|
Pompous Rhombus posted:You know what sucks? Finally getting an OM-4T, and having it drain a pair of fresh SR-44 batteries (:tenbux: at Radioshack) within 3 days/20 shots. At least KEH takes returns... glad I didn't get it on eBay. The rest of the roll should be fine. See if you can get the shutter to close, or just put the lens cap back on. Remember when you roll the film back in the cannister that it all has to pass by the shutter assembly one more time, so just do what you need to make sure there's no light in front of the shutter when you wind it back up. Also for my screw ups- I had assumed that the black bag for 4x5 negs was enough, but alas I have been informed they need to stay in the bag AND the box. I am looking forward to trying to take some photos tomorrow!
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2009 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:You know what sucks? Finally getting an OM-4T, and having it drain a pair of fresh SR-44 batteries (:tenbux: at Radioshack) within 3 days/20 shots. At least KEH takes returns... glad I didn't get it on eBay. The frame right before the one it died during might be lost but everything else should be ok. The only time I have ever had significant bleeding between frames was the few times I was careless enough to trigger the shutter without a lens on the camera.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2009 06:05
|
|
|
johnasavoia posted:Roleicord 75/3.5, I dont use this nearly as much as I wish I did, I'll be back in the darkroom in a few weeks though so that WILL change. How do you like these two, especially Zorki, and do you think the price difference between the Rolleiflex's and the cords is worth it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2009 12:29
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:Remember when you roll the film back in the cannister that it all has to pass by the shutter assembly one more time Awwwwww poo poo. It was just a test roll of pretty inane stuff, but good to know this stuff now. Thanks guys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2009 13:34
|
|
|
w_hat posted:How do you like these two, especially Zorki, and do you think the price difference between the Rolleiflex's and the cords is worth it? The zorki has such a tiny viewfinder that its really a pain to use, ideally I would like to pick up the CV 12 or 15 and just scale focus, and use the external viewfinders. Otherwise its a terrific little pocket sized camera (through leica-style film loading loving sucks). I've never used a 'flex, so I can't comment, but theres really not much more I could ask for out of a TLR, shutter speeds go up to a respectable 500th, though one stop faster would be nice to really use this thing wide open in daylight, I don't know if the viewing lens' are any better on the 'flexes but a brighter screen would be nice, but theres really nothing major I would change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2009 17:45
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:how can i shoot lf really cheaply? what is the cheapest 8x10 i can possibly get? Well, even if you were to stumble upon an 8x10 camera for next to nothing, the cost of film, film holders, and developing (if doing color) is so prohibitive it isn't worth it unless you're making real money off of your work. Consider the following link: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162719-USA/Kodak_8134652_Portra_400NC_8x10_10_Sheets.html That's 10 sheets of film for almost 100 dollars. BEFORE processing, which will run you about the same. 4x5, as you might imagine, costs half of that, which is still expensive, but much easier to justify once you really get a hang of it. Black and white is always the place to start, as it's far cheaper: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/533812-USA/Kodak_8179707_TXP_4164_8x10_Tri_X.html ($50 bucks for 50 sheets is a bit more economical.) I'm not terribly familiar with your personal history in this thread, but if you're looking to go LF, just hook yourself up with 4x5 system. It's a bit easier to fall for when the costs are a bit less insane. Once you factor in the costs of film holders, film, developing or developing equipment and chemicals, a decent loupe, a decent light meter, a hefty tripod, a nice durable dark cloth, a shutter release cable, etc etc etc, it gets up there. The best way is to really spend some time with a borrowed one or a rented one, if you can.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 07:15
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:The rest of the roll should be fine. See if you can get the shutter to close, or just put the lens cap back on. Remember when you roll the film back in the cannister that it all has to pass by the shutter assembly one more time, so just do what you need to make sure there's no light in front of the shutter when you wind it back up. Learning large format is all about making tons of mistakes. Keep making them, you'll get it.  I'm at the point that when i send out my color sheets for processing, I put them in three halves of film boxes (like they come), but also with all of the cracks sealed and a piece of tape around the entire thing to keep it from opening. it's a bit obsessive, but I've wasted enough film that it's necessary. My only hurdle that I still have difficulty with is remembering to flip my dark slides 100% of the time. Every batch of 50 sheets has at least one or two sheets that is double exposed. And to address reciprocity, which someone had mentioned earlier, I find that I just tack a little bit of time onto the end to overexpose when my exposures become longer than a few seconds. I try to keep it relative -- if my mind/light meter tells me 5 minutes, I give it 7. If it tells me 10, I give it 14. You get to a certain point that overexposing would be rather difficult and would result from negligence. There are calculations out the wazoo for that sort of thing, but I never quite paid enough attention to learn them by heart. In terms of calculating reciprocity for long bellows extension, well, using a field camera makes it virtually impossible to do that anyhow. Field cameras forevz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 07:21
