|
hmmm..... HHMMMMMMM....  HHMMMMNNNGGHHHH  Yeah, that light meter is buried behind way to many intricate bits for me to feel comfortable taking it all apart soldering stuff and putting it back together again, on the bright side I fixed my lovely multimeter.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 13:45 |
|
|
For the Pentax, Does the meter stay on the entire time or does it shut off after a few seconds? Is the little red light always on? What is it doing or not doing? Is the mirror and shutter just not retracting all the way?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Spedman posted:A good a reason as any other, have you looked at using fabrics at all for the cyanotypes? Not yet, but I have this grand vision of trying to print something on a denim jacket. Had to print a new negative since the first version came out scratched and I wanted to see if my home printer is comparable to my work printer. It is not. Neg came out really thin with strangely high accutance. i vastly overestimated the exposure time and ended up with this:  Time to bust out the bleach I guess. 1/4 tsp sodium carbonate in 500 ml warm tap water. Agitate until just slightly washed out because the toner tends to over-darken:  Rinse thoroughly then agitate in 3 tbsp instant coffee in 500 ml tap water until color has shifted to taste:  This started out as an experiment to see if a complete fuckup could be rescued but I think I like the result. Sticking with the work printer for the time being for negs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Stand dev in Rodinal gives a cool glowy effect for the high contrast areas where dark objects meet the sky, and it's great. img562 img566
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
How do I best travel by airplane with film? Check it all in, or carry on? I remember a discussion lately about it but I can't find it. e: carry on it seems, but I'm seeing some conflicting stories about whether or not the scanner will do any harm Xabi fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Feb 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
Carry-on, ask for a hand-check of your film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
The scanner won't do any harm but I get hand checks anyway. "Hand check" is the magic word so that you sound like you know what you're talking about, and then very rarely you have to follow up by saying (whether true or not) that you like to push your film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
I had 3200 film go through carry on scanners 3 times with no ill effect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:So my Pentax 6x7 burns through its battery in just minutes after I shoot a couple frames with it. This is a new issue. Any idea where I can start looking for where the issue is? Maybe your battery is short circuiting? Is the battery very hot after it dies?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Maybe your battery is short circuiting? Is the battery very hot after it dies? not that I noticed. I've gone through 3 batteries now though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
I had a Pentax 6x7 that killed batteries dead.If yours is a 67 model it might be worth fixing if it's a 6x7 then whelp. I ended up just buying a BGN grade 67 model on KEH.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:not that I noticed. I've gone through 3 batteries now though. Do you have a metered prism? If so, maybe take it off and see if the behaviour persists? I once had a piece of debris caught in the contacts between prism and camera body and it shorted out the battery, making it go flat in no time. It's of course just me grasping straws here, but I guess before you toss that nice 6x7 in the trash...
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Do you have a metered prism? Nope, no meter on it at all. I'm not trashing it. It's going to get fixed at a place that was recommended to me locally.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
 _DSC5832 by Stingray of Doom, on FlickrCrossposting from landscape thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 10:29
|
|
|
Some of you might find this interesting. It's english all the way through except for the intro, so don't be scared. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8cO5_rOFGo
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
My neighbor showed me his old TLR yesterday and it was cool as poo poo. I don't even shoot enough 35mm but I really want one of these fuckers. I also want to try cyanotype, that looks awesome, but all my negatives are 35mm and I'm too poor to shoot LF. Maybe I can rig up some hillbilly poo poo with my enlarger...
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
Just remembered I have an old laser printer in the closet, if I get off my rear end and install the replacement Jetdirect card I bought I could make transparency negatives and try cyanotype... http://www.freestylephoto.biz/070091-Formulary-Liquid-Cyanotype-Kit-1-Liter seems pretty good, $20 for a liter of fluid which seems like it should cover a lot more than the 24 sheets it claims... especially since their 100mL kit claims 50 sheets. Edit: awww yeah, printer is working beautifully, too bad I'm flying away tomorrow and won't be back until Saturday night. Sunday will be transparency-making day. Pham Nuwen fucked around with this message at 06:32 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Noice. How long?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
5 minutes! Those lights are bright but ugly as hell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:5 minutes! Those lights are bright but ugly as hell. is that an LED light or halide?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
LED. The Portland metro area is replacing all of their vapor lamps with LEDs and they're goddamn garbage trash.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Those lights are bright but ugly as hell. Yeah I'm inclined to agree, we've got some near where I live and they look weird as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
I do like LED traffic lights, they can actually been seen at sunset and sunrise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
I have a couple of weird technical questions I can't seem to find an answer to. I have a Nikon FM, and I had a situation today where I couldn't get a proper light reading at any aperture. I finally got it so 250 was overexposed and 500 was underexposed I think at f/16. Moving the shutter speed dial between the two settings indicated correct exposure, and allowed me to fire the shutter so I took the shot. Does that actually work or does it have to be clicked into either 250 or 500 to be accurate?  Secondly I picked up a cheap Vivitar 200mm prime lens. I tested it indoors and it seemed fine, but when I went outside I couldn't get a correct exposure reading no matter the aperture or shutter speed. Switching to my 50mm in the same spot with similar apertures, I was able to get a correct exposure reading. Is something wrong with the lens, or am I just missing something? Here are a few shots from my first 3 rolls of film just so there's some interesting content in this post. I just started shooting two months ago.      
