|
So what's this fading around the edges of the negative? Is the rodinol off? It's been sitting in a bottle the last 4 months... is it hosed? I thought it had a good shelf life  Once I'd developed they looked fine but after about ten minutes the edges started fading away like this... Other possibility is that it's old fixer/stop? I'm using kodak indicating stop bath and ilford hypofam for fixer. The fixer was a pretty fresh bottle but it has been sitting there a few months... HP5+ in R09 1:50 11 mins 20c mod 54 
Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Jul 31, 2014 |
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:15 |
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:So what's this fading around the edges of the negative? Is the rodinol off? It's been sitting in a bottle the last 4 months... is it hosed? I thought it had a good shelf life
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:So what's this fading around the edges of the negative? Is the rodinol off? It's been sitting in a bottle the last 4 months... is it hosed? I thought it had a good shelf life Looks like uneven water drying to me. How are you hanging your negs to dry? I put mine up by a corner, not level. Also, how much Photo-flo are you using?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Yeah there seems to be a common theme when they're drying this weird fading comes in from the drying corner. Hanging them on a coathanger with film clips. Some just dried now and the fading disapeared, but otehres it didn't. I'm using 10 drops of photo-flo for 2L water... maybe that stuff is out of date?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:Yeah there seems to be a common theme when they're drying this weird fading comes in from the drying corner. Hanging them on a coathanger with film clips. Some just dried now and the fading disapeared, but otehres it didn't. That sounds like a lot of photo-flo, but the marks don't look like too much is the problem. Do you have really hard water? It looks like a problem I was having where all the water runs to the bottom of the neg, then dries, leaving mineral or other deposits as it dries. My solution to this problem was to use deionized or at least distilled water for the final rinse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
I'm on tankwater. I'm not sure... I'm sort of leaning towards how the film stored/handled... plus it got run through a bunch of x rays... and sat in a loving suitcase on a hot deck of a ship for two hours while I was waiting for the helicopter to bring my luggage back to me. E: the it seems to be fading from the top of the negative, where it's being hung, not the bottom, so it's not like a deposit issue. That main big top right corner was where it was hanging from. Weird. Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Jul 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Yeah, no, it's definitely your water. I only use enough deionized water to completely immerse a sheet of 4x5 - definitely not 2L. More like 600mL for my graduated cylinder. Give it a shot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
This owns bones.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
 Black and Gold, Istanbul by JaundiceDave, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
I bought a Pentax ME Super off ebay recently, and what better way to test it than a cat cafe right?     Thing is I didn't expect ISO 400 film to look so noisy. It's lomography film (in my defence, it was on offer) if that makes a difference. Would switching films help or should I just shoot at lower ISOs instead?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 11:27
|
|
|
basch posted:Thing is I didn't expect ISO 400 film to look so noisy. It's lomography film (in my defence, it was on offer) if that makes a difference. Would switching films help or should I just shoot at lower ISOs instead? Yeah lomo film is poo poo, get a roll of Portra 400 and have yer mind blown.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 12:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Yeah lomo film is poo poo, get a roll of Portra 400 and have yer mind blown. Granted that that is kind of the point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Yeah lomo film is poo poo, get a roll of Portra 400 and have yer mind blown. I splurged and got 5, this better be good 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
Here's a comparison - 35mm film, cheapo Kodak Ultramax:  Nearly exactly the same scene on medium format Portra: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 11:22
|
|
|
 cane by PC-P, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