|
|
|
brohammed ali posted:stuff Thanks for that, I think I'll stick to 35/120 until I have a real need for lf.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 07:47
|
|
|
Smile! Polaroid is savedquote:For a generation, the Polaroid camera gave near-instant pleasure to millions of users around the world, chronicling everything from births and weddings to the downright explicit. But when digital photography came along in the 1990s – with instant images and the ability to edit and delete pictures before they see the light of day – Polaroid was doomed, its iconic white-framed snaps apparently defunct. This is brilliant news.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 15:52
|
|
|
Hey guys I hope you don't mind if I chip in with a dumb little question. I just bought a used Nikon F100 for a photography class and I got a manual focus Nikon 50mm f 1.8 manual focus lens for a great price. Am I right in believing that the manual focus lens will work fine with the F100 or do I need to return it and get the newer AF lens?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 20:51
|
|
|
Rednik posted:Hey guys I hope you don't mind if I chip in with a dumb little question. I just bought a used Nikon F100 for a photography class and I got a manual focus Nikon 50mm f 1.8 manual focus lens for a great price. Am I right in believing that the manual focus lens will work fine with the F100 or do I need to return it and get the newer AF lens? You only get Aperture Priority or Manual, and you only get Center-Weighted and Spot Metering. The AF and AF-D will give you Matrix Meter and Shutter Priority and Programme modes. And I think Manual will work better because you'll see the indexed aperture appear in the finder, though I don't know for sure that you won't get that with the AI/AI-S version.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 20:57
|
|
|
I'm thinking about buying another medium format camera. Currently I have a Bronica ETRSi and a Yashica-Mat. The bronica is nice but the quality from the 645 negative is not that much of a leap from 35mm. The Yashica-Mat is nice is and in pristine condition but the ground glass is dim and I don't much care for the TLR experience, even though they are quite trendy right now. What I am looking at is a Pentax 67, a Fuji GSW690 (aka the "Texas Leica"), or possibly a Mamiya 7. The Fuji is the cheapest of the bunch and has the biggest negative at 6x9, but the thing is comically large and I don't think it will fit well in any camera bag that I own. I can work around those two issues though, and the price is right at around $700. The Pentax is also gigantic and heavy, but is an SLR, which I prefer. It's got interchangeable lenses, viewfinders, and a general reputation for quality. The price is around $500-600 as well depending on which lens I get. The Mamiya 7 is also an interesting choice but would cost me around $1500 with a lens and everything. It is smaller and lighter than the other choice. The downside is the price and I have heard that the build quality is crap. I am not ruling it out. Does anyone have any thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 22:02
|
|
|
TokenBrit posted:You only get Aperture Priority or Manual, and you only get Center-Weighted and Spot Metering. Thanks! I appreciate the help, and I can't wait till the camera comes in the mail.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 22:25
|
|
|
brohammed ali posted:Learning large format is all about making tons of mistakes. Keep making them, you'll get it. Thanks for the encouragement. I'm learning how to actually use my Sekonic light meter, and mistakes there are temporarily making things worse. I went out and took 10 photos with the LF Saturday, then when I got back to the house I resumed reading about my meter and realized I had gotten shutter and aperture priority mixed up  That should make for an interesting batch!I snuck out to the beach today, and took another 10 with my logbook to record my settings. It will be cool to see how these come out, but I quickly found the limitations of a 40+ year old camera- the shutter speed only goes up to 400, so even with the aperture at its smallest I was still beyond the abilities of the camera for some of the shots. Overall, the work with film is doing what I had hoped- it is a means in itself, but the reason I went back to it was to focus more on the mechanics of photography, which I was not doing at all with my digital stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2009 23:32
|
|
|
Idiot question: I was shooting film for the first time in...ages with my Zenit-E with regular fujicolor 400 ISO film. It turns out I overadvanced and ripped the film out. Am I screwed? I'm sure I am, but I'm curious if anyone there has advice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2009 07:44
