|
I've done lots of C41 processing, but no E-6, which I hear is a little more complex and very temperature-dependent. I already had to build a temperature-controlled water bucket to get consistent results from batches of C41 chems batch when reusing them. It's a pain. E-6 is probably not much worse, and if you do it right you'll get a positive to scan instead of having to color correct a negative. But it's still a pain. There's nowhere even remotely close to me that does in-house consumer E-6 processing. I mail my stuff to Citizens Photo in Portland. They have decent prices and turnaround (better on both counts than my local lab that just takes more money and time to mail it out themselves), but I've gotten some really botched scans from them before. Here's a gear mini-review. The Bronica GS-1 is relatively cheap, has aperture-priority AE (with the AE finder), and TTL flash. And the lenses are very sharp, and cheap. I got a new old stock 65/4 for $200. Haven't developed any of what I've shot with it yet, though. This was with the 110/4 macro:  Also, an important update: The 107-SW is still good.  And contrasty. 
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I've done lots of C41 processing, but no E-6, which I hear is a little more complex and very temperature-dependent. I already had to build a temperature-controlled water bucket to get consistent results from batches of C41 chems batch when reusing them. I hada mind to invest in one of these to help out (and serve dual purpose) http://www.seriouseats.com/2016/01/first-thing-to-cook-with-sous-vide-immersion-circulator-essential-recipes.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
E-6 is just as easy at c41, you just have two developers you need to keep at the right temp, the successive baths have a wider tolerance of temps. All you need are containers and a sink with warm water.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Sous vide development works. It's so simple I wondered how I was even intimidated by c41 processing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 23:09
|
|
|
I wonder what the scam is I mean it's obviously a scam, I just wonder what kind of garbage they'll send you for your three fiddy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2018 14:35
|
|
|
My guess is that they won't actually send you anything at all. I got stung by a scam like this a few years ago buying a laptop from a third-party seller on Amazon. I found a recent but used MacBook pro for a good price, put it in my basket and found that they couldn't deliver to my area. They had some text about shipping to other areas being available on request so I contacted them and they created an invoice for me as a private sale, I paid for it via bank transfer and never heard from them again. The seller had high reviews over a long period of time, but all of their reviews were for furniture sales. This VM Korea store seems to mostly sell cosmetics. So I guess that the scammers hack legitimate sellers to hijack their reputation and seem more legit. In my case I did some research, found that there were a lot of people who'd fallen for the same thing that I had (different sellers but same bank info). I reported it to the police but they were worse than useless and closed it within a day due to a lack of leads (I provided them the bank account info and the whois data for the domain that the scammers had emailed me from). When you are on the phone to the 'cybercrime' police department and they ask if your email address is upper or lower case, then you know you're in for a bad time. Moral of the story, don't buy used electronics online late at night, after an 18 hour day and some drinking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2018 16:24
|
|
|
Never do a "private sale" from an eBay or Amazon listing. Those are scams designed to get you outside of the protections offered by using the official check out system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
yes, I figured that out afterwards. But they presented as a legitimate company with positive reviews over a period of time. I'm just suggesting that this is what the scam here is. If you put that Leica in your basket and try to check out with it, you'll find that it's not available for delivery to your area unless you contact them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
Hi film thread. I recently came into the possession of an old Nikon FA that, while having had lots of love, is still in pretty good shape. It's about the time of year where I start feeling claustrophobic from being cooped up inside all the time, so I'm using the camera as an excuse to get out in the cold and put my (now half remembered) college photography classes to use. I'm scanning my first couple of rolls as we speak, and boy, I'm rusty at everything. A couple of questions: What's a fair price to pay per-roll for developing? My local shop charges $7 per for C-41 which feels like a lot, especially since this batch I got back from them has a not-insignificant number of scratches and some finger prints in the emulsion (thankfully on photos that were poorly exposed anyways). I looked at Citizen's Photo which SMERSH Mouth mentioned higher up on this page... are there any good east coast labs that are similarly priced folks would recommend? $3.75 per roll sounds very affordable, but I'd imagine I'll pay a lot for shipping film all the way across the country which would defeat the purpose of paying less per-roll. Second, since the scanning thread is archived I'm hoping I can ask some questions here. Is there a way to change the default Epson Scan auto exposure to not to blow out the whites on every single photo? Right now I'm setting my black and white levels to the top/bottom of the curve for each photo before scanning to give myself a lot of extra room to adjust again once I bring it into Photoshop. However it seems silly to have to do it for every single photo and I'm wondering if there's a setting for the default behavior.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
