|
Wild EEPROM posted:Having some weird problems and I have no idea what I'm doing (both in general and wrong) What volume of chemistry are you using? Spots sounds like foam and lighter bottom 1/4 sounds like underdevelopment. Both can be caused by not using enough liquid.
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:00 |
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:With previous rolls (TriX, hp5) I'm getting some weird spots. Usually white, and usually on the bottom of the film as well. How do you agitate? Turning the can, shaking the can, or spinning the pole? The reel can move on the pole if you agitate by turning the can, so careful about that. And you obviously get foaming if you shake it, or turn it too aggressively.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 08:27
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:What volume of chemistry are you using? Spots sounds like foam and lighter bottom 1/4 sounds like underdevelopment. Both can be caused by not using enough liquid. 500+5ml of developer quote:How do you agitate? Turning the can, shaking the can, or spinning the pole? rotate the tank while also rotating it end-on-end. Gently, about 15 times at the beginning, and a few taps to dislodge any bubbles. About the same at 30 minutes
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
I've had that problem before and put it down to not enough dev for stand developing. So whenever I do a single roll of 120 I use 600ml and 1+125 rather than 1+100 (which you should do anyway for 120 film).
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:500+5ml of developer Yeah, that's just enough to cover under ideal conditions. As Spedman said, use 600mL. Another thing I also sometimes did when only developing one roll is put an empty reel on the core above the loaded reel to remove the possibility of the loaded reel moving up on the core.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
I have few hundred mounted slides I need to digitize without ICE, and they are caked with dust. What would be the best way to clean them? Compressed air? Just wipe them?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
 real photographers don't need crutches like viewfinders and rangefinders, they Just Shoot Putrid Grin posted:I have few hundred mounted slides I need to digitize without ICE, and they are caked with dust. What would be the best way to clean them? Compressed air? Just wipe them? rocket blower and the softest possible brush afterwards
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:
The MD is for mounting on a microscope, like if a leicaphile was gonna take some dick pix for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Any cyber monday sales on film happening?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Guy was giving these away on Craigslist. Most likely expired according to him. Do I just up the ISO and hope for the best?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:Guy was giving these away on Craigslist. Most likely expired according to him. Do I just up the ISO and hope for the best? Most of them yes, shoot them maybe one stop slower. (I.e. ISO 200 for those rated 400, 100 for those rated 200, etc.) However: The Seattle Film Works one might not be regular C-41 process. Processors may not want to handle it. Ilford HP5+ is a traditional black/white film, will either be expensive to have developed at a lab, or you will have to home develop it. A bad lab might even try to develop it in C-41 chemistry, which will just give a blank roll.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
nielsm posted:The Seattle Film Works one might not be regular C-41 process. Processors may not want to handle it. It isn't C-41, it's ECN-2. If you send it to a processor that doesn't notice you risk gunking up their equipment with the terrible AH layer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Asking the thread that has the people who might actually be using one: Are smartphone light meter apps a decent replacement for a dedicated incident meter, and are there any particularly good ones (for Android)? Any special considerations when metering for MF?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Asking the thread that has the people who might actually be using one: Are smartphone light meter apps a decent replacement for a dedicated incident meter, and are there any particularly good ones (for Android)? Any special considerations when metering for MF? They are okay in a pinch. I tried a bunch a few years ago and settled on this one https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.dq.fotometroNa&hl=en
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Hi, film thread - sorry for long post / trip report. This thread inspired me to get into B&W film stuff, and I'm having a ton of fun. From my 4th and 5th rolls of film (35mm Tri-X, no pushing, in HC-110):    I'm still working out the kinks in the process. Using dilution E for 6.5 minutes (20C, 1 min initial agitation, then for 10s per minute) instead of dilution B for 6 minutes seemed to decrease grain and slightly improve the tones I'm getting (there seems to be some contradictory information about this out there, even in the massive dev chart and in this thread). Instead of using hypo, I'm using the "Ilford method" (10, 20, then 30 inversions with water replaced between rounds). I had a problem with very spotty drying (using tap water in Amsterdam). Adding a final tap water wash phase with a few drops of surfactant seemed to make no difference, but doing the final 30 inversion phase with distilled water and a few drops of surfactant improved the result a lot. I'm still getting a few spots here and there, though. For these last two rolls, I used the same process, except after hanging the rolls I wiped one roll off between my two closed fingers (I think I've seen this method mentioned before in this thread). I haven't touched the second roll. The wiped roll seemed to end up a bit more spotty in the end, but the difference was small. The largest problem seems to be that the final photos of each roll consistently end up having lots of scratches and generally worse quality than the rest of the roll. It's always most noticeable with the very last photo. Example (already heavily edited in Lightroom):  Is this just a problem with how I'm loading? I'm using a 2-reel Paterson tank with the wide flanged Arista reels, and a big changing bag. I leave the leader outside the reel when rewinding, and I load from roll to reel, I don't open the rolls to take the film out - I ended up with generally worse results when I did this earlier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
I always Hulk Hogan the 35mm canister open, take the spool/film out and then roll on the reel. You may be accumulating bits of crap on the felt of the canister as you pull the film out, but I can't think of why the last few shots would be more lovely then the rest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
Spedman posted:I always Hulk Hogan the 35mm canister open, Like with your bare hands? I use one of these things http://www.amazon.com/Chef-Craft-Bottle-Opener-Tapper/dp/B00440D3EC/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1449185284&sr=8-8&keywords=bottle+opener
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Like with your bare hands? I use one of these things http://www.amazon.com/Chef-Craft-Bottle-Opener-Tapper/dp/B00440D3EC/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1449185284&sr=8-8&keywords=bottle+opener  
