
pic rel is shot with a pentax mx, yellow filter, exposed for 800 asa and developed 1+50 in rodinal for 18 minutes with spinning/swirling agitation

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 10:54:20 No.4279171 Report

Quoted By: >>4279172

>>4279170
pentax smc 50mm f1.7 lens

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO scan0002_03.jpg, 4MiB, 5655x3625

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 11:25:06 No.4279172 Report

Quoted By: >>4279192

>>4279171
another

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 12:05:55 No.4279175 Report

Quoted By: >>4279646

>>4278935
>i usually just pour the fixer
Don't do this moron. Dev and stop go down the sink with running water. I keep bad fixer in glass bottles for when my local government does a chemical disposal event thingy a few times a year.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 13:12:50 No.4279183 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278981
I used a Nikon 9000ed for years. Camera scanning blows it away in terms of quality. It also takes substantially less time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 15:20:01 No.4279192 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279170
>>4279172
so grainy it looks fuzzy

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 16:40:30 No.4279220 Report

Quoted By: >>4279304

How pita is color developing at home? I know the procedure, interested in practical results.
Do you often get messy colors?
Do you often waste chems because they oxidized?
What's your workflow to invert colors?

Also, is anyone shooting kodak vision3? It's pretty much b&w film price, and delivers good quality photos

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 7 (4).jpg, 563KiB, 756x1134

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 17:44:34 No.4279252 Report

Quoted By: >>4279645

>>4279133
Good point. I didn't think of it like that.

>>4279159
Ty. Enjoy this extra grainy image of him. I used one of those funky washi films.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 17:50:28 No.4279254 Report

Quoted By: >>4279255

>>4279144
I'm thinking about buying a 720nm filter, but my most powerful flash is just a Nikon SB-22 Speedlight
And I'd be using the film on a f/3.8 TLR
How many stops should I compensate for? Would this be viable?
For example, for a distance of 2m (which is reasonable for street) I should use f16 at ISO 200 (the film's nominal ISO)
So I could shoot wide open at f3.8 but this would be just 4 stops down
Will all of the photos come out basically black?
I can't find info for exposure compensation with flash

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 17:57:33 No.4279255 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279254
>another question
Considering I'm shooting with a leaf shutter, I can sync the flash to any speed
Can I get good results letting regular light in "just to help" with background etc. and still have the infrared look from the subject being hit with a splash of infrared light?
And then I can control the amount of ambient light through the camera speed (1/500" being way less ambient light etc.)
In sum it would be a photo underexposed by regular light, but "buffed" with infrared light
Does any of this make sense?
>pls help

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 18:03:06 No.4279257 Report

Quoted By: >>4279259 >>4279305

>>4278871
Dors anyone know of what kind of flash I can get for my nikon F? Is it just somthing with a correct sync cable port and the proper cord?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 18:10:48 No.4279259 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279257
Any flash that also has a pc sync port? There's probably a thingy you screw onto the camera to hold a flash, or you can just carry it around.

Fun fact. Older strobe kits just used normal ass 2 prong extension chords as their connector.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 19:03:20 No.4279282 Report

Quoted By: >>4279285 >>4279286

newfag here, what is the point of offering the same film in 24 and 36 shot rolls? i feel like I'm getting jewed on development for the smaller rolls since labs charge per roll

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 19:08:15 No.4279285 Report

Quoted By: >>4279286 >>4279288

>>4279282
back on the day 24 rolls were for casual snapshitters and 36 for pros.

Basically because you can use the whole roll faster and can see your snapshits faster

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 19:15:54 No.4279286 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279285
Didn't know about that. Makes sense
>>4279282
I feel like it's useful if you just wanna do some specific shots with a film, or if it's an expensive film you can just pay a little bit less to get to test it and see if you like it
Of course the price variation is minimal, but if you buy 4 different stocks, all 24 exp for like $7 instead of $9 for a 36 exp roll, you'll save $8 (which is enough to buy another 24 exp roll or add 1 buck and buy a 36 exp one)
So I think it's good to get to experiment with a bunch of different films
It's also useful for some "novelty" films, like Lomo stuff
Maybe you wanna play with that, but you don't wanna shoot an entire 36 exp roll because it can get tiring
So there are some possible uses
But I never buy 24 exp rolls precisely because of what you said: I'll pay the same for the development and scanning, so in the end it turns out to be more expensive

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 19:16:18 No.4279288 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279285
>Basically because you can use the whole roll faster and can see your snapshits faster
I get that, but I wish I'd paid more attention when I placed my order

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Kodak Pro Image 100 #4 -0024.jpg, 3MiB, 3856x2576

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 20:56:14 No.4279304 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279220
Just did my first color rolls in the last two days, can't speak on chemical oxidizing, but having done a good amount of B&W it isn't any harder than that provided you have a means of controlling a water bath's temperature.
I've been happy with the colors so far, as for inverting I just use a dedicated Minolta scanner so I'm not familiar with doing it manually camera scanning.

fe2fucker

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO as1.jpg, 86KiB, 1000x1000

fe2fucker Wed 31 Jan 2024 21:01:09 No.4279305 Report

Quoted By: >>4279309

>>4279257
Get a Nikon AS-1 flash adapter, then you'll be able to stick whichever shoe mounted flash you feel like on there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 31 Jan 2024 21:16:06 No.4279309 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279305
Really? That's great to hear I can still (potentially) use my Sb-800 on my old F. Just need to see about it having the right port.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 00:22:52 No.4279346 Report

Quoted By: >>4279347

Not sure if this is right place to post this but whatever. I just recently found two cameras in my house. One of them is an Olympus OM-1 the other is a Pentax ME I think. Should I get them serviced before using them as they have not been used in almost 20 years.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 00:28:02 No.4279347 Report

Quoted By: >>4279349

>>4279346
Check the foam in the mirror part, and the foam that seals the back where the film goes.

Put the shutter speed to 1 second and time it with a timer.

Replace batteries and see if light meter responds to light.

If they're all good you're fine. A CLA is always a good idea with an old camera because the shutter speeds usually slow down, and they will recalibrate them, and the light meter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 00:30:02 No.4279349 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279347
Thanks anon, I will do what you said. I hope you have a good day

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1706748863807.jpg, 948KiB, 996x1503

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 00:54:34 No.4279355 Report

Quoted By: >>4279359 >>4279366 >>4279924

>>4278871
>Pic is my favorite photo.
M5aggot from earlier. End of the day I went with a mint condition bessa r2 and a Zeiss 50mm /2 instead

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04510editSMBD.jpg, 1MiB, 1600x1600

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 01:08:31 No.4279359 Report

Quoted By: >>4279364

>>4279355
nice dude, i'm sure you'll like that kit if you're looking for a great rangefinder experience

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 01:34:09 No.4279360 Report

Quoted By: >>4279945

>>4279150
yes, the 720nm hoya filter...
hmmm i believe i had the aperture fully open and the shutter at 60.

the f3.8 would be more than viable, my rokkor 28mm is only 3.5! c: BUT i usually always push my film at least a stop because that's how i was taught.

the whole infrared flash / exposure compensation information is nowhere online hahahahaha maybe in some forums. I'd suggest if you want to experiment with infrared film and infrared flash i'd start out with either an infrared filter so you can do traditional infrared b/w photography OR buy a filter and cover your flash with it or buy one of those infrared flash filters for $29

photos coming out black? the flash irl was very dim compared to how the photos came out. the photos made it look like a traditional flash was used.

do you shoot 35mm?? you might want to experiement with infrared with a cheaper format?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20201014-roll 6015.jpg, 578KiB, 2886x1833

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 02:01:38 No.4279364 Report

Quoted By: >>4279365

>>4279359
I sold my XPRO-3 for this so I hope it'll turn out good.
>shot on Leica CL that I shouldn't have sold.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 02:09:50 No.4279365 Report

Quoted By: >>4279367

>>4279364
BASED DOGHAIR! I've been waiting to see one on someone else's scan!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO [33] Kentmere 100_medium_res.jpg, 5MiB, 2435x3612

