|
  I was thinking about getting a pen camera as a pocket rocket, but they seemed quite bigger than a decent film point and shoot.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 20:21 |
|
|
It looks like Lomography are releasing a new camera: http://www.lomography.com/magazine/tags/408332-a-quality-character From the hints it looks like it'll be a Russian rangefinder, like a Fed or Zorki.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
I just took six rolls to Yodobashi to be developed, partly because I was wary of taking undeveloped film through another three scanners (Narita, Shanghai, Sydney) and partly because I wanted to see if they'd do it any better than my local shop. Now I have two inscrutable receipts which I'm assuming are for E6 and C-41 development. Excited! I won't be able to pick them up for a while, though, as I'm doing more travel in the meantime. Also, Yodobashi's really earned its reputation as a film mecca. I don't know where the Shinjuku outlet ranks, but I was absolutely blown away by everything they had on offer. I could spend days and probably a few thousand dollars there easily.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
Spedman posted:It looks like Lomography are releasing a new camera: And it will probably cost $250+ and you don't even get a weird package wrapped in brown paper and twine from some guy in Ukraine with a name you can't pronounce
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:And it will probably cost $250+ and you don't even get a weird package wrapped in brown paper and twine from some guy in Ukraine with a name you can't pronounce Well that's the thing, Fedka.com have great working Russian cameras and lenses for a reasonable price, I don't see how Lomo will beat that. Unless of course they've had their own plastic rangefinder made like the Bel-Air.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
I still haven't shot my IR film, because I'm having a hard time determining how far I need to turn the film advance knob on my Yashica A. It doesn't seem like it's entirely consistent for the next frame, and It's going to take me a while to figure out how far to turn the knob to advance to the next frame. For reference, this camera has one of those red windows on the back to tell you when you've reached the next frame. Has anyone shot any Agfa IR film through a camera with a film advance window? It does have a paper backing, but i'm not sure how well that would work to prevent any light leaking through. I could always shoot a roll and find out if it has any adverse effects, but I'd rather not risk wasting a $10 roll of film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
And here is the big deal from Lomo, a new rangefinder lens: http://shop.lomography.com/au/russar-plus?utm_campaign=nl_russar_launch_int&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter  EDIT: $650 
Spedman fucked around with this message at 11:47 on Apr 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 11:18
|
|
|
Spedman posted:And here is the big deal from Lomo, a new rangefinder lens: If it comes with a VF, that's actually not a bad deal. The 20mm Russar is kinda rare and goes for between 500-700 on ebay depending on condition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 12:51
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:If it comes with a VF, that's actually not a bad deal. The 20mm Russar is kinda rare and goes for between 500-700 on ebay depending on condition. Ahh, I didn't see it comes with a view finder, I retract my EDIT: I don't see any mention of a view finder on the site Spedman fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Apr 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Dog Case posted:I found a thing at the thrift store again I had a 42mm f/1.2, until the lovely Chinese adapter I had it on failed and I dropped it onto some concrete  Glass is fine but barrel is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Ahh, I didn't see it comes with a view finder, I retract my I didn't either so it's probably a pretty big "if".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I had a 42mm f/1.2, until the lovely Chinese adapter I had it on failed and I dropped it onto some concrete indeed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
notlodar posted:If you hang out in the room for a couple minutes, your eyes will adjust and you should be able to see any light leaks. For the most part, they don't matter so much as long as you still cant actually see anything in the bathroom after, say, 5 minutes. Also, darkrooms don't really have to be completely dark. I mean, if you're processing 3200ISO film in the open, it does, but the color print room at my college had holes in the floor big enough to feed the stray cats under the building, and enough daylight through them to navigate by, and it never fogged the paper. try it with a lime posted:I managed to slice my finger open on one of the film canisters in the dark bag without noticing and figured if the negatives were covered in blood, adding Jet-Dry wouldn't be any worse for the wear. Everything seemed to have come out alright. drat, I've had a couple of injuries in the course of my photography career, but never cut myself with the film (cutting myself with a knife building sets/taping things/pinching bits of skin off when slapping a fresh battery into a DSLR, on the other hand...) RustedChrome posted:I ran across a film vending machine this past Saturday at Kinkaku-ji in Kyoto. Horribly overpriced but not something I see often.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 19:05
