|
Just be aware you only have ~5 stops of range on Velvia, most other colour films have ~8. If you're looking to get blown highlights and crushed blacks in a single image tho it's perfect. It is a really rewarding film to get right tho, I need to shoot more of it. Megabound fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Sep 12, 2018 |
#
?
Sep 12, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
An aside, that Spotmatic with the borked light meter I mentioned now has a working light meter after a few smacks onto a tabletop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2018 01:30
|
|
|
edit: this post should not be here
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2018 01:47
|
|
|
Helicity posted:edit: this post should not be here 90% of this thread
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
Film thread, on a whim while waking around a flea market I got a Minolta SRT 100 with a 50mm f1.7 lens. It all appears to be working-ish (other than the light meter which I don't have a battery for yet), but this is my first film camera so on closer inspection I think what I got isn't the best mechanically. Basically the following: - Some dust inside the lens - A bit of a dirty mark on the viewfinder prism inside just above the mirror - Sometimes the mirror stays up after firing the shutter, sometimes it doesn't, looks like the foam material that the mirror stops against is a bit degraded and sticky - At the fastest shutter timing (1/500) can't really see any flash of light with the film door open even with the lens removed in bright light (I can at 1/250) - The timing down at 1 second seems inconsistent and once the shutter just never closed. I'm quite willing to have a go at pulling it apart and cleaning/restoring it, thoughts? My plan is to shoot B&W and I'm happy with a softer vintage look, primarily because my existing digital camera is perfectly fine in terms of razor sharp images and colours and I'd like to have a go at developing the negatives at home.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2018 13:17
|
|
|
I don’t know if this is the thread for it but I’m wondering what some of your favorite older lenses are, since I assume a lot of you are using them shooting film. I have a small collection of both Pentax and FD mount Canon glass since I started on film (and would still like to shoot it but prefer to develop myself and haven’t had the time to invest) and I used to adapt that to a Sony NEX5n. After getting into Fuji those lenses have been sitting around but I am getting into Sony and am enjoying shooting these old lenses on full frame. So far I’ve heard a recommendation for the Pentax 35mm 3.5 so that’s on my list. The cheaper the better (and I wouldn’t be against newer manual lenses if the price is right but wouldn’t seem likely) so although I’m curious about more expensive lenses I am realistically not in a place to get into that. Currently I have a 24, 30, 50, 55 and 135. Some are in better conditions than others (and I didn’t even list a 70-210 since it is fungused up) so I wouldn’t mind looking into others in those focal lengths but I’d definitely appreciate focal lengths other than those. Currently I have adapters for PK, FD and M42 so lenses with those mounts are a plus but not required. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
The Minolta 50mm f/1.7 is common as dirt and a wonderful lens and their 28mm f/3.5 is dirt cheap and also really great for the price point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
Anybody in New Zealand here with recommendations about what B&W film and developer chemicals I can get locally? Looks like I can get Tri-X which seems to come well recommended but the only chemicals locally available are Ilford, not sure what combo would be best for a total beginner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Tri-X and Ilford ID-11 (equivalent to Kodak D-76) is probably the most "standard" starting combo there is. Ilford makes excellent supplies and film, you can't go wrong with their products.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 00:25
|
|
|
Ilford DD-X is also a good choice, easy to work with. I'm not even sure if any of my local places stock ID-11. Precision Camera doesn't seem to, may have to see if Austin Camera does. I'm interested in playing with different types of developing chemicals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
If you can get Rodinal, I'd recommend that. It's a liquid developer so no messing around with standard solutions, it lasts forever once you've opened the bottle and it's pretty fast - most stocks are 4-6 minutes at a 1:25 solution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 05:42
|
|
|
I guess this is a film camera question. Users often warn against using the Vivitar 252 with a modern electronic camera because it can damage the delicate circuitry. I have one that I used with a Nikon FM, obviously no problem there. Would it be safe to use on a Pentax 6x7? I know that camera has an electronically-timed shutter, but no hotshoe, just a flash sync port. Using a 252 mounted in the wood grip's cold shoe with the sync cable running to the body: A bad idea? What about an Autopana PE-3000? It's another old-rear end flash, but one that doesn't seem to have much information available about it via a cursory Google search. I know the P67 is not the best with a 1/30 sync speed, but that's going to be fine for my purposes...frying what I hope will be the last film camera I buy for a decade (seriously love my P6x7) is not. Also, Portra 400 at 1600: much better than Portra 400 at 3200?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