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 02:22:23 No.4279366 Report

Quoted By: >>4279367

>>4279355
Good choice, enjoy your new tool!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20201208-BANZAIPIPE5DEC20035.jpg, 156KiB, 1648x1063

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 02:26:09 No.4279367 Report

Quoted By: >>4279371

>>4279365
Not dog hair
>>4279366
I can't wait till I get it, I'm also moving back to Hawaii so the photos gonna be good

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 02:50:27 No.4279371 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279367
Close enough! I don't mind some hairs on a scan. A print is a totally different story tho.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 08:55:48 No.4279416 Report

Quoted By:

Would you say that sharpening is essential when sharing film scans online?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07893-0020.jpg, 3MiB, 3417x2278

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 17:52:13 No.4279460 Report

Quoted By:

reigndears :DDD

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07893-0022.jpg, 3MiB, 3520x2347

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 17:54:44 No.4279461 Report

Quoted By:

LOOK UP
MINESHAFTS

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07428-0014.jpg, 3MiB, 3610x2407

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 18:15:22 No.4279467 Report

Quoted By: >>4279472 >>4279477

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 18:35:41 No.4279472 Report

Quoted By: >>4279481

>>4279467
i like this picture

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 18:43:36 No.4279477 Report

Quoted By: >>4279481

>>4279467
kino af, anon
good job

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07428-0013.jpg, 3MiB, 3606x2420

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 19:07:44 No.4279481 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279472
>>4279477
thank you. also took this on that day.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 19:26:16 No.4279483 Report

Quoted By: >>4279485

>>4278921
Either large format movements or self printing
The former cost a damn lot, and the other i don't have the space for it (yet)
Soonest will be learning flash for portraits

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 01 Feb 2024 19:47:14 No.4279485 Report

Quoted By: >>4279697

>>4279483
You're going to print yourself? That sounds exciting. For cardboard cutouts?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 00:52:53 No.4279564 Report

Quoted By:

any SDfags ITT? where's the best place to get photos of the planes coming into san diego international

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 01:11:23 No.4279571 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278871
EXTRA EXTRA
KODAK TO CUT PRICE OF TRI X by 30%
KODAK TO CUT PRICE OF TRI-X BY 30%
https://petapixel.com/2024/01/31/kodak-cuts-iconic-tri-x-black-and-white-film-prices-by-up-to-30/

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20210107-BANZAIPIPE5JAN21010.jpg, 2MiB, 4250x2678

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 03:47:20 No.4279613 Report

Quoted By:

Love me some lithe boys
>how make color not teal

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 05:21:02 No.4279645 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279252
Sweet looks like my pup. Most obedient one I ever owned

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 05:21:48 No.4279646 Report

Quoted By: >>4279661

>>4279175
not the anon you were replying to but why shouldnt fix go down the drain with water? going to be making new chemistry for the first time since may and i dont want to blow up my pipes

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 05:38:46 No.4279661 Report

Quoted By: >>4279912 >>4279969

>>4279646
Used Fix has silver-hallide in it. Liquid antibiotics that can poison the water table, fuck up your septic tank and can fuck up a sewage system

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 07:57:07 No.4279676 Report

Quoted By: >>4279681

qrd on the differences between gold and colorplus? gold is sharper and less saturated except for reds?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 08:29:47 No.4279681 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279676
wider dynamic range also

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 11:10:08 No.4279697 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279485
Nice pun lad, but you know what ? I'll do it it sound fun
I'm gonna print myself with en enlarger and ilford papaer when i get the necessary gear

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PXL_20240202_190640988~2.jpg, 3MiB, 4080x3072

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 19:13:33 No.4279809 Report

Quoted By: >>4279831 >>4279834 >>4280011

on tap for the weekend - Kodak Double-X with an orange filter, tasty

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240202_115228.jpg, 2MiB, 1800x2963

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 19:54:05 No.4279831 Report

Quoted By: >>4279834

>>4279809
Nice. I pulled out my ugly m3 for the first time in a long while. I did have it CLA'd a while back, so it works really nicely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 19:56:41 No.4279834 Report

Quoted By: >>4279841 >>4279851

>>4279809
>>4279831
post pics you take with your camera not of your camera

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_5089.jpg, 2MiB, 1500x2250

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 20:00:19 No.4279837 Report

Quoted By: >>4279913

windmill

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 20:08:00 No.4279841 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279834
why

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 20:27:08 No.4279851 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279834
I do. I'm out taking pics right now, goof ball. I'll post some later today. I think I may have some nice shots.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 23:14:20 No.4279912 Report

Quoted By: >>4279921

>>4279661
what if i dont feel like going to a disposal centre. can i feed it to my dog?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 23:17:08 No.4279913 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279837
nice halations anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 23:45:55 No.4279921 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279912
If you want to refer to him in the past-tense then shure

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Fomapan 13.jpg, 214KiB, 1200x798

Anonymous Fri 02 Feb 2024 23:52:40 No.4279924 Report

Quoted By: >>4279964 >>4279970

>>4279355
long time g2 user here..almost 10 years.
i love the ergonomics, the size the meter built in, ofc the insane lenses etc...
but it's AF only. not that it's a total turn off but i considered a RF camera with manual focusing.
few questions ahead
is the Bessa R plastic one really a no go and do i have to go with the r2 r3 etc ?
How good are the Color Skopar 35mm f2.5 ??
There's a seller with the bessa r body + skopar 35mm + a jupiter 50mm
so is this a m39 mount ??? or did he attach an adapter ?
which are the best and cheap lenses for m mount as in 28 & 35mm ?

picrel is a booty i shot long time ago and rescanned today.
contax g2 28mm tla200 flash ttl mode

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO [004].jpg, 5MiB, 4000x5297

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 00:59:32 No.4279945 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279360
oh sorry, I didn't see you had replied me
Thanks for the info, I'll buy a cheap 720nm filter and do the flash thing
If there's not much compensation to be made, I think I'll just do the flash thing with the filter over it
Sounds cool as fuck, I'd love to have basically an invisible flash
I'm thinking of buying a 49mm filter, so that I can use it attached to the lense of my Pentax K1000 and later buy 35mm IR film to shoot
Since it's way bigger than my TLR lense (wich is probably around 25mm or something in diameter), maybe I can just hold it in front of the lense with some sort of black cloth around it so that stray light doesn't get in (I believe this would work)
>thanks, have a black metal album cover

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 02:13:25 No.4279964 Report

Quoted By: >>4279995

>>4279924
im imagining the smell
what iso fomapan? skin came out nice

fe2fucker

fe2fucker Sat 03 Feb 2024 02:26:19 No.4279969 Report

Quoted By: >>4280006

>>4279661
Like one liter of fixer per year is gonna do any fuckin difference.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO PXL_20210822_204436710.jpg, 4MiB, 3024x4032

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 02:26:49 No.4279970 Report

Quoted By: >>4279995 >>4282058

>>4279924
Guy with all the Bessas responding
>is the Bessa R plastic one really a no go and do i have to go with the r2 r3 etc ?
No, the Bessa R is still dope and feels just as solid as any plastic SLR like a canon ae-1. I actually prefer it over all-metal m mount Bessas. The thing to think about is if ltm will limit you. There are so many m lenses and so many new companies making high quality, affordable options. Not true for ltm. Want an ltm 35mm 1.4? Good luck.
>How good are the Color Skopar 35mm f2.5 ??
I love it. I have 'better' 35mm lenses but the 35/2.5 ltm skopar with 39mm filter threads (not the one with 43mm threads) is maybe my favourite lens.
>There's a seller with the bessa r body + skopar 35mm + a jupiter 50mm
Sounds like a great kit so long as it's not a stupid price.
>so is this a m39 mount ??? or did he attach an adapter ?
Yes. No both lenses are also m39 aka ltm

>which are the best and cheap lenses for m mount as in 28 & 35mm ?
28/3.5 Avenon/Kobalux, 28/2.8 canon
35/2.5 skopar

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 03:41:00 No.4279995 Report

Quoted By: >>4279996 >>4280098

>>4279964
the brappff was a dream i tell you that. fomapan100 btw
>>4279970
oh man..yeah i think if i'll ever spend money again it will be the r2 i guess. getting a single 35mm f2 ultron and that would be it. thx

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Yvonne Fomapan 16.jpg, 246KiB, 1110x728

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 03:42:03 No.4279996 Report

Quoted By: >>4280000 >>4280052

>>4279995
forgot brapbox.jpg

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Yvonne Fomapan 23.jpg, 351KiB, 930x1400

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 03:49:21 No.4280000 Report

Quoted By: >>4280052 >>4280940

>>4279996

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 05:19:07 No.4280006 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279969
I wouldn't risk it but you do you FE

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO WHATdoido.jpg, 4MiB, 2441x1953

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 05:29:20 No.4280007 Report

Quoted By: >>4280008 >>4280264

I have a ton of film but I don't know what do to shoot. Need ideas for a project or goal.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240202_213134.jpg, 841KiB, 1800x2654

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 05:33:05 No.4280008 Report

Quoted By: >>4280262 >>4280264

Anyone else use their vornado to dry their negatives???

