|
Rollei 35 prowhine: why the gently caress didnt the designers forsee that 24mm filters would be impossible to find in the year 2011 
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:07 |
|
|
http://www.adorama.com/FLU2437.html Thre you go. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 05:15
|
|
|
My Zorki 6 and Industar 22 that I ordered from Fedka.com came in today. drat this a cool camera. I should not have waited this long to pick one up, with the lens collapsed it fits nicely in my sweatshirt pocket.
8th-snype fucked around with this message at 06:08 on Aug 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 05:43
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:My Zorki 6 and Industar 22 that I ordered from Fedka.com came in today. drat this a cool camera. I should not have waited this long to pick one up. With the lens collapsed it fits nicely in my sweatshirt pocket.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
Just picked up a bottle of Adonal and a box of Diafine. Now to figure out what to do with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 06:09
|
|
|
HPL posted:How is the film advance on your Zorki 6? I've got two of them and it's really grindy and gritty and hard to turn on both, which is silly considering how well the older knob-style advances worked. Gets a little tight halfway through the roll. I paid a little more than ebay prices but the camera is in really great shape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 06:09
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Reasons to stay away from expired film: Expired Ektachrome G in 120 is just plain awesome, especially the late 90's vintage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 12:28
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Gets a little tight halfway through the roll. I paid a little more than ebay prices but the camera is in really great shape. Mine are so crazy that I ripped the film out of the can because the force required to advance the film was roughly equivalent to film-ripping force so I couldn't tell.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 15:15
|
|
|
recipe for magic: fuji neopan acros 100, shot at EI 80 (preferably medium format) rodinal 1+50 develop ten minutes, gentle inversions for ten seconds each minute
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 23:53
|
|
|
I prefer to use Rodinal 1:100 at 18 mins, agitation for first minute, 3-4 seconds at every 3-minute interval. But yeah, Rodinal and Acros are a great combo. Acros is fine-grain enough that Rodinal doesn't hurt anything, and dilute Rodinal boosts sharpness. Plus, since Rodinal is one-shot, I never have to worry about the freshness of my developer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2011 23:57
|
|
|
I thought this might be appropriate here, my friends and I just did a photoshoot for another friend and we decided to go completely analog and do it all in film. Weapons of Choice by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 00:07
|
|
|
HPL posted:Mine are so crazy that I ripped the film out of the can because the force required to advance the film was roughly equivalent to film-ripping force so I couldn't tell. http://www.mattdentonphoto.com/cameras/zorki_6.html This dude describes lubing the gearing and loosening some screws to fix that problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
A package arrived today, containing many rolls of expired B&W film for me to play with. Some of it looks really old - a couple of the rolls of Kodak Tri-X 400 have 20 exposures, and the labels are green text on slightly faded Kodak yellow. Film 110826 by Execudork, on Flickr I know what I'll be doing this weekend...
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 04:23
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:http://www.mattdentonphoto.com/cameras/zorki_6.html I tried that already.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
Picked up a working Weston Master II and working Weston Master III plus two other meters that may just need batteries all for $20 on Craigslist 
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2011 15:54
|
|
|
Hey, this seems like a good place to ask. I read somewhere that exposed film can be used as a (crude?) visible light filter, only--or almost only--allowing IR through. I've got some old negatives from back in the day, and there's usually a length at the end of the roll that is exposed but doesn't have a picture on it. My question: of the scrap I have, some of it is more clear and some of it is mostly opaque. I assume I would want to use the mostly-opaque part as my filter? Or is the fact that it's actually been developed make it useless to me? That is to say, I have this:  I assume I want to use the darker stuff on the left to filter out visible light and only let IR through? Of course assume that whatever sensor I'm going to be looking through the filter with can, in fact, see IR. I just want it to only see IR and I read this is a cheap option.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
Bad Munki posted:Hey, this seems like a good place to ask. It's exposed slide film that people use for this. Negative film has a colored mask.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 04:19
|
|
|
Oh, see, I don't know poo poo about which is which. The other option is, apparently, the platter from an old floppy disk. Problem with that being, of course, where the hell will I find a floppy disk?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 04:25
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:It's exposed slide film that people use for this. Negative film has a colored mask. Wouldn't you want unexposed slide film? Exposed slide film is clear. Though maybe you meant to say developed, which I assume you would have to also do?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 05:12
|
|
|
Today I was at the bookstore looking through photography magazines and wound up coming home with this: Today's Impulse Purchase by ethics_gradient, on Flickr I also saw something about the Fuji Darkless kit, which I'd never heard of (it's been out for a while, but is Japan-only, I'm pretty sure):  Basically you develop your roll of film while it's still in the canister. Results are inconstant given that the film will often stick to itself if it's not on a proper reel, but I thought it was kind of a neat idea, anyways.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 08:23
|
|
|
 simulacrum by atomicthumbs, on Flickr spotmatic, super takumar 55mm 1.8, ultramax 400
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 11:20
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:
holy poo poo this is awesome
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 20:30
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:holy poo poo this is awesome http://www.japanexposures.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=23&products_id=187 Going for around $26.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2011 12:44
|
|
|
For those of you cool enough to shoot with  rangefinder cameras, I just came across an awesome find. These were at the Daiso Japan $1.50 store. They're some sort of cell phone (older flip phone) case and they cost me $1.50 each! They have a reinforced round mouth with an internal closure that works with the draw string. The inside is padded, there's a carabiner loop and a belt loop! I bought 1 for each of my lenses, they're way nicer than the unpadded leather pouch they came with. The best part is that these are the perfect small size. An SLR lens would be too big for them, so I don't need to waste space in my bag for such a thing. B&H sells similar pouches for $30+.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 00:45
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:For those of you cool enough to shoot with I'll have to check 100 yen stores here for those, would be great for my NEX kit. And actually, most Japanese people are still rockin' the (JDM) clamshells, although smartphones are gaining traction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 03:14
|
|
|
Looks like a chalk bag.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 03:20
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:Wouldn't you want unexposed slide film? Exposed slide film is clear. Though maybe you meant to say developed, which I assume you would have to also do? You are right I meant to type "unexposed slide film", whoops.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
Elite Taco posted:Looks like a chalk bag. It's pretty much exactly like a chalk bag, only 50% sized. I'll get a shot of a lens in one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 04:58
|
|
|
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but I've never really though about it before... If I get my Kodachrome cross-processed C-41, is there a way to fix the colors in post? I.e., is there a way to color-correct in Lightroom/Photoshop to get the colors looking natural again, or is the image too far gone after being cross-processed?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 14:49
|
|
|
The only way to get colours on Kodachrome is with the Kodachrome process. C-41, E-6 and all other current colour processes depend on the film emulsion having dyes itself, but in the Kodachrome process, the dyes are present in the developing chemicals. I believe C-41 or E-6 processing would just give you a blank film. You can only cross-process Kodachrome as B/W.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 15:17
|
|
|
nielsm posted:The only way to get colours on Kodachrome is with the Kodachrome process. C-41, E-6 and all other current colour processes depend on the film emulsion having dyes itself, but in the Kodachrome process, the dyes are present in the developing chemicals. I believe C-41 or E-6 processing would just give you a blank film. Whoops I misspoke, and meant Fujichrome which is an E-6 slide film. Sorry, was just waking up when I wrote that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 15:21
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:Whoops I misspoke, and meant Fujichrome which is an E-6 slide film. Sorry, was just waking up when I wrote that. I think a lot of the crazy colors people get from cross processing are actually just a result of bad scanning.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 15:26
|
|
|
I found a local camera shop I didn't know about that carries a variety of developing chemicals  I have 35mm reels but not 120 reels. I remember the last time there was a reel discussion people seemed to be split pretty evenly between plastic & metal. I personally think Hewes stainless are the way to go for 35mm, but there was at least one person saying that plastic was better for 120 specifically. Those of you that do your own 120 - metal or plastic, and more importantly, why?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
Getting 120 film started on a plastic 120 spool can be an exercise in frustration, but I find that once the film is in the auto-ratchet mechanism works better than with 35mm. Go figure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
Plastic reels are super super easy with 120. The only time I've ever had a problem loading was when I had the rollers slightly wet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
Stand developed 35mm HP5+ in 1+100 Rodinal today, for 90 minutes, and it looks great! I'll post photos once I get home to my scanner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2011 22:13
|
|
|
I don't have more problems loading 120 onto my plastic reels than with 35mm. I'm basically clumsy, so there's a certain baseline of difficulty for me, but I haven't noticed a difference between the film formats. I've never used a stainless reel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2011 00:58
|
|
|
 AP compact developing tank reel. Fully compatible with the normal AP developing tank, together with every other developing tank in the world (jobo, paterson (what I use them with) etc). Just to be confusing, AP have a classic line that are identical to the paterson line, and have all the same loading problems as paterson reels. Heaps of other brands you've never heard of before also sell developing tanks; they're re-badged AP ones. So "generic brand" compact developing tank will almost certainly be these reels if you're having trouble finding them. Why? look at that guide flange! Just look at the sucker. they close together on 35mm film they're so big. Soooo freaking easy. It used to take me 5+min to load the paterson plastic reels, these are first time every time. And don't be fooled by the picture, the end of the film slides past the loading flange entirely when loaded in the tank so there are no issues with development.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2011 13:20
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Without a doubt my favourite reel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2011 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:07 |
|
|
Yup, I got a couple of the classic model (almost no flange) with a developing tank I bought at a garage sale. I ended up throwing them away because they only led to frustration and kinked film. Compact reels all the way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2011 17:17
|
|