not reason to think it wouldnt be fine on the 6x7
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I guess this is a film camera question. Users often warn against using the Vivitar 252 with a modern electronic camera because it can damage the delicate circuitry. I have one that I used with a Nikon FM, obviously no problem there. Would it be safe to use on a Pentax 6x7? I know that camera has an electronically-timed shutter, but no hotshoe, just a flash sync port. Using a 252 mounted in the wood grip's cold shoe with the sync cable running to the body: A bad idea? The Pentax 6x7 is safe up to 300V and the Vivitar 252 uses 205V. For Portra 400, 1600->3200 is a much bigger jump in terms of image quality than 800->1600.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2018 06:55
|
|
|
Cool, thanks. EDIT: Film camera question: I think I asked about this a while back. It was to do with an issue that 1.) had only appeared in one photo, and 2.) was hard to demonstrate with a web-size image. Since then, I've gotten a higher-res scan of the negative in question and come across a similar issue with a different negative. Click on thumbnails for an enlarged view. This image...  ...is bitingly sharp on the left, but kind of blurry on the right. It's just about a half-and-half split.  (The blurry part) (The sharper part.)The vast majority of photos from this camera are uniformly sharp. This photo was taken at f/16, so there should be decent sharpness extending behind the railing into the trees. The only cause I can really imagine is that the camera shook a bit during exposure, but not before part of the image was exposed while the camera was still. The shutter speed was about 1 second, and the tripod was kind of crappy and on soft ground. Does this sound reasonable at all? Camera in question is a Pentax 6x7 MLU, so shutter vibrations at slow speeds can cause problems without a good sturdy tripod. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Sep 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2018 02:30
|
|
|
As someone who's about to start developing BW film at home, this doesn't actually do me much that a cheaper sous video machine doesn't, right? https://cinestillfilm.com/products/...cessing-at-home Also, shooting film is way fun! Haven't done it since I was a tween. Picked up a couple of 70s Pentaxen and now I'm hooked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
B&W is much less temperature sensitive than colour processing. Just keep your chemicals and bottles of distilled water at room temperature (20-24º) and they are ready to go. You don't typically need to manage the working temperature unless your workspace is well outside that range.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
20ish ºC works fine for me, for B&W. I use a regular sous vide machine for C41 and don't have any complaints. Also, I really hate that first "action shot" that's all over the photo news aggregator sites, what a weird way to pour something. Reminds me of that classic pic of the military guy eating a hotdog.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
Just ordered a dark bag, Paterson style tank and some measuring cylinders and bottles last night woo. I'm going to try the black yarn thing for replacing the light seals around my film door and get some black self-adhesive foam sheet for the mirror bumper because the pre-cut light seal kits would cost twice as much to ship here as the kit itself costs. Does anybody have any photo-references for various B&W films available and the kind of image they capture and how the developers effect that? I'm kinda feeling like high contrast and grainy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Does anybody have any photo-references for various B&W films available and the kind of image they capture and how the developers effect that? I'm kinda feeling like high contrast and grainy. That look isn't really my bailiwick, but off the top of my head: TriX/HP5 and high-concentration (1:10-1:25) Rodinal are your easiest bet here. If you want to go full Moriyama you want to use Dektol (but Moriyama himself admits that he has no idea about the details, as he did most of his early photography, developing included, sleep-deprived and drunk off his rear end). I've heard good things about Dektol diluted 1:3 for 3-4 minutes. Part of why Robert Capa's D-Day images look the way they do is because the developer was too hot and cooked the emulsion (melting it clean off in some cases); you can do interesting things with warm tanks if you're feeling experimental.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
Insanite posted:As someone who's about to start developing BW film at home, this doesn't actually do me much that a cheaper sous video machine doesn't, right? Looks like they rebranded this Chefman sousvide, gave it a nicer display and added the accordion bottle holder. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 05:50
