|
So, I finally developed my first roll of film! A roll of Hola 400 (120 film, dunno if it comes in other sizes) - and it seems like it went pretty well! A few questions on the results, though. A few of the pictures with the sky in them, the sky fades from light towards the horizon to dark towards the top:  Is this just how the film acts, or is it the fault of development? There’s also some slight vertical streaks in the upper-right of this shot, that don’t seem to be in other shots:  That one was at the bottom of the film strip when I had it hanging to dry, could it be water streaks? There’s also a weird light/dark spot in the top-right of this shot:  Which doesn’t seem to be in any other frames. Also, you can see on all these shots, the edges of the frames appear to be slightly light. Is that a light leak in the camera? Was it a problem with development? Something else?? All these problems appear in the negatives, so I’m fairly certain they’re not scanning problems.
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:55 |
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:So, I finally developed my first roll of film! A roll of Hola 400 (120 film, dunno if it comes in other sizes) - and it seems like it went pretty well! A few questions on the results, though. A few of the pictures with the sky in them, the sky fades from light towards the horizon to dark towards the top: That's normal. The sky is lighter near the horizon. Your shots are either underexposed in camera or while scanning. The snow is gray and the shadows inside the trees are solid black. Keep in mind that a mostly white scene or a scene that is mostly bright sky will trip up a reflective meter and make it think everything is way too bright. Compensate with some extra exposure. Less of an issue with an incident meter. Same with your scanner; any auto setting would see all that white and try to tone it down so everything looks more balanced. CodfishCartographer posted:There’s also some slight vertical streaks in the upper-right of this shot, that don’t seem to be in other shots: Looks a lot like it. I've solved my streaking issues by giving my film a dunk in Photoflo for a few minutes, shake the water off while still on the reel and a wipe down with a Kimwipe. Once in one direction and then the other with a fresh wipe. Kimwipes won't scratch anything when damp. CodfishCartographer posted:There’s also a weird light/dark spot in the top-right of this shot: Possible, but its probably just flare. Was it a bright day and the sun was a little to your right and above? CodfishCartographer posted:Also, you can see on all these shots, the edges of the frames appear to be slightly light. Is that a light leak in the camera? Was it a problem with development? Something else?? The light bits appear uniform on both sides of the image and falls off softly. Light leaks from the camera are usually much more distinct and you'd had to be pretty unlucky to have exactly the same leak on both sides. What you have there looks a lot like light leaks from the film not being tightly wound on the film roll; a "fat roll". When you're handling 120 film make sure it stays nice and tight on the spool or light will get in around the edges. When loading use your thumb or finger to put a bit of tension on the feed spool while winding on to the take up spool to start it off tight. Try to minimize the roll's exposure to light. I'll keep the wrapper when I load a new roll and stuff the roll back in when finished with it. Don't leave it sitting on the counter for a few days before developing a batch like I sometimes do with film in canisters. Sauer fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Mar 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
Sauer posted:Looks a lot like it. I've solved my streaking issues by giving my film a dunk in Photoflo for a few minutes, shake the water off while still on the reel and a wipe down with a Kimwipe. Once in one direction and then the other with a fresh wipe. Kimwipes won't scratch anything when damp. Thanks for all the tips! This was just a test roll to practice developing on, so I'm glad to know I didn't botch it up aside from the drying part, and even that was a relatively minor error on one frame. When you say that kimwipes won't scratch when damp, do you mean when the wipes are damp, when the film is, or both? Also good to know about the 120 roll tips, I'm still pretty new to MF so I'm leaning the best practices with them. I have a bunch more to develop which...I've been leaving on the counter like I do with 35mm...oops 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
Kimwipes won't scratch soft surfaces when damp. I don't wet them first, the moisture in the leader and trailer of the roll is enough to do the job. Learning experiences are fun; the first time I shot with my Yashica Mat and got to the end of the roll I popped it open immediately without continuing to wind it on until the roll was all wrapped up. Thankfully this was in the middle of the night in a lightless field but it was still a little butt puckering at the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 01:14
|
|
|
I recently (last year) exposed light sensitive jello to light.  Untitled by Sauer, on Flickr Without the border I find this image boring. With the border I find it pleasant. I'm probably projecting my own desire to find this image desirable on to the image. Regardless I'm going to make a print and hang it in my office at work to remind me that I could be hiking around this Parc instead of staring at CAM software.  Untitled by Sauer, on Flickr The Kiev-60 I bought from a gentlemen on this forum came with a fisheye lens. I don't really "get" fisheye photography other than it being the only acceptable way to capture skaters. I really like the Kiev, after being serviced by Arax. The TTL viewfinder is a bit poo poo but its has a really good (like super good) waist level finder. If any of you have advice on using a fisheye to shoot something other than skateboarders I would appreciate it. Sauer fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Mar 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
A few more night time shots. Really digging roaming around at night, the colours are just wild.   