>>4280007
Make a book! Or xmas cards!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20240202_233021_113_1.jpg, 1MiB, 1928x1183

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 05:41:34 No.4280011 Report

Quoted By: >>4280020

>>4279809
Nice
going to a con this weekend so I loaded it with some HP5 because lel, also first time I am going to try some portraits with flash on film so I am guessing b&w is going to be more forgiving

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 06:58:07 No.4280020 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280011
pushed HP5 is the best, I think I've only ever shot it at box speed twice with one of those times with an orange filter for more contrast

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _fucking white spots how do they (...).jpg, 319KiB, 1341x900

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 07:09:47 No.4280022 Report

Quoted By: >>4280024 >>4280050

Ok, so I know that I fucked up this roll but I don't know how.

are those air bubbles? my fixer is fucker?

I am ruling out the developer since its fresh but my fixer its from last year and has some funky stuff floating around.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 07:29:52 No.4280024 Report

Quoted By: >>4280102

>>4280022
Did you bang your tank against the table a few times?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 27 (1).jpg, 2MiB, 1839x2839

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 10:11:13 No.4280043 Report

Quoted By: >>4280044 >>4280050

A couple from today as promised. Does anyone have any thoughts on the quality of this old leica lense? I used delta 400 at 400.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 9 (3).jpg, 3MiB, 2297x3545

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 10:12:50 No.4280044 Report

Quoted By: >>4280045

>>4280043
Sorry about dog hair. One day I will be scanning my prints rather than scanning negatives and there will be no dog hairs on those!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 33 (3).jpg, 3MiB, 2244x3521

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 10:14:26 No.4280045 Report

Quoted By: >>4280046 >>4280050

>>4280044
Obligatory fun dog picture.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 24 (3).jpg, 3MiB, 4228x3200

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 10:20:08 No.4280046 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280045
Aaaand lastly a nice lil 4x5 shot. The clouds were nice so I went and took a few shots. Used my 2 stop red filter for this one.
Kinda wish I used the 65mm instead of 90. Next time!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20240203_115452.png, 986KiB, 1133x693

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 10:57:41 No.4280049 Report

Quoted By: >>4280050 >>4280055 >>4280056 >>4280102 >>4281491

i'm trying to figure out what to do in darktable to eventually make my bland and white pictures look nicer or more le refined. especially when printed
i am not able to do my own prints, and the only available prints i can find locally are digital prints
here is a tif file for one picture i'd like to print
https://files.catbox.moe/kqfql0.tif

pic related is pretty much what i am capable of achieving at the moment. crop, orientation, and moving the bottom point in tone curve

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:04:36 No.4280050 Report

Quoted By: >>4280053 >>4280054 >>4280102

>>4280049
intrepid enlarger?
i recommend it c: i've had mine for over a year and so far no complaints.

>>4280045
hahahahaha fucking cut >:D

>>4280043
dead swan?

>>4280022
https://www.reddit.com/r/AnalogCommunity/comments/10hlb87/black_dots_on_my_negatives_help_i_just_developed/

either dust or dirty developer? maybe ya have abunch of light leaks in your camera? lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:05:55 No.4280052 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279996
>>4280000
good job anon

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 25 (2).jpg, 3MiB, 2229x3283

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:12:26 No.4280053 Report

Quoted By: >>4280058

>>4280050
Canada goose. Just found it out there.. Must have died in the last 12ish hours.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:16:32 No.4280054 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280050
>intrepid enlarger
looks neat, cant justify the expense right now though

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:17:26 No.4280055 Report

Quoted By: >>4280059

>>4280049
Do you have a calibrated monitor? For digital print I'm pretty sure you need to sharpen it enough, and then just make it look nice to your eye.

I would probably increase the contrast, and maybe lower the highlights a bit to see if there's any additional detail in the clouds.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO kqfql0.jpg, 3MiB, 3655x2436

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:18:48 No.4280056 Report

Quoted By: >>4280059

>>4280049
meh

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image0 (15).jpg, 2MiB, 4032x3024

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:22:00 No.4280057 Report

Quoted By: >>4280102 >>4280285 >>4281493

minolta 16 automatic loaded with hicon 3378e sound film - 12iso lmao

i'm trynna do the whole discreet street/spy photography thing a go.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:24:02 No.4280058 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280053
beautiful

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO scan0027_02.jpg, 3MiB, 3280x2624

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 11:44:00 No.4280059 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280055
no calibrated monitor, just some wonky IPS panel i bought years and years ago
from what i remember, the sky was very very undetailed this day. just plain white-ish gray. terrible weather, would not expect much more detail in the clouds, plus i think i slightly overdeveloped the negs
>>4280056
thanks, half frame 5222 in rodinal is not particularly well suited for low grain

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 420190630_1093981468397634_75024 (...).jpg, 268KiB, 1536x2040

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 13:46:36 No.4280071 Report

Quoted By: >>4280253

>>4278871
I am yet another zoomie joining the film bandwagon after buying this at a flea market for 50 euros. Going to test it soon I hope it works correctly because I don't know anything about fixing such cameras. The lens is Tokura 28-70 f:1:3,5-4,5.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1000013062-01.jpg, 2MiB, 1500x2000

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 17:04:05 No.4280098 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279995
>oh man..yeah i think if i'll ever spend money again it will be the r2 i guess. getting a single 35mm f2 ultron and that would be it. thx

Ya I have the 35/2 Ultron. It's a fantastic lens. Still like using my skopar tho :)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 03 Feb 2024 17:13:04 No.4280102 Report

Quoted By: >>4280247

>>4280024
damn I forgot about that, I used the little stick that came out with the tank instead. Looking into that seems that those bubbles are more common on winter somehow. Going to try do inversions and see what happen
>>4280049
crank up the contrast basically
>>4280050
damn looks exactly like my negatives but I didn't cut into the felt like someone said there. Light leaks I don't think so I have another color roll taken with that camera that was developed by a lab and came out nicely.

Going to try to filter my developer and bang the tank while developing
>>4280057
absolute madman, hope that you live somewhere sunny lol

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240203_184127.jpg, 1MiB, 1800x2998

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 02:53:25 No.4280246 Report

Quoted By:

GIWTWM.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO SL.jpg, 4MiB, 2077x2876

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 03:04:59 No.4280247 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280102
desu some of my two favorite photos came from inside the church i shot at

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO mamiya 16 automatic 3378e sound (...).jpg, 1MiB, 2000x2000

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 03:06:31 No.4280248 Report

Quoted By: >>4280251

ngl these came out better than i expected. there might be potential here. gonna shoot some imagelink microfilm next. fun little experiment

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04701.jpg, 4MiB, 2384x3373

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 03:07:38 No.4280249 Report

Quoted By:

last one c:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240203_191629.jpg, 755KiB, 1800x2533

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 03:18:26 No.4280251 Report

Quoted By: >>4280257

>>4280248
Cool! It would interesting to use grainy film and then cropping to make a super grainy print.

