|
Pukestain Pal posted:Yeah, it's 120. What would cause that? Exposure through the backing paper, one way or another. Most likely if you handle the loading or unloading of the camera in direct sun, or perhaps if the light seal on the camera back isn't perfect. I've seen it a few times myself, but I'm honestly not entirely sure myself. I just know I have negatives with shadows of circled frame numbers etc. right in the middle of them.
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
nielsm posted:Exposure through the backing paper, one way or another. Most likely if you handle the loading or unloading of the camera in direct sun, or perhaps if the light seal on the camera back isn't perfect. I guess when I shoot 3200 again I'll be way more careful on when I load/unload film. I'm pretty sure I did both in my hotel room that wasn't all the bright, but don't remember for sure. I'm developing a roll of HP5 tonight that went on the trip with me, so hopefully that doesn't have the same issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Understanding posted:I've seen a giant rayograph print at MoMA, I've even seen a mattress used to print one too. You can use cyanotype chems to do that kind of photogram if you aren't lucky enough to have the name Man Ray. Understanding posted:this is the first I've heard of such a thing. It seems kind of handy for lots of different alt printing processes that are UV dependent, especially for people who live in non-tropical or cloudy places.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:It seems kind of handy for lots of different alt printing processes that are UV dependent, especially for people who live in non-tropical or cloudy places. And the other issue is getting reproducibility in your printing process. If you can get a good recipe going and know you'll get at least get a decent print out of it, or know if the negative isn't quite right without having to spend hours trying to figure out why things look like crap.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:It seems kind of handy for lots of different alt printing processes that are UV dependent, especially for people who live in non-tropical or cloudy places. I've used one made of florescent UV lights and planks of wood connected to an old darkroom timer, my professor does a lot of alternative process prints and wrote a literal poo poo-ton of information over his process, mostly dealing with the setup of what he calls the "digital negative".
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Is any of his writing online?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
deaders posted:The general consensus is that film under 3200 ISO really isn't an issue in carry on baggage. I have flown with Tr-x in 35mm and 120 a few times and and have not noticed any issues with it at all after developing. Yes, but the issue is checked luggage, not carry-on. I can't speak to why Spedman never had issues even with film in checked luggage, but I've definitely seen anecdata to suggest it *can* be a problem. It's probably only some airports and some randomly selected bags that get put through the higher dose xray machines. To me, it's just not worth the risk. I'll put my film through the carry-on xrays without a second thought (though I get hand checks instead when there's time and I don't mind the additional inconvenience), so in my mind there's absolutely no reason to put film in checked luggage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:Just scanned in some Delta 3200 from my trip. It ended up having to go through a carryon xray machine once because of some issues with flights. See those white dots? Is that a byproduct of the xray pass? Any ideas? Contrary to what other people are saying about exposure through the backing paper, that just looks like water spots to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Understanding posted:wrote a literal poo poo-ton of information over his process Spedman posted:Is any of his writing online?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Contrary to what other people are saying about exposure through the backing paper, that just looks like water spots to me. The whole wash was done with distilled water and dried for a day. I can't imagine that being the case, but I guess it's possible. I think it's just going to remain  . I'll do a rewash and see what happens just for kicks though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
In case anyone hates money, KEH is doing 10% bodies, 15% lenses, 20% everything else sale with the code SITEWIDE today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:In case anyone hates money, KEH is doing 10% bodies, 15% lenses, 20% everything else sale with the code SITEWIDE today. I just saved like $40 on a Mamiya TLR and so should you. Discount doesn't work on film tho.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Is any of his writing online? His negative workflow was posted online on his tumblr, which I painstakingly sifted through and tagged so I could find it later. His actual printing process he doesn't go over because 1. He goes over again and again how many variables there can be so he feels any numbers he can give are practically useless in his opinion. 2. I guess he want's to keep his secrets close to him? He said it took him a few years to get his process close to how he want's his final prints. anyway you can find it here http://dammit-joe.tumblr.com/search/Gum+Bichromate and if you wanna sift through and find some animated gifs he made of him working, http://tonygonzalezartist.tumblr.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yes, but the issue is checked luggage, not carry-on. I can't speak to why Spedman never had issues even with film in checked luggage, but I've definitely seen anecdata to suggest it *can* be a problem. It's probably only some airports and some randomly selected bags that get put through the higher dose xray machines. Sorry if I was a little confusing before, I totally agree with MrBlandAverage, don't check your film, always put it in your carry-on bags, checked bags get hammered with X-Rays. The reason why I mentioned it before is that on my last trip between Aus and US I had to put my Instax with a few shots left in it in my checked bag because of space in my carry-on. There were no ill effects, but I sure as hell wasn't going to put my Portra 400 in there on the trip back. Thanks for those links Understanding, I'll be sure to check them out today. If anybody is interested in Alt Processing stuff, I highly recommend Jill Enfields book: http://www.amazon.com/Enfields-Guide-Photographic-Alternative-Processes/dp/0415810248
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:In case anyone hates money, KEH is doing 10% bodies, 15% lenses, 20% everything else sale with the code SITEWIDE today. oh man OM glass get innnnn 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Sorry if I was a little confusing before, I totally agree with MrBlandAverage, don't check your film, always put it in your carry-on bags, checked bags get hammered with X-Rays. The reason why I mentioned it before is that on my last trip between Aus and US I had to put my Instax with a few shots left in it in my checked bag because of space in my carry-on. There were no ill effects, but I sure as hell wasn't going to put my Portra 400 in there on the trip back. Yeah, I absolutely didn't throw my film in checked baggage. I don't hate throwing away photos.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
