|
Where do you even live to have to pay $25 to dev and scan so I can go there to start a lab because gently caress
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 17:40 |
|
|
New Zealand, about as far away from anywhere as you can get in some respects. Also those prices are in NZD but wages are lower over here so I think it's comparable. Small population means film is very niech and places have to charge a lot more due to the low volumes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
Why not just buy Portra from B&H and scan them yourself? I get that film is expensive (fellow antipodean) but shooting cine film to save money feels like a false economy. I think if I shot any more colour I’d seriously consider sending it to Citizens Photo in Portland; as it is I mostly shoot, dev and scan my own B&W, which is the way to go if you really want to save money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:New Zealand, about as far away from anywhere as you can get in some respects. Also those prices are in NZD but wages are lower over here so I think it's comparable. Small population means film is very niech and places have to charge a lot more due to the low volumes. But you're buying the C41 chemistry anyhow to develop it yourself. Why do you have to pay $25 to get Portra developed and scanned when you already have the means to do it at home? Why is cine film cheaper to develop than regular colour negative film when you are using the same chemicals for both?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2019 04:51
|
|
|
 I'm about to take the plunge. Might as well go whole hog and pick up some C-41 chemicals while I'm at it. I've been watching videos all evening about how to load film onto a reel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 04:35
|
|
|
if you live in a civilized country with film labs dont bother fuckin with c41 just take it to the lab and spend morer time shooting and editing that goes for all of you timewasters
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:
I’ve got one of those. I really like shooting with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 04:58
|
|
|
Just got back from vacation with around 6 rolls of film to develop, 3 black and white and 3 C41, some 120 and some 35mm. Rather than spending ~75 dollars on getting them all developed, I'm thinking of just spending that money on developing poo poo and doing it myself. Anyone have a recommendation for what chemicals I need to buy? I shoot MAYBE 2 rolls a month, so ideally it'd be something that lasts a long time. Also, what's a recommended Patterson tank size? Also, what's the risk factor for loving up the development on my first try? I'd rather not lose a ton of vacation photos due to being inexperienced developing. I guess I could blow through a test roll first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 05:08
|
|
|
I’ve read that HC-110 developer will keep indefinitely if you mix it directly out of the bottle (don’t mix a large working stock). I doubt my technique is all that great, but I have yet to outright botch any of my developments, c41 or B&W. Just follow the directions and mind your temps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 05:22
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:if you live in a civilized country with film labs dont bother fuckin with c41 just take it to the lab and spend morer time shooting and editing Can you point me to a good lab in Manhattan? Also time wasting is kinda the point!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 05:27
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:Can you point me to a good lab in Manhattan? I've heard good things about The Color House and Pro Image.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 05:50
|
|
|
President Beep posted:I’ve got one of those. I really like shooting with it. Same. It’s a joy to use.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 05:54
|
|
|
So i build one of those Arduino Laser Shutter Speed meter yesterday, and learned all my cameras have to get adjusted so yay. i spend only $30 in parts and I have enough to make 5 laser/sensor pairs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 15:27
|
|
|
The Modern Sky posted:So i build one of those Arduino Laser Shutter Speed meter yesterday, and learned all my cameras have to get adjusted so yay. ...are they all off by about the same amount?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
I'm getting back into film photography after being in digital for the last decade or so. In the past, I had taken my film to Costco and just had them scan it... but that's not a viable option anymore. What I'd like to do is: 1) Send my negs to the most inexpensive lab that I can (that will do push/pull processing upon request) 2) Scan the negs myself To scan the negs, I'd like to use my DSLR (5D Mark III). My initial attempts at this will be done with my Pixel 3 as a backlight, or an iPad, with a 50mm 1.4 and a macro tube. This brings me to my two questions. 1) What is the best inexpensive online lab that will do push/pull processing and send my negs back to me in neat little 6 frame strips? 2) How in the hell do I properly color correct my digitized negatives? Everything that I've read about converting film negatives to positives with this technique seems very time consuming. Is there a way to automate it, maybe with Silverfast? Or does Silverfast absolutely need a scanner? I'd like to avoid buying a scanner, as they are expensive, and I don't want to spend over an hour scanning 12 negatives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
Sneeze Party posted:Everything that I've read about converting film negatives to positives with this technique seems very time consuming. Is there a way to automate it, maybe with Silverfast? you could automate it by buying a scanner. silverfast, epsonscan, or vuescan all can convert a negative into a color corrected positive directly from a scanner
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 18:19
|
|
|
Negative lab pro plug in for lightroom seems to do a good job inverting colour neggies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 18:20
|
|
|
Yeah, trying the demo version of negative lab pro did produce some promising results. Black and white, on the other hand, is dead easy to invert in lightroom/photoshop with no extra plugins necessary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Negative lab pro plug in for lightroom seems to do a good job inverting colour neggies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Sneeze Party posted:This looks absolutely perfect for my workflow. Thanks for the suggestion. How much better is this than just doing it in PS?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:How much better is this than just doing it in PS?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:Negative lab pro plug in for lightroom seems to do a good job inverting colour neggies. The film thread: poz my neggies