Found this lil guy the other day. Tempted to buy some film for it, but it's horrifically expensive. On average 20 usd per roll for 8 shots. 828 is a pretty interesting sized format.

fe2fucker

fe2fucker Sun 04 Feb 2024 03:21:11 No.4280253 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280071
>Flea market
>50 euros
Dude you gotta haggle oml those are online prices

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 03:48:26 No.4280257 Report

Quoted By: >>4280259

>>4280251
hahaha yeah, that would be pretty cool! with some faster speed film and some pushing the pics would look grainy almost pointillist pen drawing perhaps.

that's a nice pocket sized camera. i've never heard of 828. might be worth a shot tho! i'd check for light leaks on the bellows before shooting- they have that black liquid rubber cement that you can seal light leaks with on the off chance that you need to fix her up

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled15.jpg, 20KiB, 124x162

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 04:11:43 No.4280259 Report

Quoted By: >>4280260

>>4280257
I have a fun idea to use a long enlarger lens and make semi abstract pictures like that. I think with the right image something like this would look so cool in a series. It's abstract, but not to the point of being nothing, so your mind fills in the detail.

I see some rolls of expired 828 film on ebay for like 12 dollars. Maybe I will get some of that as a first test...

With the 16mm film do you buy rolls of it, or sort of bulk load the little film canister things? 828 is paper backed, so I think it would be kinda tricky to bulk load it, maybe it's actually easier???

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 04:37:36 No.4280260 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280259
yeah, it's really boggling and warping my "visual grammar" :) it's esoteric lmao something like that would be very interesting if not for personal/solipsistic reasons

i bought some 16mm 3378e sound film from mononoaware. they're a film collective out in brooklyn. check it out!
i shoot on a bolex a lot, and hicon is perfect for broke analog filmmakers

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 05:42:14 No.4280262 Report

Quoted By: >>4280306

>>4280008
LMFAO hahahahahaha all that fucking dog hair brooooo

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 05:48:56 No.4280264 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280007
i agree with this guy >>4280008 make some christmas cards or work on a calendar for your mum or dad or someone you love perhaps. focus on a specific thing. i've been wanting to make one for my mom and keep lagging

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 07:50:58 No.4280285 Report

Quoted By: >>4280322

>>4280057
>iPhone 7
you're joking

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 20 (1).jpg, 3MiB, 3406x2232

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 09:18:12 No.4280306 Report

Quoted By: >>4280323

>>4280262
I hope you understand my struggle just a little more now. Sometimes the air turbulence from wiping my scanner off pulls more hair onto the scanner.
I'll get a dog hair in my food when I'm at a restaurant in a completely different city sometimes.

One of my goals is to minimize dog hair in my darkroom and I'm going to build a hepa filtered film drying cabinet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 10:57:53 No.4280322 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280285
shhhhh... this is my cross to bear and i'll hear none of it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 04 Feb 2024 10:59:27 No.4280323 Report

Quoted By: >>4280678 >>4280689

>>4280306
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6Dyl1V_Hvg

the struggle is reall my nigga.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot 2024-02-04 225647.png, 522KiB, 477x553

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 07:04:44 No.4280667 Report

Quoted By: >>4280678

loading this is a bit difficult- almost had one of those changing bag panic attacks. hopefully everything was loaded correctly.

testing the camera out again tomorrow and processing 7266 tri-x reversal as a negative.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 08:40:59 No.4280678 Report

Quoted By: >>4281580

I was looking at the probe camera thread, and saw wide angle macro. I quickly tested my 65mm lense on my 4x5 for a macro shot, and I am able to get something like a 5:1 magnification using the full bellows extension! I doubt the results will be as good as my dedicated macro lense, but I can get significantly higher magnification, so this will unlock a whole new set of possibilities for my macro work! I may work on it tommorow.

I also got a cheapish monorail 4x5 that should be great for macro work. It has a much longer bellows extension, so I may be able to use my 720mm nikon lense finally, and take very high mag macro shots. Exciting!

>>4280323
I think the juice is worth the squeeze. I'm not a digital hater. I just think analog photography is cooler and I enjoy the struggle. I also suffer greatly from a mild form of sunk cost fallacy.

>>4280667
Looking forward to the results!

fe2fucker

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO camera-cock.gif, 486KiB, 500x500

fe2fucker Mon 05 Feb 2024 11:19:21 No.4280689 Report

Quoted By: >>4280702

>>4280323
he is completely right and thats why it makes for such a good hobby.
you really get to sit down and get into the nitty gritty, and there's basically no limit to how autistic you can get, i mean look at the people making their own wet plates, daguerreotypes and autochrome plates.

endless possibilities

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 12:53:20 No.4280702 Report

Quoted By: >>4280848

>>4280689
>epilepsy gif
buy fucking tripod man

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO imm023_N23.jpg, 361KiB, 1536x1024

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 15:03:35 No.4280723 Report

Quoted By:

Düsseldorf

fe2fucker

fe2fucker Mon 05 Feb 2024 19:46:08 No.4280848 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280702
Nah :)

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO BDOTG_001.jpg, 4MiB, 2160x1762

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 19:50:50 No.4280853 Report

Quoted By: >>4280854 >>4281004

Some shots from a vintage car event in England

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO BDOTG_002.jpg, 3MiB, 2160x1762

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 19:51:57 No.4280854 Report

Quoted By: >>4280855

>>4280853

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO BDOTG_003.jpg, 4MiB, 2160x1762

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 19:53:17 No.4280855 Report

Quoted By: >>4281495

>>4280854

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240205_140434.jpg, 683KiB, 1800x2046

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 22:10:46 No.4280892 Report

Quoted By: >>4281580

This is just crazy. 5.6:1 magnification!!!!

I looked up the formula.

(Bellows extension - focal length)/focal length = magnification

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240205_141310.jpg, 1MiB, 1800x2678

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 22:14:19 No.4280894 Report

Quoted By: >>4281580

What I see on the ground glass.

Has anyone else done 4x5 macro?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 23:44:26 No.4280918 Report

Quoted By: >>4280922 >>4280924

shot some tri x 400 underexposed by 2 stops. never experimented with push/pull. if dev time at box speed is 8min, do i push such that dev time is 32 min? that seems a bit excessive no?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 23:57:51 No.4280922 Report

Quoted By: >>4280923

>>4280918
2 stop push is generally x2.25 the normal box speed, so 18 minutes

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 05 Feb 2024 23:59:16 No.4280923 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280922
ok thanks i wasnt going to invert every 30 seconds for half an hour

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 00:00:59 No.4280924 Report

Quoted By: >>4280933

>>4280918
check Massive Dev Chart or the Tri-X data sheet for the developer you're using and those will tell you

ex. MDC says rodinal (1:50) @400 = 13 mins, @1600 = 18:30 mins

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 00:19:44 No.4280933 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280924
yeah i always get a bit confused with whether underexposing means higher iso or lower but i figured it out. mdc says tx400 shot 1600 in d76 at 1:1 is 13:15min. thanks

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 00:25:46 No.4280940 Report

Quoted By: >>4281031

>>4280000
What is the inspiration behind this photo?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 42.jpg, 2MiB, 1752x2598

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 00:43:37 No.4280945 Report

Quoted By: >>4280947 >>4281035

Any recs for a cheapish short telephoto lens for my Minolta X-700?

I have never owned one before as I always thought it might look too weird taking photos of people in the street with a long lens but I want to fuck around with the DoF and see if I like it

fe2fucker

fe2fucker Tue 06 Feb 2024 00:48:05 No.4280947 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280945
Just get a minolta 85 or 135mm?
Theyre not that expensive.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 43 (1) (1).jpg, 4MiB, 2244x3391

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 07:11:45 No.4281003 Report

Quoted By: >>4281117

I have 2 pictures of goats that I like, so I shall post them.

I believe both of them were taken with a zeiss biogon 28mm on a contax g1 using delta 400 film.

Thanks.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 47 (1).jpg, 4MiB, 3391x2244

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 07:13:18 No.4281004 Report

Quoted By: >>4281117

Here is number 2.

