|
what the gently caress posted:I seriously have so much respect for people that do this. Watching people like Borut Peterlin go from start to finish with plate to print is loving agonising and must take so much patience and discipline. He seems to have a crazy amount of energy, plus he does it full time now, so he can actually do it properly. I watched a video recently of him showing some salt prints he made from a collodion negative, and he had dozens of trial prints before he got what he wanted. He should invest in a UV box, putting the drat prints in the sun for hours on end would drive me nuts.
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
I'm pretty determined to try and do a bit of Eastern Europe next year. I really want to do one of his workshops that new house he's done up looks loving rad and just genuinely seems like a really cool guy. Yeah I saw that salt print video of his and it is hard to watch because it seems so insanely time consuming. I would have thrown everything in the bin and hung myself before I'd even done 2 prints with that process. Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Aug 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:Welcome to the club. Buy a handle. I'm the guy who commented on your 'gram about the handle and the folding focus hood. This is what I was talking about : http://www.pentaxforums.com/accessoryreviews/pentax-67-folding-focusing-hood.html I find it super useful for waist level stuff because it includes a magnifying loupe which is great for focusing. Also it's way lighter than the prism and you don't have to lug that stupid thing around. Then again I'm a big ol noob so maybe you dont have any problems with these things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
From today. I am really bad at scanning these things, they are much nicer in the flesh. New helper tray from Lund Photographics helps a little, makes development a bit better but I'm still missing parts with the flow.  Jake  Simon  Ryan 
Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
Impressive stuff man, I simply wouldn't have the patience for that level of delicacy. Replicating filmic tones through a scan can be really hard, probably the only recommendations I have are don't set the white point quite so high (paper white =/= screen white) and play with curves. I'm loving my C330s, and I'm getting more confident snap focusing at f2.8, the fact the focus wheel turns the same direction as a cinema follow focus is helpful, all my reflexes are correct. I need a project though, this stuff doesn't really feed my hunger for narrative/conceptual work. Excuse the borders, I'm too lazy to do more than one export and they're useful for my blog.  190815-6x6Pro400h (2 of 4) by TimFPictures, on Flickr 140815 Portra (2 of 2) by TimFPictures, on Flickr 140815 Portra (1 of 2) by TimFPictures, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 13:51
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:Replicating filmic tones through a scan can be really hard, probably the only recommendations I have are don't set the white point quite so high (paper white =/= screen white) and play with curves. Scanning film I can handle. These are black plates so are reflective scans. The guide I found on how to scan them just involves setting the levels with the little dropper tool thing and clicking around the image till you find one that's ok, and it's all over the place.. It's really hard but yeah ok maybe I'll try curves. Thanks for the tip.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
what the gently caress posted:Scanning film I can handle. These are black plates so are reflective scans. The guide I found on how to scan them just involves setting the levels with the little dropper tool thing and clicking around the image till you find one that's ok, and it's all over the place.. It's really hard but yeah ok maybe I'll try curves. Thanks for the tip. Practically what this means, and this is purely trial-and-error experience not professional theory, is that you should either scan with a bit of leeway either side of the histogram and then apply curves in PS or you should scan with a curve already applied. If you're using Epson Scan it can be pretty straight forward. Image not mine, ignore the annotations  Basically you want your white point just clipping over paper white (B), this seems contradictory to what I just told you, but you then move the output white to something like 200, this doesn't CLIP the image at 200, it's just the value assigned to the input white point (I think). You can then set the shoulder, the upper part of the tone curve, to soft on the tone curve viewer, and this'll neatly roll off your highlights, giving the print a bit of leeway and insuring you don't have any harsh digital whites, play with the output/input balance until your highlights look good. Same can be done for blacks but I find that less integral. Grey point is then set based on what looks good. I hope that was helpful/not patronizing/confusing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Scan as 48 bit tiff don't touch the histogram in the scanning program do it all in photoshop etc
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:
This one is great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Chill Callahan posted:This one is great. Even with the guy on the left side of the frame? I'd have preferred it if he wasn't there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:Even with the guy on the left side of the frame? I'd have preferred it if he wasn't there. It would be better without the dude but he doesn't ruin it for me at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:Even with the guy on the left side of the frame? I'd have preferred it if he wasn't there. I'm gonna say that it actually needs the dude and wouldn't work without. He adds context and also visually balances the heavy dark shadow on the right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:
