|
i found an old tlr holgas are fun too  
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2009 14:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:54 |
|
|
Finally got around to scanning some negs that I took with my F100. The dust removal feature on the Epson V700 blows. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2009 23:35
|
|
|
Rednik posted:Finally got around to scanning some negs that I took with my F100. The dust removal feature on the Epson V700 blows. F100  What film are you using?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2009 23:38
|
|
|
j883376 posted:F100 Tri-X 400 @ 320 but developed at the normal time in D76.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2009 23:41
|
|
|
Rednik posted:Finally got around to scanning some negs that I took with my F100. The dust removal feature on the Epson V700 blows. Those dust removal features usually only work on C41 (generally colour) films.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 07:26
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure that digital ICE works on slide film as well, but not Kodachrome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 18:05
|
|
|
gib is correct. If you're curious, it takes a second scan using IR light, which reflects dust more than the emulsions. The extra bits are filled in using interpolation (guesswork).
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 21:06
|
|
|
So, what do you guys do for actually making prints of your pictures? Do you own your own enlargers? Or do you have a nearby university/high school/developing lab that you use? My wife and I are moving soon, and I'd like to set up my own darkroom for developing my film, but I'm lost as to actually getting prints. Can I just take in my prints to the local pharmacy or wherever?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 22:39
|
|
|
areyoucontagious posted:So, what do you guys do for actually making prints of your pictures? Do you own your own enlargers? Or do you have a nearby university/high school/developing lab that you use? My wife and I are moving soon, and I'd like to set up my own darkroom for developing my film, but I'm lost as to actually getting prints. Can I just take in my prints to the local pharmacy or wherever? Kind of curious on this too. Right now I'm scanning the negatives with the plan to mess around with the levels, crop etc. and then send them off to wherever for printing, but I would like to hear what others are doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 22:47
|
|
|
HPL posted:Kind of curious on this too. Right now I'm scanning the negatives with the plan to mess around with the levels, crop etc. and then send them off to wherever for printing, but I would like to hear what others are doing. With film I shot over the summer I tried using Dwayne's Photo for B&W prints and they ended up ugly as sin. Not much thought put into contrast and exposure. Fortunately, now that I'm back at the uni I use the enlarger in the darkroom across the street and it works out pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 22:57
|
|
|
Rednik posted:With film I shot over the summer I tried using Dwayne's Photo for B&W prints and they ended up ugly as sin. Not much thought put into contrast and exposure. Fortunately, now that I'm back at the uni I use the enlarger in the darkroom across the street and it works out pretty well. You mean you sent them to the regular printing service the same as a colour photo? And in what particular ways were they bad? I'd like to print out a few of my photos for decorating the walls. I also had a neat idea involving printing photos on something clear like a transparency. Does anyone do that decently?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 22:59
|
|
|
areyoucontagious posted:So, what do you guys do for actually making prints of your pictures? Do you own your own enlargers? Or do you have a nearby university/high school/developing lab that you use? Also, you don't need a darkroom to develop film. The only time you have to be in complete darkness is when you're loading film. You can get a changing bag, or be cheap, and just do it under several blankets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 23:29
|
|
|
HPL posted:You mean you sent them to the regular printing service the same as a colour photo? And in what particular ways were they bad? I'm fairly sure that going anywhere that they print color will work just fine. The way they work is that they scan the negatives and then just print them out. All automated, they just pop them in the machine and it does all the work. It's not like it does anything with chemistry, so it shouldn't ruin your negatives since they're only being scanned. I wouldn't recommend a pharmacy or anything though mostly just because they tend not to care about people's pictures, so they do a crappy job. And of course you run the risk of them being careless and scratching a negative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 23:31
|
|
|
Kaerf posted:Both. My room doubles as my darkroom, but my school has a full fledged darkroom that I make use of occasionally. Going into a room with no windows is also good for this. For example, my bathroom at school has no windows on it, so if I were to develop in there, I could just go sit in the shower with the lights off and have no risk of ruining the film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2009 23:33
|
|
|
Be careful loading film in a bathroom. The tiniest amount of light from under the door or from a charger LED or something could screw with your film. I use a changing bag and it's pretty easy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 00:05
|
|
|
I use my storage room to load film. I make sure the lights are off outside the door and I put a towel at the bottom of the door just in case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 00:27
|
|
|
The local lab around here, Sharp, does photographic prints from negative film. For slide film they scan and print, unfortunately. Thankfully the people who work there love film too so they usually do a good job. Except I've noticed a particular employee who, whenever they're on duty, my scans always look ultra-compressed and filled with artifacts. I thought it was just my imagination and film grain until I got a roll back when someone else must have been working, because the difference was night and day. Maybe it is just my imagination. But at any rate, I need to get my own darkroom and enlarger etc. I love film but the costs of developing are killing me. Of course I'd still need them scanned, eventually I will need to invest in a good scanner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 00:38