>>4280853
These are nice looking. Thanks for sharing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 10:15:00 No.4281031 Report

Quoted By: >>4281055

>>4280940
Lust ? I was spontanious very spontanious.
Thats her belt coverinh her boobs btw and it was her idea.
She is very much of a goofy person actually.
We went there and took some photos and i used my digi + film cameras and spent the day with her. All i can think of now

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 10:58:41 No.4281035 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280945
never thought id live to see the day to see a picture of a hot woman being jelous of a fat couple

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 12:58:58 No.4281055 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281031
why did she agree to be the subject of your lust?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 15:48:08 No.4281092 Report

Quoted By: >>4281134 >>4281273 >>4281585

I will preface this by saying i am very new to photography. That being said, how sensitive is "night time" film (800t or the like) to IR light? More over could I use a IR light/laser (peq15/Dbal) to light up an area I want to take a picture of? I want to shoot night time forest with very little light but for the IR light I will be using to light up the area. Is this even possible with film?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 17:04:30 No.4281117 Report

Quoted By: >>4281153 >>4281154

>>4281004
>>4281003
goats are based, i love those bastards
thanks for your goat pictures

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO whoknows_-2.jpg, 4MiB, 2438x1950

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 17:34:04 No.4281131 Report

Quoted By: >>4281135

>>4278871

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 17:38:50 No.4281134 Report

Quoted By: >>4281311

>>4281092
Why not just use infrared film

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO whoknows_-3.jpg, 3MiB, 2121x1697

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 17:38:55 No.4281135 Report

Quoted By: >>4281139

>>4281131

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO whoknows_-5.jpg, 4MiB, 2251x1801

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 17:44:27 No.4281139 Report

Quoted By: >>4281140

>>4281135
missed focus and exposure was wonky

Zach

Zach Tue 06 Feb 2024 17:46:07 No.4281140 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281139
It looks fine to me.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 36 (1) (1).jpg, 3MiB, 3391x2245

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 18:48:35 No.4281153 Report

Quoted By: >>4281156

>>4281117
You're welcome. Have 2 more. They are so chill.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 32 (1).jpg, 3MiB, 3391x2244

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 18:50:38 No.4281154 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281117
:D

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000009880019.jpg, 1MiB, 2348x1557

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 19:03:23 No.4281156 Report

Quoted By: >>4281165

>>4281153
Reminds me of this photo I took

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 19:14:04 No.4281165 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281156
Why is the black sheep in jail? I bet the one that's looking at the camera is responsible.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Canon VTdeluxe - Jupiter8 - Port (...).jpg, 670KiB, 1500x916

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 19:29:32 No.4281175 Report

Quoted By:

The Jupiter-8 is a nice little lens but that flare is horendeous
(Budapest was nice)

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 06 Feb 2024 23:05:29 No.4281273 Report

Quoted By: >>4281311

>>4281092
looking at the spectral sensitivity curve for Kodak 800T, it doesn't look like it's sensitive to IR at all but you can always experiment!

why not use IR film as the anon suggests?

https://125px.com/docs/motionpicture/kodak/5289_zh_CN.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 00:38:41 No.4281294 Report

Quoted By: >>4281312 >>4281314 >>4281972

anyone ever play with a Nikon N80/F80 before and have any thoughts on them?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240206_162941.jpg, 776KiB, 1667x2575

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 00:41:28 No.4281295 Report

Quoted By: >>4281318

My 4x5 kit is basically complete now! My big fuck off ground glass loupe has finally arrived from Thailand. The translucent bottom reverses so you can use it for gg viewing and film viewing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:14:31 No.4281311 Report

Quoted By: >>4281316

>>4281134
>>4281273
Thanks anons. I'm not opposed to shooting IR film, but I wanted to see if I could get away with having some cool effects from the IR light on the film. Also I thought IR film was like stupid expensive.

fe2fucker

fe2fucker Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:16:41 No.4281312 Report

Quoted By: >>4281325

>>4281294
I have a Fuji Finepix S2 Pro which is an F80 with a digital back.

It's a pretty light camera, heavy lenses dont fit it all too well. It's not very snappy either, the mirror comes up and down at a leisurely pace and you can hear the servo and the hella gear reduction whirring away with each shot. It's not very loud however.

So while its not a super hispeed lodrag sports camera, its a very comfy camera.
Autofocus is quick enough that I have nothing to complain about, the meter is bob on, and it even has a built in flash, something most nikons of that era didnt have.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:17:10 No.4281314 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281294

Main features of the F80/F80D/F80S:

* SLR camera with built-in speedlight makes taking pictures easy and enjoyable, even for the most inexperienced beginner

* The dynamic AF, which utilises five-area autofocusing, enables sharp focus on irregularly moving subjects

* The vari-brite focus area display system clearly displays focus brackets at selected focus area in the viewfinder

* Nikon´s exclusive 10-segment 3D matrix metering provides correct exposure in various shooting situations

* Custom setting enables You to choose customised combinations of various functions / modes

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:36:34 No.4281316 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281311
https://www.freestylephoto.com/81040123-Rollei-Infrared-400-ISO-35mm-x-36-exp

cheaper than Kodak and Cinestill lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:39:58 No.4281318 Report

Quoted By: >>4281322

>>4281295
Why did it come from Thailand?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:41:00 No.4281319 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278915
>Traveling with film is a pita
Isn't that mostly a meme

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240206_184539.jpg, 762KiB, 2097x1474

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 02:49:32 No.4281322 Report

Quoted By: >>4281335

>>4281318
It seems to be a niche enough item that there are not many being sold on the internet/ebay. I spent a while looking at name brand loupes and settled on the rodenstock aspherical.
Nikon makes a nice one, Leica's is a basic bitch scam, I think Zeiss also makes a decent one as well. Horseman was another option..
I am very happy with the rodenstock. It is 6x with the reversible stand. The size and aspherical glass makes it a real treat to look through. I also like that it matches a couple of my 4x5 lenses, hah.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 03:01:51 No.4281325 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281312
Thanks for the insight, sounds like it's worth it since they're relatively cheap and I already have a D5100 (crop sensor) but the button layout looks almost the same and I have some Nikkor glass that I can use between the two

I got a Canon T70 not too long ago but it's acting up and idk what it's deal is...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 03:54:18 No.4281335 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281322
>It seems to be a niche enough
>mfw i remember a time when these were common accessories.
But i also took a photo class in high school that still processed film back in '02. fuck i'm getting old.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO whoknows_-8.jpg, 5MiB, 2476x1981

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 16:12:48 No.4281424 Report

Quoted By: >>4281425 >>4281476

Jank Phoenix 200 colors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 16:18:16 No.4281425 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281424
gr-aaaii-ny

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 19:37:26 No.4281476 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281424
Wonder what Phoenix 200 would look like with the halation layer added

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO imm011_N11.jpg, 231KiB, 1024x1536

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 19:56:12 No.4281484 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 20:49:20 No.4281491 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280049
Use the 'rgb levels' tool to set the black and white points. Basically all I do to my b&w stuff, sometimes turn on the 'local contrast' module to being out some detail

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 20:51:36 No.4281493 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280057
camera a cute
how do you get film for this lil nigga? gotta bulk roll?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 20:58:05 No.4281495 Report

Quoted By:

>>4280855
these are all based anon. I don't know how modern cars look so cringe and old ones are so kino

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 21:07:00 No.4281500 Report

Quoted By: >>4281519 >>4281977

What's the name of the fuzzy dark material that blocks the light in the film canister?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 17 (2).jpg, 2MiB, 3391x2244

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 21:14:58 No.4281503 Report

Quoted By: >>4281504 >>4281528

I took these pictures when it was quite dark using tmax 100 pushed one stop with a nikon 50mm at f1.2. I used a monopod to keep the camera as still as possible. Think I was shooting at like 1/3s to 1/2s with them.

