|
I brought a Schneider Symmar-S lens which has Compur 1 markings on it but the lens board mount looks to be about 56mm, what sort of lens board mount is that? It looks like an extra ring attached to the regular mount but I can't take it off.
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
crap nerd posted:I brought a Schneider Symmar-S lens which has Compur 1 markings on it but the lens board mount looks to be about 56mm, what sort of lens board mount is that? It looks like an extra ring attached to the regular mount but I can't take it off. Can you take a picture of it? Are you talking about the retaining ring, which should have notches in it? Do you have a lens wrench?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
crap nerd posted:I brought a Schneider Symmar-S lens which has Compur 1 markings on it but the lens board mount looks to be about 56mm, what sort of lens board mount is that? It looks like an extra ring attached to the regular mount but I can't take it off. Is it a big ridged ring with screw holes in it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/114183606/galaxy-hyper-speed-120-for-medium-format-camera?ref=hero_thanks Medium format positive paper "film"
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
I got a pair of used Dianas for cheap (one is the Lomography reproduction and one is an original Diana-F in the box with the manual, strap, flash, etc.) and ran some expired film through the reproduction just as a test. I'll see if anything interesting comes out, but honestly it was just bullshitting around the house to see if I could get the thing loaded and working. In more interesting news, Saturday is Dapper Day at Walt Disney World and I got my hands on a Brownie No. 2 that appears to be part of the pre-Great War run in almost pristine condition. Along with dressing up with my girlfriend in our turn of the century chic, I'm going to bring the Brownie along for some period-appropriate pictures! I've loaded it with some black & white Ilford ISO 100 and I'm gonna play around at the Magic Kingdom to see what we get.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Spedman posted:https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/114183606/galaxy-hyper-speed-120-for-medium-format-camera?ref=hero_thanks Ah, yes, the stuff that, while being optimized for it, does require reversal chemistry... which of course they will also sell you. I wish they wouldn't call their product "direct positive," because it's completely different than the stuff Ilford makes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
Spedman posted:https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/114183606/galaxy-hyper-speed-120-for-medium-format-camera?ref=hero_thanks that is some extra dumb poo poo right there. MrBlandAverage posted:Ah, yes, the stuff that, while being optimized for it, does require reversal chemistry... which of course they will also sell you. I wish they wouldn't call their product "direct positive," because it's completely different than the stuff Ilford makes. yeah, I cancelled my 8x10 pledge because they weren't upfront about needing additional chems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Can you take a picture of it? Are you talking about the retaining ring, which should have notches in it? Do you have a lens wrench?  The inner notches are quite recessed in the outer ring, I don't have a lens wrench but I don't think it would fit in the outer ring anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
crap nerd posted:
Get yourself a spanner wrench and unscrew the outer ring. I suspect you'll then be able to take off what does look like a board hole size adapter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
Thanks a million, I'll pick one up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:that is some extra dumb poo poo right there. I just thought, "why?" when I saw it was direct positives with reversal chemistry. What hell is wrong with a contact print or just shooting slides, neither of them would be less complicated and both would give you a nicer result.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
What I really don't get is that they compare their product to Polaroid... but this one involves a big manual process?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
Eh. I think it's kinda neat. If you already have the gear to process BW film, then it's cool to get a positive print immediately after developing without having to worry about scanning or making contact prints which can be time consuming. But you can't use regular BW chemistry and have to buy their special formula? boo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Also there's no pledge level that gets you rolls of film and the chemicals. Also, also, I'm the guy with a medium format camera who wants passport-sized photos from it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Also, also, I'm the guy with a medium format camera who wants passport-sized photos from it. That's true, but also, if you've ever dug through a collection of family photos, you'd probably have noticed that a lot of them were ~6x9cm because all you could get back then were contact prints when everyone had a cheap folder or a kodak brownie. You could argue that's what they're trying to reproduce here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Eh. I think it's kinda neat. If you already have the gear to process BW film, then it's cool to get a positive print immediately after developing without having to worry about scanning or making contact prints which can be time consuming. But you can't use regular BW chemistry and have to buy their special formula? boo. Yeah if it was just shoot and dev as normal then cool but if I'm gonna add a reversal step 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Yeah if it was just shoot and dev as normal then cool but if I'm gonna add a reversal step This. I've done reversal Black and white slides and while they looked gorgeous it was a pain the rear end. If this was just normal developing I could definetly get behind for some toying around, but extra development is just not worth the hassle... edit: From looking in their delevoping guide, you could just use a standard reversal developing process for black and white ... It would take a little bit of experimenting to get the times/dilutions right but it's most likely doable without proprietary chemicals. Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Apr 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