Can’t help you on the first question (but I’m sure there are tons of east coast places which charge a similar price) As for the second, it’s best to scan as a positive and adjust it in post. You learn to sort through things really fast.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
kedo posted:Hi film thread. I recently came into the possession of an old Nikon FA that, while having had lots of love, is still in pretty good shape. It's about the time of year where I start feeling claustrophobic from being cooped up inside all the time, so I'm using the camera as an excuse to get out in the cold and put my (now half remembered) college photography classes to use. I'm scanning my first couple of rolls as we speak, and boy, I'm rusty at everything. You can get around shipping costs by sending largish batches in small boxes. I used to use small flat rate boxes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
I have 2 rolls of 35 mm Fuji 400 film that I want to develop and have a question about the different options I have since I'm still fairly new to all of this. Why is there a difference in quality if I get my film developed at a local camera store that offers 60 min development as opposed to mailing it in to a pro film development lab? Is it just the different machines that they use and would you say that the quality will be noticeably different?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 08:22
|
|
|
Your local store might not be getting a large volume of film to develop, so their chemistry might be getting stale, and the machine might not be well maintained. Those can both lead to uneven results. A pro lab is more likely to have a well maintained development machine, or can even do it by hand if they don't process the volume to make machine maintenance worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 09:27
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:I have 2 rolls of 35 mm Fuji 400 film that I want to develop and have a question about the different options I have since I'm still fairly new to all of this. Why is there a difference in quality if I get my film developed at a local camera store that offers 60 min development as opposed to mailing it in to a pro film development lab? Is it just the different machines that they use and would you say that the quality will be noticeably different? There are three contributing factors here: 1 - The machine itself, i.e. the temperature control and film handling (rollers vs. dip-and-dunk, etc) 2 - The upkeep of that machine, i.e. the cleaning and recalibration that makes sure that the machine doesn't run too hot or too long, or maybe smoosh a piece of lint into the emulsion while it's soft, and that all the times and temperatures are consistent 3 - The upkeep of the chemistry in the machine. As you run film through the chemistry, it depletes and starts to behave differently (and eventually stops working at all). A pro lab should be replenishing their chemicals more or less continuously, keeping the activity within a very narrow envelope. A cheap one-hour lab will often run a batch as long as it can get away with it, and then drain the machine and top it off with new, since this is a running expense and film volume isn't anywhere near what it used to be. This is fine if you're the first one in the new baths; your colors can get pretty muddy if you're in near the end. The C41 and E6 processes are very highly standardized, at least in principle, so whether there's a noticeable difference really depends on exactly what's going on that day with that lab. With a pro lab, a large part of the 'quality' you're paying for is much stricter consistency.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 09:35
|
|
|
Finally mixed up some XTOL and developed some Tri-X from my Olympus XA that have been sitting in the back of my drawer for the last two or so years: Tombstones in the Snow by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Lost Boat by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Swan by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Christmas Party by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Rain Slicked Streets by Tim Breeze, on Flickr (Not pictured, the roll of 120 I butchered trying to load it onto the reel because I am rusty as hell.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 13:26
|
|
|
I get my color films developed at a photo shop in Montreal that uses regular old minilab machines (Photo Service is cheap and runs huge volumes) but we've also got Boréalis where developing and printing is all they do. They make a big deal about using dip & dunk machines instead of reel to reel like every other lab in the city. Given how rapid C-41 development is wouldn't dip and dunk result in the tail end of the film being over developed and the end clipped to the hangars being under developed?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
Sauer posted:Given how rapid C-41 development is wouldn't dip and dunk result in the tail end of the film being over developed and the end clipped to the hangars being under developed? There isn't any appreciable effect, provided that the machine is in good repair and uses constant speed throughout. Enough chemistry "sticks" to the film between baths to keep acting while it's in the air (it's only 10-15 seconds from starting lift on one tank to finishing the drop on the next). The last frames out of the developer bath are the first ones into the bleach, and the rest of the steps are "to completion" anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