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 09:00
|
|
|
Oh, man. Love this one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 10:52
|
|
|
   Who knows where those 2 lines came from in the first show? Film!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 12:23
|
|
|
they look like a camera strap hanging in front of the lens
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
polyester concept posted:they look like a camera strap hanging in front of the lens Well then, that'd be why I took 2 frames of that, but the second one without the shadows isn't framed as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
Don’t let that shill fool you. It’s actually rods!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
President Beep posted:Don’t let that shill fool you. It’s actually rods! That's just what Big Camera Strap wants you to believe. Please watch my 45 minute YouTube video where I explain how to use naturopathic ingredients to support your camera instead of cancer-forming lengths of leather and nylon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2019 07:26
|
|
|
So I am a moron and shot a ton of Portra 400 and forgot that I had my ISO setting stuck between 100-200. When I send it off to be developed, will it come out fine if I tell them to develop it 1 Stop over exposure? The photos from my trip are in China during the winter so most of the days, the weather was overcast. I don't know if that makes a difference at all. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
Portra 400 is extremely flexible — a stop or two over isn’t a problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
Ramms+ein posted:So I am a moron and shot a ton of Portra 400 and forgot that I had my ISO setting stuck between 100-200. When I send it off to be developed, will it come out fine if I tell them to develop it 1 Stop over exposure? The photos from my trip are in China during the winter so most of the days, the weather was overcast. I don't know if that makes a difference at all. Thanks!  If there's some extra cost for pushing film in dev at that place I would just leave it. VelociBacon fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Mar 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
Don't tell them to push it, you over exposed. Pushing is leaving it in the juice longer to compensate for underexposure and expand a squashed tonal curve. If you're really concerned, ask them to pull a stop. You'll lose some contrast and saturation by doing this but it might rein in overly hot highlights. You'd also be fine just developing normally. Porta can suck up a lot of over exposure before things start looking weird. You'll get more saturated colours and if the weather was crappy most of the time you probably won't have blow highlights anyway. I shot my last trip to Yukon on Porta 400 rated at 200 the entire time and developed normally. Had no trouble at all with the negatives. Sauer fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Mar 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
So I got one of the C-41 kits from film photography project, and their instructions for timings don’t seem to mention the speed of the film, nor adjustments for different types of film. Is C-41 development just that streamlined, where you use the same development times for all films, regardless of type or speed? I've got some rolls of Portra 400, Fuji Superia 400, and Fuji Superia 1600 that I need to develop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
In my experience, yeah. C41 is C41. I’ve developed film from ISO 160 to 800. Same times for everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
In general, you don't want to push or pull film development unless you specifically want the look of pushed film, or you *really* hosed up the metering (like by 4 stops or more). It's not like moving the exposure slider to the right in post, it has specific effects that you might not want. Because the negative is basically blank in the dark areas, there's nothing for the developer to work on when you push, this means that your dark areas are going to stay dark, you can't pull detail that doesn't exist out of shadows. Your midtones and your highlights however will be lighter. The effect will be a stronger contrast curve with deep blacks. You may also get some colour casts as well if you push it a lot, but those can be fixed in post unlike the shadow contrast. If you pull the film to compensate for overexposure, you are (as Sauer said) going to lose a lot of contrast and some saturation. Most negative films have a lot of latitude for over exposure with Portra being particularly notable for it (you can still get usable images 5 or 6 stops over exposed). You might end up with noisy bright areas, but you can fix that with some carefully targeted noise reduction. If you are shooting negative film and you are a stop or two out of whack, then you are probably fine unless the lighting is particularly janky. You can almost certainly fix whatever exposure issues exist in post.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2019 05:19
|
|
|
President Beep posted:In my experience, yeah. C41 is C41. I’ve developed film from ISO 160 to 800. Same times for everything. Neat! Is it okay to develop multiple different types of film at once? So like Portra 400 on one reel and Fuji 1600 on the other?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
Yeah, i think the formulation of C-41 means that you can throw any film stock, and what ever box speed into the same chemistry to get developed with the same Developing times, since it would be inefficient to have to change up the developing times/temps/etc for every roll at a standard mini-lab
