|
Primo Itch posted:That's a whole lot of grain for a 6x9 ISO 100. What developer are you using? Fomadon, which is rebadged Rodinal. It was pushed a bit too, I shot it at 400 and pushed it a stop then opened the exposure a bit more after scanning.
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
Primo Itch posted:That's a whole lot of grain for a 6x9 ISO 100. What developer are you using? Hi I'm fomapan have we met?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
Yeah, it's super cheap stuff, I live in Slovakia and Foma is a Czech company, so it's very commonly available around here. They do a 200 and a 400 speed B&W film as well and the 400 is super grainy but can be pushed to 3200 easily if you don't care about pin-sharpness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
I was disappointed when I developed my first few rolls of Foma 100. Even when shot at box, it's not a very fine film, compared to Acros and the like. 200 is weird but I feel like I just haven't found the right application for it. 400 rules, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Hi I'm fomapan have we met? Not really, I have to import any black and white film that's not Tri-X and with shipping + taxes even the cheapest chinese film ends up more expensive  I have some rolls of 120 Ilford Pan F+ that I'm almost scared of using since I'm not sure I'll ever be able to put my hands on some again (got them on a trip to europe some 5 years ago, still have like 3/4 of the rolls I bought). And the single roll of 120 Velvia that I'd have to ship to some other continent (really) to get developed. Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Apr 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Boston area goons have any recommendations for local places to develop film?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
huhu posted:Boston area goons have any recommendations for local places to develop film? Hunt's is fine. Color Services in Needham is better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
These were taken on an Argus C3 Matchmatic. It's quite difficult to focus properly as they changed all the numbers on the dials to match a light meter that didn't come with the camera, so I had to guess and try to remember the manual's chart in my head as I shot. The first image has severe light leaks due to the camera jamming and the film coming out of the cassette when being wound.     
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
How is film in Seattle, are there enough places to get it developed? What about rental darkrooms? Any photography clubs worth noting?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Answering two out of three:RobotDogPolice posted:How is film in Seattle, are there enough places to get it developed? I've only dealt with them a couple times (I've got a long-established relationship elsewhere), but Panda Lab has been full of solid people every time I've dealt with them. RobotDogPolice posted:What about rental darkrooms? PCNW has your back there if you're OK working in shared chemistry.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
RobotDogPolice posted:How is film in Seattle, are there enough places to get it developed? What about rental darkrooms? Any photography clubs worth noting? Development in Seattle is kinda pricey. I send all my stuff to Citizens in Portland unless I just have a roll or two then I go to Moon Photo in greenwood. There's a bunch of photo clubs and meetups in town but I haven't bothered with any personally. If you are developing B&W glazers has all the stuff you need to get started doing it yourself.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
 Desert Structure Investigation by Devin Wilson, on Flickr anyone have a few dozen rolls of neopan 400 they don't want? 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
 Does b&w photo paper goes bad after a while ? I bought 20 year old RC paper (still sealed) from a little fidgetty guy and the few sheets I tried immediately turned uniform gray in the developer tray. I could still get normal prints with my fresh paper so it's nbd but I might refrain from buying cheap old paper in the future.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 09:35
|
|
|
nothing like shooting a few rolls after not touching a camera for a while and then throwing almost all the photos straight into the loving trash
crap nerd fucked around with this message at 13:23 on May 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Cool. Did you catch the dolphin yourself, or just run across it on the beach, like you do? quote="atomicthumbs" post="471991224"] Desert Structure Investigation by Devin Wilson, on Flickr anyone have a few dozen rolls of neopan 400 they don't want? [/quote] Is neopan 400 completely discontinued, or just not sold in the US anymore? I'd like to find something that's a little less grainy than HP5, but not as clinical as Delta 400. Right now for me that's HP5 at 320 in Perceptol. I have no idea if Neopan 400 would be the right thing. Better processing practices are probably what I really need, but it would be cool to try out a different 400 ISO film. It's also been a long time since I shot tri-x, but I don't remember it being very different from HP5.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Is neopan 400 completely discontinued, or just not sold in the US anymore? Yodobashi doesn't carry it anymore, so I'm going to assume it's pretty much gone forever. SMERSH Mouth posted:It's also been a long time since I shot tri-x, but I don't remember it being very different from HP5. Tri-X feels like it has a different tonal response than HP5, but even so it's hard to tell unless you've got the two negatives side by side, or switch from one to the other after a lot of careful work. I've never been able to tell any difference in grain structure, though, even with a loupe.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Cool. Did you catch the dolphin yourself, or just run across it on the beach, like you do? There was a storm. I think this poor guy tumbled around on the rocks and died, its skin was scratched. It just washed ashore right near our house.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I'd like to find something that's a little less grainy than HP5, but not as clinical as Delta 400. Right now for me that's HP5 at 320 in Perceptol. I have no idea if Neopan 400 would be the right thing. Better processing practices are probably what I really need, but it would be cool to try out a different 400 ISO film.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 10:36
|
|
|
Anyone have any recommendations for where to get film developed in the DC area or a place to send it to be developed? Usually send mine to Dwayne's but was really disappointed with the results recently and would like to try some place else.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:
