|
Molten Llama posted:The contrast will be low, it may be grainy, and it'll obviously be black and white, but it can be done. A friend of mine tried it once, it worked out sort of OK. He was overexposing by two stops and used some diluted household bleach after fixing.
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 22:50 |
|
|
I just got an EOS 3, and my only standard length lens that will fit is my nifty fifty. So I am looking for an affordable EF mount standard zoom. Something 200 bucks or less on KEH. I see a few options, does anyone have any thoughts on any of these? 24-85 F3.5-4.5 ULTRASONIC 28-105 F3.5-4.5 MACRO ULTRASONIC 28-70 F3.5-4.5 II 35-105 F3.5-4.5 MACRO
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 03:53
|
|
|
Molten Llama posted:The contrast will be low, it may be grainy, and it'll obviously be black and white, but it can be done. Thanks for the feedback on the leaves. I also shot that same scene on an Argus C3, which I haven't finished the film in yet, have to polish that off this weekend I think. I do have a fair amount of film to try it on. You'd think that people would check before dropping he camera odd in the donation bin. Every other camera I pick up has film in it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 05:18
|
|
|
Just bought a Moskva-5 off of eBay. This should be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 19:19
|
|
|
HPL posted:Just bought a Moskva-5 off of eBay. This should be interesting. How much did you get it for? Only a couple of hours until I develop my first couple of rolls. Checked my chemicals and there at 70 degrees, guessing the easiest wat to cool them is putting them in a tray of cold water?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 19:43
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:How much did you get it for? Roughly $80 before shipping. Wanted to get one in as good shape as possible since folders can be kind of iffy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 19:46
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:Only a couple of hours until I develop my first couple of rolls. Checked my chemicals and there at 70 degrees, guessing the easiest wat to cool them is putting them in a tray of cold water? If you're using developer 1+1, you can use cool water or even ice as needed for the water portion. 70's close enough it should be fine for the rest of the chemistry, but if you want to cool it down, you've got it figured out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 19:46
|
|
|
HPL posted:Just bought a Moskva-5 off of eBay. This should be interesting. I just got my Super Ikonta in the mail this afternoon, and realized the roll of XP1 I had laying around is actually C-41 process. Also, the seller didn't mention the camera was apparently kept in a cigar box, ugh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 19:53
|
|
|
Well developed my first roll... and it worked perfectly. Don't know what I was worried about, the hardest part was light proofing my room, I had to wait until dark, hang a blanket that weighed a stupid amount from a flimsy curtain pole, push my mattress up against the door then sit with another blanket over me trying to wind film onto a spool. Very pleased with the results though, now that the test roll is done, only 6 more to go tonight. fronkpies fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Oct 10, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 22:50
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:Well developed my first roll... and it worked perfectly. For the future you might consider purchasing a changing bag, which is basically a light proof sack with armholes, so you don't have to lightproof your bedroom every time you want to develop film.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:13
|
|
|
Twenties Superstar posted:For the future you might consider purchasing a changing bag, which is basically a light proof sack with armholes, so you don't have to lightproof your bedroom every time you want to develop film. Definitely on my list of things to buy. Not to keen on wrestling with a mattress again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:20
|
|
|
If you can't find a changing bag in your area, consider this until you can order one and have it shipped: - Small cardboard box - five or six "black" garbage bags - large towel - Some kind of weight Throw the box in the first garbage bag, then put each garbage bag inside another. This is because none of my bags were actually black but slightly translucent. If you can find a black garbage bag so much the better. Put the garbage bag on a table with the opening facing you and close the opening flat. Put a weight or brick or whatever on the middle part of the opening so you basically pinch it closed except for two smaller openings on either side. Drape a towel over the whole setup and you've got the most ghetto changing bag ever. I don't recommend using it in broad daylight or even in a lit room, but I used it in my basement with light leaks everywhere and I don't see any indication that my photo quality suffered in the least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:46
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:and I don't see any indication that my photo quality suffered in the least. How would we tell? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:49
|
|
|
I use my bathroom. Its pretty light leaky even with the lights in the room outside it off, but when I get in the shower and pull the curtain its good enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:How would we tell? Hiyoo! Get this man a talk show 
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:51
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Hiyoo! Get this man a talk show Thanks folks, I'll be here until Thursday!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2009 23:55
|
|
|
