|
GWBBQ posted:What's a good way to clean really dirty black and white negatives? We finally got a new scanner at work and I've been trying to finally scan the negatives ExecuDork shot and sent me last year (better late than never, right?) and I can buff them with kimwipes for a few minutes a frame and get most of it off, but some crud remains. Sorry!  My negs recently have been much cleaner, I'm not sure what I did wrong with that roll.If you're going to use dishsoap or something like that, dilute it in some water first, it's much easier to measure out small volumes (a mL or two) than tiny volumes (less than a mL) and dishsoap is pretty viscous, making small measures even harder.
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 06:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
I just ordered 2 35mm rolls of Ilford SFX 200, has anyone got advice for using it? I'll be sticking it in a Pentax P30N, will this be a problem? I don't think the SFX 200 is proper IR film anyway so I'm not too worried about any of the P30n's camera parts using IR (I don't think they do)
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
No, the P30 series uses a pressure takeup and a mechanical winder, it should be fine. And yeah SFX200 isn't a very deep infrared film anyway, it's just "extended red". To be safe you might want to load it in a darkroom and make sure your seals are up to par. Infrared does work its way around pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
Should I use any sort of filter with it? I've heard deep reds mentioned but there's so much people on the internet who've posted about testing the film and then not following up on it that I'm confused.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 22:18
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Should I use any sort of filter with it? I've heard deep reds mentioned but there's so much people on the internet who've posted about testing the film and then not following up on it that I'm confused. Basically from my experience with SFX200 in 120 format it's basically infrared plus your normal light spectrum. Meaning that even using a red filter will only yield a subtle effect. If you want those snow white leaves you're going to need an IR filter like the R72 and rate the film at around EL40. Also yes handling wise think of it as a super fast film. Like another poster said it fogs up quite easily so make sure you load it at least in a dimly lot room or better darkroom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 06:18
|
|
|
A good red 29 filter with SFX 200 will yield some really impressive results. You don't necessarily to go as a far as an IR filter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 06:41
|
|
|
Thanks, can't wait to try it out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 11:06
|
|
|
2 Questions: 1. Does anyone use film scanners here? If so, which ones? 2. What is the difference between the film (that actually comes in a roll which you put into your camera) and the negatives. How do you get the latter from the former?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 15:45
|
|
|
1. If by "film scanner" you mean those little boxes that feed in a strip, one frame at a time, I think the answer is no. A google search for "film scanner" brought me this, which is a box of foolishness. Don't get one. I use a flatbed scanner with a light in the lid designed for scanning film. I got mine for $20 when somebody was moving, but the Epson V500 is very highly recommended around here and I think sells for like $100. 2. Film and negatives. It's always film. It's "unexposed film" when you buy it and load it in your camera. It's "exposed film" after you use it but before it has been developed. Negatives are what you have after you develop the film - a synonym would be "developed film". Unless you use slide film, which is a positive film (rather than a negative film like B&W or colour print film); that's called "colour reversal film" sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:1. If by "film scanner" you mean those little boxes that feed in a strip, one frame at a time, I think the answer is no. 2. Ah, that makes sense. It seems then that, unless you want/are able to develop your own film, that there isn't much point in buying a film scanner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
Anti-Derivative posted:2. Ah, that makes sense. Not necessarily. Getting negatives back from a quick C41 place like CVS and scanning is quick and you'll make your money back after 5-10 rolls. Also, bulk developing with a lab and scanning the negatives you want rather than all of them, and wasting the money, is a smart way to go about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 16:07
|
|
|
scotty posted:Also, bulk developing with a lab and scanning the negatives you want rather than all of them, and wasting the money, is a smart way to go about it. This is probably what I'm going to do when I get back from Scotland and Ireland. Just got this for the trip too  
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 16:10
|
|
|
Anti-Derivative posted:1. Does anyone use film scanners here? If so, which ones? I use a Veho VFS-008, the resolution is pretty bad and you need to colour correct but I shoot a lot of film and don't have time or money to get it all scanned so I just use this, it does the job and if I ever need anything properly scanned, I'll just bring it into a shop. DJExile posted:This is probably what I'm going to do when I get back from Scotland and Ireland. Ireland  We've loads of nice filming locations, please post whatever you take here!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 17:54
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Ireland I'll mostly be around Dublin and the surrounding area. Anything specific I should seek out? E: And I'll have 4 days in Belfast, Northern Ireland so if you have suggestions there too I'd love to hear them 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 17:59
|
|
|