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
  (it's actually kind of a pain in the rear end for film canisters but I can't find my cheap churchkey opener)
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Like with your bare hands? I use one of these things http://www.amazon.com/Chef-Craft-Bottle-Opener-Tapper/dp/B00440D3EC/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1449185284&sr=8-8&keywords=bottle+opener Absolutely, peel it open from the felt slit where the film comes out, the reel then pops out easily. I find it so much quicker and less painful than using an opener.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
as great as these are they're way to stupid pricey. Prying them from the opening slit is how I used to have to break them open when I worked at a drug store photo lab. Of course you could cut yourself on the metal, never happened to me though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Ok I'm clearly loving something up here and am too dumb to figure it out. I just got a new computer. Installed Lightroom & PS, imported my old catalog. Just started scanning some backlog of B&W negatives. I scan as positives and save to TIFF files. I then open those files in Photoshop and do the following:
Ends up looking something like this, this is what I see in both Photoshop & the Windows photo viewer:  When I try to view the picture in Lightroom's Library, though, it seems to have a weird sepia cast:  If I click over to "Develop", it's fine, but then going back to the Library fucks it up again. Any ideas what I'm loving up?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
Check how you're saving it in Photoshop. Plus the b&w scan should be a grayscale 16 file, not colour.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Check how you're saving it in Photoshop. Plus the b&w scan should be a grayscale 16 file, not colour. Yep, scanning BW as colour will always give you a colour cast in Lightroom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Yep, scanning BW as colour will always give you a colour cast in Lightroom. But the scanning thread said scan b&w negatives as positive color film :/
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
From my understanding, scanning BW in full colour/bit means your getting as close to a "raw file" out of the scanner as possible and you do all the fiddling in Photoshop where you're choosing how you want to edit it. Personally, I just scan in 16-bit greyscale at 2400dpi for BW films and don't have any problems with clipping etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 07:10
|
|
|
Yeah same, I just scan in 16 bit grayscale straight out of the scanner and have no issues when editing. There are no color casts in b&w to fix anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
I think the shutter on my ME Super gets stuck. I can't see though the viewfinder or advance the film. If I open the back and gently nudge the curtain with a fingernail it will pop back and function again. Switching to fixed 1/125 or any other mode doesn't do a thing. Does it need some lubricant or cleaning thing ? It looks completely clean but vOv. (I'd have posted this in the ME thread but it's archived now)
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 10:16
|
|
|
This looks like an awesome summer project: http://petapixel.com/2015/12/07/this-guy-built-his-own-automatic-film-processor-the-filmomat/
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Spedman posted:This looks like an awesome summer project: That kicks so much rear end. Building something like that would be so much fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhgOWvP1vZA
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
Extremely jealous of the dedication it took to build that. I'm pretty sure everyone who has developed film at home in any sort of high volume has wished they had the skill to build something like that. I have rudimentary plans to build a temp controlled water bath for under $100, but automatic fluid pumping with controlled timing and agitation is crazy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Oh poo poo. It will cost $2100 freedom dollars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:Oh poo poo. Might as well get a jobo
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:Oh poo poo. He's German, so it's probably insanely overly engineered and will work for 10 years with out a hitch, hence the crazy price tag. I reckon you could build something similar for around $500-1000, get a hot-water system pump, a bunch of solenoid valves, a raspberry pi/arduino to control it, and fish tank bubbler all of eBay for not a hell of a lot. And then build the tank out of acrylic, which is pretty cheap and easy, and build it around Paterson tank spindles for roll film, and hangers for sheet film.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
If I was to try E-6 development myself, are these the right chemicals? http://www.freestylephoto.biz/1020316-Tetenal-Colortec-E-6-Kit-1-Liter
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:If I was to try E-6 development myself, are these the right chemicals? Yes, but the 3-bath process is IMO inferior to the 6-bath process labs use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yes, but the 3-bath process is IMO inferior to the 6-bath process labs use. I don't know what the options are for me to send out E-6 but I'm in Canada and I assume it's a millionbillion dollars per roll. I used that exact kit, it worked well and I had no problems - but I'm not sure I'd be able to distinguish between "inferior process" and "ExecuDork is a clumsy oaf". E-6 and C-41 are really similar, in my limited experience, and the major differences compared to B&W are 1) all film is the same, no adjustments of time or concentration required for different ISO and 2) temperature control is important, but easily solved with a bucket full of water at the right temperature you can place the developing tank into.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Yes, but the 3-bath process is IMO inferior to the 6-bath process labs use. So where do I find that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Where do you find the home kit falls down? Bleach needs oxidation to work. Fix degrades with oxidation. Combining the two means you should use the whole kit at once, one-shot, if you want to avoid problems with one or the other. Pukestain Pal posted:So where do I find that? In gallon containers. Nobody makes small 6-bath kits anymore 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:00 |
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Bleach needs oxidation to work. Fix degrades with oxidation. Combining the two means you should use the whole kit at once, one-shot, if you want to avoid problems with one or the other. Makes sense, thanks. I've used exactly 1 of each of the two main process kits, both from Tetanal, and both times I used kits advertised as being for 8 rolls to develop 12 rolls because the instructions said you could expect 50% more use if you did everything within a short time (a month? maybe? hard to remember the exact wording) and I did both kits over weekends. For B&W I tend to develop a couple of rolls one day, a couple of rolls a week or so later, then nothing for a month, and so on. But B&W doesn't include a bleach or "blix" step, so I don't have to worry about that oxidation conflict, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2015 21:30
|
|