|
As promised (edit: on the last page): 
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2011 23:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:22 |
|
|
Nice, thanks. Looking at those pictures, it occurs to me that I don't think I've ever seen a still picture of somebody actually using a large format camera (and very, very rarely for medium-format). Mostly I just find pictures of the camera, no person in the shot. How do you guys keep track of which roll of film is which if you develop two or more rolls at the same time? I've got two rolls of 135 Ilford HP5+ 400 I'm planning to develop this weekend, and I'm not too worried about getting mixed up (I shot fairly different things on each roll, and both are recent enough I can remember most of what I was doing) but I'm curious if getting mixed up is ever a problem, or if you've seen differences based on which roll was closer to the lid of the tank or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
loving love the $US right now. $1 Australian is buying $1.10 almost. So I'm buying so much poo poo from B&H right now. Shopping list so far Kodak Tri-X 400 Ektar 100 Portra 400 Still have half a dozen rolls of Velvia 50. Anything else I should add? I don't shoot that much black and white so would like some other stuff. All 35mm. Maybe I should buy a used medium format camera from them as well. Its all so cheap god damnit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 01:46
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:How do you guys keep track of which roll of film is which if you develop two or more rolls at the same time? I've got two rolls of 135 Ilford HP5+ 400 I'm planning to develop this weekend, and I'm not too worried about getting mixed up (I shot fairly different things on each roll, and both are recent enough I can remember most of what I was doing) but I'm curious if getting mixed up is ever a problem, or if you've seen differences based on which roll was closer to the lid of the tank or something. Very carefully.  As long as you've got an adequate volume of solution in there, there won't be a problem. The agitation mixes the chemicals up. If you're running multiple tanks at the same time (many rolls, different films+developers, etc), you either need to label them or be meticulous with where you set them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 01:48
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:How do you guys keep track of which roll of film is which if you develop two or more rolls at the same time? I've got two rolls of 135 Ilford HP5+ 400 I'm planning to develop this weekend, and I'm not too worried about getting mixed up (I shot fairly different things on each roll, and both are recent enough I can remember most of what I was doing) but I'm curious if getting mixed up is ever a problem, or if you've seen differences based on which roll was closer to the lid of the tank or something. What do you mean which roll is which? Why would that matter? Enough chemicals to cover them up, and as long as they're the same emulsion, it won't matter. You'll have an easy time seeing which is which at the end. :V Rontalvos fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Apr 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 09:36
|
|
|
Are all film changing bags the same? If I get a cheap one from ebay, will it be as well sealed/easy to use as a b&h or adorama one? Also, what size do you guys suggest is necessary (planing to get a paterson universal 4 tank)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 12:24
|
|
|
Finally loaded the lone roll of Adox Ortho 25 that's been sitting in my fridge for forever into my SLR. Anyone have any experience with films like this? I also have some Rollei 80S which is supposed to be quite interesting and Adox CHS 50. Now that we actually have something resembling light over here it might actually be enjoyable to use slow films.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 12:36
|
|
|
l33tc4k30fd00m posted:Finally loaded the lone roll of Adox Ortho 25 that's been sitting in my fridge for forever into my SLR. Anyone have any experience with films like this? I also have some Rollei 80S which is supposed to be quite interesting and Adox CHS 50. Don't shoot any ladies you like with the Ortho, it will bring out every line and crease in their face, making them look 10 years older.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 16:22
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Nice, thanks. Looking at those pictures, it occurs to me that I don't think I've ever seen a still picture of somebody actually using a large format camera (and very, very rarely for medium-format). Mostly I just find pictures of the camera, no person in the shot. I was in joshua tree and ran into a guy shooting a mamiya 6 and i was shooting with my rz67 & 4x5. tbh, I think national parks bring more serious photographers out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 18:17
|
|
|
I posted a while back how I wished someone made a digital camera that was like a film camera. I'm not sure why I didn't see this guy. OMG I want this. I guess I should save my pennies. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3oyhQGcKYs
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
Just started developing my own black and white, any tips/tricks/wisdoms would be greatly appreciated. also, how the hell do you get leaders out without using brute force?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 13:09
|
|
|
Since I'm buying film and not reloading canisters on my own, I just pull the top off of the film canister with a bottle opener since it's just getting tossed out anyway. However, you can get a leader retriever to pull it out without mangling the canister: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/122166-Arista-Metal-Film-Retriever
