|
Reichstag posted:Ohhh, those are c-41. In that case that's not what it is. Possibly a very minor light leak then, only visible at slow shutter speeds, does it show up on any other frames? I'm starting to think the Walgreens lab is at fault. I thought it was very odd how the ukelele player's shoe was chopped off because I had paid careful attention to framing. I just checked the negatives and it's all there in the negative! What's the deal? It happened with this picture too. 
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2012 06:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
Crossposting from medium/large format thread More scanning:  Afro, Astor Place, NY by JaundiceDave, on Flickr  Broadway and Astor Place, NY by JaundiceDave, on Flickr  Woman and Dog, Promenade des Anglais, Nice by JaundiceDave, on Flickr  Two Women, Promenade des Anglais, Nice by JaundiceDave, on Flickr  Seaside Bench, Promenade des Anglais, Nice by JaundiceDave, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 03:17
|
|
|
Bought a "camrea + 3 lens" from ebay for £20, photo was blurry but it looked olympusy to me so I took a punt. Turned out to be a OM30 in good nick but with no auto adaptor(not sure what it's called), a tamron zoom that's taken a knock and three other legacy lenses. Sigma 35-70mm f/2.8-4, prakticar carl zeiss jena 35mm f/2.4 and a kestrel MC auto 35-70mm f/2.8-3.8. Not tested but all three seem fine with clean glass and no mould. I know the Sigma and the prakticar might be worth a bob or two but can't find anything out about the Kestral even though it looks like the nicest of the lenses, anyone ever heard of them at all?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 15:01
|
|
|
Kodak is killing their digital camera business... but looks like they are keeping everything else for now. http://www.kodak.com/ek/US/en/Kodak...ews+Releases%29 This was relevant to you guys. Kodak posted:Kodak’s continuing consumer products and services will include:
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 15:53
|
|
|
Hahaha, the "Kodak is dying because they're stuck in the 1900s and didn't embrace digital!" news guys are going to be really confused.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:Hahaha, the "Kodak is dying because they're stuck in the 1900s and didn't embrace digital!" news guys are going to be really confused. To be fair, they were right. Kodak got stuck making the low-margin part of the camera and sold it to other companies so they could make the high-margin part. Of course, they did get burned with the whole DCS thing, and their P+S cameras were nothing to write home about. My girlfriend has a Kodak Zi8, it's a really sweet little Flip Video type thing that can record 1080p or 720p @ 60fps. It seems great, it's specced way better than the competitors (SD card, mic in jack). They also made a waterproof version called the ZX3 Playsport I think. It'll be a shame to see those go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 18:54
|
|
|
I've made a conscious decision to stop using Kodak products anyway. Kodak is not long for this world and i figure now is the best time to check out alternatives. I'd rather give my money to Ilford who are likely to stick around and actually bring out new products. edit: In the meanwhile i still have a bottle of HC-110. I read that HC-110 kan be used as a print developer as Dilution-A with the addition of a teaspoon of SodiumBicarbonate. Has anyone tried this? NihilismNow fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 18:58
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:I'd rather give my money to Ilford who are likely to stick around and actually bring out new products. Man, those fuckers over at Kodak resting on their laurels. When are they going to get off their rear end and make us some new film stocks? I mean, it's been six months since they released Portra 160, a year since Portra 400, 2 years since Ektar, and 3 years since Vision 500T. I'm going to give my money to Ilford instead, who in the last 5 years alone has released: Or Fuji, after all they've released: Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
Kodak's film division has always "gotten it". As hosed up as the rest of the company is...