I think one of the issues is that a lot of papers have a developing agent embedded in the paper. However, the real cause of fog is physics. These days I generally say to myself--this poo poo is hard to get right, why waste time with old film/paper which might add another layer of complexity? My general plan for if I get poor is: 5x7 on Adorama/Ultrafine/Arista.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
Xabi posted:Have you tried FP4 Plus @ 400? I never considered that. FP4 to me seems kind of like smoother HP5. If it pushes as well, I guess it could be worth a shot? (In fact, it was the flat but grainy look of some HP5 I shot on an overcast day that got me wondering about alternatives. I wonder if FP4 + 2 would have given smoother grain and more contrast in that situation..) In other news, it's nice having a relatively compact and portable 6x7 camera. 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I never considered that. FP4 to me seems kind of like smoother HP5. If it pushes as well, I guess it could be worth a shot? FP4+2 is not that smooth. It has a lot more contrast though:  huevos by Ryan Chan, on Flickr cauliflower by Ryan Chan, on Flickrthese two are FP4 at 500, I can't remember if it's D76 1:1 or Rodinal 1:24 that I used. And FP4 at 125 (box), D76 1:1  Screen Shot 2016-11-30 at 8.36.16 PM by Ryan Chan, on FlickrA fair amount of contrast added on that one.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2017 09:49
|
|
|
Hi, film thread I have never before visited. I'm looking to figure out what I should recommend for a scanner that can digitize 4x5 color transparencies for work. Literally, that would be its only purpose--we have lots and lots of 4x5 color transparencies, many of which will eventually need to be digitized, and we are currently sending them the an outside service to scan when we need scans, which seems crazy. There are fairly expensive options with specialized 4x5 film/transparency holders (my research led to the Epson Perfection V800). If that's necessary, I can recommend that. But is there a mid-range option that could accomplish the same thing? I did a search in this thread, and wasn't 100% clear on the answer. (Can *most* scanners have the element that blocks light for reflective scanning removed so that they can scan transparencies?) onefish fucked around with this message at 22:12 on May 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
You want a flatbed that has a backlight in the lid. Only specific scanners designed for scanning film/transparencies have this and regular scanners or all-in-one jobs unless specified, do not. The problem with a lot of film scanners is that you need a suitable 4x5 film holder for them. The cheaper scanners like the V600 scan film but do not have a 4x5 holder. You could get something used for very cheap and still get good results, like an Epson 4870. Just make sure it comes with the holders.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
How much resolution do you need? If you have 4x5 transparencies in the first place I imagine there's a lot of information to capture there. If not, you can improvise the backlight pretty well just by using an iPad or something, and your standard office scanner/copier/all-in-one. If you have a really cheap scanner, this may require some creative hacks (one of my favorite bits of my Dorkroom posting history there).
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Thank you. I don't know exact numbers, but I'm guessing I need to print at something along the lines of 600 dpi at size up to 12 x 15 inches (though much more often 8 x 10). While an old Epson model would definitely do the trick--I don't need the ridiculously high dpi new models offer--I am probably going to end up with one of the more expensive consumer solutions, likely the Epson V800, because I don't think the people approving the purchase will want to buy something used. I wanted to try the improvised backlight method just to see how it went, though, and it's not even coming close to working--if I scan a transparency on the office flatbed with my ipad on a flashlight-white screen behind it, the image comes out completely dark. I am clearly making some very simple mistake, but it seemed like that's all people are suggesting for that improvisation method: https://petapixel.com/2011/07/25/how-to-scan-film-using-your-phone-or-tablet-computer/
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
onefish posted:Thank you. I don't know exact numbers, but I'm guessing I need to print at something along the lines of 600 dpi at size up to 12 x 15 inches (though much more often 8 x 10). While an old Epson model would definitely do the trick--I don't need the ridiculously high dpi new models offer--I am probably going to end up with one of the more expensive consumer solutions, likely the Epson V800, because I don't think the people approving the purchase will want to buy something used. Just be aware the 4x5 holders that come with the V800 are trash. You'll want to get on eBay and get the V700 version.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
The low speeds on my Yashica Mat are a jamming. The internet tells me that's usually because of dried lubricants in the shutter timing mechanism. Let's just open it up and... Oh that's not complicated at all. Two screws and the shutter timing gear set came out as one module, nicely designed. Going to spend the night in some lighter fluid and hopefully spin nice and free tomorrow.  Suppose I have no choice but to clean everything up while I'm at it. There's a disturbing amount of hair in it, some of it unusually curly if you know what mean. The previous owner did say it was well loved.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Sauer posted:The low speeds on my Yashica Mat are a jamming. The internet tells me that's usually because of dried lubricants in the shutter timing mechanism. Let's just open it up and... You'll want to use (very little) machine lubricant on that once you've completely stripped the old stuff off. Sounds like most of the lubricant in there already is probably water soluble and maybe flavored.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
And by very little, really use very little. So little you think you did not use any at all. I did the same job on a Mamiya TLR lens and I had to completely strip it and relube three times because I used too much oil and it found its way onto the shutter blades eventually.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice. I was originally going to run it dry. I've got some real nice high end machine oil at work I can "borrow".