Does Wal Mart still send out C-41 120 film to be developed really cheap if you don't need prints?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
135mm f/2.8 and a winder coming for my OM-1. gently caress yeah 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:In case anyone hates money, KEH is doing 10% bodies, 15% lenses, 20% everything else sale with the code SITEWIDE today.  just shook on a deal to get a mamiya c3 from a dorkroom goon and have ordered some hp5 120 and a 80mm f/2.8 lens for it (ontop of the 105mm it's coming with
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
Just scored a really old bottle of hc-110 from my school's lab. It's date code is 0125 and marked 11/01, way before any of the professors started here. Still in it's original opaque gray bottle. I'd be more excited except i dont have smaller bottles to decant it, and i've heard from you guys about how it eats through the bottle over time. But i guess if it hadn't by now it might not at all. This is all good since i have a half gallon of d-76 left and it's probably expired by now. Moving on to alt printing, i'll be emailing my professor later tonight about the actual gum bichromate printing process, and when i finally get it (i did ask for it last semester) i'll share what i can. Also, I got like 5 rolls of 400tx 120 from a grad student I know who told me it went through xrays like 6 times, and some paper is coming my way from another grad student! It's good to be a broke as college student. The Modern Sky fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Jan 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
What happened here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
The most irritating part of working in recycling is dealing with all the worthless junk people recycle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:The most irritating part of working in recycling is dealing with all the worthless junk people recycle.  That's one hell of a find.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:The most irritating part of working in recycling is dealing with all the worthless junk people recycle. f youuuuuuuuuuuu my favorite part about buying vintage lenses at bargain prices, is the previous owner most likely kept a UV or skylight filter on it for the it's entire lifespan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:The most irritating part of working in recycling is dealing with all the worthless junk people recycle. holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:The most irritating part of working in recycling is dealing with all the worthless junk people recycle. had to look this up because i dont know things but 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Acros is a really good film. Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
So the colors in Portra 400 are as good as it gets. Look at this. Untitled
mulls fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Feb 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
So this might be a rather tangential question, but I am an xray tech by trade and found a lot of neato teaching films of wild diseases in the basement storage at work. I would really like to digitize them and share their educational goodies, but I am not really sure how to go about this short of paying some records storage company that has a film digitizer. A brief look seems that my best bet would to just take em up on a lightbox and snap a shot with my crummy old digital camera as all the scanners I have access to do not have a 17"x14" field. Are there any suggestions as to how to go about this if someone has some sort of experience in digitizing film? Such as the kind of settings I should use.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
mulls posted:So the colors in Portra 400 are as good as it gets. Look at this. dat color  Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum by Paul Frederiksen on 500px
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
Asproigerosis posted:So this might be a rather tangential question, but I am an xray tech by trade and found a lot of neato teaching films of wild diseases in the basement storage at work. I would really like to digitize them and share their educational goodies, but I am not really sure how to go about this short of paying some records storage company that has a film digitizer. A brief look seems that my best bet would to just take em up on a lightbox and snap a shot with my crummy old digital camera as all the scanners I have access to do not have a 17"x14" field. Are there any suggestions as to how to go about this if someone has some sort of experience in digitizing film? Such as the kind of settings I should use. As for settings, a macro lens is very handy. If you don't have one and can't borrow one, the basic kit lens will get the job done. The idea is to set up the camera centred on the light table, put it in manual focus and take a few test shots to line it up exactly, and use some middle value for the aperture and the camera's "native" ISO - typically that will be about 100. A tripod is necessary, you can happily use longer exposures (like 1/4 second) on a tripod setup that are impossible to do hand-held. What is your digicam? And are you at any risk of getting into or causing trouble by doing this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
More cyanotypes in the works... Not sure if I want to tone this one or let it stand as is. In progress by voodoorootbeer, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
That looks really good as is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
mulls posted:So the colors in Portra 400 are as good as it gets. Look at this. Hence the name of the thread 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:More cyanotypes in the works... Not sure if I want to tone this one or let it stand as is. How big are the negatives you're working with?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Spedman posted:How big are the negatives you're working with? I'm cheating and printing digital negs on 8.5x11 transparency sheets although I did shoot the source image on tri-x in this case. Maybe someday I'll add large format to my stable but no time soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
With all the hassle of shooting, developing and getting the right negs from 8x10, I'm considering printing up some transparencies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 11:15
|
|
|
a package of pictorico transparencies is only $21 at 8.5"x11", and even then, you'll probably get good results using less expensive kinds. My professor had a way of find both a good exposure time, and a good tone curve to work out of, using a printout of boxes from 1-100% black. When I get my paper and chems, I'll probably end up doing the same and make my own tone curve in photoshop to run the negatives through. In the mean time though, I have to come up with an idea to begin my project for the semester.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
split tonin like it's 1849 split-toned by voodoorootbeer, on Flickr Source image shot on Tri-x with Zeiss Ikon Nettar because why the hell not. sorry for the cell phone quality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2015 22:24
|
|