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
You can't expect your negatives to turn out well without sacrificing something in return. Law of Equivalent Trade and all that 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
I'm gonna be developing my b & w soon here at Rayko in SF. I've never actually processed my own film before, but I read the guide on pg1, and it seems pretty simple. I have a couple questions though. I have various film types and speeds, will this effect my developing time? For reference, I have couple rolls of delta, 1 400 speed, and 1 3200 speed. Several rolls of Arista 400, a roll of pan f, and something else I forget.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
dog nougat posted:I'm gonna be developing my b & w soon here at Rayko in SF. I've never actually processed my own film before, but I read the guide on pg1, and it seems pretty simple. Yes. Use the Massive Dev Chart as a starting point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Yup. C-41 (colour neg) was invented and optimized to run any film through the automatic machine with exactly the same parameters - a roll of 800 next to a roll of 100 was fine. B&W is the opposite - no automatic developing machines (that I'm aware of) and you have to set development times for the film - brand, type, and ISO are all important, as is brand / type of developer. The Massive Dev Chart has never let me down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yes. Use the Massive Dev Chart as a starting point. Do Tri-X times in HC-110 ever get fixed? I remember that the chart was using old emulsion times for that developer. Anyhoo, BW development is pretty easy. I used pg1 guide as well when I started and it worked out pretty well. And now for a picture. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
I just developed my first roll of B&W film and it turned out great! I did Arista Premium 400 in Fomadon LQN developer following 8th-snype's page 1 guide pretty much exactly, although of course I looked up and used the appropriate development time from the massive dev chart. I saw what looked like some water spotting as it was drying, but now that the film is fully dried I don't see any spots. It gets pretty humid pretty quick when you're trying to load film inside the bag, but I managed to get it on the reel. I don't have a DSLR or a scanner, so I don't think I can really show off my negatives very well at this time, but they all seem to have developed nicely with sufficient contrast and everything. Grain looks nice too. I'll try printing some in a few days after I figure out a safelight. Then I'll try taking lovely cellphone pictures of the prints, assuming those come out right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
Goodwill actually had something worthwhile in stock: FD mount Vivitar 35-70 and Nikon 2x teleconverter for $10, FD mount Sears 135mm f2.8 for $6. I believe you could call me heavily invested in FD glass  Is there any way to convince an AF-S lens without aperture ring to stay open at widest aperture instead of closing down to the narrowest when I mount it on the tele?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yes. Use the Massive Dev Chart as a starting point. Dev in Rodinal for an hour at 1:100. Cook a burger while you're waiting. Be happy with a full belly and decent negatives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:Goodwill actually had something worthwhile in stock: I *think* if you open it wide up on the a camera and then pull the lens off it'll stay at that aperture, but it might just be a canon thing. Or i'm completely wrong, but try googling into that further!
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I *think* if you open it wide up on the a camera and then pull the lens off it'll stay at that aperture, but it might just be a canon thing. Nope, Nikon's aperture control is still mechanical, even on G lenses (which almost all AF-S lenses are too.) You would have to force the aperture lever to stay in the far position, not sure what would be reasonable for that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I *think* if you open it wide up on the a camera and then pull the lens off it'll stay at that aperture, but it might just be a canon thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
I think this is where I heard about the app 'Shutter-Speed' and I was trying to use it to measure the shutter on my Yashica D, but it isn't as simple as I thought it would be. Here is the output for 1/60th of a second:  Does anyone know how I'm supposed to figure out my shutter speed from this? Is it peak to peak? Because if that's the case my camera is really off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:I think this is where I heard about the app 'Shutter-Speed' and I was trying to use it to measure the shutter on my Yashica D, but it isn't as simple as I thought it would be. Yeah. Peak to peak would be about 1/45, so about a half a stop slow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yeah. Peak to peak would be about 1/45, so about a half a stop slow. So this is pretty close to 1/30th of a second? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I *think* if you open it wide up on the a camera and then pull the lens off it'll stay at that aperture, but it might just be a canon thing. The only thing Google has been helpful for so far is making me relatively certain that this is an off-brand teleconverter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:So this is pretty close to 1/30th of a second? That's just one peak in your selected range there. The other peak is off to the right... Looks like your 1/30 is also at least half a stop slow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Another travelling-with-film question: is it safe to mail film back home? I have about another half-dozen rolls exposed, but I won't get a chance to have them developed in time to take the developed rolls home with me. I'm reading that travelling with exposed film shouldn't have any impact, but it's still a bit worrying and in any case I'd be happy to get it out of my luggage. Is all air freight x-rayed anyway? Is there a simple way to ensure it doesn't go through any x-ray machines (ie sea mail?) or am I just being paranoid and should just bring it back on my carry-on?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
