|
Just bought this lot for 15€ I have no excuses now do I 
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 10:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:43 |
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:
Soooo good
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 10:36
|
|
|
pootiebigwang posted:If humans are involved and I am shooting color, I see absolutely no reason to ever shoot anything but Portra. wow this guy is straight outta central casting
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:So Bushwick Community Darkroom is loving terrible, CRC is too expensive. What other decent labs are there in NYC? RIP Manhattan Color y'all. They told me they were moving a week before they closed  LTI is great. I think CRC was cheaper a few months ago, dunno what happened.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
the contrasty sunset turned out as well as i could hope for on astia. xpost from medium format thread.  Evening Thunderstorm, Salt Lake City by Cameron Mattis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Genderfluid posted:the contrasty sunset turned out as well as i could hope for on astia. xpost from medium format thread. Astia owns and this picture owns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
First roll through my new OM10 came back blank, and I'm not sure why (forgive incorrect part names). The shutter fires just fine, and the timing on manual mode is definitely picking up the change in speed from the little add-on part. The winder seemed to be winding just fine, as I had definite tension winding the roll back this morning, right up to the point I felt the leader pop and the tension go. The meter worked and matched up to my DSLR's meter set to same ISO. Aperture blades worked fine, and I shot most of the roll wide-open anyway. I guess there could be a major light leak someplace in the body, but I don't see anything obvious looking at the curtain or the body.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Huxley posted:First roll through my new OM10 came back blank, and I'm not sure why (forgive incorrect part names). Like, black blank or white blank? You say light leak which makes me think the negatives came back dark, but that sounds unlikely to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
LargeHadron posted:Like, black blank or white blank? You say light leak which makes me think the negatives came back dark, but that sounds unlikely to me. Clear blank. So not a light leak as they would be super overexposed and black (duh, me).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Did you actually see the winder move everytime you advanced? edit: VVV sounds right, only speaking from the experience of my own screw ups. Bud fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Aug 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Clear blank. So not a light leak as they would be super overexposed and black (duh, me). Is the rebate (text along the edges) visible? If there's not even that (completely clear negs) then something happened in development (hosed developer).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Bud posted:Did you actually see the winder move everytime you advanced? I felt more tension turning the winder after loading film than I did with no film in the camera, so I assumed it was pulling correctly. And the handle on the top (that I used to unwind after I finished the roll) turned when I cranked the handle. MrBlandAverage posted:Is the rebate (text along the edges) visible? If there's not even that (completely clear negs) then something happened in development (hosed developer). I let them trash the negative after he showed me it was blank, so I don't remember, unfortunately. I'm still learning, so that's a thing I'll be sure to check if it happens again. I'm going to go home and double check the shutter one more time, put another roll of cheap film through it and see if anything comes out this time. I'd hate to think the lab machine hosed up the development and they implied it was my camera that was broken. Thanks guys.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
Huxley posted:I felt more tension turning the winder after loading film than I did with no film in the camera, so I assumed it was pulling correctly. And the handle on the top (that I used to unwind after I finished the roll) turned when I cranked the handle. What film was it? If they developed B&W film in C41 chemicals you'd end up with a completely blank roll of film 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:What film was it? If they developed B&W film in C41 chemicals you'd end up with a completely blank roll of film Agfa 200, so super cheap to begin with since I was just testing, but definitely C41.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Tri-x medium format: Tri-x 35mm: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
HP5+ small format: Toro by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr  GRAPHICS by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr  Tree by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:HP5+ small format: I read "small format" and thought you might be using something like 16mm for a minute. I still maintain hope of some day shooting with my Minolta 16 MG: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:I read "small format" and thought you might be using something like 16mm for a minute. I still maintain hope of some day shooting with my Minolta 16 MG: http://m.ebay.com/itm/201153433448?nav=SEARCH I'm sure you could get the motion picture equivalent of Portra 400 in 16mm
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:HP5+ small format: Nice
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Thanks for the help the other day. I figured out my issue. My kids yelling at me that morning caused me to pocket an unshot roll instead of a shot roll. I am the big dummy. Knowing I was testing an old camera, I grabbed the cheapest thing on the shelf that shot 36 frames, Agfa Vista 200. I always forget how soft these old kit 50s are wide open. Sunflower by mattphilpott, on Flickr  Magnolia by mattphilpott, on Flickr  Slide by mattphilpott, on Flickr Huxley fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Aug 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 15:08
|
|
|
deaders posted:Nice Thanks!  Untitled by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr  Untitled by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Has anyone here used this particular C-41 kit before? http://www.freestylephoto.biz/660141-Rollei-C-41-Color-Kit-1-Liter Reading the instructions the bleach step can only be used twice, however you can mix 50/50 used and unused bleach together and get another two. The kit can only make 1 Liter of bleach. If I am using it for 120 development and I use 500mL each time I develop a roll I am only going to get 6 rolls worth before I run out of bleach. Is their any way to extend this further? since at the ~$60 price tag for the kit I would be paying $10 a roll and at that point send out is cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Have you heard about the Tetenal C-41 kit? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109267-REG/Tetenal_T109306_C_41_Press_Kit_for.html They are cheaper, powder based (no int'l shipping restrictions & infinite shelf life when unmixed), and the instructions say you can process 8 rolls of 120 (20 exp) out of a single 1L batch. Though people say you can stretch that upwards of 50% or more with no noticeable degradation if you do all your processing within a few days.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Have you heard about the Tetenal C-41 kit? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109267-REG/Tetenal_T109306_C_41_Press_Kit_for.html The instructions appear to be written for use in a rotary developer, will it work with a Paterson tank?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:The instructions appear to be written for use in a rotary developer, will it work with a Paterson tank? Yep, that's what I use it with. From the description: "Equally well suited for processing with hand inversion tanks and in rotary processors."
