|
CarrotFlowers posted:Yeah I was hoping it was the scanning, but I just scanned a roll before that so I looked at three negatives and it's definitely on the negatives. Weird that it's only on three negs and so straight.
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 07:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
Good news, got my camera cleaned and the second roll turned out much better. Shot on cheap Walmart Fujifilm 200    
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 08:46
|
|
|
Is Nikon LS2000 worth "used price is nearing 2x that of a new V700" for a film scanner?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 12:44
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Weird that it's only on three negs and so straight. That was a phone typo, oops. It's on all the negatives on that roll. thanks Santa is strapped, I'll try that 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 16:09
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Is Nikon LS2000 worth "used price is nearing 2x that of a new V700" for a film scanner? Maybe, if you're only ever planning on shooting 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 17:29
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Good news, got my camera cleaned and the second roll turned out much better. Shot on cheap Walmart Fujifilm 200 Nice pics!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
TBH the shittiest thing about plastic tanks is that they're smooth textured and just about impossible to unscrew the top half off of if your hands are wet. Otherwise they're pretty awesome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 03:00
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:TBH the shittiest thing about plastic tanks is that they're smooth textured and just about impossible to unscrew the top half off of if your hands are wet. Maybe if you have tiny little baby hands.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 03:31
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Good news, got my camera cleaned and the second roll turned out much better. Shot on cheap Walmart Fujifilm 200 Terrific pics, also thanks to the model.. She's sweet and looks relaxed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 09:53
|
|
|
I finally got myself a scanner. Campsite view by Herounicorn, on Flickr  The waterfall was dry by Herounicorn, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2012 12:01
|
|
|
New 4x5 stuff, goddamn why did I buy a new camera during the rainy season? (because 4x5 owns that's why) 20121119-01-web by 8th-samurai, on Flickr  20121119-02-web by 8th-samurai, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2012 12:26
|
|
|
Im That One Guy posted:
This one owns, would deserve to be freed from scratches. 8th-samurai posted:
Yes these own too. What church is that by the way? Reminds me of another church in Modena.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2012 14:08
|
|
|
maxmars posted:This one owns, would deserve to be freed from scratches. It's some church I drive past on my way home from work in north Seattle. No idea what denomination.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
I seriously need to buy an air purifier or something. I left my film to dry in the shower after running it for a few minutes to get the dust down. Between the time I moved them (dry) from the shower to the scanner they were covered in dust. And I mean I dust this place every week so it's not like I'm living in my own filth here. Dust just appears :[
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2012 20:42
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I seriously need to buy an air purifier or something. I left my film to dry in the shower after running it for a few minutes to get the dust down. Between the time I moved them (dry) from the shower to the scanner they were covered in dust. And I mean I dust this place every week so it's not like I'm living in my own filth here. Dust just appears :[ Do you dust with a cloth or with a feather duster? If the latter, it'll only push the dust around, not get rid of it. Also, dust the day you plan to develop. Maybe change your furnace air filter if you can? Also try spraying some Febreeze down the furnace vent, it'll clump the dust up instead of letting it float around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
I dust with one of those static dust-rags or whatever Swiffer is selling this year. I'm getting dangerously close to just doing all my developing and scanning on campus in the chemical clean-room.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 00:22
|
|
|
At first I thought I wanted a nicer rangefinder since my original canonet is a bit of a beater and I had convinced myself that was why my pictures stink. Turns out it's got to do with the fact that while film has good exposure latitude, it's a lot happier being exposed correctly, and I just have to take that (albeit recalibrated) selenium meter with a grain of salt. I might just put the money I was saving up for a Bessa towards a standalone meter. Any suggestions for a nice light meter to throw in the bag with a rangefinder? LUNCH COMBO Also, I'm finally starting to catch the film bug. It's crazy satisfying when you're starting to get a handle on how to handle exposing film and reading a scene's exposure. Finally the keeper rate is going up. Trambopaline fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Nov 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 05:49
|
|
|
39 shots on a 36 roll 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 05:57
|
|
|
Trambopaline posted:At first I thought I wanted a nicer rangefinder since my original canonet is a bit of a beater and I had convinced myself that was why my pictures stink. Turns out it's got to do with the fact that while film has good exposure latitude, it's a lot happier being exposed correctly, and I just have to take that (albeit recalibrated) selenium meter with a grain of salt. I might just put the money I was saving up for a Bessa towards a standalone meter. Any suggestions for a nice light meter to throw in the bag with a rangefinder? If you want to buy new, the Gossen Digisix is great, tiny, and takes modern CR2032s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:39 shots on a 36 roll What you do, load in the dark?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 14:39
|
|
|
Some cameras are designed so that when you load them properly you can get the use of more than the usual 36. Leica M film bodies are one, but I don't know what else do it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 15:25
|
|
|
Laser Cow posted:Some cameras are designed so that when you load them properly you can get the use of more than the usual 36. Leica M film bodies are one, but I don't know what else do it? I have achieved more than 37 exposures on Rollei 35 and Olympus XA2. (But I always rewind at 36 with my F90x because I know if it does more than 36 it's 37, and 37 is annoying to archive.) Pretty much any camera with manual winding and a shot cassette-to-spool distance can do it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 16:37
|
|
|
