|
nielsm posted:You need to mix the entire kit at once, to get 1 L of each solution. However after that you can measure out however much you need for each development. Thank you, much appreciated. I might give one of the 1L kits a go and see how it compares to the lab development. Lately my lab has been delivering scratched and dirty negs so it can't be hard to beat that...
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
You'll be very angry/happy when you realise how easy it is to get good results.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:London Drugs Huh. That's weird - why wouldn't you just toss the CD/prints in the trash on your way out of the store if you wanted dev-only? I can't remember what the downtown camera shop charged me for C-41 the last time I was there, months and months ago, but I think it was like $4 / roll. I've got an E-6 kit I think I've built up enough rolls to make it worth cracking it open, I really should get on that. On the other hand, I've been quite happy with the prints I've ordered from London Drugs. Gargonovitch posted:Any Canadian goons know where I can get E6 or RA4 chemicals from? If it comes to a group buy I'd be interested in RA4 for a reasonable price.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Huh. That's weird - why wouldn't you just toss the CD/prints in the trash on your way out of the store if you wanted dev-only? The way I'm reading it, dev costs $4.99/$5.99 if you get prints or a CD (which cost extra, presumably more than two bucks), while dev only costs $6.99/$7.99. The obvious solution is to order "1 print of exposure #1", for $0.29, and qualify for the "with prints" price, but they probably mean "prints of the whole roll".
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
 door by PC-P, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Do any of you use a DSLR to digitize color negatives? And if so, do you have any Lightroom presets to recommend for getting rid of the orange tone?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Do any of you use a DSLR to digitize color negatives? And if so, do you have any Lightroom presets to recommend for getting rid of the orange tone? This is gonna be your answer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_qeZOWqchM
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
Shellman posted:This is gonna be your answer Yes
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Shellman posted:This is gonna be your answer I'm amazed that this is still making the rounds. It's a solid tutorial. That was one of my first MF photos
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
I added it to the OP to cut down on it being requested every other page, we are now down to it being posted every 4th or 5th page.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
The reason I followed it up with the LR preset question is because I'm thinking about digitizing all my parents' 35mm stuff, which is all color negative. I have a V750 but flatbeds are pretty drat time consuming for a job of this scale, which doesn't require the be all, end all of quality. No way am I going to be tweaking any but the absolute best shots of them individually, I just need something "good enough" I can run everything through.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:The reason I followed it up with the LR preset question is because I'm thinking about digitizing all my parents' 35mm stuff, which is all color negative. I have a V750 but flatbeds are pretty drat time consuming for a job of this scale, which doesn't require the be all, end all of quality. No way am I going to be tweaking any but the absolute best shots of them individually, I just need something "good enough" I can run everything through. If you have PS, you can create an action to do Auto-Levels or Auto-Color, then run the action on that batch of photos. Should give you a reasonable starting point for minor tweaks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Tried some caffenol film developing a few weeks ago. Turned out okay for a first attempt. Hopefully I can get access to a scanner better suited for film soon. Lines by KatticusFinch, on Flickr Bike Rack by KatticusFinch, on Flickr Alley Men by KatticusFinch, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:If you have PS, you can create an action to do Auto-Levels or Auto-Color, then run the action on that batch of photos. Should give you a reasonable starting point for minor tweaks. That works, thanks! edit: Also, I bought an immersion circulator for doing sous vide. It's mighty tempting to use for developing C-41 or E-6, thing will hold a cooler full of water within .2C all day. On the other hand, mixing something I prep my food with, with chemicals... Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Oct 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:That works, thanks! Use a tub within the main tub filled with water to hold the chemical tanks if you're worried about your impeller getting gunked up with chemical residue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Use a tub within the main tub filled with water to hold the chemical tanks if you're worried about your impeller getting gunked up with chemical residue. drat, that's a great idea. Not so much worried about gunking up the thing so much as potentially contaminating food, but that would solve it. edit: so yeah dudes and dudettes, you should buy a sous vide rig to 1) develop film and 2) enjoy delicious food. I've got a Sansaire, although I'm on the list for an international Nomiku 2.0 whenever that comes out (can't take the Sansaire with me to Australia unless I want to buy a transformer). Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Oct 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
I'm not sure if it's even possible to answer this question... I've previously printed all my 35mm stuff on 8*10 paper. It always seemed a little small for hanging, although fine for viewing. Is 9.5*12 much of a step up for hanging photos? I don't have much available money so I'd be limited in what I can get. These are the two papers I'm looking at, any opinions? Given I have a few negatives I want to print off, test prints, etc. a 10 sheet envelope of paper doesn't seem like the right buy so I'd be getting 50. http://www.thephotoshop.ie/index.php?route=product/product&path=61_88_105&product_id=96 http://www.thephotoshop.ie/index.php?route=product/product&path=61_88_105&product_id=297
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:drat, that's a great idea. Not so much worried about gunking up the thing so much as potentially contaminating food, but that would solve it. You can make a system to do this yourself if you want easily enough. I just took a 5 dollar immersion heater, a tiny fish filter to circulate water, and an arduino with a relay setup and temp probe. Had it turn the heater on if it was too cold, turn it off if it was too hot, and it'll sit within 1c of target all day long. I tried setting up a fancy PID system to run it but man that was just not working with my tank. e. Wiring up circuits is fun! 