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 13:23
|
|
|
beeker posted:Since I'm buying film and not reloading canisters on my own, I just pull the top off of the film canister with a bottle opener since it's just getting tossed out anyway. However, you can get a leader retriever to pull it out without mangling the canister: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/122166-Arista-Metal-Film-Retriever I suck at retrieving leaders, have always just mutilated the canister with a bottle opener.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 13:41
|
|
|
Buy Dymo tape. Peel sticky part off (obviously). Feed into canister and rotate canister nipple (????) clockwise. The tape should attach to the leader (might need to be left a few minutes to 'set'). Pull tape out and hopefully the leader with it. It might be fiddly in theory but when I did it it worked first time and I've only had to do it once. Spedman posted:Don't shoot any ladies you like with the Ortho, it will bring out every line and crease in their face, making them look 10 years older. Makes sense, though that might be fun in itself... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 13:56
|
|
|
why does film come in multiples of 6?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 14:28
|
|
|
echobucket posted:I posted a while back how I wished someone made a digital camera that was like a film camera. I'm not sure why I didn't see this guy. OMG I want this. I guess I should save my pennies. charel posted:Just started developing my own black and white, any tips/tricks/wisdoms would be greatly appreciated. Don't be afraid to push B&W a lot, films like Tri-X/Arista Premium 400 seems to be made to be pushed to 800 and 1600. Get a changing bag if you don't have one yet, having to black out a whole room isn't worth it unless you are printing too. Use filtered/distilled water for the last rinse before you hang up the negs to dry, bad water or a dusty environment can really crap up a nights work development. Are you using a camera that auto-rewinds or one that you have to crank? Just wind it until you hear the *click* as the film just comes off of the take up spool. Leader stays out so you don't have to fish it out later. Sushi in Yiddish fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Apr 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 14:45
|
|
|
There's an even sillier way to retrieve a lost leader, it sounds weird but it worked pretty quickly for me. 1: Turn the spool on Roll A (lost leader) until you hear the click of the leader going past the felt light trap. 2: Grab any other roll of film (Roll B) and lick the emulsion on its leader. Seriously. 3: Insert the now moist and sticky film leader of Roll B an inch or so through the felt trap on Roll A while whistling a 70's porno theme. 4: Pull Roll B back rapidly like you're tearing off a bandaid. With any luck, the damp emulsion will haul the other leader right back out with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 16:44
|
|
is go
|
These were auto rewind victims, took the girl in the lab about 20 seconds to do all three, definitely going to pick up a retriever and never worry about it again. Got a changing bag, getting film on the reel first try is still touch and go, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it. If i'm using distilled water, is it worth using photoflo as well?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 16:58
|
|
|
charel posted:If i'm using distilled water, is it worth using photoflo as well? Yes. Also, why bother with the leaders? Seriously, use a bottle opener to pop the canister open. It's a thousand times easier.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 17:12
|
|
|
unixbeard posted:why does film come in multiples of 6?  It comes in multiples of 4. The 24-frame roll is a relatively recent introduction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/135_film#LengthAll of the negative protectors I've seen are designed for strip lengths of 4 or (less commonly) 6. That makes 24 and 36 exposure rolls ideal, since those numbers are divisible by both 4 and 6...
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 17:37
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:All of the negative protectors I've seen are designed for strip lengths of 4 or (less commonly) 6. That makes 24 and 36 exposure rolls ideal, since those numbers are divisible by both 4 and 6... Strips of 5 are also really common because it fits 8x10 paper for contact printing. The problem with this is it can leave an "orphan" negative that's tougher to handle and keep track of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
I've been considering buying a film camera. Last night I spotted a Nikon FM2 for sale on the local craigslist. http://salem.craigslist.org/pho/2345488557.html quote:I have a Nikon FM2 for sale with many extra's! The Nikon FM2 is an almost fully-manual, semi-professional interchangeable-lens 35mm SLR camera perfect for any photography class, or as a great for a professionals back up camera! These are selling for as little as $50 (for the body only, NO lenses) and as much as $600+ on ebay. This camera is in excellent condition and I think that this is a GREAT deal on a camera that comes with MANY extra's! I will consider any reasonable offers and everything in the photo is included.  She's selling it for $175, I want to get it down to $150. With it comes Craigslist quality photos:    And in the email she told me: quote:I still have the camera for sale. It's in great condition, however I haven't used it in a few years. I did have it repaired right before I stopped using it. Let me know if you would like to see it in person. Thank you, Amber What should I look out for when seeing the camera in person? Is $150 reasonable for the camera and equipments? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 22:44