I really like the look of these pictures. There's a sort of surreal haze/glow to them. Pretty cool.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 6.jpg, 1MiB, 3509x2352

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 21:16:09 No.4281504 Report

Quoted By: >>4281505

>>4281503

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 14 (3).jpg, 3MiB, 3513x2244

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 21:17:28 No.4281505 Report

Quoted By: >>4281582

>>4281504
The dirt looks like stars lmao.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 21:58:57 No.4281519 Report

Quoted By: >>4281522 >>4281977

>>4281500
Velvet?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000087660018.jpg, 4MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:10:42 No.4281520 Report

Quoted By: >>4281527

Leica M5, 35 Summicron Asph (v1), Kodak Aerocolor IV 2460 (Luminar 100), 1/500s f/8

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000087660015.jpg, 5MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:12:02 No.4281521 Report

Quoted By: >>4282048

Same as above.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:12:07 No.4281522 Report

Quoted By: >>4281524 >>4281977

>>4281519
It is pretty velvety but it's synthetic and more fuzzy. I'm looking for a name that I can look up and buy roll/strip for reasons

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000087660022.jpg, 4MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:13:24 No.4281523 Report

Quoted By:

Same as above.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:14:36 No.4281524 Report

Quoted By: >>4281977

>>4281522
Velvet is a type of fabric finish, not the material itself. Look at synthetic velvet, like polyester, rayon, etc.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:31:39 No.4281527 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281520
this is great

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 07 Feb 2024 22:35:08 No.4281528 Report

Quoted By: >>4281628

>>4281503
>There's a sort of surreal haze/glow to them
A lot of the old f1.2 lenses are like this at 1.2. Stop down to 1.8 or f2 and it goes away

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:02:19 No.4281580 Report

Quoted By: >>4281628

>>4280678
hahahaha what's funny is that i absolutely messed up all those photos on account of jamming the take up reel/cassette. did another test yesterday tho!

>>4280892
>>4280894
i figured this was possible, but have never actually seen it done. didn't even know there were bellows extensions for large formate hahahaha how did your photos come out?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:04:26 No.4281582 Report

Quoted By: >>4281628

>>4281505
What are those pods?
The stars the pods looks like a different planet

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04657.jpg, 3MiB, 2000x1349

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:07:21 No.4281585 Report

Quoted By: >>4281612

>>4281092
i don't see why not? you just need an infrared filter over whatever light source you plan on using, and possibly experimenting with either long exposures or pushing film a few stops c:

pic is a repost, but i shot this using infrared flash in a very dark spot

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO trix 16mm box speed.jpg, 4MiB, 2000x2500

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:14:10 No.4281590 Report

Quoted By: >>4281607 >>4281612

mamiya 16 automatic - probably my new favorite camera. i can literally carry it in my suits jetted pockets

developed these in a bucket

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04792.jpg, 4MiB, 2790x1991

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:15:39 No.4281592 Report

Quoted By: >>4281607 >>4281612

this little shit camera has no right being able to macro focus - the only real issue is my finger getting in the way of the lens

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04775.jpg, 4MiB, 2840x2072

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:16:47 No.4281593 Report

Quoted By: >>4281607 >>4281612

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04789.jpg, 5MiB, 2799x2008

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 01:18:15 No.4281594 Report

Quoted By: >>4281607 >>4281612

tv, foot rest, and couch out in the middle of a storm

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 02:01:03 No.4281607 Report

Quoted By: >>4281650

>>4281590
>>4281592
>>4281593
>>4281594
these are awesome man.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 02:22:50 No.4281612 Report

Quoted By: >>4281650

>>4281585
>>4281590
>>4281592
>>4281593
>>4281594
Damn, now I want to take my Kiev 30 for a spin again.

How are you scanning these? Camera scan?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240207_191131.jpg, 936KiB, 1800x2667

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 03:15:54 No.4281628 Report

Quoted By: >>4281650

>>4281528
That's what I figured. It is a nikkor 50mm. Kind of a fun look.

>>4281582
I think the pods are silage. It was on a cow farm.

>>4281580
Well, I fucked my 65mm lense today when I wanted to use it, and by the graces of god I was able to take the cover off, poke around the shutter release/internals, unstuck it, and put everything back together, and it works now! I have no clue what I did, but I did it.

I have been lazy, but I am going to take my 6th 4x5 shot using the super macro, so later tonight or tmrw I may have a pic to show you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 05:12:43 No.4281650 Report

Quoted By: >>4281674 >>4281677

>>4281607
thanks man! c:

>>4281612
hahahaha you should! it's honestly, the most fun i've had shooting, and especially with the price of film these days.
i think something about how small the lens is makes these spy cameras be able to take macro like photos (?) i'm thinking of something like Justin Qunnell's mouth camera pinhole macro shots

and yes, using a bellows extension on my a7sii

>>4281628
holy fuck! that's some elevated ape tinkering ingenuity xD i'm glad you got it fixed! (: can't wait to see

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 12.jpg, 2MiB, 2597x2051

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 06:44:26 No.4281674 Report

Quoted By: >>4282030

>>4281650
Well... I screwed up the exposure and got nothing, lol. I had a feeling my light meter was lying to me, and the bellows extension probably dropped the exposure by 2 or 3 stops and not 1... I will set my flashes up soon to redeem myself.

Here is a picture I took the other day with the same 65mm lense. I really love the quality of this lense. I think this picture came out wonderfully. Very pleasing to look at.
I used a 1 stop green filter to lighten the grass. Tmax 100 at 100.

Your mamiya 16 shots are great also. I like the style of your photography.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 07:42:43 No.4281677 Report

Quoted By: >>4282030

>>4281650
I found the calculation for bellows extension factor, and I need to add an extra 5.5 stops to my exposure, lol. I did not realize it is dependent on the focal length of the lense you're using...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07034-0035.jpg, 577KiB, 1800x1200

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 09:42:59 No.4281694 Report

Quoted By:

crosspost from rpt

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 14:46:29 No.4281736 Report

Quoted By: >>4281738

I want to get into film, but I can't get over how you only know you fuck up by paying for your photos to be developed and paying for film to try again

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 14:49:35 No.4281738 Report

Quoted By: >>4282429

>>4281736

If we are only talking 35mm, that only happens if you really don't understand the exposure triangle.

Most film is somewhat forgiving anyway so you really need to be a retard or shoot with a broken camera to really fuck it up

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 14:56:39 No.4281742 Report

Quoted By: >>4281758 >>4281904

Should I get a Nikonos or F2?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 15:42:35 No.4281758 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281742
f2 for sure

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 21:19:42 No.4281904 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281742
Unless you live in Atlantis, F2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 21:21:10 No.4281906 Report

Quoted By: >>4281916 >>4281917

any tips for metering night shoots? I have a tri pod and shutter cable at least

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 21:33:10 No.4281916 Report

Quoted By: >>4281918

>>4281906
Dont forget to compensate for reciprocity failure.

A lot of people use a phone based light meter because they are better for very low light settings.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 21:38:45 No.4281917 Report

Quoted By: >>4281928

>>4281906
For b&w expose for the shadows develop for the highlights.
For color meter for the highlights and shoot +2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 21:38:47 No.4281918 Report

Quoted By: >>4281928

>>4281916
with a phone app should I be zooming in to get my exposure settings? tapping around the scene gives me way different exposure times depending on if it's zoomed in or not

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 08 Feb 2024 21:54:53 No.4281928 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281918
Use this >>4281917 advice and choose what is important. Spot meters will tell you the exposure to make that middle gray tone, so depending on what you're metering you may want it brighter or darker.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07034-0011.jpg, 687KiB, 1200x1800

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 00:40:12 No.4281969 Report

Quoted By: >>4282048

le back focus

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 00:49:57 No.4281972 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281294
I copped one off ebay for $60 :3

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1000013179-01.jpg, 320KiB, 819x1103

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 01:22:54 No.4281977 Report

Quoted By:

>>4281500
>>4281519
>>4281522
>>4281524
Do y'all really not know it's called felt?

Finally got off my ass and developed a roll. Skate photo trained my shutter finger well

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 06:45:33 No.4282030 Report

Quoted By: >>4282042

>>4281674
nice shot! :)
oh no! i'm surprised cuz you were shining a light directly at your subject too.