After using exclusively vintage 35mm cameras for the past couple years, I managed to get a pretty good deal on a Nikon F100, which is compatible with modern AF-S lenses. So now I can use my DSLR lenses interchangeably between digital and film. Granted, they're made for crop sensors so I get a little bit of vignetting, but it's not too bad. Pretty excited about this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:After using exclusively vintage 35mm cameras for the past couple years, I managed to get a pretty good deal on a Nikon F100, which is compatible with modern AF-S lenses. So now I can use my DSLR lenses interchangeably between digital and film. Granted, they're made for crop sensors so I get a little bit of vignetting, but it's not too bad. Pretty excited about this. F100s own. I bought two of them in 2003 for like $800 a piece. Worth every penny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:F100s own. I bought two of them in 2003 for like $800 a piece. Worth every penny. Concur with this, although I got one last year for a birthday present.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:After using exclusively vintage 35mm cameras for the past couple years, I managed to get a pretty good deal on a Nikon F100, which is compatible with modern AF-S lenses. So now I can use my DSLR lenses interchangeably between digital and film. Granted, they're made for crop sensors so I get a little bit of vignetting, but it's not too bad. Pretty excited about this. You will love it. The only camera that bests it is the F6, which can use both the old and new TTL strobes among other things, but the simple fact that the F100 uses AA batteries makes it a winner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
Yeah after playing around with it for a night, this thing is a beast. Feels way more expensive than my D5100 and will probably outlive it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
I shoot 35mm film on my ME Super, but lately I've been thinking about picking up another film body, something that I can slap my EF-mount lenses on. Is there a Canon body that just rocks and isn't super expensive? I tend to shoot more medium format than 35mm, but my film classes start up soon and those work (at least at first) in 35mm. It'd be nice to have a wider range of lenses available.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
The Canon EOS 3 is dope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
EOS 3 if you have the funds ($200-350). It's basically a 5Dmk3 film body (almost). If you want to save some money, A2, Élan II or Élan 7 should only run you $25-75 or so. I don't think it's worth it to go any older than those models.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
Tony Two Bapes posted:The Canon EOS 3 is dope. Oh wow, 45 point eye control? Keh has some in stock, too. Damnit. About to blow money visiting the E: Mightaswell posted:EOS 3 if you have the funds ($200-350). It's basically a 5Dmk3 film body (almost). Yeah, think I just convinced myself looking at it. I hate that photography has made $200/$300 seem like not that much. Hokkaido Anxiety fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
I managed to talk myself out out of an EOS 3 only because I found a mint Élan II with a battery and lens for $25 locally. I'll still probably buy one eventually.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Oh wow, 45 point eye control? Keh has some in stock, too. Damnit. About to blow money visiting the Come to the land of the tastemakers and buy my EOS 3  I have it listed in the buy/sell thread somewhere...
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
The EOS 3 is the F100 of canons. If you don't want to spend that much, there's a couple of camera stores in Seattle with a boatload of the cheaper EOS models.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:20
|
|
|
 I'd strongly advise against buying a cheaper EOS film model They REALLY weren't built to last like the older FD bodies. I've had two EOS 5s over the years, both have had body problems. A lot of the parts are made of cheap plastic and the years haven't been kind to the dials and stuff. I've also had an EOS 500, which had a shutter issue. I've read from people here that a lot of the older EOS models have the same sticky shutter problem.If I was getting an EOS film body nowadays, I'd only go for the EOS3 or the 1-V (  )
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Yeah, think I just convinced myself looking at it. I hate that photography has made $200/$300 seem like not that much. They're quite cheap too, so you can stick a 50 on one and not care too much what happens to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:
Yeah but if you get something like the EOS 33/Elan 7 whatever for $30 that is practically free. I will be picking up an EOS 3 at some stage though...
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
New camera new lens 420 shoot Portra erry dayyyyyyyyy
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Okay, I was wrong, I'd just been thinking about selling my EOS 3. Go check it out if you want one!
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
a bicep? V by voodoorootbeer, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:a bicep? Well this owns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Aw man I'm going to get into some double exposures over this weekend, those last few have been really cool.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
 links by PC-P, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
Tony Two Bapes posted:
I love this. First test roll through my new F100 came out well. A little bit of vignetting using my 35mm 1.8G but not bad.   Expired Kodak Gold 200
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:15 |
|
|
 My mate found this in all his poo poo and wants to know if he can get film for it
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 16:08
|
|