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:Idiot question: You could take it out in a changing bag or dark room and put the film in an opaque canister or even respool it if you have an empty reloadable cassette. Actually getting it processed might be a bit more complicated. Your local drug store would probably scoff at it, and honestly I have no idea how those mini-lab things are loaded but a pro lab might be more willing to take it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2009 08:08
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:Idiot question: It's the colour bit that's the pain. I think this is something you've got to take to a pro lab if you're not comfortable doing it yourself. I'd be half tempted to get it in on a spool lightproof developing tank and take it down to a pro lab. Perhaps if you post where you are someone might have a suggestion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2009 10:41
|
|
|
I've heard plastic tanks might be trouble for stand/semi-stand development. True/False/Why? I'm heading back to hc-110 (obscene dilutions) from diafine because I feel like a lazy jerk and am sort of fishing for an excuse to buy a cool-looking metal tank. dunno fucked around with this message at 11:05 on Jan 21, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 10:57
|
|
|
dunno posted:I've heard plastic tanks might be trouble for stand/semi-stand development. True/False/Why? I haven't heard that, but I can tell you that metal tanks and reels are so much nicer. I have the slightly nicer metal reels that have little hooks in them that you slide the film on top of, instead of a clip. They are a bit more expensive but easier to use than even the best plastic reel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 16:33
|
|
|
I have a $25 amazon gift certificate and I thought I might blow it all on some 35mm film for my silly toy cameras. I have a Lomo fisheye and a Blackbird, fly TLR. I used a roll of Kodak 400TX black and white and was really happy with how it came out. It does seem to be a bit more expensive than some other films, and I wonder if for my uses if there isn't something cheaper that will look much the same. On amazon the Ilford stuff seems to be a lot cheaper. Kodak 400TX is $6.85 versus $3.89 for HP5+ or $5.39 for Delta. Am I thinking about this too much?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 19:27
|
|
Associate Christ
|
I think HP5+ would be closer to Tri-X than Delta would. Go for the HP5.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 20:40
|
|
|
johnasavoia posted:My Zorki 4, a russian Leica IIIf(I think...) copy, with 50/3.5 collapsible lens. That's a Zorki 1 of some description (can't tell the letter designation from the picture), and it was a Leica II copy (IIIs have slow speeds). Just being picky
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 20:54
|
|
|
Arista Premium 400 is Tri-X for less than $3 a roll. Unfortunately you'll only find it at Freestyle, not on Amazon. HP5 will not look like TX at all, but it is a really nice film by it's own merits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 20:57
|
|
|
All the film is sold via adorama on amazon. The 400TX has free shipping, but all the others are $3 PER ROLL to ship. This is all very silly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 21:22
|
|
|
We should get a tag change on this thread to the black FILM tag. Would stand out much more. Edit: Wow! Ask and ye shall receive... Mannequin fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Jan 21, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2009 22:31
|
|
|
This thread is one of my all-time favorites. Now for a mini-update. I found several screw-ups in my steps on doing LF film work, and I'll post them with my fixes: 1.) I assumed the bag inside the box of sheet film was lightproof. It's not, and doing a bit of keyword searches I found this to be a common mistake. Fix:I now keep my film in the bag AND in the box, or the film holders. 2.) I thought my master bathroom was completely dark at night. It has no windows, and I turned off the lights in the bathroom, the bedroom and the hallway. That was not enough apparently, because some screwing around with long exposures on my DSLR showed me light was still creeping in somehow. Fix: I use my changing bag for all my sheet film handling now. It's a little cramped, but works well. 3.) I thought I had bought a "simple" Sekonic light meter. Nope. Still cryptic, tons of settings to get me into trouble. Fix: I read through the manual, then a couple days later printed the PDF of it and highlighted and noted the parts I plan to use now. And it goes in my LF (laptop) bag. They seem like stupid mistakes now, but they are big deals when it's not solved by a camera less than 20 years old. I have 10 color, 10 b&w so far, and plan to shoot 10 more b&w early tomorrow when it starts raining here. Hopefully I get some useful ones out of this batch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 06:19
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:We should get a tag change on this thread to the black FILM tag. Would stand out much more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 06:21
|
|
|
breathstealer posted:That's a Zorki 1 of some description (can't tell the letter designation from the picture), and it was a Leica II copy (IIIs have slow speeds). Just being picky im a fuckshit!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 08:49