|
|
|
I haven't looked in a while but $150 seems steep. I want to say FM2n's run about $100-125 and neither of those lenses are worth anything (you can find something similar rummaging at any Goodwill). If those are just offbrand UV filters they're worth probably $1 apiece. I scored an auto macro bellows for a Nikon today and yesterday I got a second developing tank with 2 reels and 6 rolls of circa-2000 film for $2. There's some Tri-X Pan in there too. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Apr 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I scored an auto macro bellows for a Nikon today and yesterday I got a second developing tank with 2 reels and 6 rolls of circa-2000 film for $2. There's some Tri-X Pan in there too. May I ask where you got this deal? That's an awesome snag! Miskatonic posted:I've been considering buying a film camera. Last night I spotted a Nikon FM2 for sale on the local craigslist. If it's an FM2n, it's definitely worth at least $150. The way to tell is if the flash sync is 250, 200, or 125. This will be the red number on the shutter dial, and is the only way to differentiate the different types. 250 is the one you want, it's the FM2n, with a better, indestructible titanium honeycomb shutter featuring a faster max speed of 4000 and a flash sync of 250. The 200 denotes the post-titanium improved aluminum shutter, and 125 is the pre-titanium, FM carryover shutter. the filters and such might be worthwhile, and the lens looks like garbage. but $175 for the whole kit doesn't seem too bad. If she won't budge, just flip the lens and/or bag for $25. FM2's have been gouged up to $200-250 in the NYC area for beat to death, body-only cameras. See if she'll sell you the body only for $100-125, that would be a steal! Also, keep in mind that Ebay prices are not a bargaining chip. I picked up my FM2n body for $150 on ebay. red19fire fucked around with this message at 00:11 on May 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2011 23:49
|
|
|
Took my new K-1000 out to Mount Holly Cemetery to shoot a roll. I'm sort of happy with the results, although they don't look very sharp to me. This is mostly using the 50mm f/2 that came with it, except for the one of the skyscraper, that's the Sears 80-200 f/4. They look okay at smaller sizes, but blown up they aren't too hot looking to me... maybe I'm just too used to digital. Also, this is BW400cn so I guess that could be part of the problem. I guess I should get some Tri-X and run through it or something. I wanted something the local walgreens could develop though (Yes, I'm lazy and impatient)  Mount Holly Cemetery - Angel by jdorseydesign, on Flickr  Mount Holly Cemetery - Old & New by jdorseydesign, on Flickr  Mount Holly Cemetery - Dove by jdorseydesign, on Flickr  Mount Holly Cemetery Statue by jdorseydesign, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 02:46
|
|
|
So I should look out for this? Edit: Miskatonic here, on my girlfriend's laptop. Posted on her account by mistake.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 02:51
|
|
|
red19fire posted:The 200 denotes the post-titanium improved aluminum shutter, Not quite, the original FM syncs at 1/125 and the short lived FM2 was 1/200. All FM2n's have a sync speed of 1/250 (which makes it easy to recognise them at least) and for all practical purposes the titanium and aluminium shutter versions are exactly the same. Worth noting is that on the basic FM2 it is 1/125 that is in red lettering even though 1/200th is the max sync speed, however there is an extra speed on the dial right after 1/4000 marked X200. This was naturally quite awkward which is why it was changed fairly quickly. The lenses are nothing worth keeping though, okay for trying out I guess but you likely want a 50mm prime of some decription. Oh and lastly, the chances of it being an FM2 with the original 1/200 flash sync is rare. Only thing you might what to look at is the shutter (which you should do anyway to make sure they're not damaged). Original titanium bladed FM2n's naturally have a honeycomb pattern but the later aluminium bladed shutter is smooth. All blades should lay flat (don't touch them whatever you do but I'm sure you know this). Check the light seals (foam surrounding the film chamber in places) for being gunky. Hopefully if she did have the camera repaired before she stopped using it then it should be in good working order. l33tc4k30fd00m fucked around with this message at 05:10 on May 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 04:46
|
|
|
l33tc4k30fd00m posted:Not quite, the original FM syncs at 1/125 and the short lived FM2 was 1/200. All FM2n's have a sync speed of 1/250 (which makes it easy to recognise them at least) and for all practical purposes the titanium and aluminium shutter versions are exactly the same. I stand corrected, then. I have an FM2n and FM side by side here, so that plus a mis-remembered K-Rock article means I incorrectly believed the 1/125 sync on the FM2 was lifted from the FM. I could have sworn it went 125 Al > 250 Ti > 200 Al. Either way, Miskatonic should go for the FM2n, it's far more practical & valuable in the long run.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 06:12