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Seems like Ferrania will finally be restarting film production in mid September. Fingers crossed!
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Have you heard about the Tetenal C-41 kit? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109267-REG/Tetenal_T109306_C_41_Press_Kit_for.html I did all 12 rolls over a weekend because the instructions specifically talk about using it all within a short period if you're going for more than the advertised 8 rolls. I suspect I could have done more than 12 rolls. EDIT: I bought mine from Freestyle, but it's exactly the same stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Has anyone here used this particular C-41 kit before? I've used this kit and I got way more than six rolls out of it. I want to say it was over 25 rolls out of the solutions mixed between 120 and 35mm developed over roughly a six week period(16 is the recommended limit). I probably could have gotten more but the blix was starting to smell noticeably off towards the end and I didn't want to chance it. I don't remember reading anything about the blix solution only being usable twice. I guess my cost would have been roughly $1.50 a roll. This is the first and only C-41 kit I've used so I don't know if it is necessarily the best value out there but it was really stable and pretty easy to work with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Seems like Ferrania will finally be restarting film production in mid September. Fingers crossed! On a scale from Impossible Project to Ilford, what is a reasonable expectation for this company's stuff?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:On a scale from Impossible Project to Ilford, what is a reasonable expectation for this company's stuff? Probably quite good I should think, most of the staff have worked at Ferrania before and they're reusing all the old film coating machines and stuff. Whether they will have a sustainable market is another story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:On a scale from Impossible Project to Ilford, what is a reasonable expectation for this company's stuff? I'm guessing it'll be closer to Adox if they do black and white, and probably like Agfa if they're doing slide film (which apparently they are). I'd be fairly confident it's going to be decent quality stuff. Ezekiel_980 posted:Has anyone here used this particular C-41 kit before? If the shipping isn't too bad, maybe get this instead: http://www.macodirect.de/chemistry-colour-chemistry-rollei-digibase-midi-literbrfor-films-40027brfor-films-10021-p-2340.html I've gotten great results from the Digibase kits.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
Spedman posted:http://m.ebay.com/itm/201153433448?nav=SEARCH Wouldn't the sprocket hole(s) be the wrong way? Vision3 is the Portra motion picture equivalent and it's the sexiest film ever made.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Have you heard about the Tetenal C-41 kit? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/109267-REG/Tetenal_T109306_C_41_Press_Kit_for.html I did this for a while but felt it was a hassle. Probably because i didn't have development times for 68°f chems. And the chemicals ain't that great for you, all my tanks leak a little bit and I've just about run out of gloves. And the short shelf life of the stuff I wasn't too keen on. I am tempted to see what results I could get out of the really exhausted chems right now. Bought that back in march and only did a couple rolls.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
What do you guys think about the longevity of film, 10 or even 20 years from now? People probably asked this question in the mid 2000s when digital cameras started to really pick up, but here we are 10 years later and sensors are getting crazy good, and we're beginning to approach the medium format level "equivalent" of megapixels in consumer digital cameras. Meanwhile the film manufacturers continue to strip down their varieties of film stock. There is still some catching up that digital has to do but I can't imagine it taking more than a decade at the current rate. I know some pros still exclusively use film, and more and more hobbyists are taking to film for it's aesthetic value, but how much time is left, really? I know this is impossible to answer but I feel like total film abandonment is inevitable in less than 20 years. I suppose a similar comparison would be that of vinyl records and digital audio. Even though digital audio quality has objectively surpassed vinyl in every way imaginable, people still buy vinyl records (2013 saw the most vinyl sold in decades). BANME.sh fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:What do you guys think about the longevity of film, 10 or even 20 years from now? People probably asked this question in the mid 2000s when digital cameras started to really pick up, but here we are 10 years later and sensors are getting crazy good, and we're beginning to approach the medium format level "equivalent" of megapixels in consumer digital cameras. Meanwhile the film manufacturers continue to strip down their varieties of film stock. There is still some catching up that digital has to do but I can't imagine it taking more than a decade at the current rate. I think color film will be gone in 20 years, but black & white will be around in some form basically forever because it's so much easier to manufacture.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
I doubt colour film will be gone completely. The big names like Kodak and Fuji might stop making it but there's going to be a hobby market for a long time and I expect enthusiast run companies will continue to produce it in smaller amounts. If Lomography and The Impossible Project are typical examples then you might have mixed feelings about this outcome though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
I imagine that if a company like Ilford can exist in 2014, it can probably continue to exist in 2024. I'll probably have to switch from Tri-X to HP5 at some point but worse things have happened. As far as colour is concerned, I hope it lasts but who knows.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
You can always doomsday prep for the end of film like I have, and get a copy of Ron Mowrey's book on making tons of different emulsions (both film and paper). But I think companies like Ilford, Foma and Adox will be around for the long-hall, as long as they have good retailers like Freestyle and Macodirect selling their stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
So is this a bad scan or did the lab do a lovely job? I converted to BW and turned the highlights way down on the curve, the markings are more visible that way. The colours look very distorted when seen with a normal tone curve
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:43 |
|
|
Like Ilford specialising in only b&w film, you might see other film manufacturers that only specialise in colour negatives or slides, like Ferrania which is starting up again and only offering slide film for the moment. So there just might be a bit more longevity for colour film, but like the others have said, I'm pretty sure b&w film will be around for a long long time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2014 09:19
|
|