|
Someone on here recommended Fuji 800 Pro Z as something nice to pick up, so I'm going to go get some tomorrow and I was wondering if 1600 color film exists, and if so, what kind should I grab?
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2008 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:Someone on here recommended Fuji 800 Pro Z as something nice to pick up, so I'm going to go get some tomorrow and I was wondering if 1600 color film exists, and if so, what kind should I grab? 1600 Superia exists. I have some in the freezer but I have never shot it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2008 03:22
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:Someone on here recommended Fuji 800 Pro Z as something nice to pick up, so I'm going to go get some tomorrow and I was wondering if 1600 color film exists, and if so, what kind should I grab? Right now in Japan, Fuji makes 1600 Natura. From what I've heard and the little I've seen, it's pretty amazing for a 1600 color negative film. Whether you can import it, hard to say. Ask your local camera shop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2008 16:34
|
|
|
Pretty hot stuff from Fuji & Cosina right here
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2008 06:09
|
|
|
Luxmore posted:Pretty hot stuff from Fuji & Cosina right here An awesome camera. It would make a nice compact travel MF camera...which is lacking in the market today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2008 06:34
|
|
|
friendship waffle posted:find some local place that will do drum scans of your negs. That's really the best you can do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2008 06:44
|
|
|
killabyte posted:An awesome camera. It would make a nice compact travel MF camera...which is lacking in the market today. I wouldn't call it "compact" (though I guess it's all relative); it's still a sizable beast. By the way, a good travel camera in medium format that's pretty modern is the GA645 series. Yeah, it's "only" 6x4.5 but the lenses are amazing. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2008 17:37
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:I wouldn't call it "compact" (though I guess it's all relative); it's still a sizable beast.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2008 17:40
|
|
|
Luxmore posted:The vertical format on those drives me nuts. I know I can just flip the camera sideways, but argh. I actually really like it but yeah, it does take a little getting used to, just like with a half frame 35mm camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2008 18:14
|
|
|
 The best film camera dealer in Sweden is holding their seasonal auction soon, and just put up their auction list. It is in Swedish with certain comments in English, but I trust you people are mostly in it for the images. Notable objects: Two golden Nikons (#341 and #344) The Fotosniper FS-2 KMZ (#416) pictured above. A plethora of Leicas and Hasselblads. (The listed sums are in SEK, and starting prices. 10SEK ~ 1.4USD. Not affiliated in any way.) Snaily fucked around with this message at 08:37 on Oct 10, 2008 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2008 22:02
|
|
Snaily posted:Haha, I've heard about these but never actually seen one. These are ridiculous and awesome at the same time. I want one! EDIT: drat. It's around $2100 after the currency conversion. That auction has a lot of really neat older cameras. That 70s Shirt fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Oct 9, 2008 |
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2008 22:07
|
|
|
Snaily posted:
I hate you so much, there's so much there that I want - and none of it that I can afford :/
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2008 23:44
|
|
|
So a friend has an attic with a bunch of abandoned film equipment, I went up there to look around and snapped this pic of a few of the bodies that looked to be in decent condition. Do any of these look like something I should hold on to/try to use? I have free reign over them if I want any of them or anything. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2008 00:42
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:So a friend has an attic with a bunch of abandoned film equipment, I went up there to look around and snapped this pic of a few of the bodies that looked to be in decent condition. Do any of these look like something I should hold on to/try to use? I have free reign over them if I want any of them or anything. Argus (the yellow one) rangefinders are fun. What's the guy in the left upper corner? Yashica, Minolta?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2008 01:01
|
|
|
Snaily posted:(The listed sums are in SEK, and starting prices. 10SEK ~ 7-8USD. Not affiliated in any way.) So it turns out my conversion sucked. It should be 1.4 USD per 10 SEK. Apologies and free laughs all around. (not Iceland)
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2008 08:38
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Argus (the yellow one) rangefinders are fun. Looks like a Yashica Lynx, though maybe not the 14. It will probably be in better shape than the Argus, but both should be pretty fun if they work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2008 16:03