Yeah, the smaller cameras are more likely to get you more frames simply because the film has less distance to travel from spool to spool, so you'll get at least one freebie at the beginning and one at the end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 18:31
|
|
|
My F3 could get 38 exposures pretty easily, but the shutter locks at 1/80s until the film counter gets to 1, so I don't even try getting something good on the 0 and 00 exposures. Sometimes it lets me get extra one at the end, sometimes not, I guess it's how I load it. Extra exposures just means it won't fit in one negative sleeve though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 19:36
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Extra exposures just means it won't fit in one negative sleeve though. You can only contact 7 strips of 5 on an 8x10 anyway 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:What you do, load in the dark? I just start shooting as soon as the film is in, usually there will be a half frame or so at the beginning but this time it was about 95% of a frame, plus the normal 38. It was in an XA which doesn't require much film to reach the take up spool. eggsovereasy posted:Extra exposures just means it won't fit in one negative sleeve though. I just bought 7x6 sleeves.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
1.Using Tx400, I took a picture of this dog:  Because I was worried the dog would turn out to be a black blur, I overexposed it by a stop, shooting it at ƒ/1.7, 1/60s, where the “correct” exposure in Av mode/lightfinder app was the same, but at 1/125s. The iphone picture above was at ISO 125, ƒ/2.4, 1/20s. If my math is right, the equivalent exposure at ISO 400 and ƒ/1.7 would be 1/125s. Did I do something foolish by overexposing it? The general idea was that I could tell the lab that some pictures might be overexposed, and that it was intentional; later I would go and fiddle with the outputs in post to correct the exposure. I was concerned that I’d lose detail if I exposed it at the level the camera thought was correct. 2. Later this evening, I’m going out to Manhattan with some friends. Could I again overexpose stuff (I’ve got about half the roll left) to compensate for the general lack of light? I know that this’ll drag me into the shaky-hands level of shutter speeds, most likely. But is there any other problem, besides possibly a very cross and confused photo lab? 3. My camera seems to have developed some light leaks, so I’ve sealed up the back with hockey tape. Of course, this makes it a bit of a pain to change rolls. So do you holga types or other people who tape up your cameras just bring a roll of tape with you if you want to or think you'll need to change rolls?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
What are people's general impressions of the Canonet rangerfinders? They seem to be relatively cheap and I'll like to give rangefinder shooting a try without spending megabucks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2012 19:55
|
|
|
Are there any modern lenses that I can fit on my Minolta X-370? Or adapters to let me do so? I'm mostly looking for a good 50mm.
Fuzzy Pipe Wrench fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Nov 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
Shazaminator posted:What are people's general impressions of the Canonet rangerfinders? They seem to be relatively cheap and I'll like to give rangefinder shooting a try without spending megabucks. I've never used one, but I've just heard good stuff. The battery might be a pain in the rear end to work out though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 03:33
|
|
|
Shazaminator posted:What are people's general impressions of the Canonet rangerfinders? They seem to be relatively cheap and I'll like to give rangefinder shooting a try without spending megabucks. They're solid cameras, the RF patch is pretty big compared to other 70s RFs that I've been able to get my hands on which makes it a bit easier to focus with. Lens is fast and performs very well. I personally had problems with inconsistent frame spacing/overlapping so I eventually ditched it. Here's a shot that I got with it:  Birthday Cake by jemuelb, on Flickr e: And another:  Untitled by jemuelb, on Flickr mes fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Nov 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 04:48
|
|
|
Fuzzy Pipe Wrench posted:Are there any modern lenses that I can fit on my Minolta X-370? Or adapters to let me do so? I'm mostly looking for a good 50mm. What's wrong with Minolta's 50/1.7? MC/MD glass is fairly cheap, esp the 50mm ones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 05:56
|
|
|
Zenostein posted:What's wrong with Minolta's 50/1.7? Nothing in particular, just none are available locally.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 08:26
|
|
|
While a fairly cursorary search reveals that there are x to MD/MC mount adaptors do exist, I doubt you'll find them locally. Personally, I'd be more willing to go to Keh and buy a lens of them. Assuming your camera doesn't have Tv, you could even pick up the MC lenses. They're almost definitely not local, but it's a drat sight easier than finding an adapter for Canon/Nikon lenses, at least locally. It seems that most adapters go from MF lenses to dSLRs; or at least the ones that one could buy easily.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 09:08
|
|
|
Fuzzy Pipe Wrench posted:Nothing in particular, just none are available locally. Just find something on-line, film photography is all about patience anyways.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 11:58
|
|
|
Fuzzy Pipe Wrench posted:Nothing in particular, just none are available locally. I happen to be selling an MC 50mm/1.7 in the Buy/Sell thread AS WE SPEAK. I PM'd you about it, I'm itchin' to gitcha whatcha need!
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
Mest0r posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
krnhotwings posted:UCSD student, eh? Alumni actually, graduated last this past June. Bother more students and shoot more film around campus like I did in my last year there.  Posters by jemuelb, on Flickr  Tiny Dog by jemuelb, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 06:28
|
|
|
 Friday Night Rummage Sale Elderly Crush by atomicthumbs, on Flickr  Water Hazard by atomicthumbs, on Flickr  Kaiser I by atomicthumbs, on Flickr Olympus Infinity Stylus Epic, with Kodak Ektachrome P1600 slide film. It expired in 1994, but it came out "okay" shot/developed at 1600 anyway. atomicthumbs fucked around with this message at 08:39 on Nov 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 07:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
Mest0r posted:Alumni actually, graduated last this past June. Bother more students and shoot more film around campus like I did in my last year there. For the sake of posting some content:  Sacred Valley of the Incas by krnhotwings, on Flickr Snapped that two years ago in Peru. I didn't think much of it when I scanned it, but I've grown to like it after looking at it a couple of times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2012 08:02
|
|