This is totally loving rad, from a fellow Mamiya C330 afficianado.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
 Clementi by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 11:06
|
|
|
Not condescending at all. Very helpful.Thanks heaps i'll give it a shot. There's no whites tho so much as creamy highlights
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
Ilford 3200 gives me a big ol boner San Gennaro, Williamsburg Brooklyn by spike mccue, on Flickr edit: except flickr made it look like poo poo. wtf.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Yeah I deleted my old flickr account ages ago. I set another one up recently but have seen heaps of people whining about it, particularly the auto-sharpening... can you turn it off or what? great shot btw Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Aug 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
Took a few shots with my Mamiya C220 on a recent trip to SF.    I was worried because I forgot to bring my cable release. Really had to concentrate to stay steady for the shots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Barrowed my dads speed graphic in return for developing his film, utter pain in the rear end to use (he needs me to show him how to use it) but it does take neat photos. Speed Graphic 1 by Shrieking Muppet, on Flickr  Speed Graphic 2 by Shrieking Muppet, on Flickr  Speed Graphic 3 by Shrieking Muppet, on Flickr  Speed Graphic 4 by Shrieking Muppet, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
Is the lens uncoated?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Is the lens uncoated? It's from the 1950s so I doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:It's from the 1950s so I doubt it. So it probably isn't  (Tell tale blown-out skies) Here's an 8x10 on x-ray film, some uneven development, not enough in the darkbox 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 09:50
|
|
|
 Taman Jurong by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
How many "keepers" do you get per roll, out of curiosity?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
 Adam by Glenn Nielson, on Flickr Very few shots where I did the format justice, but I still had fun. My biggest struggle was leveling the camera. And I should've brought a step ladder for some of the portraits I took.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
what the gently caress posted:How many "keepers" do you get per roll, out of curiosity? If you're referring to "keepers", then maybe about 50% per roll on average.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:If you're referring to "keepers", then maybe about 50% per roll on average. I wish I could manage a strike rate that high... I'm happy when I snag two keepers on a roll.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
For portraits / headshots I've been getting like 6 out of 10 per roll. For landscape stuff it's more like 2/10.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:I wish I could manage a strike rate that high... I'm happy when I snag two keepers on a roll. That used to be me when I was just starting out, so I think the more you shoot, the more you 'curate' even before you press the trigger, hence your keeper rate starts getting higher in that sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Anyone have experience with ND filters on the Mamiya Sekor lenses? The results from these lenses are insane so I'm hesitant to stick something on the end of them but I'd also like to be able to shoot at f2.8 during the day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:I wish I could manage a strike rate that high... I'm happy when I snag two keepers on a roll. Stop pressing the shutter for bad photos.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Stop pressing the shutter for bad photos. Sage advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Stop pressing the shutter for bad photos. This should be in the OP of photography. Takes a while to click though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Stop pressing the shutter for bad photos. This is a much better summary of what I said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
I try to maintain a hit rate of about 1/4-1/3. Any lower than that and I need to get better at something - raw physical technique, reflexes, or just knowing when a shot is lost and there's no use burning film. Any higher than that and I need to be harder on myself and raise my mental bar of what constitutes something worth keeping.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
My keeper rate is negative
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Stop pressing the shutter for bad photos. That's why I haven't shot anything in weeks... On a side note, I never really got into the traditional 35mm focal length because it was never wide enough when I needed wide, and every other time I preferred something in the 40-45mm range so I didn't have to zoom with my feet as much. From experience, how does that translate to 6x6 and 6x7 diagonals? If you tend to like a normal focal length in 3:2, does 80mm fit the bill with a more square frame?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Helicity posted:That's why I haven't shot anything in weeks... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWork/charts/comp_pentaxmed_3.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Helicity posted:That's why I haven't shot anything in weeks... I think it's 80mm for 6x6 and 90mm for 6x7.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
Here's a thing:
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 08:17
|
|