|
|
|
CanuckBassist posted:I use my storage room to load film. I make sure the lights are off outside the door and I put a towel at the bottom of the door just in case. And then you smoke a few reefers just to be sure?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 01:05
|
|
|
A few shots from the weekend. Arista Premium as usual, ISO 1600. A variety show at a small French cafe. Canon A2E with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4:  
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 01:28
|
|
|
I wanted to make sure the old Canon Rebel actually worked so I ran a roll of film through it, and then I bought a scanner today, a Canon 8800F. From what I've seen thus far, it's a pretty good scanner. Still learning how to use it. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 07:59
|
|
|
I don't print very often, so when I do I take the time to rent a darkroom with an enlarger (£4/hour + £1.50 for 1 litre each of dev, stop and fix) and make darkroom prints! I take 2 or 3 hours and make a few FB or RC prints each time. It's well worth the £13.50 it costs for 3 hours. I get to use top notch equipment, washers, drying racks etc. and all the lightproofing and maintenance of equipment is done for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 10:30
|
|
|
Okay guys, follow up to my post about the scans I got. Seems their scanner was hosed up or something. I quickly thumbed through a couple of the pictures I knew were problematic and they seem to look fine in print. I think I'm going to write them a quick letter and let them know I'm somewhat disappointed in the scan quality. I don't plan to get too angry though just because I had a coupon for free online scans. Free just shouldn't mean poor quality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2009 20:10
|
|
|
Where and how can I get Kodachrome developed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2009 23:32
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Where and how can I get Kodachrome developed? Dwayne's Photo is, I believe, the only place left on the planet that still develops Kodachrome. It's in Parson, Kansas. http://www.dwaynesphoto.com/
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2009 23:59
|
|
|
Been thinking about getting a TLR since there's not much else in the "somewhat portable" medium format category for that kind of price range. Ideally, I'd like a Mamiya C330 since I can put a 55mm lens on it for landscapes, but the body plus lens is getting pricey, but that seems to be the only wide-angle option since everything else is 75mm or 80mm. Any ideas? I'd rather get a 6x6 or 6x7/6x9 since most of the photos I'd be taking would be landscape so a 6x4.5 would mean holding the camera sideways all the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 00:38
|
|
|
HPL posted:Been thinking about getting a TLR since there's not much else in the "somewhat portable" medium format category for that kind of price range. Ideally, I'd like a Mamiya C330 since I can put a 55mm lens on it for landscapes, but the body plus lens is getting pricey, but that seems to be the only wide-angle option since everything else is 75mm or 80mm. Any ideas? I'd rather get a 6x6 or 6x7/6x9 since most of the photos I'd be taking would be landscape so a 6x4.5 would mean holding the camera sideways all the time. Consider a C220 if you're shopping online, or alternatively an RZ or RB 67, you can sometimes get really good deals on those. Heck, with an RZ you can even get/rent a digital back if you want. C-series cameras don't pop up on craigslist very often around here very often. *lovingly strokes his C330*
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 00:54
|
|
|
The various flavors of Bronica might also be useful. They aren't as tidy as a Yashica 124, but not folder type huge, and the Bronicas are going realy cheap these days. I fished a ETRC out of the bay with a speedgrip and two lenses, 75mm and 150mm, and a prism finder, for $136 shipped. KEH has ETR family bodies cheap, like under $50 for an ETRC, which I'm considering picking up so I can have a couple different kinds of film going, load one with color, one with BW, or whatnot. edit-Is there even a 6x4.5 TLR in existence? As for CL, I rarely see medium format gear locally and what does appear is still pricey. Gnomad fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Apr 11, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 02:11
|
|
|
dunno posted:Consider a C220 if you're shopping online, or alternatively an RZ or RB 67, you can sometimes get really good deals on those. Heck, with an RZ you can even get/rent a digital back if you want. Every review of the RZ and RB makes a big deal about how heavy they are. I want something I can take on long walks and trips. KEH seems to have some okay deals on non-330 Mamiya TLR bodies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 02:27
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:The various flavors of Bronica might also be useful. They aren't as tidy as a Yashica 124, but not folder type huge, and the Bronicas are going realy cheap these days. I fished a ETRC out of the bay with a speedgrip and two lenses, 75mm and 150mm, and a prism finder, for $136 shipped. KEH has ETR family bodies cheap, like under $50 for an ETRC, which I'm considering picking up so I can have a couple different kinds of film going, load one with color, one with BW, or whatnot. My Seagull came with a mask you can drop in it to give you 6x4.5, I'd think most manufacturers would have that option. HPL posted:Every review of the RZ and RB makes a big deal about how heavy they are. I want something I can take on long walks and trips. Like the size of a human head. They're definitely studio cameras. Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Apr 11, 2009 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 17:45
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:My Seagull came with a mask you can drop in it to give you 6x4.5, I'd think most manufacturers would have that option. Does the mask then let you get 16 pictures to a roll or do you end up with really big spaces between pictures?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 18:07
|
|
|
