|
TokenBrit posted:I'm all geared up for my 4 hours in the darkroom tomorrow! I've been looking forwards to this for ages, got some FP4 to process and some paper to print on. Hooray! That was relaxing! Printing didn't go as well as I'd hoped, I started running out of time if I wanted to wash stuff properly. I was amazed at how well it all came back to me, I haven't done it in months. As soon as I got in the darkroom I just fell into a routine and was managing to dev 2 tanks of film at the same time as setting up the enlarger and mixing the chemistry for the paper. It's a great feeling to be surrounded by chemistry, paper and film.  Next step, once I've got more printed, is to start making my own chemistry. Pyrocat HD (and lung cancer), here I come.
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2009 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
I haven't actually done darkroom yet, but I hadn't developed film in a couple of decades and it all came back to me-I managed to get 120 loaded on th reel without goofing it up, same with 35mm. Craigslist yielded an old Durst F30, now I need to figure out how to lightproof the bathroom and kick everybody out for a while (only 1 bathroom in the house). It is astounding though, like falling off a log. You never forget how.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2009 03:58
|
|
|
Another roll through the $65 thriftstore Nikon FA, Fuji 200, and a wierd scanner that I can't seem to get to work with scan lines. It's time to upgrade the scanner I think. http://www.fotothing.com/photos/3fd/3fd9f4d671300f6dd71a5d95efa40474_135.jpg Downtown Palmer, Alaska, behind the feed store. last feed store left in Palmer.  http://www.fotothing.com/photos/db9/db9dcda320a74cb025cdf4c29d0ded59_135.jpg A pigeon ruling his roost at sunset on that same feed store.  http://www.fotothing.com/photos/6bc/6bc8eef5e4d8f39d30918986118af203_135.jpg A raven guards his dinner against hungry rivals in downtown Anchorage. Ravens are interesting birds, smart and crafty, but have weird habits like tearing the wiper blades from cars. Nobody knows why.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2009 06:31
|
|
|
I decided to finally try using my Kodak Duaflex II tonight with paper negatives. A very, very eldery man sold it to me for five bucks, including the flash bracket and a bunch of intact flash bulbs. Picture from GIS:  Mine's got a pretty hilarious amount of dust behind the lenses. I mostly just wanted to see if I could get any recognizeable images out of it without having to do the whole 120->620 conversion. Here's the result of a 70-second exposure onto a 6x6~cm strip of 5-year-old Ilford MCIV glossy RC paper, developed in Dektol and scanned for inversion and curves adjustment in Photoshop. The shutter release is a side-mounted button, kind of annoying to hold down for that long... hopefully outdoor shots don't take so long.  Definitely dirty and soft, but I'm thinking this could get some neat and spooky results with the right subject matter. edit: changed image Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Feb 10, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2009 04:17
|
|
is go
|
I like the results from the Duaflex, I never thought of doing paper negs in a film camera. I spent some quality timeat the kitchen sink with a stainless steel tank and some horribly dangerous chemistry and got these out of my Bronica.  
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2009 05:09
|
|
|
I'm back in the darkroom again, and I'm working with fiber paper now as opposed to the resin coated stuff. Scanning film can be nice (and seriously convenient) but I don't know if it's ever going to replace the magic of watching your picture appear in the developer bath. Unfortunately I can hardly afford to keep shooting this way, and access to a darkroom on campus will only be around for so long, so I'll need to return to digital at some point. Also, about fiber paper - the process for printing takes about twice as long, but the results are absolutely amazing compared to the RC stuff I used before. The range of tone is miles above what you can pull out of resin coated paper.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2009 07:08
|
|
|
Just found out today that my university has a darkroom workspace, I'm really excited to get a film camera. How is the AE-1 for a first 35mm camera? There's a listing on my local craigslist for an AE-1 with 4 lenses (50, 100-200, 200, and an unknown macro), a 2x teleconverter, vivitar flash, autowinder, and bag for 125.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2009 18:41
|
|
|
Hollis Brown posted:Just found out today that my university has a darkroom workspace, I'm really excited to get a film camera. How is the AE-1 for a first 35mm camera? There's a listing on my local craigslist for an AE-1 with 4 lenses (50, 100-200, 200, and an unknown macro), a 2x teleconverter, vivitar flash, autowinder, and bag for 125. I learned on an AE-1, it's a great choice for a beginning camera and it looks like you'll have a nice collection of different focal lengths.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2009 00:12
