|
  Fomapan 100, Rodinal 50+1 This is my 35mm counterpart to acros+hc110 in mf, in terms of how much I like it.
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 07:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
Nice, Reichstag, as usual! In other film news I just managed to get my hands on 6 rolls of 120 size, supposedly cold stored Kodak Ektachrome 64T. It expired in 2001. Wanna shoot some night shots now. Super stoked.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 09:00
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:
I'd be interested in trying this Rodinal 50+1 processing, how do I do it? From the quantities sounds like standup development, which I never did. I typically use fomadon LQN 1+10 with times taken from the manufacturer. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
maxmars posted:I'd be interested in trying this Rodinal 50+1 processing, how do I do it? From the quantities sounds like standup development, which I never did. Nope, 1+50 is a standard processing time. I followed the massive dev chart and did it for 8:30, agitating as usual.  e: You just need a syringe to measure out the developer at this high dilution, since 500mls working solution only uses 9.8ml dev.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 10:03
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Nope, 1+50 is a standard processing time. I followed the massive dev chart and did it for 8:30, agitating as usual. cool thanks will try as soon as I'm out of fomadon
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
I had my Instax 100 in my checked luggage flying between Melbourne and LAX, with a single shot still left in the camera. So I just took the shot after the flight expecting a very over exposed frame from the high power x-rays they use on the checked bags, and I ended up with a perfectly exposed shot, no tell-tale streaks or anything. It's 800 iso instant film, so I was expecting a mess, which makes me assume they don't x-ray every bag as it goes through.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
This box just arrived for me too
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Please NSFW those pornographic images 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 09:57
|
|
|
Just wanted to share a comparison I made between my old Epson V500 and my new(ly acquired, used,) Epson 4990. Same negative, same post-process flow - except I couldn't get the colors the same due to the scanners having different lighting tech. I'm impressed, and this baby can scan up to 8x10 and takes any format in-between. I'm seriously considering investing in a 4x5 press camera or a cheap rail camera to start to get into large format. I'm eyeing an Linhof Kardan Color. I'm never buying new scanner hardware again if I can get one used from a photographer for 1/4 of the original price. This one is in pristine condition even though it was bought in 2005, and the dude even had the receipt. Scanned an old slide with it:  Hand Overboard by Cdammen, on Flickr I'm really satisfied with this purchase.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 10:12
|
|
|
Spedman posted:I had my Instax 100 in my checked luggage flying between Melbourne and LAX, with a single shot still left in the camera. So I just took the shot after the flight expecting a very over exposed frame from the high power x-rays they use on the checked bags, and I ended up with a perfectly exposed shot, no tell-tale streaks or anything. alkanphel posted:This box just arrived for me too Mega Itch posted:Just wanted to share a comparison I made between my old Epson V500 and my new(ly acquired, used,) Epson 4990.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 16:22
|
|
|
Just got this lot in the post today: All expired but supposedly kept refrigerated. The guy I got it off has some pretty cool photo projects on his site: http://www.jasperwhite.co.uk/festival-tents/
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
What is it called if your viewer is just an eyepiece. Not a rangefinder or TTL or TLR, but literally just an eyepiece sitting a top the camera to show you the field of view? I broke out my grandfather's Kodak Retina I, which research tells me is a '45-'48 model 010, and what I described above is what it has. I don't know if it's still called a viewfinder. Anyway, I loaded up some HP5+ in it this morning and figured I'd play around with it. I'll need to pick up new chemicals since I haven't used the darkroom in a while. What developer should I try to get? Last time I bought any of this, the shop threw in a half bottle of Kodak developer for free since it was just sitting around. It's probably no good.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
Mr. Powers posted:What is it called if your viewer is just an eyepiece. Not a rangefinder or TTL or TLR, but literally just an eyepiece sitting a top the camera to show you the field of view? I prefer the term "camera". Maybe specify the film type, so "35mm camera". But seriously I don't think there's a specific term for that. Was the developer hc110? If it hasn't turned a nasty brown it might still be good, all depends on how tightly sealed it was.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
Mr. Powers posted:What is it called if your viewer is just an eyepiece. Not a rangefinder or TTL or TLR, but literally just an eyepiece sitting a top the camera to show you the field of view? Generally these are called viewfinder cameras.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