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Man, those fuckers over at Kodak resting on their laurels. When are they going to get off their rear end and make us some new film stocks? I mean, it's been six months since they released Portra 160, a year since Portra 400, 2 years since Ektar, and 3 years since Vision 500T. Porta 160 and 400 were 1 new emulsion to replace 2 old emulsions though. Effectively they have shrunk your choice. What is Vision 500t i've never heard of that film or seen it for sale anywhere? Releases don't tell the whole story either. With PX125 discontinued does Kodak even still make a non T-grain normal speed B&W film? NihilismNow fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:What is Vision 500t i've never heard of that film or seen it for sale anywhere? It's movie film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:16
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:Porta 160 and 400 were 1 new emulsion to replace 2 old emulsions though. Effectively they have shrunk your choice. What the hell is "normal speed"? No, Kodak doesn't make a 100/125 speed cube-grain B+W film anymore. Ilford makes FP4+, use that instead if you're so against T-grain. Portra 160 and 400 were both new film stocks that are better than the things they replaced for most customers. They are slightly thinner to make scanning easier (since almost everyone shooting film is using hybrid-digital workflow now), in the middle of VC/NC contrast-wise for easier digital post-processing, they're lower grain, and they have loving insane latitude, as in they can easily do 4 stops either direction and look pretty normal. You can't do that with VC/NC. Yes, there are fewer stocks, but if that means Kodak keeps making film I'm all for it. Fuji just did the same thing, except they just axed a bunch of stocks and didn't replace them with anything at all. Say goodbye to FP-3000b45, FP-100b45, Astia, 160NC, Sensia, Neopan SS, T64 and all QuickLoads. The number of films they've released to replace that? Zero (0). Kodak is pretty much the only company who's still investing in film research, and they can do it because they still have the movie industry. "What's Vision500T" indeed - it's what pays the bills, son. A 100ft bulk roll probably lasts most amateur photographers a year or more, a cinematographer will blow through that in 60 seconds. All the improvements in Portra 160/400 were pioneered in Vision 500T, and then Kodak let us have them too. Go easy on them. They aren't perfect but they're not the devil. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:34
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:It's movie film. Is it possible to use cine 35mm in a still camera? I thought the perforations were different? If not that opens up a whole new category of products to explore  .
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:34
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:Is it possible to use cine 35mm in a still camera? I thought the perforations were different? If not that opens up a whole new category of products to explore You can do it, you just need a special chemistry to do it (also there's a backing that must be washed off after). Most labs won't mess around with tiny short ends like 36exp rolls, but there's one that does cater to photographers. Someone here was sending some to them, I think. It's also recommended in the datasheet to store processed negatives at an extremely cold temperature, basically in a deep freezer. That may only be important for master film reels of billion dollar movies, though, or your image may fade away to nothing. Did we ever figure out how stable modern ECN-2 emulsions are at room temperature?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:40
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:What the hell is "normal speed"? No, Kodak doesn't make a 100/125 speed cube-grain B+W film anymore. Ilford makes FP4+, use that instead if you're so against T-grain. I still see Plus X in 135, or is this just old stock?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:50
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:I still see Plus X in 135, or is this just old stock? I know it's discontinued in 120, I thought I read they were just releasing old stock in 135 until they burn through the last master roll in deep storage. Maybe I'm mixing that up with Tech Pan, which apparently hadn't been produced for like, decades when it was discontinued.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:52
|
|
|
The local pro-lab has Technidol and Microdol-X on the shelves. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:56
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:The local pro-lab has Technidol and Microdol-X on the shelves. Let me know if they have the Tech Pan to go with it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Kodak is pretty much the only company who's still investing in film research, and they can do it because they still have the movie industry. "What's Vision500T" indeed - it's what pays the bills, son. A 100ft bulk roll probably lasts most amateur photographers a year or more, a cinematographer will blow through that in 60 seconds. All the improvements in Portra 160/400 were pioneered in Vision 500T, and then Kodak let us have them too. Go easy on them. They aren't perfect but they're not the devil. Point taken. But what happens now the movie industry is shifting away from film much faster than anticipated? I read there are now new 35mm cine cameras being built anymore. Can they survive with production processes set up as you point out for as much larger volume than the remaining analogue photographers can consume? Still i guess we should enjoy it while we can.