|
|
|
gib posted:Looks like a Yashica Lynx, though maybe not the 14. It will probably be in better shape than the Argus, but both should be pretty fun if they work. Problem with the Yashicas (and the lens isn't big enough to be a 14) is that the rangefinder beam splitter tends to turn to crap and you have a very dim or non-existent rangefinder patch on some cameras. I have an otherwise mint Lynx-14 that's practically unusable because of this. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2008 00:15
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Problem with the Yashicas (and the lens isn't big enough to be a 14) is that the rangefinder beam splitter tends to turn to crap and you have a very dim or non-existent rangefinder patch on some cameras. I have an otherwise mint Lynx-14 that's practically unusable because of this. I have a Yashica Minister D 700 (Minister D with the 45mm f1.7) - would've loved a Lynx-14 for that sweet massive f1.4 lens - but this was going for a steal. The main problem with the rangefinder for me is that it was obviously dropped once or twice in its life and the vertical alignment is a little out. Other than that it's in brilliant condition - though I'll find out how well everything works when I get my first roll of film I put through it back from the developers. But I guess there's no way to adjust the rangefinder patch short of taking it completely apart is there?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2008 02:38
|
|
I came across this tutorial on how to use instant coffee to develop black-and-white film, so I gave it a shot and thought I'd share the results.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2008 07:08
|
|
|
Back_From_Termina posted:I came across this tutorial on how to use instant coffee to develop black-and-white film, so I gave it a shot and thought I'd share the results. I've got a friend who does this but he seems to be unable to load the film properly because he'll shoot a roll of 120 w/ his 6x6 Yashica TLR and only get about 7 good pics. I haven't seen the negatives but the way he describes them makes them sound like they're not loaded in the reel right and are touching while he's developing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2008 12:57
|
|
|
Back_From_Termina posted:I came across this tutorial on how to use instant coffee to develop black-and-white film, so I gave it a shot and thought I'd share the results. I bought the goods to do that (washing soda is REALLY hard to find) but I haven't gotten around to doing it yet. Maybe I will try it tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2008 02:47
|
|
|
killabyte posted:I bought the goods to do that (washing soda is REALLY hard to find) but I haven't gotten around to doing it yet. Maybe I will try it tomorrow. Around here all the grocery stores carry it. Tried this last year and it was fun, but horrendously grainy. I'll stick to Diafine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2008 02:50
|
|
|
I tried my hand at real printing for the first time today. Not enough time before the lab closed to do any enlarging, but it was fun just to do a contact sheet and a few test strips to prepare for enlarging.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2008 02:53
|
|
|
killabyte posted:I bought the goods to do that (washing soda is REALLY hard to find) but I haven't gotten around to doing it yet. Maybe I will try it tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2008 09:12
|
|
Luxmore posted:Seriously, I decided to try this a while ago and I could not find "washing soda" anywhere. If anyone has soda-finding tips, let me know, because I'd love to give this a try. I couldn't find washing soda crystals anywhere either, but it turns out that washing soda crystals are just sodium carbonate, a common ingredient in dish-washing detergent. So I just bought the most generic detergent I could find (to reduce the number of possible additional chemicals) and just used more than the recommended amount in the tutorial to compensate (1 additional scoop). Worked fine, although I think you have to overexpose even more than the tutorial's one-stop recommendation with this method. I shot 50iso and rated it at 25 like the tutorial said, but I also bracketed upward as well. The best exposures were 5 stops over. Dishwashing detergent evidently doesn't do as good a job of activating the developer as pure sodium carbonate would. That 70s Shirt fucked around with this message at 09:23 on Oct 12, 2008 |
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2008 09:18
|
|
|
If you're having trouble finding washing soda: 1. Make sure you're in the laundry aisle of the grocery store. 2. Try local swimming pool and hardware stores. Sodium carbonate is sold for managing pH balance. 3. Bust out the yellow pages and locate a chemical supplier. If you're in the U.S., you'll probably have to sign their log book in case you decide to go blow up a federal building with a U-Haul truck. Failing any of those, there's always Photographer's Formulary, but the shipping makes such a cheap chemical pretty expensive. (On the other hand, if you can only find it in enormous bottles at the pool store and have an aversion to the G-men...)