Dr. Despair fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Oct 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:You can make a system to do this yourself if you want easily enough. I just took a 5 dollar immersion heater, a tiny fish filter to circulate water, and an arduino with a relay setup and temp probe. Had it turn the heater on if it was too cold, turn it off if it was too hot, and it'll sit within 1c of target all day long.  If I end up doing more C-41 at home, I want to make myself one of these.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Mrenda posted:I'm not sure if it's even possible to answer this question... On the other hand, money limitations and presumably space / equipment limitations mean you'll have trouble getting really big. What kind of equipment for printing do you have? Could you print, say, 16 x 20? Other common paper sizes are different ratios of height x width, so you'd have to crop your pictures to fit them onto 11 x 14, for example.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:On the other hand, money limitations and presumably space / equipment limitations mean you'll have trouble getting really big. What kind of equipment for printing do you have? Could you print, say, 16 x 20? Yeah, there's only so far you can lift an enlarger head. If this is limiting him, probably the simplest step is to get a "wide-angle" enlarger lens like Componon-WA or Rodagon-WA. You can get fancy with how you use the enlarger - for example, projecting through a hole in a table onto the ground. Or running an enlarger horizontally, projecting onto a nearby wall, although you run into alignment issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
Speaking of prints, how do you guys frame them? Or do you frame them at all? What style frames? How heavy are they? I have lovely apartment walls, so I can't hang anything too heavy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Santa is strapped posted:Speaking of prints, how do you guys frame them? Or do you frame them at all? Mix and match thrift store frames, all spray painted the same color.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
I just use plain black frames from Ikea, they already matted if you print in standard sizes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
A piece of blu-tack to hold it on the wall because it's not worthy of framing (is what I do)
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Santa is strapped posted:Speaking of prints, how do you guys frame them? Or do you frame them at all? voodoorootbeer posted:Mix and match thrift store frames, all spray painted the same color. 8x10, 5x7, and 11x14 are easy to find in thrift shops, but 8x12 is very rare and anything bigger seems to be a mixed bag of mostly custom or oddball-sized frames that you'd have to cut matting for to fit something into. I hate matting, not sure why, seems to be one of those little irrational annoyances but I like my pictures to fill the frame, and the frame itself to be pretty minimal. Thin, black, and not too beat up. Speaking of framing & hanging on lovely apartment walls (whassup rental-life buddy), is anyone thinking of running a print exchange? I ran it last year, it's really not that much work but I'd rather not do it twice in a row to avoid generating paranoia in anyone (read: SoundMonkey and his burgeoning mania).
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Yes, I'm so down (to participate  )
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
So I haven't seen much talk about those Plustek OpticFilm scanners. Obviously they only work with 35mm, but they seem to do it as well if not much better than normal scanners. The downside being that it will only work with 35mm. Anyone have any good/bad experiences? The Pentax comes back soon, so I want to get my poo poo together for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
I recently got a used plustek opticfilm 8100 as my first scanner and I like it for my type of usage (mostly 2-3 films per month). I'm new to film so I can't vouch on the image quality, but to my eyes it's pretty nice. The film holder feels kinda flimsy and its sometimes hard to get a film strip positionned correctly and be aware the scanner doesn't have a hardware dust/scratch removal (I think the more expensive model do), so I always work with clean negatives and always blow the dust before putting the holder in the scanner. It's slow cooking though, I preview each image on viewscan one by one and scan when I feel I can do something out of it. It comes with Silverfast 8 which is apparently pretty good by I just scan the negatives in vuescan and use colorperfect in photoshop. hth I posted some pics earlier in the thread taken with a cheap nikkor 35-105mm zoom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
I just got a few pro packs of Portra 160 but usually use Portra 400. With 400 I just shoot it at 400 EI - is 160 pretty much the same or is it better to slightly overexpose?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Same
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
 Apparently the taco method works, although it works better inside my newer tank and not the family hand me down. Also somehow me and my father didn't gently caress up with the large format all the exposures are perfect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Shot on my last few rolls of Astia. Fa Yuen Street, Hong Kong by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Shot on my last few rolls of Astia. Niiiiiice
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 11:35
|
|
|
Long time lurker, mostly because I haven't had time to shoot film in a while! I finally had the opportunity to shoot two rolls of film that I've never worked with before. On the slide front, Velvia 50. On the B&W front, Ilford Pan F+50. I was pleasantly surprised. I'll split it into two posts to not overwhelm.  Bellagio waters by 96cobraguy, on Flickr 000003030008 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr 000003030022 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr 000003030034 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr High Roller 2 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr 000003030025 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr 000003030016 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr 000003030015 by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Michele by 96cobraguy, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
and the other Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr Untitled by 96cobraguy, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
96cobraguy posted:
especially love those
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
My two enlargers are in my parents' place, packed away in a wardrobe. There's literally nowhere to set up a dark room where I am, nor could I monopolise any of the space. I'd have to rent time in an arts centre darkroom (€12 for three hours, no choice in chems, no toning.) Their enlargers are all donated, from what I remember they have nothing amazing, and I haven't seen what lenses they have on them. I figure they're about as good as my cheaply picked up enlargers. To be honest I'd prefer to use my own enlarger because I find dichroic heads easier for printing, but I have to make do with what I have access to. Realistically 9.5*12 is probably as large as I could go, and 12*16 is both cost prohibitive and not possible with the dark room's equipment. I think they have one large format enlarger (4*5) that stretches to the ceiling from a table, but I don't know if that'd be usable for printing 35mm at 12*16. If I'm sticking with 8*10 rather than 9.5*12 I'd be tempted to go for a warm tone paper. More expensive but I think it'd suit what I'm printing. Affordable though as I could get a couple of prints from a 25 sheet pack, rather than going for a 50 sheet pack the 9.5*12s come in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
I took my Olympus half frame to a music festival. These are all Tri-X developed in HC-110 E according to Massive Dev. It's really fun to try to create an image that spans a frame, either by seeming to continue the one shot or to juxtapose two visuals.  img211 img169Also, sometimes just showing the same scene four times looks cool.  img225
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 02:15
|
|