|
|
|
That sounds like a decent deal to me. You'll be getting most of everything you'd want, you may want to add a tripod and a cable release later. And hooray for school darkrooms. Given the popularity of digital you might have it mostly to yourself. Fire up the tunes and get busy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2009 04:01
|
|
|
Oh man, this is like Christmas! My friend lent me their tanks, chemicals, papers, and enlarger :o. I am not sure I am going to try to print my own shots yet, but I am very excited to do my own developing! This stuff obviously hasn't been touched in quite some time. Most of the chemicals have expiration dates in 2005. I will have to replace these, or will they possibly still function? The unmixed kodak developing powder has solidified into a brick. I definitely need to replace this, yes? There is some fixer in there that has never been taken out of the box, and some PhotoFlo that has never been opened. Usable? Thank you for any advice. I have just read tutorials online, so I am going to have my friend here the first (few) times I do this. I will need to get my hands on at least a developing bag.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 03:25
|
|
Associate Christ
|
terriyaki posted:Any recommendations on some Canadian online stores that sell b&w and color 120 film for cheap? For color print is fine and preferable, not looking to get into slide quite yet. Any Canadian film goons here? I noticed this hasn't been answered yet. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 03:37
|
|
|
CanuckBassist posted:Any Canadian film goons here? I noticed this hasn't been answered yet. Last time i bought film online it was from the states, though at this point I'd have to order a lot for adorama or b&h to really beat my local retailers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 03:59
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:Oh man, this is like Christmas! It looks to me like the previous owners mixed up part of the bag of developer? Not a good idea, actually. It's very difficult to get the different dry powders all mixed together in the correct proportions if you mix up part of the bag. The unopened chemistry should be fine. The photoflo seems to last forever, the bottle I'm using is older than dirt and works fine. The stuff mixed up in the bottles should be tossed, definitely toss the developer. Mixed fix may or not be OK, at least you can check it by putting a small piece of film in the fix and see long it takes to clear the film. A changing bag is nice but I've had good luck lately with winding the film on under a pile of blankets. But I do need to get a bag soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 04:46
|
|
|
To all you who are well versed in film varieties, I'd like some recommendations for 120 size slide film. I bought a medium format camera and it's still on the way, and I have a photo class that is forcing me to shoot slides. Naturally I want to play with 35mm too but I am incredibly excited to start my new stumbling foray into the wide world of 6x6 and was planning on going to the local photography store (the one that all the others said stock slide film, nobody else did) to poke around and see what they've got. Plus I'm eager to use their 20% student discount. I see Ektachrome, Velvia, Provia? Anybody willing to chime in what they like to shoot with and why? How much different can they all be? I'll actually go ahead and ask the same about 35mm or 120 b&w film. I'm looking to start developing at home come spring/summer but have access to a school lab in the mean time. I hear t-max and tri-x can be pushed silly amounts, which might be fun. How about Ilford 3200 film? Or Ilford at all? I love their paper but know little about their films. (I've only ever shot Kodak Plus-X 125 in b&w) tl;dr: Please recommend me 35mm/120 color slide and b&w negative films to use, and why you like them. (Forgive any possible 2:30am incoherency)
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 11:29
|
|
|
Rontalvos posted:To all you who are well versed in film varieties, I'd like some recommendations for 120 size slide film. I bought a medium format camera and it's still on the way, and I have a photo class that is forcing me to shoot slides. Thanks for asking all these questions, I have pretty much all the same questions too. Id also like to know what chemicals people like to use for prints, I haven't had much luck finding much about them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 16:41
|
|
|
Rontalvos posted:To all you who are well versed in film varieties, I'd like some recommendations for 120 size slide film. I bought a medium format camera and it's still on the way, and I have a photo class that is forcing me to shoot slides. For general use I like Ektachrome, Provia, and Astia. Astia is pretty cheap so you may want to start with that. Velvia is very nice but is geared more towards landscape photography, though I have shot it for urban uses before and it was basically OK. In short I would go buy a roll of Astia and Ektachrome and play with it, and if you like landscapes, grab the Velvia. Provia is nice because you can get it in a 400 speed. I can't think of a single slide film that is available above ISO 400 besides Provia so if you need speed that is the one to get. Tri-X is a classic and a lot of people love it because it is easy to use, very pushable, can be developed in diafine easily, etc. It's a classic film. Personally my favorite 2 films are Acros 100 and Neopan 1600. I also like Ilford XP2 super which can be processed at any lab unlike standard B&W. B&W film is cheap so just experiment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 17:31