Huh. I thought viewfinder was referring to through the lens/focusing screen type cameras (SLRs). From memory, it could be HC110 or possibly TMax. I'll check when I get home. carticket fucked around with this message at 18:49 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
I bought a tiny little viewfinder camera, a Rollei 35, at the beginning of March, and I've finally gotten some shots developed. I love this little thing. rollei-tests001 by Stephen Tyndall, on Flickr  rollei-tests004 by Stephen Tyndall, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
Nah, "viewfinder" is "thing you use to find out what the camera is viewing". It could also be a rangefinder (i.e. assist you in finding focus as well as composition), or the camera could a mirror to reflect the actual view of the lens to the viewfinder (i.e. SLR, single lens reflex), or it could use another lens similar to the taking lens and reflect it to the viewfinder (i.e. TLR, two lens reflex), or it could go right through to the lens, replacing the film plane (view camera). If you have nothing more specific to describe the type of camera, but it does have a viewfinder, then it's just a viewfinder camera. ^^^ Yeah the Rollei 35 is cute, although a bit awkward to use.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:That's quite impressive. How much did the 4990 cost, and how did you find it? Did it show up on Craigslist? Talked an hour with the dude selling it. We got into a discussion on aerial photography which he does. Mega Itch fucked around with this message at 19:24 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
a foolish pianist posted:I bought a tiny little viewfinder camera, a Rollei 35, at the beginning of March, and I've finally gotten some shots developed. I love this little thing. I always feel like the Rollei 35 is 90% of a good camera. The optics are great, but it's hard to realize their full benefit because there's no rangefinder. I would have settled for it being a bit taller with a rangefinder built in. It's so small I find it a little tough to operate and hold still, and it would have given them a proper place for a flash shoe. Mr. Powers posted:Huh. I thought viewfinder was referring to through the lens/focusing screen type cameras (SLRs). SLRs have a viewfinder that you look through to see the groundglass/focus screen, viewfinder cameras have a tube you look through directly.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:SLRs have a viewfinder that you look through to see the groundglass/focus screen, viewfinder cameras have a tube you look through directly. In this case a very small 4x3mm tube.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
For the first time in a long time, I have Friday and Saturday nights free. I think it's time to run a hot bath, break out the C-41 kit (bought it months ago, haven't dared open it yet), and start grinding through my backlog of 120.  Says it's rated for 10 rolls but guessing I can get 14-16ish if I store the mixed chemicals in sealed containers in the fridge and do it over a single weekend? Figure I'll start with two unimportant rolls to make sure I'm not loving up the process, put what's hopefully the best stuff in the middle, and have the lesser-important stuff on the trailing end. Mr. Powers posted:What is it called if your viewer is just an eyepiece. Not a rangefinder or TTL or TLR, but literally just an eyepiece sitting a top the camera to show you the field of view? Iron sights 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
This'll sound like a silly question, but what's the point of pushing something like HP5? Is it just if you intend to do 36 shots indoors or in low light? Because I was playing with a roll I told my camera was ISO800, and being outdoors was an exercise in frustration, mostly. It's a strange feeling to be angry that there's sunlight, but shooting at f/22 for a tree or a building feels weird as hell. Also, because I'm an idiot, I decided "Av won't let me shoot this, I'll do it manually" and took a frame at 1/1000@f/1.7. My idiocity aside, unless you have a camera that can go faster than 1/1000 or you're mostly shooting indoors, is there a point to pushing beyond 400?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
No not really
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
"Is there any point to wearing a scuba rig in a sunny field?"
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
If you want to get high contrast/grain. See Daido Moriyama's photos.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:"Is there any point to wearing a scuba rig in a sunny field?" Point well taken. In my defense, I started that roll in January. I just took like 5 months to finish it, and in that time the sun showed up. But that notwithstanding: the point is to use a roll in low-lit areas and probably in a single go, right? That or find a magical f/∞ lens and go hog wild. Grain for everyone! e. Daido Moriyama's photos are stunning, so there's that. I think what I might be asking is something along the lines of: can you remove yourself from the equilateral triangle of exposure? I mean you could probably do so with some post-processing. But I understand that film has some latitude: so maybe how much latitude do you have? I'm asking because I may have impulse-bidded on an Argus C3 — absent me buying a bunch of ISO 100, I'd have to do some serious gymnastics to get that to work with readily available film. e2: Oh god if I developed poo poo on my own, I still wouldn't come close to what that guy's managed. Zenostein fucked around with this message at 02:00 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 01:36
|
|
|
Or use a compensating developer. Diafine: Shoot TX or HP5 at any settings you want anywhere!