DJExile posted:I'll mostly be around Dublin and the surrounding area. Anything specific I should seek out? Oh cool, I live in Dublin, there's loads of nice locations. Try to get down to the Dublin Docklands at night time, there's some really nice lights, I was on a film shoot down there once and it's got some great places to shoot. Glasnevin Cemetary is cool, Botanic Gardens if you're into Nature photography. Try Ballymun or Finglas if you like shooting Urban stuff. Temple Bar is a dream on the weekend for street photography, weekend goths everywhere and all other sorts of people. Trinity College is cool too, it's full of old buildings if you're into architecture. All in all, it's really easy to get around by bus or taxi. Good luck, looking forward to seeing what you get!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 18:03
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Ireland I'll be in Dublin in a month or so. The missus is going to Cork for an academic conference and I'll be puttering around the country while she's busy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
pseudonordic posted:I'll be in Dublin in a month or so. The missus is going to Cork for an academic conference and I'll be puttering around the country while she's busy. If you're going on any planned shoot locations, hit me up if you want someone to tag along, I'm always looking to go on shoots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:If you're going on any planned shoot locations, hit me up if you want someone to tag along, I'm always looking to go on shoots. You don't have PM's or so the forum tells me. Hit me up on AIM and we can chatter away 
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
I'm actually off now to go on a shoot with a few friends so I'll AIM you when I get back tomorrow!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
Anti-Derivative posted:1. Does anyone use film scanners here? If so, which ones? I use the PlusTek OpticFilm 8100 with great satisfaction. For 35mm and coupled with VueScan I've found I can produce scans that are WAY better than with an Epson, either V500 or V700 for a price comparable to the V500, but the film scanner device can't scan medium format film or (of course) prints.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 23:41
|
|
|
 Tracked down my light leak. Loaded the roll, pumped the film a few frames in the dark, then before I took the next (and only) actual photo I took the camera and held it right next to a bright lamp for a minute or so. Took the photo and immediately rewound everything back into the can. This way I had one photo which I could match up with the film gate on my camera, and logically the only place that I should see a light leak on the roll would be exactly where it's coming in. Developed the sacrifice roll, marked the leak on the film, fed the roll back into my camera and wound it until the only photo on the film matched up with my gate. And BINGO  Looks like I'm getting a light seal kit. All things considered, this is probably the best place to get a light leak. Easy to fix.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
DJExile posted:This is probably what I'm going to do when I get back from Scotland and Ireland. Nice. I've got one and although my main 35mm gear is Olympus, I use mine primarily with my NEX 5N and it's a fantastic lens. Sharp, fast-focusing (short throw and smooth but quick action) and sturdy. Going to Olympus OM lenses took a bit of getting used to with the aperture dial on the front. You've got to keep checking your aperture to make sure you haven't bumped it to something other than what you want. I also highly recommend the Olympus 50mm f/1.8 as well. Excellent lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 02:21
|
|
|
Anti-Derivative posted:2. Ah, that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 03:05
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:
To be honest I did not understand exactly where the leak is.. The circle points to an internal mechanism? Pardon my stubborness. Also, do you have a link for the generic seal kits? If I can avoid cutting the material myself, I'd be happier. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 10:01
|
|
|
My Ilford SFX 200 arrived today 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 22:10
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:All things considered, this is probably the best place to get a light leak. Easy to fix. Just think- the money spent on that sacrifice roll and chemicals could have gone towards a G1! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
maxmars posted:To be honest I did not understand exactly where the leak is.. The circle points to an internal mechanism? Pardon my stubborness. The circle just points to the arrow I drew onto the film. I developed the film and drew the arrow where I saw the light leak so I could more easily spot exactly where it was when I wound it onto the black takeup reel. Since the back is solid, logically the only thing that could be leaking at that point is the seal between the body and back right where the arrow is. I suppose you could also have a light leak from inside the top shell (where the wind knob, etc, are) but that is far less likely. As far as places for generic kits, I'm planning to order the $12 "bulk kit" one from here: http://camerasealkit.com I haven't heard anything bad about them, and honestly it's pretty hard to gently caress up a piece of foam and some felt. As long as it's 2mm and has a self adhesive back, I'm pretty happy. McMadCow posted:Just think- the money spent on that sacrifice roll and chemicals could have gone towards a G1! That's still the dream 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Since the back is solid, logically the only thing that could be leaking at that point is the seal between the body and back right where the arrow is. I suppose you could also have a light leak from inside the top shell (where the wind knob, etc, are) but that is far less likely. You know what's funny? Even though your camera doesn't have a counter reset mechanism, that's exactly where my FEDs have leaks. Thanks for the link by the way.. I'm eager to see some pics from you Zorki without leaks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 00:44
