|
Snaily posted:Either it's the Diafine or the fix, but something makes my hands smell for 36 hours when I've done some developing. They smell like wood pulp factories. Ilford rapid fix stays on my hands for ages, i use washing up liquid and sugar to get rid of most of it, otherwise i would sit there all day sniffing my fingers.
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2010 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 06:10 |
|
|
Good lord, have you people never heard of gloves?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2010 23:57
|
|
|
HPL posted:Good lord, have you people never heard of gloves? If my developing is going to be over 5 minutes I usually just make sure my can is sealed tight and bring it with me to my computer desk or in front of the tv or something. Pain in the rear end to keep taking off and putting on gloves just for that. Besides, if you're careful and use funnels and everything, there's no reason you should be getting any fixer on your hands in the first place. Just towel off the tank after you've rinsed the stop bath through it and nothing should get messy. Also, Ilford Rapid Fixer homies in this thread 
some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Jan 8, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2010 00:09
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:If my developing is going to be over 5 minutes I usually just make sure my can is sealed tight and bring it with me to my computer desk or in front of the tv or something. Pain in the rear end to keep taking off and putting on gloves just for that. Even without the smell, I find that my skin gets messed up if I don't wear gloves and there are a lot of nasty chemicals involved in film developing that shouldn't be on your skin anyway. I guess you could put the developing tank in a Ziploc bag or something. Still, it's usually at the measuring stage that I get stuff all over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2010 00:15
|
|
|
Lady Gaga saves Polaroid? Marketing babble or something real? Are they trying to cash in on the hipster/retro/lomo market? Will it be a digital toy camera with a printer or actual film?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:Lady Gaga saves Polaroid? ah yes, my favorite part of the polaroid brand: their digital cameras
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2010 01:26
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:Lady Gaga saves Polaroid? only lady gaga could make polaroids uncool
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2010 01:53
|
|
|
gently caress scanning with silverfast on a mac, i want vuescan back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2010 16:57
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:gently caress scanning with silverfast on a mac, i want vuescan back. What was wrong with silverfast? I tried the demo and I thought it was friendlier. I'd probably switch if I could afford to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2010 19:59
|
|
|
I have used both, i think VueScan has more options and better file processing... and more control figuring out how to control that stuff is another story. I think it took me days to just figure out how to crop a bath of photos properly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2010 22:18
|
|
|
The main problem is it took me so long to get the thing set up properly, my biggest frustration comes from actually installing the thing on a mac, having to download an updated version and then find that my serial isnt working. Vuescan is alot more user friendly, as notlodar said it takes a bit of getting your head around, the UI is terrible. Not sure if its just me but a head to head of image quality between the two and vuescan comes out on top, although the infrared on silverfast is better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 01:39
|
|
|
HPL posted:Good lord, have you people never heard of gloves? I suspect my gloves are semi-permeable, and my tank likes to leak a tiny bit, at least when I'm opening it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 12:55
|
|
|
Snaily posted:I suspect my gloves are semi-permeable, and my tank likes to leak a tiny bit, at least when I'm opening it. I use disposable latex gloves. Haven't had a problem yet. I hate how every time I spill film chemicals, it's never the stop bath or developer or water, oh no. It's always that stinky fixer, god dammit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 17:25
|
|
|
HPL posted:I use disposable latex gloves. Haven't had a problem yet. Better than than selenium or sepia toner, I guess. I was using a shared tray a couple months ago to do some selenium toning. T'was a big batch, used about half a bottle before dilution. Went to the bathroom and came back to an odd surprise... where the hell did it all go? Oh, sweet, the tray had a tiny little crack in the corner and now there's selenium all over the damned place. Wee!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 18:14
|
|
is go
|
There is no worse way to spend a Sunday than scanning and rebuilding your lightroom catalog from scratch. Cant. Scan. Much. More.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 21:24
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:There is no worse way to spend a Sunday than scanning and rebuilding your lightroom catalog from scratch. What PlusTek is that, and how do you like it? Bonus points for not just letting your RSI-ed wrists talk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 22:42
|
|
|
