|
"I'll put a vertical element in the left third of all my photos today"  
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2019 12:38
|
|
|
I bought a Super Speed Graphic today and I want to connect it to a strobe trigger. The lens has no PC socket, but the body has connectors for a flash cable. Looking around online, I can only find Graflex to PC cables that have two flat pins at the Graflex end. My camera has three holes that are small and round - big enough for a 2.5mm jack to go into, but not big enough for it to be inserted all the way. I can't find a cable that would fit this description. There are Graflex flash units on eBay, but none of them come with cables. Am I figuring this wrong? Is there a better way to get PC sync capability on the camera without buying a new lens/shutter?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I bought a Super Speed Graphic today and I want to connect it to a strobe trigger. The lens has no PC socket, but the body has connectors for a flash cable. Looking around online, I can only find Graflex to PC cables that have two flat pins at the Graflex end. My camera has three holes that are small and round - big enough for a 2.5mm jack to go into, but not big enough for it to be inserted all the way. I can't find a cable that would fit this description. There are Graflex flash units on eBay, but none of them come with cables. Am I figuring this wrong? Is there a better way to get PC sync capability on the camera without buying a new lens/shutter? Maybe 2.5mm Microsync? That sounds strange for three holes, though. I'd send some pictures of the setup to Paramount Cords - they've probably seen it before, and if they have, they can make you a custom cord to handle the conversion. Their prices are pretty reasonable, considering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Here's what it looks like from the manual. Mine is exactly like this. I don't have a flash though
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 05:45
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Here's what it looks like from the manual. Mine is exactly like this. I don't have a flash though Yep, Paramount will help you. See the "Super Speed Graphic – Graflex" section. A basic PC conversion cord will run you ~$40.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2019 06:08
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:Yep, Paramount will help you. Paramount could not help me. I ordered a Graflex X-sync to PC cable then they emailed me 6 times about it. The dude was super unprofessional and had no idea about anything. Eventually he cancelled my order because he couldn't figure out what to do and decided that it was my fault despite me literally giving him the exact dimensions that I needed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:Paramount could not help me. I ordered a Graflex X-sync to PC cable then they emailed me 6 times about it. The dude was super unprofessional and had no idea about anything. Eventually he cancelled my order because he couldn't figure out what to do and decided that it was my fault despite me literally giving him the exact dimensions that I needed. Who did you talk to, if I may ask? Their products are pretty reliable but there seems to be someone there who makes CS hit-or-miss at best (apparently calling is better, if not always practical). This said, now that we know what's going on, improvising a cord should also be relatively easy - it's just a matter of getting the right electrical circuit to close at the right time. Might be more shop work than you're willing to deal with, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
I was talking with a guy called Jon. I ordered a 25cm curled cord but apparently the guy couldn't figure out the difference between cm and mm even after I gave him the lengths in inches. I live in Thailand, so calling New York isn't really practical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I was talking with a guy called Jon. Yeah, we use linear units called "Freedoms" and "Liberties" here now. One freedom is the length of a bald eagle tear and one liberty equals 1776 freedoms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 17:04
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:I was talking with a guy called Jon. 25cm is a relatively short cord - probably best just to make it as a 1-foot piece with no coil section at all. On a scale of 1-10, how much do you want it? I'm willing to try proxying it for you if you want; drop me a PM.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:25cm is a relatively short cord - probably best just to make it as a 1-foot piece with no coil section at all. On a scale of 1-10, how much do you want it? I'm willing to try proxying it for you if you want; drop me a PM. The shortest stock length they had was 3 feet. I was trying to explain that I didn't need that much cable. I want to be able to hook this thing up to my studio strobe trigger, so I'd say I'm at an 8 on the want it scale. I'll drop you a PM.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
I've been doing more work with the big camera lately. Looking for that next bit of inspiration. Made this in the meantime.  Entryway by Jason, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:I've been doing more work with the big camera lately. Looking for that next bit of inspiration. Made this in the meantime. How much dodging/burning do you do in the processing of the film with that alt process? That looks great.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
That really is a nice image. Dramatic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 23:45
|
|
|
^^Thanks!VelociBacon posted:How much dodging/burning do you do in the processing of the film with that alt process? That looks great. A lot, but probably not as much as you think. A big part of the process is retraining your brain to understand how different colors and contrast situations are going to read on the paper negative, because it's usually way different than cellulose film. And while the actual time on enlarger is often as much as 10 minutes, most of the broad strokes are already there in the negative if you've shot it right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 01:26
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 11:02
|
|
|
Just knew this was one of yours without looking at the username.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 12:29
|
|
|
spookygonk posted:Just knew this was one of yours without looking at the username. I'll take that as a compliment!