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:Point taken. Kodak's film division has already taken its beatings. They've downsized capacity twice now, and they've got an appropriate level of capacity for the modern demand. And you might be surprised, movies are actually coming back to film. The dynamic range is better (Vision 500T is insane), and it's a lot easier to just do a higher res scan than to resample DVD-quality digital up to HD levels. It's not ever going to return to the level it once was, given, but I think we're nearing the bottom. And yes, enjoy it while you can. It may be gradual, but it's undeniably going to be downhill from here in terms of film pricing and availability. If you really like a particular stock, you could do worse than to chuck a hundred rolls of it in the freezer. e: Also, Kodak is positively forthright about their business and their product availability compared to Fuji. Every six months there's a rumor from some stupid Fuji subsidiary or distributor that sends everyone into a tizzy and takes everything on the list out of stock for weeks. You basically know it's discontinued when it doesn't come back. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:03
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The dynamic range is better (Vision 500T is insane), and it's a lot easier to just do a higher res scan than to resample DVD-quality digital up to HD levels. It's not ever going to return to the level it once was, given, but I think we're nearing the bottom. Doesn't the emergence of 4k video kind of negate the scanning advantage? Also, I wonder what will happen to the film resurgence in photography once all the good cheap gear is snapped up. I mean shooting was a pretty sweet hobby back when M1 Garands were $100 or whatever but those days have come and gone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
HPL posted:Doesn't the emergence of 4k video kind of negate the scanning advantage? Also, I wonder what will happen to the film resurgence in photography once all the good cheap gear is snapped up. I mean shooting was a pretty sweet hobby back when M1 Garands were $100 or whatever but those days have come and gone. Personally I think someday someone's going to come out with some kind of cheap printable sensor that will revive that gear. Think of printable OLEDs, but a sensor instead of an emitter. 10 years ago, an LED was a discrete component, now you can get a big sheet of them on some Mylar. Hopefully it'll exist by the point I'm retiring  And the gear is nowhere near gone. Medium/large format gear is dirt cheap, and only the very best gear has even started to rise. You can pick up a basic 645 setup for $220, you can get a basic RB67 setup for $250. 35mm has always been a bit funny because people use the lenses on digital, so there's demand in addition to the film users. It's still by no means terrible except for, again, the very best gear. The sharpest, the fastest, the longest, the widest, that stuff has always cost you dearly. No, 105/1.8s aren't $50, and they will never be, but name me a focal length between 28 and 105mm equivalent and I can find you something that'll be razor sharp, max $150 and possibly under $100. (I don't know that much about cinematography, honestly, this is just what I've gleaned from the internets) Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:24
|
|
|
4k isn't any more of a compelling reason to switch from film stock than 2k RAW cameras were. The same advantages and disadvantages of each format still exist, and modern film hits 4k resolution. That being said, post production costs on high resolution digital will continue to fall, and as time marches on, I don't doubt that less and less feature films will be shot on film. But in 2012, it almost comes down to personal preference.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:42
|
|
|
Just picked up the two rolls of E-6 I dropped off about 10 days ago, they told me they're probably discontinuing their slide film processing and in the future will be subcontracting. I guess that means longer waits and probably higher prices.  I requested "develop only", which they did - but it was still $10.75/roll of 135x36. It appears nobody will ship E-6 develop-at-home kits to Canada, even though the "hazardous goods" are a) not particularly hazardous and b) of hazard categories routinely shipped across the US/Canada border all the drat time. A Flickr discussion I found talks about getting Tetanal E-6 kits from a specialist photo store in Germany, Foto Impex, but their website is being rude to my computer tonight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:The local pro-lab has Technidol and Microdol-X on the shelves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 03:22
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:A Flickr discussion I found talks about getting Tetanal E-6 kits from a specialist photo store in Germany, Foto Impex, but their website is being rude to my computer tonight. Foto Impex is quite good, as long as you can handle the ordering process being in German. Of German shops, I prefer Foto Impex to Macodirekt, they seem to have a better selection, better organised andI have preferred their shipping options inside Europe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 07:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Man, those fuckers over at Kodak resting on their laurels. When are they going to get off their rear end and make us some new film stocks? I mean, it's been six months since they released Portra 160, a year since Portra 400, 2 years since Ektar, and 3 years since Vision 500T. While Kodak may have released 500T in 2007 they released a new VISION3 50D stock (5203/7203) last year and in 2010 they released a new 200T stock (5213/7213). They're pretty productive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 15:34
|
|
|
Welp, snagged a Graflex Optar 135mm f/4.5 lens + Graphex shutter + lens board on eBay for $40 BuyItNow. Looks to be in great condition. Now I just need to find a cheap Crown Graphic or Speed Graphic or Crown View body to use it with 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
e: Never mind.