 Cork City Hall Bike by mrendatious1, on Flickr This is the first time I've been a bit unhappy with Rodinal 1:100 stand development. It's a little too grainy for my liking, any bump in sharpness sent it too far. Also, this was shooting a dark grey street with a light grey building against a lighter grey wall in early morning overcast sunshine and the stand development just made it far too flat. I had to do a bit of messing around to get it to this point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:Another travelling-with-film question: is it safe to mail film back home? I have about another half-dozen rolls exposed, but I won't get a chance to have them developed in time to take the developed rolls home with me. I'm reading that travelling with exposed film shouldn't have any impact, but it's still a bit worrying and in any case I'd be happy to get it out of my luggage. When I moved back to Aus from the UK, I sent home about 100 rolls of film by post. I put a big label on it saying "do not X-ray, photographic film inside", I have no idea if that did anything, but the film was fine and still shows no ill effects two years later. Also I've received plenty of film via post and never had any problems, including higher iso stuff like Neopan 1600.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
 _DSC5857 by Stingray of Doom, on FlickrMrenda posted:
Did you do some dodging/burning on this one? you seem to have these weird halos around people in the photo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:Did you do some dodging/burning on this one? you seem to have these weird halos around people in the photo. I noticed it but I have no idea what it is. It's in the untouched .tif scan, both my "contact sheet" scan and the high DPI film positive scan. It's too dark to check the actual negative but if it's in both scans... There was no touch up around either area either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Mrenda posted:I noticed it but I have no idea what it is. It's in the untouched .tif scan, both my "contact sheet" scan and the high DPI film positive scan. It's too dark to check the actual negative but if it's in both scans... This is due to the stand development, basically the people are dark (bright in the negative) hence didn't use a lot of developer, giving the standing developer more energy to work on the area surrounding them giving you these weird halos. That said, the negative seems quite overdeveloped. Even Rodinal stand shouldn't be this flat in my experience. It might be a mixture of overexposure, flat lighting and over-development, like you said. I guess check your development temperatures and dilutions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
So some people have been donating junk to my school again, the tech was okay with me going through it to see if there was anything I'd want. 28mm f3.5 and a 100mm f2.8 for my brother's OM-10. A lot of other cameras didn't work, old EOS 650 too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:Another travelling-with-film question: is it safe to mail film back home? I have about another half-dozen rolls exposed, but I won't get a chance to have them developed in time to take the developed rolls home with me. I'm reading that travelling with exposed film shouldn't have any impact, but it's still a bit worrying and in any case I'd be happy to get it out of my luggage. Spedman's approach might work. I once ordered 3 rolls of Ilford 3200 from Sweden (ebay), and I think Canada Customs X-rayed them because they're utterly blank. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Spedman's approach might work. I once ordered 3 rolls of Ilford 3200 from Sweden (ebay), and I think Canada Customs X-rayed them because they're utterly blank. If they'd been x-rayed, you'd see areas of density, like so:  Were there edge markings? If not, you hosed up developing. If so, your shutter wasn't firing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Hmmm... perhaps I hosed up the developing. No edge markings, no shading or patterns of any kind. Just uniform medium gray. I still have two of the three rolls I haven't shot or done anything with. I'll have to load them and run them through, see if I did indeed screw up developing. It was a while ago - like, more than a year ago - so I can't remember anything about what I did that day. What would totally grey-out a roll of film? Putting in Fixative instead of Developer? Accidental exposure of the whole roll to light?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 20:21 |
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Hmmm... perhaps I hosed up the developing. No edge markings, no shading or patterns of any kind. Just uniform medium gray. Grey as in opaque gray sounds like no/bad fix. If it's transparent but dark, then maybe bad dev AND bad fix.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 23:52
|
|