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
I'm not sure about the technical details with that camera but it sounds like you might not have the best understanding of "correct exposure". There are plenty of situations where you want that kind of basic, old-school meter to be reading as over or under exposed, e.g. a dark-coloured subject will be showing underexposure when it is correctly exposed and vice versa. Same thing for back-lit scenes or reflections off water. The book Understanding Exposure is very helpful if you don't have it already.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
deaders posted:I'm not sure about the technical details with that camera but it sounds like you might not have the best understanding of "correct exposure". There are plenty of situations where you want that kind of basic, old-school meter to be reading as over or under exposed, e.g. a dark-coloured subject will be showing underexposure when it is correctly exposed and vice versa. Same thing for back-lit scenes or reflections off water. I do have that, though I haven't finished reading it. I just thought it seemed weird that I was getting different readings with the same settings on two different lenses. Back to studying then, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:I couldn't get a correct exposure reading no matter the aperture or shutter speed. Switching to my 50mm in the same spot with similar apertures, I was able to get a correct exposure reading. Is something wrong with the lens, or am I just missing something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:It could have had something to do with the framing of the shot when you were metering. If the camera has a TTL (through the lens) meter, which it almost certainly does, it will meter the scene as seen through the lens. Still, you should have been able to find an aperture/shutter speed combination to get a "correct" exposure with either lens so it's kind of puzzling how you didn't. Doesn't sound like it's anything wrong with the lens though, it shouldn't affect it. It was incredibly bright outside and I was using ISO 400 film. Maybe that's the problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
Maybe the pin that tells the camera the max aperture or the current aperture setting isn't working or maybe you had depth of field preview turned on which could gently caress with the through-the-lens metering
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
mulls posted:Maybe the pin that tells the camera the max aperture or the current aperture setting isn't working or maybe you had depth of field preview turned on which could gently caress with the through-the-lens metering The second may be the case. The lens is heavy and I'm not confident about where I had my hands placed at the time. I just pulled the lens out and the pin moves when I adjust aperture. Popped the lens on, focused at a point across the room and set it to a "correct" exposure reading at 4 different apertures without problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
some cameras don't meter right when the DoF preview is engaged because DoF preview stops the aperture down but the meter thinks your lens is at max aperture, so it's getting in f/8's worth of light and pretending it is f/2.8's
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
mulls posted:some cameras don't meter right when the DoF preview is engaged because DoF preview stops the aperture down but the meter thinks your lens is at max aperture, so it's getting in f/8's worth of light and pretending it is f/2.8's It's possible that I had it pressed down, but it seems unlikely. I'll mess around with it tomorrow again and see if I can't figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure FM turns the meter off when DoF preview is engaged. The coupling for AI metering is on the edge of the aperture ring itself, not a lever that moves on the lens. The edge of the aperture ring pushes a lever on the camera body, so if one lens was metering wrong all lenses would. There is an aperture lever in the lens, but it only adjusts the actual aperture between the one set on the ring and the maximum. I don't think that lever being out of alignment would cause metering faults. (Check: Set the aperture ring to smallest aperture. Push the aperture lever all the way. Check if any of the aperture blades are still visible through the lens, if they are there is a fault with the lens.) I don't know about the meter on the original FM, but on the FM2 the meter is 3-part: An up arrow, a down arrow, and a circle between them. When one of the arrows light up, the exposure is wrong by more than 1/3 EI in the indicated direction. When the circle lights up, the exposure is within 1/2 EI of correct. Any display where the circle is lit is the best possible setting, unless your lens allows aperture adjustment finer than whole stops. But again, keep in mind that reflected light metering as TTL necessarily is, is dependent on the reflectivity of whatever you're pointing the camera at. The exposure the meter indicates is not necessarily correct, you always have to take the scene into account.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 08:45
|
|
|
nielsm posted:
This is almost exactly how metering on the FM works (which the cosmetic difference of there being 3 circles instead of two arrows and a circle; they function the same way). I just tested again: pointing the 200mm out the window (it's bright and sunny today) I couldn't get the middle circle to light up at f/3.5, f/22, or f/11. When I turned inside and pointed it towards my darker kitchen, I was able to get a circle reading at f/11. With my 50mm pointed out the window I was able to get the circle at a few different apertures. I put the 200mm back on and set the ASA to 100 and was able to at least get circle + at a few different apertures pointing out the window. I think I just different film for close ups outside. Thanks for all the help goons!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
This is kind of fun. My mom came across a Kalloflex in her basement that she suspected was my dad's. He died 15 years ago, so we couldn't really ask. When she sent it to me, there was film in it, so I got it out. Kodacolor II. First C-41 film apparently. Just got it back from the lab, and there are actually some useable photos on it! 35 years it sat undeveloped.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
That's p neat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
gently caress, I just destroyed an entire roll of film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:gently caress, I just destroyed an entire roll of film. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 13:45 |
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:gently caress, I just destroyed an entire roll of film. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 04:03
|
|