|
|
|
I have a Yashica 124G and I'm looking for a more compact, non-tlr camera to carry with me when I travel. Can anyone recommend one that's fairly 'cheap'? If anyone has one for sale, PM me. I'm also interested in trading my Graphlex Speed Graphic depending on the trade arrangements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 17:34
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:I have a Yashica 124G and I'm looking for a more compact, non-tlr camera to carry with me when I travel. Can anyone recommend one that's fairly 'cheap'? If anyone has one for sale, PM me. I'm also interested in trading my Graphlex Speed Graphic depending on the trade arrangements. If it's 120 you want to carry, I can't think of a camera meaningfully more compact than the 124. Some of the fixed lens Rolleis maybe, but 120 and compact just don't play nicely together. I used to own a 124 and my present 120 is a Bronica ETRC, it is certainly not more compact than a 124. The 120 SLR's are all fairly large, the toy cameras are probably not worth traveling with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 20:05
|
|
|
Yeah, the top-down viewing is just very fumble-prone for me. I may just play with it until I've used all my 120 and then play with a 35mm for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 20:08
|
|
|
If you can find one in working condition, a 120 folder will definitely fit the bill in terms of portability.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2009 23:33
|
|
|
Rontalvos posted:tl;dr: Please recommend me 35mm/120 color slide and b&w negative films to use, and why you like them. I haven't shot much slide film at all (mainly stick to b&w) but what I have shot has been on Velvia 100. Loved the results. For 35mm b&w if you're going to be developing and printing your own negatives I would highly suggest starting out with one film and only using that one film for a while. Developing film at home is not hard, but if you're constantly changing film types and always getting unsatisfactory results it's harder to pin down exactly what's wrong. If you stick to one film type you'll at least remove that variable. Tri-x is a wonderful film and I'd suggest using it if you haven't had any previous experience with film. It has a huge latitude, meaning that even if you expose a shot incorrectly you'll still be able to make a print from it. In addition to that, it can easily be pushed to 800, 1600, or 3200. Another similar film is Ilford's HP5. It's quite similar to Tri-x in the sense that it can also be pushed easily and there's a fair amount of latitude. The main difference that I have found is that HP5 seems to have more grain (especially visible in scanned negatives). Also, I develop everything in XTOL at a 1:1 dilution. That's another thing to take into consideration, different developers will give you different results. With regards to print developers I haven't found much difference between what's available. The negative itself and the paper used are the main determining factors for how a print looks. Although, there are cold tone and warm tone paper developers, I haven't experimented with them yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 00:09
|
|
|
Just a headsup, the winner of World Press Photo 2008 was apparently taken with a Leica and Kodak Tri-X.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 00:26
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:If you can find one in working condition, a 120 folder will definitely fit the bill in terms of portability. Olympus Six (or chrome six, or any of the variations they had) is a pretty good choice, the upmarket ones came with a 75/2.8 - and I absolutely love mine. They should be easy enough to find - as there was a bunch of them made, and you can grab them from anywhere from £50-£200 or so it seems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 01:41
|
|
|
hybr1d posted:I have a Yashica 124G and I'm looking for a more compact, non-tlr camera to carry with me when I travel. Can anyone recommend one that's fairly 'cheap'? If anyone has one for sale, PM me. I'm also interested in trading my Graphlex Speed Graphic depending on the trade arrangements. Have you considered a Fuji 645? Doesn't get any more compact than that for medium format.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 04:23
|
|
|
I know this sounds like heresy, but does anyone make medium format lenses with fast apertures like f/1.4? And can you get 120 or 220 film in ISO 800 or 1600?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 05:05
|
|
|
Browser weirdness. Ignore.