I just started shooting film and will be traveling soon for about 1.5 weeks - what's the deal with 35mm film and airport x-ray scanners? I will be shooting with 400 speed 35mm film. I know that some airports will check it by hand but if they don't allow that is it bad to let it go through the x-ray scanner?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:I just started shooting film and will be traveling soon for about 1.5 weeks - what's the deal with 35mm film and airport x-ray scanners? I will be shooting with 400 speed 35mm film. I know that some airports will check it by hand but if they don't allow that is it bad to let it go through the x-ray scanner? You can ask for them to hand-check it. Just have it in a plastic ziplock or something in your carry on and pull it out for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 19:23
|
|
|
it's stuff over 800 that can get fried on one pass, not that many people are carrying around 1600 iso film anymore. supposedly, multiple passes on 800 or even 400 can cause fogging. a single go through the machine shouldn't do anything to 400 iso. having said that, i've never had a problem getting a hand check
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:having said that, i've never had a problem getting a hand check The TSA crew at SFO has been incredibly hit-or-miss for me in this regard - some of their agents are on top of things, but I have about a 50-50 chance of someone trying to make up regulations on the fly. If I have to go through them, I mostly accept that the smartest thing to do is to mail my film home. ( To be 100% fair, I travel with medium and large formats as often as not, so I can be an edge case of an edge case. )
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
Out of the 10 times I've flown with film, hand checks were never an issue for 9 of them, and usually opened up a conversation about how great film was or how crazy I was. The one time it was an issue, it was pretty bad, and the TSA agent almost got me kicked off the flight for "misleading and lying" to her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
Exposed film is a bit more sensitive to x-rays than unexposed film. Like the others, I generally ask for a hand check but I tend to get told it's not possible a lot. I fly a lot within Europe and so a journey is often multiple flights going through several sets of security at different airports on the way. In some cases, that means my film gets scanned 3 or 4 times or more on the way around. I haven't noticed much of a problem with the 135 or 120 film that I use, but I prefer slow films anyway (100-200 stuff mostly).
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Out of the 10 times I've flown with film, hand checks were never an issue for 9 of them, and usually opened up a conversation about how great film was or how crazy I was. The one time it was an issue, it was pretty bad, and the TSA agent almost got me kicked off the flight for "misleading and lying" to her. Go on
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Last time I flew with film they had no trouble hand checking it even in a place where you don't have a protected right to hand check like in the USA. Just unbox the rolls and put the canisters in a clear bag. The 120 film got a raised eyebrow but that's it. The agent only swabbed the opening of the bag. Didn't touch the film. My camera was going through no matter what though since it's an electric device (Yashica Mat with no meter) in their eyes. Maybe don't a keep a roll loaded.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
Yeah, that's a good point. Not only is your camera going to go through the scanner regardless, there's also a non-zero chance that they'll ask you to open the back. I flew to Colorado a while ago when the TSA was insisting that all electrical items must be able to be powered on and my (fully mechanical) Arax MF camera caught their attention. They were convinced it was a video camera. and asked me to turn it on. I told them what it was and they insisted on opening up the film magazines to see what was in there. I've been asked to take a picture of the floor with a camera before to prove that it works. Not a problem with digital of course, but tricky with a film camera and the security agents mostly have no clue how to deal with situations like that. These days, with a lot of retro-styled cameras around, it can be hard to tell the difference at a glance between an old manual camera and a modern mirrorless if you don't know anything about gear. Even if they don't ask you to open the back, if they can't see inside your lovely old-school, all-metal lenses, they are going to turn up the gain on the machine until they can. At which point your film is having a bad day. Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Jan 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
iSheep posted:Go on It's not too exciting of a story. I asked for the hand check since I had maybe 10 rolls of various 100/400/800 in the bag. She said I only needed a hand check for 1600 or higher and asked if I had 1600 in the bag. I said some of the exposed rolls *might* be 1600 and I forgot what I shot, but regardless I didn't want any of them passing through x-rays multiple times because it would affect them. She very loudly complained that I shouldn't be bringing film since digital is widely used and that it was scientifically proven that anything less than 1600 wasn't affected. After she finished checking the last roll she stopped and said that she didn't see any that were 1600 and that I deliberately lied to her. She got visibly upset and called her supervisor over and accused me of lying to a TSA agent. The supervisor just sighed, advised me to be thorough in my statements going forward since security is of utmost importance, and told me to pass through the rest of the security screening.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