|
|
|
dunno posted:I've heard plastic tanks might be trouble for stand/semi-stand development. True/False/Why? False. I use plastic tanks and have had film in them developing for hours without a problem. Dilution H rocks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 08:53
|
|
|
My local camera shop has twice now given me a set of prints back where some images don't seem to be cropped correctly. An example: It always seems to be the first few shots of a roll that are like this. These were taken with my goofy toy camera that exposes the full width of the film, sprocket holes and all. Maybe this feature of my camera is screwing them up, Maybe I am not loading the film correctly? Or can I politely ask for them to redo them if it happens again? I have been having them just give me the scans on a CD, I haven't actually had these printed in any way. And just for general learning, when I was a wee lad I always sort of imagined a roll of film had predefined areas where each photo will go. But I guess really it is just one continuous strip that can be exposed in whatever length the camera exposes, eh? What is marking the end of one exposure and the beginning of another?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 19:02
|
|
|
a strip of unexposed film.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 20:59
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:What is marking the end of one exposure and the beginning of another? Blank space. Have a look at the negs, the camera advances the film the frame width + a few mm to delimit frames. Your local shop's printer can't handle not finding the edges where it expects to when it scans the neg and thus shits itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2009 22:29
|
|
|
TokenBrit posted:Blank space. Have a look at the negs, the camera advances the film the frame width + a few mm to delimit frames. Yeah, I can see that there is not a gap when I look at the negatives. That is a pretty crappy oversight on the part of the camera designers. They could have quite easily had it pull through an extra few mm of film on each advance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2009 00:44
|
|
|
I'm coming over to the film side; I just bought a Yashica Electro 35 GSN on ebay. I'd like to get into MF but I figured it'd be safer to start with 35mm. Anyone else have one?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2009 01:38
|
|
|
w_hat posted:I'm coming over to the film side; I just bought a Yashica Electro 35 GSN on ebay. I'd like to get into MF but I figured it'd be safer to start with 35mm. Anyone else have one? It looks like a pretty cool camera. According to here: http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?YashicaElectro35GSN.html~mainFrame It appears to be an aperture-priority camera, where you set the aperture and it uses the body's (not through the lens) light meter to decide a shutter speed. Unless you know the seller quite well, I would suggest a roll of b&w to start, and pick one or two simple subjects and shoot each aperture on the first roll of film. Get that one developed and see how they come out. There's lots of talk of using a pro lab for negatives, and it seems nearly everyone here ends up either using a pro lab or doing it themselves. I'd recommend a pro lab while you get to know the camera, then move into doing at least the negative processing yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2009 16:11
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:Unless you know the seller quite well, I would suggest a roll of b&w to start, and pick one or two simple subjects and shoot each aperture on the first roll of film. Get that one developed and see how they come out. Good advice on checking it out. Do pro labs usually have a good film scanner, not drum scanners but maybe a Nikon coolscan or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2009 00:05
|
|
|
w_hat posted:Good advice on checking it out. Do pro labs usually have a good film scanner, not drum scanners but maybe a Nikon coolscan or something? Both the pro labs near where I work (Central London) have relatively cheap drum scanners.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2009 01:52
|
|
|
w_hat posted:Good advice on checking it out. Do pro labs usually have a good film scanner, not drum scanners but maybe a Nikon coolscan or something? I can't say in SoCal - most scanning services are high-end oriented. Early on I went the Epson flatbed route - I have a 4490, but should have gotten the 4990. I think the new hotness is the V500 or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2009 02:12
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:There's lots of talk of using a pro lab for negatives, and it seems nearly everyone here ends up either using a pro lab or doing it themselves. Pro labs are more expensive, but so worth it. I've never had one give me a CD full of scans cut in half with the previous/next frame, or lose/scratch negatives. If you actually care about what you're shooting, you shouldn't take your stuff to a consumer lab. I've learned this the hard way 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2009 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
Just bought a Mamiya C330, pretty excited about 6x6ness. edit for camera porn: 
dunno fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Jan 25, 2009 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2009 04:43
|
|