HPL fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Feb 15, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 05:09
|
|
|
HPL posted:I know this sounds like heresy, but does anyone make medium format lenses with fast apertures like f/1.4? And can you get 120 or 220 film in ISO 800 or 1600? Mamiya made an 80mm F/1.9 for the Manual 645. That's the fastest I've seen for any medium format lenses, but I'm only personally familiar with M645 and RB67. Ilford makes ISO3200 B&W. Kodak and Fuji make ISO800 C-41 color negative film. If you've got a lab you trust, you can push Provia 400 one or two stops. V - 
pseudonordic fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Feb 15, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 05:23
|
|
|
HPL posted:I know this sounds like heresy, but does anyone make medium format lenses with fast apertures like f/1.4? And can you get 120 or 220 film in ISO 800 or 1600? From what I can see in various online stores, ISO 800 is available in colour with Kodak's Portra 800 and Fuji's Pro 800Z (also available in 220), and ISO 3200 is available in B&W with Ilford's Delta 3200. Like some others have mentioned, Tri-X can be pushed to 800, 1600, and 3200. Edit: ^ 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 05:26
|
|
|
HPL posted:I know this sounds like heresy, but does anyone make medium format lenses with fast apertures like f/1.4? And can you get 120 or 220 film in ISO 800 or 1600? Other than that previously mentioned Mamiya 645 lens f/2.8 is about as fast as it gets for MF in general. The DoF is already so miniscule at 2.8 that I can't fathom what 1.9 would be like. Most people are shooting MF because they want more detail/relatively smaller grain/larger prints and very thin DoF doesn't fit into that modus operandi very well. Edit: So beaten on the fast film front, but remember you can always push HP5. Additionally, this is LF, but also cool: http://www.adorama.com/FJFP3000B.html?searchinfo=tmax%203200&item_no=6 dunno fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Feb 15, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 06:05
|
|
|
Yeah no, I was just doing some daydreaming about low-light photography in medium format.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 11:25
|
|
|
Pulled the trigger and bought an F4s from KEH, can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 13:03
|
|
|
Is there anything on the net that gives step by step instructions on how to develop my own black and white film? I've googled the subject but can only come up with sites that talk vaguely about it like I already know what to do, or sites that talk about what developer to use with what film and the pros/cons etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 15:38
|
|
|
Stregone posted:Is there anything on the net that gives step by step instructions on how to develop my own black and white film? I've googled the subject but can only come up with sites that talk vaguely about it like I already know what to do, or sites that talk about what developer to use with what film and the pros/cons etc. You essentially need 3 chemicals, a reel, a light sealed tank and a dark place to put the film on the reel and into the tank. Step 1: You get in the dark place, open the exposed film, put it on the reel, put the reel in the tank and put the large lid on the tank. Step 2: You pour in the developer and follow the directions for that developer and that film. Each film has a different development time for each developer. It's usually on the inside of the box, but you can find out times on the megacompendium: http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html Step 3: Pour out developer and pour in the stop bath. Follow the directions that come with the chemicals but I usually do about 3-5 minutes of agitation/inversion for thoroughness. YMMV. Step 4: Pour out the stop bath and pour in the fixer. Rapid fixer takes 3-5 minutes, regular 5-10 minutes. Step 5: Pour out the fixer and take the reel out of the tank. Film off the reel and hang it from a clip somewhere to dry. That's a simplified version. 8th-samurai has an in-depth version posted at the beginning of this thread on page 1 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 17:26
|
|
|
Stregone posted:Is there anything on the net that gives step by step instructions on how to develop my own black and white film? I've googled the subject but can only come up with sites that talk vaguely about it like I already know what to do, or sites that talk about what developer to use with what film and the pros/cons etc. I wrote out a post w/ photos that walks you through it. It's on page one of this thread. edit: gently caress, beaten
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2009 17:47
|
|
|
drat, how did I miss that. Anyways, the black and white film I have at the moment is kodak t-max 3200. Can I develop it with the same developer?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2009 06:52
|
|
|
With the same developer as what? There are some developers that T-Max 3200 (also known as TMZ) gets on well in (D-76, Kodak's own T-Max developer) and some that it's not so great in (Rodinal). Google for the combination you want to use and see if you can find results. Worst case, post on photo.net and someone will have an example for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2009 08:15
|
|
|
The same developer described in 8th-samurai's walkthrough. If I use a different developer do the rest of the chemicals stay the same?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2009 15:44
|
|
|
Looks like it'll work, but it might be really grainy. I wouldn't feel like you had to use HC-110 because it's in the first tutorial that you used. It's really just as easy to use any other liquid developer and only marginally harder to use a powder developer. The only people at which it gets interesting is when you start making your own developer from raw chemicals. I'd just buy a bottle of Kodak T-Max dev if you like using T-Max films. It really shouldn't break the bank (enough for 5 litres of solution here costs about the same as 2-3 of rolls of film, for comparison.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2009 17:33
|
|
|
Stregone posted:If I use a different developer do the rest of the chemicals stay the same?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2009 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
I think I'll get a K1000. I wanted a Canonet QL17 or a Yashica Lynx but the K1000 seems like a safer option for not much of a size sacrifice and there are tons of K-mount lenses out there, though the usual 50mm f/2 lens should get me plenty of mileage. Huh. Whaddya know. I check Craigslist and there's a Pentax MX for sale. I call up and the guy is mere blocks away from me. HPL fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Feb 17, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2009 20:51
|
|