|
|
|
maxmars posted:I use the PlusTek OpticFilm 8100 with great satisfaction. Sup plustek buddy. It's like one of those novelty film scanners, except good! I get really good results with vuescan as well, I still hate scanning though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 14:18
|
|
|
Laser Cow posted:Sup plustek buddy. It's like one of those novelty film scanners, except good! I get really good results with vuescan as well, I still hate scanning though. Yeah me too, but when I get home with some negatives, feels like Christmas. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 16:38
|
|
|
A few months back I asked about my Vivitar PN2011 (f/8, 1/125 speed) being overexposed with 200 film (on the right) but fine with 400 film (on the left). The 200 film looks pretty blurry, too. Could this be a scan issue, or could it be because I messed with the lens when I modified the camera for multiple exposures? I'm using 400 exclusively to be safe, but it is pretty expensive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 04:45
|
|
|
I've fired two rolls Kodak Ultramax 400 of film through my PEN-EES, should I take it to my local Walgreens or do you guys have a preferred lab that you prefer for developing C41?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
Miso Beno posted:I've fired two rolls Kodak Ultramax 400 of film through my PEN-EES, should I take it to my local Walgreens or do you guys have a preferred lab that you prefer for developing C41? Walgreens will probably be fine, unless they have a dirty machine or something. However, I did a little poking around and found a local lab that I like far better. For one, if you ask, they'll just develop and scan, if you don't want any prints. They also do B/W, so that's neat. And they'll scan all the rolls onto a single CD, rather than Walgreens' 1 roll, 1 CD method. Also, they're a bit cheaper (probably because of the lack of prints, save for the contact sheets they gave me). So maybe look around and see if you have a neat local lab?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
Zenostein posted:Walgreens will probably be fine, unless they have a dirty machine or something. However, I did a little poking around and found a local lab that I like far better. For one, if you ask, they'll just develop and scan, if you don't want any prints. They also do B/W, so that's neat. And they'll scan all the rolls onto a single CD, rather than Walgreens' 1 roll, 1 CD method. Also, they're a bit cheaper (probably because of the lack of prints, save for the contact sheets they gave me). There is a little lab nearby but they've been horribly unreliable with my digital prints, so I don't think I can really trust them with my film files. How's Costco for 35mm development? wheres my beer fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Aug 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 17:29
|
|
|
For the most part, all 1hr/microlab development is going to be the same. C-41 processing is nowhere near as intricate as black and white processing can be, so it's, well, harder to screw up. That isn't to say that Joe Minimumwage isn't going to royally mess up your negatives, but I've seen great results from my local CVS, and I've seen terrible results from a reputable "professional" lab.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
Walgreens Zenostein posted:Walgreens will probably be fine, unless they have a dirty machine or something. However, I did a little poking around and found a local lab that I like far better. For one, if you ask, they'll just develop and scan, if you don't want any prints. They also do B/W, so that's neat. And they'll scan all the rolls onto a single CD, rather than Walgreens' 1 roll, 1 CD method. Also, they're a bit cheaper (probably because of the lack of prints, save for the contact sheets they gave me). Walgreens will just develop and scan with no prints or cd (at least my local one does), it was ~$5 a roll this way last time I did it. Miso Beno posted:There is a little lab nearby but they've been horribly unreliable with my digital prints, so I don't think I can really trust them with my film files. I've heard good things about costco, price wise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 17:44
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Walgreens I currently lack a scanner so I think I'll pay for the CD for now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
 Lens by ebay Body by
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 23:40
|
|
|
Miso Beno posted:I've fired two rolls Kodak Ultramax 400 of film through my PEN-EES, should I take it to my local Walgreens or do you guys have a preferred lab that you prefer for developing C41? How often do you make it up to Seattle? Capital Hill 60 minute http://www.capitolhillphotoseattle.com/ is the place I use. It sucks very much that they are not open on weekends.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2012 08:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
Here's two dumb newbie questions: Yesterday, I picked up a minty Olympus 35RC for no money at all which I love. How exactly do I use the meter on this thing? I have access to 1,5v batteries as well as those expensive replacement 1,35v ones. E: I use regular 1,5v batteries in my Canon EF which I suspect would set off the meter a bit too much (I believe it was made for those old mercury batteries). Should I compensate by choosing a longer or shorter shutter time? I also found a Sekonic Deluxe Leader-2. As I've never used an old light meter before, how do I get a reading after having set the ASA and flipped the small cap open? 
widunder fucked around with this message at 10:07 on Aug 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2012 09:50
|
|