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Feb 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2012 06:20
|
|
|
I currently shoot a Canon EOS 650. The local photo shop has a Canon EOS 3 body for $200. Is this a good worthwhile upgrade?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
the posted:I currently shoot a Canon EOS 650. The local photo shop has a Canon EOS 3 body for $200. Is this a good worthwhile upgrade? The EOS 3 will get you 45 AF points w/ eye control, spot metering, and 1/8000s shutter speed to name a few upgrades. I believe it can also still be repaired by Canon should you need it. I have one and I enjoy shooting with it when I remember I have film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
I finally scored a Nikon film body - a Nikkormat FT2 with a Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8 for $100. The focus is really stiff on the lens but it's loosening up a bit as I work it. The body is just gorgeous, and it has any feature I could reasonably want. The viewfinder seems great, not quite Pentax MX level but close.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2012 03:56
|
|
|
Some recent scores.... Needs a good cleaning.  and just when i sold all my FD gear, I come across this badass: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2012 04:16
|
|
|
I seem to be getting bleed-though around the edges of my images. The sample was next to an extremely overexposed/flared section of the negative, which is fine, but I don't understand how it's ending up outside the film gate. Is the film itself spreading the light a bit?
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Feb 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 17:59
|
|
|
Probably diffraction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 20:29
|
|
|
Bioshuffle posted:I had a chance to get some pictures from an anime convention. Can someone explain me what's happening with the 2nd picture? You're winding the film the wrong way when you've finished your roll. This happened to me a few times until someone pointed it out and I noticed that on my camera, the arm for winding the film has an arrow indicating the proper direction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 23:02
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:You're winding the film the wrong way when you've finished your roll. This happened to me a few times until someone pointed it out and I noticed that on my camera, the arm for winding the film has an arrow indicating the proper direction.  I'll be damned! I'll have to track down the manual and make sure I'm winding it the proper way! I had a few frames left on my Mamiya 35mm, and I thought the Valentine's Day display at my local Randalls would make for a good picture op.     I put the camera away and I was finishing up some shopping when the manager and security officer came to escort me off the premises, threatening to call the cops for if I ever returned. The picture of the car didn't turn out as planned but I'm pretty happy with the flowers and I think they were worth getting banned from a lovely grocery store chain for. Edit: On a sidenote, I am absolutely in love with my Yashica 230AF and Macro lens combo. 
Bioshuffle fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Feb 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
Hey guys, I'm going on my first shoot in the snow next week to Whistler. I'm planning on shooting color, but as someone who hasn't been to real snow in a decade, I have no idea what to expect. About how fast should my film be to get nice handheld shots?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
MrMeowMeow posted:You're winding the film the wrong way when you've finished your roll. This happened to me a few times until someone pointed it out and I noticed that on my camera, the arm for winding the film has an arrow indicating the proper direction. Actually somewhat related to that... I've noticed that the uptake spool on my Rollei 35 turns the "wrong way", i.e. leaving the emulsion side facing outwards. It also means that the film gets forced to curl the other way which makes rewinding it rather painful. Any suggestions for overcoming that? Should I rewind the film the wrong way instead?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
I'm terrified of shooting in manual on my SLR because I can't preview the image to make sure it will be exposed properly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 02:13
|
|