Snaily posted:What PlusTek is that, and how do you like it? Bonus points for not just letting your RSI-ed wrists talk. It a 7600i se. I like it, image quality is good, infrared is good although i dont use it that much, scan time is pretty fast, loading gets annoying as you have to feed the negative holder through yourself and the maximum resolution is no where near advertised but they very rarely are. For the price range its basically one of the only choices for a dedicated 35mm scanner there is, one day ill have a nice drum scanner. http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisdhegarty/ The most recent 2 pages where all scanned with it, cant remember what resolution, probably about 1600 or something like that. Once i get organised ill post some better examples/comparisons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2010 22:52
|
|
|
HPL posted:I hate how every time I spill film chemicals, it's never the stop bath or developer or water, oh no. It's always that stinky fixer, god dammit. You haven't lived until you have bathed in five gallons of fixer. And had to soak it up off your person and floor with nothing but a roll of the cheapest industrial paper towels. That was an awful, awful night in the university film lab. Awful week, actually, as it continued to reek for several days afterward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2010 02:40
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:Cant. Scan. Much. More. Scanning is definitely the bane of my existence right now. The flatbed scanner film gate I have is a pain in the dick to operate. I'm thinking of taking some measurements and having the machine shop on campus fabricate me one where I can scan more than one exposure at a time. Even my dedicated 35mm scanner is a pain. Scan, wait 5 minutes, remove gate, advance film carefully or risk the wrath of emulsion scratching, repeat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2010 03:30
|
|
|
fronkpies posted:It a 7600i se. Cool. The 7x00i SE was on my shortlist, until I found someone selling a Coolscan V for the same price (I'm lacking the capability to scan unmounted negatives, but I'm looking high and low for the FH-3 adapter for a reasonable price here in Sweden). I'd love to see a comparative review, but the market is rapidly dwindling, as far as I know. And yes, scanning sucks balls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2010 08:39
|
|
|
Scanning is the devil, I wish I had the room for a dedicated darkroom (and the patience to do colour printing).
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2010 10:57
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Scanning is the devil, I wish I had the room for a dedicated darkroom (and the patience to do colour printing). Yes it tis. I tried to economize by having my neighborhood pharmacy "develop only" rather than paying the extra 2.99 for the cds. The result? They dutifully developed my film, rolled it back up into my canisters, and I scratched the hep out of them trying to unravel them and jam their curly asses into the film guides, and then wasting a whole Sunday afternoon trying to determine what was scan-worthy. Moral of story: Pay for developing AND scanning. Economize by cajoling 16 year old cashier into giving you half a roll of free film sleeves. ALSO: I develop sans gloves. If my gf said it were my fixer or her cat...guess who would win? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2010 07:15
|
|
|
wahhh, when did freestyle discontinue Aristacolor, it was cheap and good to learn on. is the fuji pro stuff the same thing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2010 22:32
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:wahhh, when did freestyle discontinue Aristacolor, it was cheap and good to learn on. is the fuji pro stuff the same thing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2010 01:12
|
|
|
Just finished developing 6 rolls of film via three cans - all at once. Never. Again. In any case, thought I'd share my setup.     
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2010 20:13
|
|
|
spritely posted:Just finished developing 6 rolls of film via three cans - all at once. Never. Again. I feel ya. It feels like you're one of those circus guys balancing plates on poles. That's why I got the Patterson 5-reel tank. If you shoot medium format, the 5-reel tank is a must since you can do 3 rolls of 120 at once.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2010 21:59
|
|
|
I found a bunch of old film in my lady friends closet that I took to be developed. The guy balked at one of the rolls, pointing out that it is some weird Seattle Filmworks stuff, process sfw-xl. Goggle tells me that this is some proprietary crap and few develop it any more. All the posts about it are quite old. Does anyone know anywhere that still deals with this stuff?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 21:18
|
|
Associate Christ
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:I found a bunch of old film in my lady friends closet that I took to be developed. The guy balked at one of the rolls, pointing out that it is some weird Seattle Filmworks stuff, process sfw-xl. Did you look at this photo thread? http://photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00IsQ6
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 21:25
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:I found a bunch of old film in my lady friends closet that I took to be developed. The guy balked at one of the rolls, pointing out that it is some weird Seattle Filmworks stuff, process sfw-xl. Seattle Film Works is crap. They used to send out free film and pre paid mailers in the mid 90s. It was basically tailings from 35mm motion picture film. It does not use standard C-41 and will clog up a C-41 with black gunk if you try to run it through. Throw it in the trash or try shooting it and developing in B&W chemicals and see what happens. The film itself wasn't very good. The negatives don't hold up well over time, I'm not sure but I believe the negatives were meant to be cold stored and most people did not do that. I have some 3.5" disks laying around with scans of those images on them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:10