>>4281677
huh that's crazy. where'd you find the calculations?
i shoot 4x5 once in a bluemoon but my developing tank spills developer all over the place hahaha

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240208_234324.jpg, 893KiB, 1800x3157

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 07:48:00 No.4282042 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282030
I was shooting at like 1/10th of a second when I should have been shooting at 1 second, hah. Only 2 little specks of a highlight showed up. I am developing some new pictures tonight. Hopefully these will turn out better... I got my monorail camera in the mail. Significantly more movement, more rigid, and sort of easier to adjust everything. Nice improvement over the linhof for studio type work.

There's a free app called art of foto that has an automatic bellows extension calculator. There are some useful/important calculations that you can utilize with 4x5 photography. I may start carrying a ruler in my kit, lol.

I have a this thing that goes in a 1L paterson tank and does 6 sheets at a time. I like that number for processing and scanning. It's not too much.

My other tank is more efficient with developer, but I stand dev with rodinal, so it really doesn't matter. That one does 4 sheets using 500ml of dev solution, but I lost one of the caps for it, so I am not using it anymore.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 08:30:53 No.4282048 Report

Quoted By: >>4282058 >>4282116

>>4281521
>>4281969
Sick is this street photography?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cATERPILLAR1.jpg, 3MiB, 3860x3040

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 10:06:23 No.4282055 Report

Quoted By: >>4282169

4x5 macro shot no. 1

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Whisk.jpg, 4MiB, 4104x5200

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 10:28:36 No.4282056 Report

Quoted By: >>4282152 >>4282169

4x5 macro no. 2

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO R1-07034-0004.jpg, 699KiB, 1800x1200

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 10:48:09 No.4282058 Report

Quoted By:

>>4279970
all this bessa talk is making me want to jump on the bessawagon
>>4282048
no, street photography isn't real

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DryLizard.jpg, 4MiB, 4104x5200

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 10:58:33 No.4282060 Report

Quoted By: >>4282169

4x5 macro no. 3

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Webs1.jpg, 4MiB, 3900x3078

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 11:13:58 No.4282061 Report

Quoted By: >>4282064 >>4282152 >>4282169

4x5 macro no. 4 This was taken using a 90mm lense instead of a 120mm, so the zoom is a good bit higher.

Notice any difference in lense quality between this one and the previous 3?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 12 (12).jpg, 5MiB, 4974x3999

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 11:43:42 No.4282064 Report

Quoted By: >>4282152 >>4282169

>>4282061
And the last one. No. 5
Aside from the hanging caterpillar these were all sort of test shots, but I think they came out pretty cool. Very excited to see how these negatives look when printed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 17:15:47 No.4282116 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282048
No, I built an elaborate stage and hired the amputee model.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 19:02:34 No.4282149 Report

Quoted By: >>4282150

what's the best medium format camera for someone just dicking around?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 19:11:44 No.4282150 Report

Quoted By: >>4282162

>>4282149
Mamiya 6 or 7 is great for snapshitting medium format, but expensive.

You can find a somewhat decent tlr for not that much money if you don't mind the form/function of them. If you have never used a view camera I would recommend trying it out. You see the picture in a unique sort of way with them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 19:29:11 No.4282152 Report

Quoted By: >>4282157

>>4282056
>>4282061
>>4282064
man this really is getting me get the itch for 4x5 again.

but I can barely sustain snapshitting on 120 fuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 20:12:59 No.4282157 Report

Quoted By: >>4282160

>>4282152
:D 4x5 fomapan is pretty inexpensive, and nice. Only 70ish dollars for a 50 pack! I think there is even cheaper film, but it gets into weird film territory.

What kind of 4x5 camera do you have?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 20:19:22 No.4282160 Report

Quoted By: >>4282168 >>4282177

>>4282157
None yet, I had been eyeing a Graflex because I want to take handheld photos (I know I know) but I guess that if I really want to use a large format camera properly I will need something with movements, so I also been considering a Wista but haven't decided yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 20:20:17 No.4282162 Report

Quoted By: >>4282168

>>4282150
my only experience is with 35mm SLRs and the pentax 67 seems pretty sweet. I like the SLR form factor and shit

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240129_142154.jpg, 3MiB, 2208x2702

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 21:41:13 No.4282168 Report

Quoted By: >>4282182

>>4282160
My advice for handheld 4x5 is to just get a 65mm-90mm lense, and just zone focus with the groundglass. At f11-f22 you can get a great focal distance, and you don't even need think about focusing. An anatomical grip, and a universal viewfinder is really nice for handheld also.

I have a wista field and it lacks rigidity with heavier lenses. If you can afford it go for a linhof super technika V. The super designation means it has the rangefinder on the side, and you can get cams ground by sending linhof your lense.

I'm sure there are cheaper linhoff clones with rangefinders, but I don't know about them.

The linhof super technika IV I have is a really great field camera, but is not as good as a monorail for studio work.

>>4282162
I have no experience with that camera. There's also the soviet copy that's fairly inexpensive, right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 21:41:50 No.4282169 Report

Quoted By: >>4282177

>>4282055
>>4282056
>>4282060
>>4282061
>>4282064
yooooo!!!! these are fucking crazy!! truly beautiful work :')
this one in particular >>4282061 perfect representation of entropy. the pieces of bug in the spider web- it almost resembles space/anatomical photos of cells and shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 22:56:37 No.4282177 Report

Quoted By: >>4282182

>>4282169
Thanks for sharing your interpretation! I really like it. It's great to hear because everyone has a unique one! :D

If you or anyone knows a way to anonymously share 100mb jpg files, or 500mb tiff files I can post a couple so you can see the full res scan if you want. It's really amazing how detailed the scans are when viewed at full resolution.

>>4282160
I forgot to mention that most 4x5 cameras will have some sort of medium format back you can use with them. It's a great way to practice using the camera handheld. 150mm lenses are pretty manageable, but you have to be really good if you want to use any lense longer than that. A monopod would also be very helpful.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 09 Feb 2024 23:42:37 No.4282182 Report

Quoted By: >>4282195

>>4282168
thanks for the advice man, the Linhof looks great but I think that I would try with something cheaper first in case that I get too frustrated lol
>>4282177
Oh nice to know, I was thinking about just using some good old GP3 film but might look into getting a 120 back!

Also, you can use catbox for that https://catbox.moe/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 00:24:28 No.4282195 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282182
I heard from one amazon review that gp3 doesn't have notches to show you which side the emulsion is on... Do you know?

Thank you! The first image with the clamp and leaf is using cms20 you can get a better idea of just how fine grained it is from that picture! Also I uploaded one of my color 4x5. Compressing that one basically destroyed the image quality. Enjoy!

https://files.catbox.moe/8kcoek.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/pkyh67.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/xwlsy5.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/kfnuy0.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/wmllom.jpg
https://files.catbox.moe/bsfnfx.jpg

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 01:11:09 No.4282201 Report

Quoted By: >>4282449

>>4278871
I have a roll of slide film that's been in my room for the last year including the summer. Is it going to be ok or should I expect color shifts. It's not expired yet

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 000314300003.jpg, 2MiB, 3130x2075

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 02:20:47 No.4282216 Report

Quoted By: >>4282218

retard here. I'm gonna be at disney world starting sunday and Id like some advice for low light shooting in the parks. pic related is a shot I took in my kitchen with no flash in the afternoon and the lights on. the lens on this thing is 35-80mm f4-5.6?. I had the camera set in auto mode with ultramax 400 in it. what I'm wondering is if there is any suitable shutter speed that will work handheld or is the lens just too slow? I'm not really a photography guy and that pic is actually from the first roll I've probably shot in 20 years, any advice on the subject would be appreciated.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 02:32:07 No.4282218 Report

Quoted By: >>4282227

>>4282216
If you're shooting 400 iso indoors you're gonna be running slow to begin with. Lens might be a bit too slow also. In my experience you'll be running at 1/30th and probably around f2 or 2.8. If you can manually change the ISO the camera shoots at I'd just push the Ultramax to 800. If not get some Portra 800. I assume you probably want the childhood vacation look to your shots though, which Umax can do better.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO hp51600door.jpg, 2MiB, 2048x1365