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I stand corrected, then. I have an FM2n and FM side by side here, so that plus a mis-remembered K-Rock article means I incorrectly believed the 1/125 sync on the FM2 was lifted from the FM. I could have sworn it went 125 Al > 250 Ti > 200 Al. Yeah it's definititely the case, I have an aluminium shutter FM2n and it has a 1/250 sync speed, it wouldn't have made sense for them to downgrade the shutter speed like that. But as the FM2 was only sold for a year he is unlikely to run into one anyway. Apart from having awkward speeds the only actual thing he would have trouble with (maybe) would be a lack of parts if it breaks.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 12:45
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:I've had a few relatives and friends in the past month or two surprised that anyone still makes film at all. My dad keeps telling me not to spend much money on film equipment because all the professional stuff is going to be digital and nobody will be able to make money with film anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 18:02
|
|
|
l33tc4k30fd00m posted:Yeah it's definititely the case, I have an aluminium shutter FM2n and it has a 1/250 sync speed, it wouldn't have made sense for them to downgrade the shutter speed like that. But as the FM2 was only sold for a year he is unlikely to run into one anyway. Apart from having awkward speeds the only actual thing he would have trouble with (maybe) would be a lack of parts if it breaks. Yes, I just found the ByThom.com article, and my SN is the N8xxxxx type, so aluminum 250. Apparently even Nikon's serial numbers can't tell you what camera it is. Anyway, on topic, there's a guy near me selling unexpired 7 rolls of portra 400nc and a roll of ilford hp5 for $2 each. I would assume this is a great price, and I'm also going to assume I'd have to develop it myself. Time to actually learn developing.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2011 18:09
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Either way, Miskatonic should go for the FM2n, it's far more practical & valuable in the long run. I'm back with photos of the camera!    The Serial number is N 8067206, however there are no honeycomb blades.  She said that the person who owned it before her was a professional photographer. The reason why it was being repaired was because the shutter had malfunctioned for some reason. Everything appears to be in working order, only a few scratches.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 04:24
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Yes, I just found the ByThom.com article, and my SN is the N8xxxxx type, so aluminum 250. Apparently even Nikon's serial numbers can't tell you what camera it is.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 06:12
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Anyway, on topic, there's a guy near me selling unexpired 7 rolls of portra 400nc and a roll of ilford hp5 for $2 each. I would assume this is a great price, and I'm also going to assume I'd have to develop it myself. Time to actually learn developing. Portra 400 NC is a lovely film, very much worth getting and using for general photography. Naturally it's a good choice for portraits! Ilford HP5 is a pretty nice film too although there are so many good choices there. Miskatonic posted:The Serial number is N 8067206, however there are no honeycomb blades. Haha, well I think both types of blades are pretty lookin', compared to the usual cloth shutters anyway. It looks in good condition so have fun!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 13:10
|
|
|
l33tc4k30fd00m posted:Portra 400 NC is a lovely film, very much worth getting and using for general photography. Naturally it's a good choice for portraits! Ilford HP5 is a pretty nice film too although there are so many good choices there. Can you confirm its an FM2n?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 17:25
|
|
|
How do Ektar 100 and Velvia compare under overcast/in fog and in bright sun?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 19:42
|
|
|
for the latter, i think i posted some samples itt if you look at my post history or just here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2864270&userid=131672&perpage=40&pagenumber=3#post390015613
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
I need to be more careful about walking into thrift shops with lunch money in my pocket, after trying to convince myself to stop buying cameras... or I should start checking the Salvation Army down in the industrial area more often. Today's score: Pentax ZX-M body with a spotless SMC A 50mm f/2 Minolta Himatic AF2 Six dollars each. I'll probably end up using the ZX-M as a backup body to my K1000 and throw that 50 A lens onto my K10 instead of the M-series one I usually use. edit: Oh, I had an idea I wanted to run by you folks. I've got a bunch of 99 cent windup cameras too, and a few of them are surprisingly not terrible for walkaround stuff. Would anyone be interested in mailing those around to do a group roll or something? Take a couple shots, mail to the next person, repeat. Any interest? Dr. Cogwerks fucked around with this message at 20:15 on May 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
Miskatonic posted:Can you confirm its an FM2n? Oh sorry! Yes it is without a doubt, yours is exactly like mine (though mine is black). The last major change with the aluminium shutter blades (hence no honeycomb pattern). l33tc4k30fd00m fucked around with this message at 21:55 on May 2, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 21:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:22 |
|
|
Dr. Cogwerks posted:
Sounds like fun! Count me in!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2011 21:59
|
|