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:I think Aristacolor was Ferrania, who stopped making film recently. I thought they still made 200 and 400. The Ferrania stuff was OK. I liked the 400 exposed at 200, and it was dirt cheap.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:Did you look at this photo thread? http://photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00IsQ6 Yeah, I saw that earlier. The Dale's site makes no mention of it, but I will try emailing them. Following the flickr link, I found this. They will do it for $42.50. I will have to ask my lady friend if she cares enough to try that. I don't think she has any idea what is on it. killabyte posted:Seattle Film Works is crap. What a wonderful scam they had going. I would try using it, but it has already been shot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 22:50
|
|
|
These stupid little things are way overpriced, so I was pleasantly surprised to score this one for so little (made even better by $16 in eBay Bucks I forgot I had) this afternoon: Hopefully it's not too hard to open up to clean, the ad mentions some haze. What's good for cleaning that sort of stuff off of glass surfaces that should help prevent the haze from coming back?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 23:25
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:Yeah, I saw that earlier. The Dale's site makes no mention of it, but I will try emailing them. If you know how to develop film I would try dropping it in Diafine or HC-110 and see what happens. If there is an image it will of course be B&W. If you want me to try I can give you my address and I will develop it. I've had success developing exposed film from the early 90s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2010 23:36
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Hopefully it's not too hard to open up to clean, the ad mentions some haze. What's good for cleaning that sort of stuff off of glass surfaces that should help prevent the haze from coming back? A Lenspen can work miracles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 01:13
|
|
|
killabyte posted:If you know how to develop film I would try dropping it in Diafine or HC-110 and see what happens. If there is an image it will of course be B&W. If you want me to try I can give you my address and I will develop it. I am happy developing black & white, but it sounds like this film might have some gunk layer that could duck me up. And can you really develop colour film with a black & white process and get an image? Never heard that before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 01:22
|
|
|
Kaluza-Klein posted:I am happy developing black & white, but it sounds like this film might have some gunk layer that could duck me up. Eh, give it a shot I say. Just use a one shot developer like D76. Color film has silver as well so the chemicals will work. Heck, Kodachrome is a Black and white film and can be developed in black and white chemistry just fine. It will just be really low contrast if there is an image at all. Search flickr and you will see some examples.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 02:55
|
|
|
What's a good medium format pinhole camera for a price befitting of a pinhole camera? I don't want to throw a ton of money at something just for kicks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 05:00
|
|
|
HPL posted:What's a good medium format pinhole camera for a price befitting of a pinhole camera? I don't want to throw a ton of money at something just for kicks. Building your own, I think. The Zero's are well-made but I'm guessing more expensive than what you're looking to spend. You can actually get fairly sharp results (for a pinhole) by using something that will create a perfectly round pinhole, such as a laser-drilled hole, which I think is what the Zero's use. You can pick one up for $18 or so online. Poking your own hole by hand works for most people, but no matter how precise you try to be the edges will be ragged, which degrades sharpness. Maybe that's part of the charm for some people, but I've been pretty impressed with the results I've seen from the laser-drilled ones. Apparently the best pinhole is an electron microscope aperture, but they all seem to be made out of exotic elements and kinda pricey for my humble projects. I'm holding out to meet a physics nerd who can get me the hookup. As far as a body I have the back of a 6x9 folder on my shelf that's waiting for me to get around to making a pinhole for it. You could always make a pinhole lens cap/screw on filter for your Moskva and control it with a cable release, which would cut down on camera shake when you're using it. Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 06:21 on Jan 19, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 06:12
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:As far as a body I have the back of a 6x9 folder on my shelf that's waiting for me to get around to making a pinhole for it. You could always make a pinhole lens cap/screw on filter for your Moskva and control it with a cable release, which would cut down on camera shake when you're using it. Hey yeah, my Century Graphic would be perfect for that. Swappable lensboard and a viewfinder larger than the head of a match. I'll check out the Zero stuff though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 06:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 06:10 |
|
|
HPL posted:What's a good medium format pinhole camera for a price befitting of a pinhole camera? I don't want to throw a ton of money at something just for kicks. get one at urban outfitters!
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2010 17:57
|
|