Helicity posted:She very loudly complained that I shouldn't be bringing film since digital is widely used and that it was scientifically proven that anything less than 1600 wasn't affected. After she finished checking the last roll she stopped and said that she didn't see any that were 1600 and that I deliberately lied to her. She got visibly upset and called her supervisor over and accused me of lying to a TSA agent. The supervisor just sighed, advised me to be thorough in my statements going forward since security is of utmost importance, and told me to pass through the rest of the security screening. Obviously the solution is to buy a lonely roll of Delta 3200 which does nothing but travel around with you and give the TSA agent something to look at.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 02:56
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:Obviously the solution is to buy a lonely roll of Delta 3200 which does nothing but travel around with you and give the TSA agent something to look at. that's what I do. if the TSA asks the ISO I just say "it's a mix of stuff" even though it's almost always a bag of 400 with one roll of 3200 most of the time they don't bother me. I just ask, "can you please hand check this?" and they do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
The issue is that I'll be flying around SE Asia.... I guess the best I can do is to limit the amount of times my 400 speed film goes through the scanner but I doubt many of the airport security would be willing to hand check. I mean it's not the end of the world if my film and camera goes through the scanner a few times, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:The issue is that I'll be flying around SE Asia.... I guess the best I can do is to limit the amount of times my 400 speed film goes through the scanner but I doubt many of the airport security would be willing to hand check. I mean it's not the end of the world if my film and camera goes through the scanner a few times, right? A few, no, but it adds up. Depending on where you're going, what you're shooting, and how long you'll be where, it may be worth the peace of mind to get film developed as you go, so A) run as little risk as possible of losing your latent images and B) you know as soon as possible if your film gets wrecked, so you can replace it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
Tri-x 400 @ 3200, HC-110 1+100, 30c, 21 minutes      
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
Newton rings can eat my balls
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
Busy Bee posted:The issue is that I'll be flying around SE Asia.... I guess the best I can do is to limit the amount of times my 400 speed film goes through the scanner but I doubt many of the airport security would be willing to hand check. I mean it's not the end of the world if my film and camera goes through the scanner a few times, right? I don't bother to get my film hand checked, I've done 10+ flights with Portra 400 in carry on luggage and it's been fine. I've even chucked an Instax Wide camera with a few shots in it for a flight from Melbourne to LAX in checked baggage and it was fine. In other words, don't worry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
I seem to have gotten interested in compact point & shoots right as prices have gone up on the Ricoh GR/Konica Hexar type of “premium” point & shoot camera. Are there any $100-$200 USD point & shoots with a wide ISO range? The GR1’s 25-3200 range is really impressive in something so small but I don’t wanna throw $500+ at one on eBay - and I live in Austin, so the pawn shops seem really picked over film wise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
rincewind101 posted:I seem to have gotten interested in compact point & shoots right as prices have gone up on the Ricoh GR/Konica Hexar type of “premium” point & shoot camera. olympus stylus epics do 32-3200 i think
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
Wow this is the most botched film development I've ever done. I haven't touched any of this for more than a year, I think. Pretty much everything went wrong, but my transferring it to the spiral is def. the worst part. See those huge undeveloped areas and how bent and broken the edges are? Also doesn't help the chemistry is old. My barely used jug of Xtol is completely dead, luckily my ancient bottle of Rodinal still worked. Amazingly the old diluted fixer bath was fine, cleared the leader in 80 seconds. Also this is a roll I shot in 2016 if I'm not wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
What kind of reels were you using? Maybe it's time to clean out the bb's if you're using plastic reels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
Nah that was on a classic stainless steel wheel, the kind where you hook the sprocket holes in the center and then wedge the film in. I'm just badly out of practice and didn't bother checking my work, even though I did notice things feeling a bit off. I used a Paterson plastic wheel+tank for the next roll and had no trouble loading it. (Only, my Paterson tank is huge and barely fits inside the changing bag, so I somewhat prefer the steel tank.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
Hewes reels are cool. Makes it easier to load and keeps your film from bumping & grinding with itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 22:57
|
|