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:...are they all off by about the same amount? no, they are all slow around the same area, but not by the same amounts Leica M4-2 - starts getting slow around 1/30 1/1000 is about 1/500ush Pentax k100 - gets slow around 1/500, 1/1000 is about 1/600 Minolta CLE - faster? 1/1000 is 1/1125 or there abouts. I'm going to trust the times are accurate since I know the Arduino has a timing quartz on the board, which keep times very accurately.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:you could automate it by buying a scanner. silverfast, epsonscan, or vuescan all can convert a negative into a color corrected positive directly from a scanner The colour correction for SilverFast gets close, but it's still essential to go into Photoshop and edit. I started off using their built in profiles but have since abandoned that for working with the negs directly. Once you get an eye for it you can get a pretty quick turn around. My current process is Prescan in SilverFast with their colour correction applied, if I like the shot I'll do a full scan to 48bit RAW and work on it in Photoshop. Here's a serious gently caress-up that both Silverfast, and the auto-corrected version I got from my lab came back with Ektar 100: Silverfast  Photoshop  This is more representative of what SilverFast puts out using their default profiles, Fuji Pro 400H: Silverfast  Photoshop  In the end, I'm going to be going in and making extensive corrections anyway I'd much rather put in a little more work and work with a file that has more detail, and captures more dynamic range than the 24bit corrected scan. I doubt Epsonscan would be worth pursuing for its auto correction but can't say anything towards Vuescan or Negative Pro Lab.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
I use EpsonScan but I turn all of the colour correction, inversion and other automation options off, I just do all of that in Ps when I'm spotting out dust and hairs anyway. It takes a negligible amount of time, even if you are doing a few rolls at once.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2019 05:09
|
|
|
https://www.thephoblographer.com/2019/02/02/reports-state-that-kodak-alaris-is-looking-to-sell-assets/ Bought my very first roll of Portra yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 13:11
|
|
|
savor it
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
Folks were talking about too-short fixing times earlier. I fixed a couple of rolls with some older Fomafix today for the usual 5 minutes and while things generally turned out usable, a roll of TMAX 400 had pink blotches on it, a sign of underfixing. It has a negligible effect on density and disappears when I convert the scans to grayscale, but one frame on each of the two rolls I developed had a dark patch, which is harder to deal with. Luckily they were on worthless throwaway shots:  The first was TMAX 400, the second Delta 400. Both were developed with Xtol and fixer from the same batches, but in different tanks at different times. The dark patches are visible on the negatives. Also a result of underfixing?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2019 05:52
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Folks were talking about too-short fixing times earlier. I fixed a couple of rolls with some older Fomafix today for the usual 5 minutes and while things generally turned out usable, a roll of TMAX 400 had pink blotches on it, a sign of underfixing. It has a negligible effect on density and disappears when I convert the scans to grayscale, but one frame on each of the two rolls I developed had a dark patch, which is harder to deal with. Luckily they were on worthless throwaway shots: Tmax generally requires longer fix and wash times than something like HP5. I usually fix for something like 13 minutes with Kodak fixer and never have any issues. 5 minutes seems way too short. What was your agitation like? It’s always worth doing a test with a piece of leader to get a good fix time. For most films the rule of thumb is fix for twice as long as it takes the test piece to clear. For Tmax I’ve heard go three times as long.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2019 09:33
|
|
|
Sneeze Party posted:1) What is the best inexpensive online lab that will do push/pull processing and send my negs back to me in neat little 6 frame strips? This is the resource I used when I was looking for labs, and it gives a pretty decent comparison of options. I've been using Old School Photo Lab and have been happy with their results.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
I use Dexter's Camera. They develop for $5 a roll for most formats, including B+W and E6. I just cut stuff up myself afterwards and scan at home.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 05:11
|
|
|
cerious posted:I use Dexter's Camera. They develop for $5 a roll for most formats, including B+W and E6. I just cut stuff up myself afterwards and scan at home. Fuuuuck, there are two places that develop near me, one is 10$ a roll and only does color, the other is 15$ (bit does B+W). I'd love for only 5$ developing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 06:18
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:I've been using Old School Photo Lab and have been happy with their results. Gonna keep them in mind, I've followed them on instagram for years and they like a lot of the dumb poo poo I post unrelated to film. I should send them some rolls to process for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
President Beep posted:https://www.thephoblographer.com/2019/02/02/reports-state-that-kodak-alaris-is-looking-to-sell-assets/ Is this really threatening to the Fine Kodak Products we all know and love? Seems like the business to be sold is profitable. Why gently caress with that? "The fact that it will be run by a government agency does not exactly instill confidence, now does it." I for one relish the chance to use publicly owned emulsions. Insanite fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Feb 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 14:14
|
|
|
Insanite posted:Is this really threatening to the Fine Kodak Products we all know and love? Seems like the business to be sold is profitable. Why gently caress with that? I'm kind of confused by the whole situation. Trying to figure out if Alaris actually makes the Kodak Professional stuff, or if they only sell/distribute it. The language I can find on their website seems kind of ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
I think I've read that Alaris does manufacture film products, but I trust content mill film blogs' reporting as far as I can throw it, which is either not at all or infinitely far depending on how you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2019 15:32
|
|
|
Does anyone know what I've hosed up to cause the weird lighter strip on the right side of this image: Gardener's Hut by Tim Breeze, on Flickr I thought it might be a light leak but it doesn't really look like it and it only appears on this one photo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:11
|
|
|
Might just be my lovely monitor right now, but does it extend all the way into the UR corner? Is it on the negative?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
Wet and foggy day, but at least it was relatively warm...   
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 17:40 |
|
|
Lmao: From a local Facebook group (prices are in NZD, so USD is about 2/3rds of that).
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2019 10:10
|
|