I used the classic method of taping the negatives to your monitor, then using your parents lovely point and shoot to photograph them, uploading them to your computer and wasting alot of time that you could be spending doing better things. Hardly worth posting but last night these were nothing more than emulsion, now there all developed and up on screen. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2009 20:47
|
|
|
The old man walking with the cane is my favorite.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2009 21:31
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:I used the classic method of taping the negatives to your monitor, then using your parents lovely point and shoot to photograph them, uploading them to your computer and wasting alot of time that you could be spending doing better things. Thanks, it's 1AM here and I actually have stuff to study but I just had to do try it out 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2009 23:50
|
|
|
First one on the third row is hilarious. Did you photograph each row separately? Now get back to studying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 00:30
|
|
|
HPL posted:Just bought a Moskva-5 off of eBay. This should be interesting. Interesting is the right word. I used to have one. It's a nice, lightweight, relatively compact camera. As long as your expectations are sufficiently lowered it will be fine. Russian sellers claim everything is "Excellent+" even though it is obvious from the image that the camera looks like poo poo. Problems I had: 1. It's fragile. The bellows are 50+ years old and wear it. The bellows on mine intruded in the image a little bit. 2. Small pieces of it have a knack for falling off. Finding one that still has a self timer knob is a challenge. The knob on mine fell off. 3. The leather falls off the body and the camera gets rusty. 4. It's not very sharp until about f/11. It's pretty good after that. I ran one roll through mine and sold it. I haven't yet replaced it with anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 02:08
|
|
|
killabyte posted:Interesting is the right word. I used to have one. It's a nice, lightweight, relatively compact camera. As long as your expectations are sufficiently lowered it will be fine. Russian sellers claim everything is "Excellent+" even though it is obvious from the image that the camera looks like poo poo. Yeah, I figured. Seems like it's not just a Russian thing, but a folder thing in general. The one I bought seemed to be in good shape, better than a lot of the other ones available. I'm buying it for landscapes and other such things that benefit from enormous negatives. I have my Mamiya 645 Pro for actual medium format usage. The Moskva will be more for fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 02:19
|
|
|
Since we are talking Russians for a moment can someone suggest a flashgun for a Kiev 4. Needs to have a cable, preferably as low profile as possible. The roll that I opened the back on came out mostly fine, I keep on forgetting to upload them though and they are on another computer. Maybe I'll remember tonight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 08:32
|
|
|
My first test 'roll' of 12 4x5's from a couple months back nearly killed me when I saw how much they cost to develop from the local shop. I'm happy to report I used the 'taco method' for some this weekend and developed 5 spectacular exposures using some hair bands and a tall stainless roll tank. I was using Ilford HP something 125, with 8 minutes of developer time and 5 minutes in fixer. Now I really need to find a scanner- looking at them with my loupe and telling you all how nice they are is kind of missing the point 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 17:03
|
|
|
What can I expect from a roll of Fuji Provia 400F slide film that expired back in 2004?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 17:52
|
|
|
Santa is strapped posted:What can I expect from a roll of Fuji Provia 400F slide film that expired back in 2004? I'll add another question, what can I expect from expired ektachrome 64 from 1989?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 18:19
|
|
|
Attempt 1: Shooting from the hip... GO!    Stop! Take a picture of a typewriter.  Okay, we're done. Not too terrible. Most pictures were too dark but I think I've got it figured out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 20:08
|
|
|
Yup, your photos seem to be consistently underexposed at least. You can most likely fix it really easily in post by just bumping exposure up in lightroom, for example. If your camera has exposure compensation you can probably set +1/2EV too, but I'm not sure what you're shooting with. They look good though, I bet they'll clean up really nicely in Lightroom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 20:15
|
|
|
No exposure compensation. It was Ilford XP-2 Super 400. I believe (though I may be wrong) that the film speed mark on the camera moved and I never noticed. The camera doesn't have a 400 mark so I just try and sit it between 250 and 500 where 400 might be, but it seems to be closer to 250 now than it should be. Would that give me underexposure?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 20:30
|
|
|
Mickey Eye posted:The camera doesn't have a 400 mark so I just try and sit it between 250 and 500 where 400 might be This might not work at all for what it's worth. It's probably still picking either 250 or 500 depending on where the dial is. But that's just my guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2009 20:47
|
|
|
Mickey Eye posted:The camera doesn't have a 400 mark so I just try and sit it between 250 and 500 where 400 might be, but it seems to be closer to 250 now than it should be. Would that give me underexposure? That'd give you overexposure. 250 is less sensitive than 500, so the meter will want more light.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2009 16:06
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience pushing Tmax 400? Normally I prefer Tri-X, but my local shop only had Tmax, which I understand isn't as good for push/pull processing. I may be able to shoot it at box speed, but wondering what my options are if 400 comes up a bit short.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 16:39