The Modern Sky fucked around with this message at 05:37 on Mar 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2019 05:33
|
|
|
So, my EOS 300 has arrived, and looks to be in pretty much brand new condition. Bought it for $30AUD, which is pretty good for something to use as a beginners camera. Comes with the standard 28-80mm lens, which might need a bit of a clean as it seems to have a bit of dust or fungus on the lens. I am looking to do street photography with this camera, which means I'd probably go for a different lens for that. I was thinking of the Canon 40mm STM as a good mid-ground between a 35mm and a 50mm lens, but I am wondering what kind of one you would probably recommend. There is also the option of getting a 24mm pancake lens, but I thought I would ask what the people here feel is one of the better options. I'm mainly looking to shoot in B&W, so lenses which can help with that would be great. I'd also really love to give night photography a go, but I don't have much of an idea of which lens would be best to achieve long exposure shots with. I have seen people online recommending zoom lenses, but I have no idea which one would be useful. Any help people can give will be gratefully appreciated 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2019 16:35
|
|
|
Pretty sure the 24mm STM won't work, as it's an EF-S mount lens, which is intended for crop sensor digital EOS bodies. I think you'll be limited to EF mount lenses only. I've heard good things about the EF 40mm STM, but it's only f/2.8, which isn't especially fast. I'd opt for the 50mm f/1.8. Cheaper than the pancake 40mm and considerably faster. e: I've just started using an A2E, and having a film body with modern autofocus and image stabilizatin--lens permitting--is very nice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
After lots of uhm-ing and ahh-ing, I went for a reasonably priced 50mm STM, which I bought second hand. From the photos it looks to be in tip top condition, with minimal use. I took your advice after reading more about the 40mm and the 50mm. Now I really like the 40mm, and think it would be a great lens, but I also want to do some night photography, and the 50mm works better in low light conditions, so I'll take the slightly less panoramic ability for street photography and get something which can achieve a lot of what I am looking to do. Thanks for the advice, and I look forward to receiving my lens
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2019 04:39
|
|
|
I have made a huge mistake.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2019 09:12
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I have made a huge mistake. Yeah, you should have gotten a Chamonix.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 11:06
|
|
|
So I bought a $20 lightbox off of eBay. The moral of the story is don't buy a $20 lightbox off eBay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 12:47
|
|
|
*Lite-Brite
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 12:56
|
|
|
Yikes! Jesus christ.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 13:01
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Yeah, you should have gotten a Chamonix. Dude from Facebook Marketplace was selling it for $100 with a Rodenstock 90mm f/4.5 lens, two spare lensboards, and 8 film holders. Doubt I'd get a Chamonix for that money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
A few weeks ago I posted asking for advice on shooting a 30 year old roll of Ilford FP4. I finally got around to scanning it and it came out better than I was expecting except for the backing paper bleeding through somehow on the fourth photo: Shelves by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Orchid by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  url=https://flic.kr/p/2e918us]Shower Window[/url] by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Self Portrait by Tim Breeze, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Did you do anything special with it or just shot it at box speed and developed normally?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 23:45
|
|
|
I followed the advice of Helen Highwater gave and shot it at 50 rather than 125 to compensate for the age of the film. I didn't do anything particularly special with development, just followed the timings for box speed FP4+ albeit with a more dilute developer than I usually use for a bit more latitude in timing.
Holistic Detective fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Mar 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
That turned out way better than I was expecting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
Finally got around to shooting / developing a whole roll of Portra 400 on my new-to-me Minolta. New camera who dis    I need to get used to the metering on this camera. My goats came out too dark.  These black bands happened on a few of my shots. Any idea what's going on here? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 03:12
|
|
|
What kind of Minolta? My x-700 started doing that a few frames per roll before crapping out entirely. I think a capacitor has died. e: Sorry, missed part of your question. It’s a shutter curtain dragging.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 03:22
|
|
|
My Minolta X-700 does that too
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 03:31
|
|
|
Yep, Minolta X-700. I might try a little dab of oil on the shutter curtain tracks. If it gets worse, I'll get a quote on a little professional TLC and compare that against another new body.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:55 |
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 12:03
|
|