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
Sauer posted:Thanks for the advice. I was originally going to run it dry. I've got some real nice high end machine oil at work I can "borrow". If you can, I'd pick up a fine bristled tiny little brush (can grab this kind of thing cheap from a pharmasave if you're Canadian) and use that to apply the oil. It's hard to get the oil where you need it in the tiny quantities you need without it, and the temptation to over-apply oil will be sated if you aren't applying it right from the bottle.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
That's a good idea, I'll do that. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
Graphite powder is also a very good dry lubricant. You can get it at hardware suppliers or from Amazon (where I get mine). Pros are that it will not gum up your gear ever and is super easy to apply and clean up, cons are that you will want to make sure that you don't get it anywhere near the film transport areas. Just don't use WD-40 no matter what you do. Some random film shots from the past week. Testing a couple of Kiev rangefinders and shooting classic cars in medium format.  Kiev3007.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Kiev3025.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Kiev2003.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  CassoviaArax010.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  CassoviaArax011.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  CassoviaMoskva013.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  CassoviaMoskva011.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 15:44 on May 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Another Lubitel shot. Can't wait until I finish repairing the Yashica Mat. Focusing this thing continues to be proof that the Soviet Union actively hated its own citizens.  Heron Visitor Sauer fucked around with this message at 07:01 on May 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
 I've been using a little more 35mm recently instead of just medium format, what sort of usable resolution do people usually get out of their 35mm scans? I'm using a V550 and everything usually comes out a bit muddy looking.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
crap nerd posted:
That looks about right for 35mm on an Epson V550 based on my experience. I was able to get a tiny bump in quality by running scans with some ANR glass (Better Scanning is a brand; I used something generic off eBay). The usable resolutions are lower than you would expect based off the options in the scanning application's menu. I think everything above 3200 is just upscaled or something. You'll notice a lot of 35mm scans posted on Flickr aren't very large. I think most people find that they look fine at smaller sizes. Big, higher-end scans look really nice and detailed, though. Sauer posted:Another Lubitel shot. Can't wait until I finish repairing the Yashica Mat. Focusing this thing continues to be proof that the Soviet Union actively hated its own citizens. As someone who's used a lubitel before, and just picked up an OG 500c, it seems like Viktor Hasselblad went through his own misanthropic phase, as well.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
Test roll through a Praktica Super TL, CZJ 50mm f/2.8, Kodak TMax 100 film. Praktika018.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Praktika022.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr  Praktika029.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 16:38 on May 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM fucked around with this message at 04:31 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:30 |
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Test roll through a Praktica Super TL, CZJ 50mm f/2.8, Kodak TMax 100 film. Does it front-focus a little bit? Seems like the cell phone pic has the area of best sharpness a little too close, if you were aiming to focus on the center of the frame. Speaking of TL and Super, I picked up a couple of bargain-basement Yashica TL Supers so Icould get into some m42 lenses. (The TL Super has switches for MLU and aperture stop-down, which are both nice to have for moderately long exposures.) I was looking at Pentacon/CZJ 50's and 135's, and the 30mm Meyer Lydith, as potential lenses for the Yashicas, but the cameras are both in worse functional condition than they appeared. One has a straight-up broken shutter that fires but doesn't open, the other has a broken meter, and both have prodigious amounts of internal viewfinder debris. Normally a little dust doesn't bother me, but there's, like, hair and other weird stuff in them. Guess I'll be cracking open the more functional one so I can SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 04:43 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 04:39
|
|