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Just ordered a dark bag, Paterson style tank and some measuring cylinders and bottles last night woo. I'm going to try the black yarn thing for replacing the light seals around my film door and get some black self-adhesive foam sheet for the mirror bumper because the pre-cut light seal kits would cost twice as much to ship here as the kit itself costs. I'm a big fan of JCH Streetpan 400 for high contrast stuff, not super grainy tho. Click for big, I'm always impressed by the detail it captured on the tile on the left hand face of the building. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 10:55
|
|
|
Fomapan and Rodinal is my go to for authentically grainy B&W. Fomapan 100 is pretty smooth but 400 is much grainier, especially if you push it a lot - and it will easily push to 3200.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 13:06
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice, I'll see if I can get Rodinal at all in New Zealand, it would probably be a pain to buy online and ship in (assuming it's dangerous goods). Edit: looks like I can get fomapan 400 and Rodinol easily enough shipped from Australia Blackhawk fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Sep 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:The vast majority of photos from this camera are uniformly sharp. This photo was taken at f/16, so there should be decent sharpness extending behind the railing into the trees. There is also the potential issue of the film sitting not completely flat. Film never sits completely flat and 120 film especially so since you got the film and then the backing paper just sliding around in there. This issue is (counter-intuitively) exacerbated with wider lenses, which ideally need the film to be at the exact distance to render their sharpest image. Last but not least you might encounter diffraction by f/16 - this depends on the lens design, but in general f/11 is probably a safer bet. Edit: As a general rule for 120 - if you're not in a rush, it's probably best to wind the film on gingerly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
Kodak launched Ektachrome finally so I guess watch your stores soon for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
doomisland posted:Kodak launched Ektachrome finally so I guess watch your stores soon for it. fuuuuuuck yeah  Also finally got around to developing some rolls from my half-frame and god drat I love this little guy  00000030 by Ben Wilcox, on Flickr 00000002 by Ben Wilcox, on FlickrI also bought a cheap rear end minolta maxxum not long ago and it's pretty fun for what it is.  00000001 by Ben Wilcox, on Flickr 00000011 by Ben Wilcox, on Flickr 00000015 by Ben Wilcox, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
My local camera shop has this awesome Mamiya 16 Automatic in for like $40: And I'm tempted to buy it, mostly for the novelty. Is 16mm film even widely available? I can only really find reels of 16mm movie film, and one website selling 36 exposures for fuckin 20 dollars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
I thought some of you guys might enjoy this. This guy has built a camera from scratch with all materials he made or harvested. It is currently a pinhole camera (and the next video, which he posted tonight has some results) and he will be making his own lens next and then his own film. I’m very curious how he will do it give that he’s not allowed to use any materials he didn’t make himself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpbEL23rYec
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
rio posted:I thought some of you guys might enjoy this. This guy has built a camera from scratch with all materials he made or harvested. It is currently a pinhole camera (and the next video, which he posted tonight has some results) and he will be making his own lens next and then his own film. I’m very curious how he will do it give that he’s not allowed to use any materials he didn’t make himself. drat, this is neat, and the pictures he took in the test video were awesome! gently caress, I have never even tried developing film myself (outside of a real darkroom 10 or so years ago), and now I want to build a pinhole camera.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2018 07:00
|
|
|
I picked up a copy of The 35mm Photographer Handbook at a flea market today. We'll see what new things I can learn from it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
Anyone know where the new Ektachrome is available for purchase? Curious to try it out, never shot E-6 before and people see really excited about this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
hi liter posted:Anyone know where the new Ektachrome is available for purchase? Curious to try it out, never shot E-6 before and people see really excited about this. Not sure, but I'm waiting for it to start showing up. It's strange that they're only selling the Super 8 film on the Kodak shop: https://www.kodak.com/web/product/index?id=5233761800 One thought is that they say it's not available until Oct 5th, so maybe we'll start seeing it at B&H, Adorama, and all those similar shops by Friday, at least for preorder. Edit: Pre-orders from this site: https://filmphotographystore.com/products/35mm-chrome-kodak-ektachrome-e100-1-roll
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
Ordering some Fomadon R09 (rodinal equiv.) and Fomapan 400, also considering some Tri-X to test as well. Suggestions re. exposure and develop settings?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 01:13
|
|
|