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2008 17:42
|
|
|
The washing soda I ended up finding was by Arm and Hammer: Super Washing Soda. Comes in a huge box. I can ship people a few oz of it they really want. PM me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2008 06:06
|
|
|
killabyte posted:The washing soda I ended up finding was by Arm and Hammer: Super Washing Soda. Comes in a huge box. You might want to reconsider shipping little baggies of mystery crystals in the mail 
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2008 00:31
|
|
|
My RMC Tokina 28mm f/2.8 came in the mail a while ago and I've been having fun with it so far. The only thing that I've noticed is when I focus to infinity, stuff that is very far away and should be in focus still appears out of focus. (This is just in-camera, I haven't gotten anything shot with this lens developed yet) For example, if my focus is on infinity and I point towards some trees in the far distance, they are kind of out of focus, but the sky will be in focus. What could be the reason for this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2008 03:52
|
|
|
I'm taking a Black & White film photography class at my university and I like how my prints have come out and the process behind it. However when I try and scan digital copies I'm getting a lot of grain and junk all over the scan that I can't see on the actual image. Is it something with the scanner that's causing the problem, or am I just not seeing all this debris that's on my enlargement? I skimmed the thread some, but its very likely I just missed someone asking this, so if its been asked, just point me towards it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2008 06:48
|
|
|
I just got pointed to this thread and, boy, am I ever happy!! I work for a camera store/lab now and I think it's hardening me. We don't deal in any film cameras whatsoever and carry a VERY small stock of films. Every person that says "oh, NOOOOOBODY uses film anymore" (usually accompanied by a sigh and eye roll) is just one more roll I have to shoot. My main film camera lately is a Kodak35 rangefinder made in 1948. I usually rock the "sunny 16" on it and have found it likes to overexpose by about a stop. Sadly, I now have 80ish feet of Arista.edu that I bought for it but cannot use. It's too thin to deal with the gearing in it. Even with its issues, I like to think I get some okay stuff out of it:  I have a bit of a question: Any good links on how to develop sheet film at home without a sheet tank? I set up in my bathroom. While I've not yet lightproofed it (I use changing bags and daylight tanks), I can. Most of what I've read about tray developing, though, seems overly complicated. I have been shooting with a 3.25x4.25 Speed Graphic for a few months, but only have developed 2 frames. I did them in my tall tank with the middle "spike" seperating the 2 sheets so they didn't stick. I'd prefer to not use that much developer for only 2 images. I'd go through a gallon on only like 8 shots!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 03:11
|
|
|
Plastic pipes are your friend! With around $20 and a trip to your friendly local hardware store, you can make a tube developing system for sheet film (assuming you've got some basic hand tools or a friend to mooch off of). There's a video here that illustrates the basics of the system. If you've got $130, you can buy that system premade and process up to 4x5. But the system Fred's using is just a mass-produced, nicer version of a project that started out DIY. ABS pipes, couplers, and caps will get you just as far if you have more time than money. There should still be a couple writeups floating around the internet, but if you need more detail I can throw something together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 04:41
|
|
|
Molten Llama posted:There's a video here that illustrates the basics of the system. You can fix in the light?!  I'm gonna look into tubes. Finding sheet holders to fit this film is proving much more difficult than I thought it would. Odd - It seems this was a popular Graphic. It's about half as light as the standard 4x5
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 05:45
|
|
|
Celluloid posted:My main film camera lately is a Kodak35 rangefinder made in 1948. I usually rock the "sunny 16" on it and have found it likes to overexpose by about a stop. That wouldn't be the camera, that's either your eyes or just the sunny 16 rule being inaccurate (like it's supposed to be). Without any sort of autoexposure, it can't decide to overexpose. Also: oh, NOOOOOBODY uses 2x3 film anymore
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 08:06
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:For example, if my focus is on infinity and I point towards some trees in the far distance, they are kind of out of focus, but the sky will be in focus. What could be the reason for this? Fun fact: "infinity" focus, that is, as far as the lens will turn, is usually beyond true infinity focus, so that the lens can still focus in extreme environments (say, really really cold, when thermally contracted) and to make assembly somewhat easier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 09:52
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:That wouldn't be the camera, that's either your eyes or just the sunny 16 rule being inaccurate (like it's supposed to be). Without any sort of autoexposure, it can't decide to overexpose. Even when metered, there is overexposure. I'm in a bit of a vintage camera group and it is a common complaint about the Kodak35. Most of the other members have remedied that buy buying Leicas. And, yes, "sunny 16" is inaccurate. It's such a nice starting point though. Too bad noooooobody uses 2x3. I have a box sitting in my fridge for when I find someone who does!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 15:38
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:That wouldn't be the camera, that's either your eyes or just the sunny 16 rule being inaccurate (like it's supposed to be). Without any sort of autoexposure, it can't decide to overexpose. The aperture or shutter speeds can be off from stated values, either due to error in the original camera or wear/tear over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 16:03
|
|
|
Celluloid posted:Too bad noooooobody uses 2x3. I have a box sitting in my fridge for when I find someone who does! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 18:04
|
|
|
Celluloid posted:I have a bit of a question: What is overly complicated about doing it in trays? Set up trays with your chemistry in a light proof room and just do it in the dark, that is how I always did it. Trays are cheap and after you do it once or twice you get used to doing it without being able to see.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2008 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
Luxmore posted:I have a 2x3 Graphic brad industry posted:What is overly complicated about doing it in trays? I feel pretty skilled without seeing. I mastered the steel reel very quickly and often re-spool 35mm in other cans for processing. To me, sheet film doesn't seem much harder than paper. Am I wrong or is it just really internet photographer elitism?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2008 03:52
|
|