 Untitled by Drew Davis, on Flickr  Untitled by Drew Davis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Of course on the last shot, the loving pre-1910 Brownie gets stuck. The amount of force needed to pull out the winding key enough to let me remove the film holder tore one of the pins out of the cardboard, so I'm retiring the camera after more than 100 years of existence in virtually pristine condition because I can no longer trust the key to go into the hole in the spool. I'm not entirely sure why it jammed up. I did find that the backing paper and the film were pretty well separate when I started manually unraveling the roll in my improvised darkroom (my bathroom with the lights turned off) and it's not holding tightly to the roll so I'm constantly afraid that it's going to undo itself even after being taped shut and ruin the shots. I very carefully put the roll in a lunchbox and zipped it up tight, and I'm going to get it developed as fast as possible to minimize any chance of accidental exposure. Edit: Okay, I ran a test roll of expired film through and it worked. It looks like the only real problem is that the pin that tore out won't go back in the hole and stay there, so the winding key catches on the pin as it tries to turn. I'm going to see if I can glue and reinsert the pin, because I was really lucky to get a camera of this vintage in such good condition (especially one that takes 120 film so it's not expensive or labor-intensive to run) and it would be a shame to let it go to waste. chitoryu12 fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Apr 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
 tasman pano 1 by alex gard, on Flickrhosed up the alignment and forgot to take an egg out with me but yolo, 3x 8x10 plates
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:
your poo poo is dope as gently caress, seriously never stop
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 08:06
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:your poo poo is dope as gently caress, seriously never stop
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Are you rotating the camera for those or using only shift?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Are you rotating the camera for those or using only shift? I was rotating the camera. I forgot/neglected to tilt the camera on it's 'list'? axis to get all the llines to match up. Last time i tried and failed a triptych I did this and it wooked really well. I'm gonna that again. Was thinking of Mounting the camera on the hole closest to the lens and retracting it so the nodal point was over the tripod mount and using the lens support on the back of the camera, for less distortion. but may be overkill
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:
Ovivore, an exhibit of albumen prints created entirely from the whites of locally foraged eggs. Hatching summer 2016.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
voodoorootbeer posted:Ovivore, an exhibit of albumen prints created entirely from the whites of locally foraged eggs. Hatching summer 2016. Soz if you already know this but I dip a cotton bud in the raw egg white (you can also just make an albumen solution with like 1 egg white in 1L of water and whisked to hell/filtered but I cbf) and then run that around the edge of the glass plate and then let that dry before flowing the collodion. Acts as an adhesive and stops the plates peeling around the edges like they have in that pic. Sticks like absolute poo poo to a blanket and if you want to reuse the plate cleaning it off around the edges is a nightmare. Nature's voodoo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
 Hotel Salyut by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Lavra by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Pump by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Bored by Iain Compton, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2016 12:40
|
|
|
Opinions on the Mamiya RB67?? There's one locally for a very good price and I'm tired of using improvised or very old medium-format gear... It comes with the 90mm f3.8 lens and one film back. Price in dollars would be around 125. I'm VERY tempted right now and have a lot of 120 film stocked...
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Opinions on the Mamiya RB67?? There's one locally for a very good price and I'm tired of using improvised or very old medium-format gear... It comes with the 90mm f3.8 lens and one film back. Price in dollars would be around 125. I'm VERY tempted right now and have a lot of 120 film stocked... It's rather bulky. Otherwise feels good to use. Having separate levers for winding film and cocking shutter/mirror takes a bit getting used to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Opinions on the Mamiya RB67?? There's one locally for a very good price and I'm tired of using improvised or very old medium-format gear... It comes with the 90mm f3.8 lens and one film back. Price in dollars would be around 125. I'm VERY tempted right now and have a lot of 120 film stocked... It's good but heavy as fuuuuck. I think the 90mm might suffer a bit from distortion but you can always correct it in post.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Oh yeah, the RB67 has a ton of levers and knobs and interchangeable parts, and a bunch of potential pitfalls, so if you get one make sure to read the manual.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
With a prism on instead of the wlf my RB67 is easily 10+lbs or some poo poo
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Opinions on the Mamiya RB67?? There's one locally for a very good price and I'm tired of using improvised or very old medium-format gear... It comes with the 90mm f3.8 lens and one film back. Price in dollars would be around 125. I'm VERY tempted right now and have a lot of 120 film stocked... Good enough for entry level, especially at that price -- you'll have something modern-ish with full controls that probably won't be decaying from age. I have a 6x7 back that I think is in the process of making GBS threads the bed so buy extras maybe? Also it's giant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Maria K Maria K (3) by Andrew Yuen, on Flickr Maria K by Andrew Yuen, on FlickrPhotos were shot on Ektar, because I couldn't find Portra
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Don't shoot skin with ektar unless you're in some serious overcast conditions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 19:44
|
|