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 02:35:28 No.4282219 Report

Quoted By:

HP5 at 1600

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 03:00:08 No.4282227 Report

Quoted By: >>4282228 >>4282270 >>4282346

>>4282218
I can at least use the flash indoors but it's outside that im worried about, but the little built in flash isn't gonna cut it for landscapey type shots.
> If you can manually change the ISO the camera shoots at I'd just push the Ultramax to 800.
I've seen people mention this before, but what exactly will that do?
> If not get some Portra 800. I assume you probably want the childhood vacation look to your shots though, which Umax can do better.
I considered getting some 800 but that shit's pricey especially for someone that can be considered a beginner and like you said I do want the classic vacation look. Ideally I'd have a second camera with a faster lens and porta 800 for indoors and night time, but I'm hesitant to invest too much right off the bat. pic is my $30 ebay camera, I figure it's nicer than trying to find my mom's old point and shoot.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20240112_144429149.jpg, 2MiB, 4000x2250

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 03:01:12 No.4282228 Report

Quoted By: >>4282482

>>4282227
shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 07:05:35 No.4282270 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282227
>it's outside that im worried about
if it's outside Ultramax and your lens will be enough. Usualy the park itself it very well lit even at night.
If you're really worried about it then get a prime lens, you will have to zoom by walking but you'll get at least 2 stops of light since they usualy open at f/1.8 or f/2

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 15:18:55 No.4282346 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282227
Pushing film involves underexposing in-camera and overexposing it chemically, the end result being that you can treat the film as though it was more sensitive and, in development, getting the results to match. You can set your ISO to 800 on a 200 ISO film and ask the lab to push 2 stops for good results.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 20:58:37 No.4282422 Report

Quoted By: >>4282433

i just bought my first film camera, and before i start shooting i want to check what shutter speed and aperture i would use. My camera is fully manual and i looked at things like sunny16 and exposure value chart, and lets say i take the sunny 16 rule, i wanted to check how well it applies to my digital (because the same settings apply the same way on both right?) and all of it came extremely underexposed. like im in a fully lit room, and i would say according to the sunny16 rule, i should use something like f/8 or f/11 with lets say 100 iso with 1/100s/, while my digital camera is showing i should use 1/2s with 5.6 if i want to keep 100iso. what im getting wrong here

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 21:11:11 No.4282427 Report

Quoted By:

nvm i got it with lightmeter app

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 21:14:55 No.4282429 Report

Quoted By: >>4282454

>>4281738
how different it is with other film sizes ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 21:26:40 No.4282433 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282422
Sunny16 applies if your outside on a bright sunny day. Use a external meter to help meter for things like indoors

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 22:48:04 No.4282449 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282201
it should be fine

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 10 Feb 2024 23:08:34 No.4282454 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282429
120 film is bigger and more expensive for labs to process. You get less shots per roll depending on the camera's frame it shoots (6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9). I.e. typically you pay X amount for 36 or 24 exposures in a 35mm roll vs a maximum of 15 on 6x4.5 (goes down the larger the frame is).

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1687998292031433.png, 475KiB, 1117x420

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 01:09:48 No.4282481 Report

Quoted By: >>4282482 >>4282483 >>4282485

$95 USD + shipping
Worth it? Would be my first film camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 01:14:09 No.4282482 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282481
why that? you can get stuff like >>4282228 even cheaper

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1266640754288.jpg, 56KiB, 443x334

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 01:16:01 No.4282483 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282481
>$95 USD + shipping
You can get these at any thrift store for 10 bucks. be patient.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lens.jpg, 2MiB, 1854x1920

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 01:18:17 No.4282484 Report

Quoted By: >>4282486

this might fit in gearfag thread better but today i broke a bit of the plastic on my lens. i dropped my cam (lol) and the bits where the lens attaches to the body broke (see pic rel, circled are ones that broke, glued back on). gluing them back partially worked. the lens autofocuses when i put it on, but i cant change aperture. it also slides off easily, i can detach it without holding the lens removal button. whats the fix for this? am i fucked and have to buy a new lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 01:19:26 No.4282485 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282481
For an old Olympus P&S with a broken flash? No. Look around and see if you can find a working one for about $40 or so. If you thrift, you can probably get one for maybe $15.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO body.jpg, 3MiB, 1972x1916

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 01:20:45 No.4282486 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282484
body pic attached if needed. i realized it might be unclear what im talking about. in the red circles i mean the bit where it screws on, the most elevated bit. do i just need to use stronger glue? it seems to me like its not joining properly with the body, but all the parts are there so idk

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 02:51:02 No.4282505 Report

Quoted By: >>4282575

Took the plunge and got a 400ft compatible bulk film loader. Going to feel so good to carelessly snapshit cheap, but great quality film.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20240210_190105.jpg, 1007KiB, 1800x3512

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 03:06:40 No.4282510 Report

Quoted By:

SO CLOSE. (I'm getting a wall mount for my enlarger please disregard the awful board it is securely held on.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 05:53:19 No.4282538 Report

Quoted By: >>4282544

which readily available film has good colours for landscape?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 06:34:53 No.4282544 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282538
Ektar 100

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 08:04:35 No.4282575 Report

Quoted By: >>4282584

>>4282505
how much does one of those go for? got any pics of the thing?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 08:29:22 No.4282584 Report

Quoted By: >>4282586

>>4282575
Like 900 smackers. https://www.rezivot.com/products/400ft-135mm-film-bulkloader

You can do it much cheaper, but I want easy. If I snapshit enough XX and vision3 it will pay for itself relatively quickly.

A 400' roll of XX is 330, which turns into 80 rolls of XX.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 08:48:45 No.4282586 Report

Quoted By: >>4282595

>>4282584
I don't want to sound polemical, but since you're dumping a considerable amount of money into film and film equipment for snapshotting purposes, why not just jump to digital? Personally I've always seen film as a low volume thing.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Image 11 (4).jpg, 734KiB, 1884x2557

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 10:10:55 No.4282595 Report

Quoted By: >>4282601

>>4282586
I'm saying it somewhat sarcastically I think. My more serious photography efforts lie in large format, which is very low volume. Usually around 6-12 shots in a week.

For me 35mm is a more casual film format. I'll bring a camera out when I walk my dog and just have fun photographing him or the scenery. I can easily go through a roll or more in a day like that if I feel like it.

My goal with shooting is to have prints I make in the darkroom, so digital is basically out of the question at this point. I do have a 5dm3 with some nice lenses, but I don't use it very often at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 10:46:10 No.4282601 Report

Quoted By: >>4282677

>>4282595
You're living the dream anon. I went on a weekend out a few weeks ago and had trouble using all 36 exposures of one roll.
I've been stalking the second hand market for an enlarger for months, I'd love to make my own prints, but I can't get myself to dump all that money on a darkroom, considering how little I shoot and how little shelf life used chemicals have.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 16:13:27 No.4282646 Report

Quoted By:

>>4278871
New bread
>>4282645
>>4282645
>>4282645

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 18:32:07 No.4282677 Report

Quoted By: >>4282691

>>4282601
When I was shooting street I used to be like that. Each roll was a huge effort that took dozens of hours of walking around looking for good shots.

If you really wanted to you could probably get everything you need for 35mm b&w printing for less than 300 bucks. Some of the smaller and older enlargers are pretty cheap. It would be a somewhat limited set up, but you could at least start making nice prints!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 11 Feb 2024 19:33:20 No.4282691 Report

Quoted By:

>>4282677
I was going after color. I'm not really into b&w, although I understand it's cheaper and easier. I saw listings of enlargers with dichroic heads plus with accessories for roughly 200 bucks, however when you account for additional lightproofing equipment, C-41+RA-4 chemicals, RA-4 paper, materials to DIY something like the Nova Print Processor, bottles to store chemicals, possibly DIY a way to fill them with butane, and a sous vide heater, it all shoots up to almost a grand. Chemicals and paper especially have a huge impact on the overall cost and knowing I'd have to use them in relatively short time is a big part of what's stopping me.

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 /fgt/