I'm looking at the Mamiya M645 system and it's looking like an attractive option too. The M645 Pro body, 55mm f/2.8 lens and AE prism finder should do me to start, right? I'm thinking down the road a second 120 film back for swapping between ISO 400 and ISO 1600 film would be good as well as the 80mm f/1.9 lens. It's 6x4.5 but from what I gather it shoots in landscape by deafult instead of portrait like some 6x4.5 cameras, so that's better for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 19:33
|
|
|
HPL posted:I'm looking at the Mamiya M645 system and it's looking like an attractive option too. The M645 Pro body, 55mm f/2.8 lens and AE prism finder should do me to start, right? I've got a Mamiya M645 1000S w/ the 55 F/2.8, 80 F/1.9, 150 F/3.5, waistlevel finder and CdS metering prismfinder and it's an amazing system. The negatives are landscape by default and the 55 F/2.8 is a good choice for a wide angle lens. I think you'd be happy with an M645 kit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 20:21
|
|
|
pseudonordic posted:I've got a Mamiya M645 1000S w/ the 55 F/2.8, 80 F/1.9, 150 F/3.5, waistlevel finder and CdS metering prismfinder and it's an amazing system. The negatives are landscape by default and the 55 F/2.8 is a good choice for a wide angle lens. I think you'd be happy with an M645 kit. Yeah, what I meant by landscape is that some 6x4.5 cameras take photos in portrait orientation when you're holding the camera normally while some cameras do it in landscape. Since I'd be taking the bulk of my photos in landscape, it would be preferrable to have one that normally works in landscape. A 6x7 or 6x9 would be super sweet, but the M645 seems to have the flexibility and pricing that fits better for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 20:31
|
|
|
I'm not a big guy (5'9" I think) and I have no problem with hand-holding or taking the RZ on trips. It's big, but it's not hugely bigger than what I'd be taking anyway. Perhaps I should take some photos of myself hand-holding it as evidence. I do use it on a tripod when out and about though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 21:51
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:Does the mask then let you get 16 pictures to a roll or do you end up with really big spaces between pictures? 16 per roll. There's a second little red window that lets you see the markings for 4.5x6.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 22:26
|
|
|
Ahhhh, so the Seagull doesn't have a set winding distance, you line the numbers up yourself then. IIRC, my Yashica 124 wound the same distance per shutter cocking. How do you like that Seagull? I like the TLR's, the WLF helps me visualize the photo while I'm composing. Or I could find a WLF for the Bronica, of course they cost as much as the whole camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2009 23:38
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:Ahhhh, so the Seagull doesn't have a set winding distance, you line the numbers up yourself then. IIRC, my Yashica 124 wound the same distance per shutter cocking. For $30 I'm very satisfied (when I was in Beijing I actually picked up some other variants made under a different name for $12-15 a pop), it produces decent images and of course you've got full manual control. Most people in here will recommend an entry level Yasch for $100, but I'm fine with the Seagull. Granted, I've never printed any big pictures or looked at the negatives on a loupe or anything but nothing from what I've seen makes me run away screaming. Couple examples of B&W and cross processed film (no tinkering in PS except for resize/straightening):     (sorry, the last one is a lovely "scan" I took with my old DSLR and taping the print up to a window) Goddamn I love 6x6. Some people complain about vignetting but it doesn't seem to be a problem, on my 'Gull at least. With the longish minimum focusing distance and f/3.5 lens you'll never really get a great background blur, that backpack/bicycle one is basically as extreme as you can manage. Not sure if that's a general TLR thing or specific to the Seagull. I love having the TLR viewfinder as an option, but sadly had to pretty much put it away completely when I lost my tripod on a trip last summer. Still have 6 rolls of 120 that I need to develop :-\
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2009 03:39
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Awesome. Why would anyone consider a C330 portable? Aren't those things extremely heavy compared to YashicaMats or Rolleicords? Another option for affordable 6x6 in a small package would be an Iskra rangefinder. It's considerably heavier than my Rolleicord V but very compact.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2009 23:14
|
|
|
I just got a used used Minolta XD-5 off ebay, and naturally, the seller's description of "perfect" left much to be desired (such as, say, light seals). The major problem is that the shutter decides when to return more or less when it feels like it. I know to go get a CLA for the camera, but is there anything I might be able to do to clear this up? I'm pretty handy with cars/motorcycles and computers as far as the physical repair of either is concerned, but I worry about tiny, tiny parts getting lost or damaged, and I don't know enough about internals to know "if you touch this part here, the sweat will damage it" or whatever. Anybody have any tips? This isn't an emergency; I have my SRT as well
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2009 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:54 |
|
|
God-damned Pilates posted:I just got a used used Minolta XD-5 off ebay, and naturally, the seller's description of "perfect" left much to be desired (such as, say, light seals). The major problem is that the shutter decides when to return more or less when it feels like it. I know to go get a CLA for the camera, but is there anything I might be able to do to clear this up? I'm pretty handy with cars/motorcycles and computers as far as the physical repair of either is concerned, but I worry about tiny, tiny parts getting lost or damaged, and I don't know enough about internals to know "if you touch this part here, the sweat will damage it" or whatever. Garry's Camera Repair will fix that XD-5 for $53 total. http://garryscamerarepair.com You might be able to find schematics for taking it apart. It sounds like the shutter mechanism is gunked up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2009 02:26
|
|