Ah, Foma 400. I have no experience with rodinal (always use xtol or perceptol) but I generally shoot it at 320 or 250 and develop normally but use very gentle agitation. The results have a tonal range that rivals HP5 and Tri-X imo, but it's generally more contrasty than the first, and grainier and lower-resolution than either. A classic look. It's good stuff. I don't think you can gently caress it up too bad, but am betting that you'll have especially grainy and sharp negs if you develop it in something like rodinal. It can be pushed pretty far but you'll lose shadow detail.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Ordering some Fomadon R09 (rodinal equiv.) and Fomapan 400, also considering some Tri-X to test as well. Suggestions re. exposure and develop settings? You were going for a gritty, high-contrast kind of look, right? I'd start with exposing at box speed or so, developing at 1:25 for 6 minutes. That's 20 ml Rodinal diluted to 500ml of solution, or equivalent as necessary for your development tank. Agitate it about once every minute. See how you like that, and adjust from there. Rodinal is fairly linear in its development times over most practical ranges, so as SMERSH mentions you can push a stop by adding another 6 minutes to that, or go to 1600 up near 25 minutes to half an hour, depending on exactly what you're looking to do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 04:17
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:You were going for a gritty, high-contrast kind of look, right? I'd start with exposing at box speed or so, developing at 1:25 for 6 minutes. That's 20 ml Rodinal diluted to 500ml of solution, or equivalent as necessary for your development tank. Agitate it about once every minute. See how you like that, and adjust from there. Rodinal is fairly linear in its development times over most practical ranges, so as SMERSH mentions you can push a stop by adding another 6 minutes to that, or go to 1600 up near 25 minutes to half an hour, depending on exactly what you're looking to do. Thanks for the advice, will give it a go when my stuff starts coming in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
Fomapan and Fomadon was my jam when I lived in Slovakia. Just shoot it at box speed and use the 1:25 dilution as a starting point. Don't agitate too much or too strongly, a couple of gentle turns back and forward every thirty seconds or so is all that you need.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
Film... gone bad. I tried color reversal processing on a roll of Ektar 120 after having marginal luck doing homebrew B&W reversal on a couple sheets of 4x5. Mostly failed, but managed to scan the 1st developer results as positive and solarized in post. Using year-old C-41 developer from working solution probably didn't help. Edit: Another quickie with the Shaggin' Wagon 
Father O'Blivion fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Oct 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 02:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:There is also the potential issue of the film sitting not completely flat. Film never sits completely flat and 120 film especially so since you got the film and then the backing paper just sliding around in there. quote:Edit: As a general rule for 120 - if you're not in a rush, it's probably best to wind the film on gingerly. I think this must be right. Or something like it. The issue hasn't abated and now affects about three frames of every roll. To recap, I first noticed something was up when this image turned out noticeably unsharp on the the entire right 1/3rd of the frame. (Hard to see at web size.)  Which was weird, because the following frame, taken at the same aperture and shutter speed, on the same tripod, is completely sharp.  So I went back to the scene of the original issue, and re-shot it using the same exposure settings and tripod. This time the was no problem with the negative. All sharp.  Shot some handheld test rolls (while being very careful and deliberate with the advance lever) and the appearance of the issue does seem to be pretty random. E.g., the details here were cropped from the same part of two shots, taken one after the other, handheld at 1/125, f/6.3. Besides the area shown in the left crop, both images were completely sharp. I've got four more comparative examples like this this I could post, but they all show pretty much the same thing.  That eliminated my first hunch (that the tripod had shaken halfway through the exposure), and points more to a film flatness issue, which is ironic to me because it seems like the P6x7's straightforward film spooling should keep the film flatter than interchangeable-back 120 SLR's, in theory. The unsharp area is just as likely to appear on the right edge or the left edge, and isn't consistent in its extent or location. The areas appear on the negatives themselves and are persistent across different scanners and labs. So far, it hasn't ever appeared on the first frame. I wonder if it's a pressure plate/roller problem, or maybe something with the advance crank, like it's not holding the film down tight and flush against the gate. I'm taking this P6x7 to the camera doctor later this week to see what they think, but in the meantime I'm posting here to see if anyone has an opinion on the issue. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Oct 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2018 03:39
|
|