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:I'll add another question, what can I expect from expired ektachrome 64 from 1989? I would expect a hard color shift and possibly fogging from 20-year-expired slide film unless it was frozen forever. quote:What can I expect from a roll of Fuji Provia 400F slide film that expired back in 2004? Probably still acceptable, might be moderately shifted. I wouldn't use it for anything critical, but it would probably be fine. I just did a roll on Kodak Portra 400NC from 2005-12/2006-1 that turned out just fine, but that's negative film and I think slide films are more sensitive. quote:Does anyone have experience pushing Tmax 400? Normally I prefer Tri-X, but my local shop only had Tmax, which I understand isn't as good for push/pull processing. I may be able to shoot it at box speed, but wondering what my options are if 400 comes up a bit short. 400TX is the quintessential pushing film. Tmax is below average for pushing, I think? You could probably push it 1 stop reasonably but you won't be able to do sick pushes like 400TX. 2-3 are probably out of bounds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 17:27
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Does anyone have experience pushing Tmax 400? Normally I prefer Tri-X, but my local shop only had Tmax, which I understand isn't as good for push/pull processing. I may be able to shoot it at box speed, but wondering what my options are if 400 comes up a bit short. I have shot tmax 400 at 1600 and it's kinda meh. I didn't like what push processing did to the tonality of the film (which I never liked to begin with) and the highlights seemed to block up badly. I was souping in HC-110 so YMMV if you use Tamx developer. Also you might be okay if you are shooting low contrast scenes. At the time I was shooting high contrast low light stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 18:17
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:I have shot tmax 400 at 1600 and it's kinda meh. I didn't like what push processing did to the tonality of the film (which I never liked to begin with) and the highlights seemed to block up badly. I was souping in HC-110 so YMMV if you use Tamx developer. Yeah this'll be at a stadium in the evening/night. It's actually fairly well lit (about EV 10, working backwards from what I remember the average exposure being) so I think I might be able to get away with box speed, but the nice thing about shooting 1600 is being able to throw the aperture to f/16 or f/22 and get everything in focus. I guess I'll just play it safe for now. Going to be trying out HC-110 for the first time, too. While I'm asking: I've got a 600mL tank that can do one roll of 120 film. Should I fill it all the way up and use the dilution for 600mL, or just do 300mL or something? I've always done two rolls of 35mm at a time up until now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 18:26
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Yeah this'll be at a stadium in the evening/night. It's actually fairly well lit (about EV 10, working backwards from what I remember the average exposure being) so I think I might be able to get away with box speed, but the nice thing about shooting 1600 is being able to throw the aperture to f/16 or f/22 and get everything in focus. I guess I'll just play it safe for now. There'll be measurements on the bottom of the tank, but you'll want 600ml, 300ml is way too little e: wait, 120 film, right? check your tank for 1x35mm
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 18:30
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:There'll be measurements on the bottom of the tank, but you'll want 600ml, 300ml is way too little oh hey, how 'bout that  500mL for one roll of 120 it is
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 18:39
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:oh hey, how 'bout that And if you only do 500ml you'll probably want to find the little plastic clip and make sure the reel stays put at the bottom of the tank.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 18:58
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:oh hey, how 'bout that I am sure you have already familiarised your self with the Unofficial resource guide but for good posterity I will link to it. My Paterson 2 reel tank suggests 500ml as well but I still mix up 600ml to make sure all the film stays submersed. At 600ml it comes right to the inside lip of the funnel. I use a 1:63 dilution that calls for 9.4ml of HC-110 always with consistant results. Tigertron fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Oct 15, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 22:50 |
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Yeah this'll be at a stadium in the evening/night. It's actually fairly well lit (about EV 10, working backwards from what I remember the average exposure being) so I think I might be able to get away with box speed, but the nice thing about shooting 1600 is being able to throw the aperture to f/16 or f/22 and get everything in focus. I guess I'll just play it safe for now. You might want to try Ilford Delta 400 too. I've shot that at 1600 and it seems to have finer grain and smoother contrast than Tri-X or HP5 at the same speed. XTOL works well for push developing, but if you're new to film, I'd recommend HC-110. HC-110 will give you slightly rougher grain, but it's easier to use since it's already liquid. If you plan on shooting an event, you should run a few test rolls first to figure out what development time works best for you and your camera. Sometimes you need to develop a little longer than the recommended time, sometimes a little less. The best thing to do is go shoot some non-critical games or practices before you do the important stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2009 19:14
|
|