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Or use a compensating developer. Diafine: Shoot TX or HP5 at any settings you want anywhere! Same is true for Rodinal Stand Development. Change ISO during mid film like a digital
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Just FYI, in case anyone else was waiting -- Mod54s can be ordered through B&H again (and directly from them too, I suppose). Ordered a 25 sheet box of Delta 100, can't wait to start shooting/developing my own 4x5s
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Zenostein posted:This'll sound like a silly question, but what's the point of pushing something like HP5? Is it just if you intend to do 36 shots indoors or in low light? Because I was playing with a roll I told my camera was ISO800, and being outdoors was an exercise in frustration, mostly. It's a strange feeling to be angry that there's sunlight, but shooting at f/22 for a tree or a building feels weird as hell. What's wrong with stopping down? Especially for a tree or a building. 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 03:48
|
|
|
Zenostein posted:That or find a magical f/∞ lens and go hog wild. Grain for everyone! The term you are looking for is "pinhole". Fuzzy grain, because you'll be well past the point of noticeable diffraction effects, but properly-exposed grain galore.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
I use my AE1 as my kick around camera, looking for a flash I can mount to it for those bar nights. Looked into canon speedlites but was hoping for something a little more flat. Doesn't need to bounce, doesn't' need metering, I just want a little thing to sit on the top and make bright light when I tell it to. Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
The AE1 that I bought too late to send to you and ended up sending 'round the world came with a Speedlite 177A, which seems to check your boxes. I still have it, shipping would probably be more than it's worth, if you're interested I'll put together a post for the buy/sell thread. I've got a few other manual-focus SLRs from various manufacturers from that era, several of them came with minor-brand, aftermarket flashes. They all seem to be very basic and simple, and it seems like cameras from back then were not so brand-specialized and differentiated that you couldn't just slap your buddy's Pentax flash on your Minolta camera. Or use any of the offerings from Brentwood, Vivitar, Sears, whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 06:29
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:What's wrong with stopping down? Especially for a tree or a building. There's nothing wrong with that (although sometimes I wished I had more sweet sweet bokeys) — but I feel like I've somehow hosed up if I need to stop down beyond f/22 for my camera to be willing to take the photo. Maybe it's just a dumb mental thing where I figure that if I'm gonna sunny 16 a shot, I probably shouldn't be at f/22 unless I'm skiing or at the beach. Either way, I managed to finish that roll and I learned a pretty useful lesson about not pushing iso 400 unless I have a reason to do so. So yay for me, I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
Zenostein posted:I feel like I've somehow hosed up if I need to stop down beyond f/22 for my camera to be willing to take the photo. 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 09:14
|
|
|
Get some ND filters, they're cheap as hell online.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 09:48
|
|
|
Naturally I finally get around to mixing my Naniwa kit after like, a year of procrastinating, have a night blocked off to develop stuff... and my loving digital thermometer gets wet and won't read reliably anymore.  Hopefully they sell non-lovely ones at Costco or IKEA, was already going to be out that way tomorrow morning anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 12:56
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Same is true for Rodinal Stand Development. While Rodinal Stand Development is awesome and 1:100 for an hour is a pretty good recipe for basically any exposure you haven't totally blown, it does help to process for an appropriate length of time. 1h produces normal EI, 1:30 produces a 1-stop push, 2h produces a 2-stop push. It won't be unusable without proper processing but the results will be better if you do it right.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I always feel like the Rollei 35 is 90% of a good camera. The optics are great, but it's hard to realize their full benefit because there's no rangefinder. I would have settled for it being a bit taller with a rangefinder built in. It's so small I find it a little tough to operate and hold still, and it would have given them a proper place for a flash shoe. I really don't mind the distance estimation, myself, and the really awesome optics make it a great snapshot camera.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:36
|
|