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 13:45
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I'll take that as a compliment! It was.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
Shot my first roll of Ektar yesterday. Didn't shoot anything groundbreaking, but the colors that film produces are really something else.  The film really seems to have an affinity for blue, and I tried to tone down the sky in this image. Too far?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 01:42
|
|
|
It's fine, could be less blue even. But it works with the greenness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 11:26
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:"I'll put a vertical element in the left third of all my photos today" Really loving these! They're all so really smooth and moody, just get good emotional feels from them. Random question, what did you expose for in those shots? (Also what camera/lens? 500c?) I've been having a hell of a time getting good shots with my Pentax 67 with Portra 400, and looking for any pointers about nailing exposure, beyond metering the shadows and shooting at 320/200 instead of 400.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
ianskate posted:Really loving these! They're all so really smooth and moody, just get good emotional feels from them. The first step to nailing exposure is not to overexpose by 3-5 stops.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
ianskate posted:I've been having a hell of a time getting good shots with my Pentax 67 with Portra 400, and looking for any pointers about nailing exposure, beyond metering the shadows and shooting at 320/200 instead of 400. You should expose for the exposure you want, rather than just metering for the shadows. If you don't even know the exposure you want then you should probably study more on how exposure works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2019 06:20
|
|
|
Sounds like it's time to learn all about the following topics: - 18% grey - spot vs centerweight vs "matrix" metering - how much light is 1 stop - sunny 16 - incident vs reflective - reciprocity failure (if you are shooting at night)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2019 08:13
|
|
|
ianskate posted:I've been having a hell of a time getting good shots with my Pentax 67 with Portra 400, and looking for any pointers about nailing exposure, beyond metering the shadows and shooting at 320/200 instead of 400. I don't understand exposure, I just do what you do. How do you get this wrong? Shooting Portra 400 is literally shooting film on easy mode. Aim camera at a scene. Get a light reading. Roughly dial in that reading, erring on the side of overexposure. Push button. Get film developed, sigh and chuck it in the trash (but not because exposure isn't ace!). Rinse and repeat.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2019 09:32
|
|
|
ianskate posted:I've been having a hell of a time getting good shots with my Pentax 67 with Portra 400, and looking for any pointers about nailing exposure, beyond metering the shadows and shooting at 320/200 instead of 400. What do you not like about your photos ? You don't really need to nail the exposure on common scenes to get an acceptable image when shooting portra 400.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Haha, thanks for all the replies, wasn't expecting so much feedback. I'm aware of some of those things and have had reasonable success with other cameras and film stocks over the years, but I suppose maybe it's the lens (105 2.4) being out slightly out of focus or not as sharp as I'd hoped for. Something just doesn't feel "right" visually, if that makes any sense. The exposure isn't incorrect, I'm not getting any wild under/overexposure per se, but being able to achieve that dreamy/creamy look that I see in other shots is essentially what I feel is lacking. Maybe it's just technique and practice or a combination of that and the lens/body, or even development. I've been self developing with C41 press kits for a while and other films have resulted in decent shots, but they still lacked that same sort of surreal tonality. I'll have to post some examples when I'm back at a computer later this week, will update this post with something, because I don't want to totally derail the topic with help/advice questions. Thanks everybody 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Can you post a pic that illustrates creamy/dreamy?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2019 23:01
|
|
|
ianskate posted:Haha, thanks for all the replies, wasn't expecting so much feedback. I'm aware of some of those things and have had reasonable success with other cameras and film stocks over the years, but I suppose maybe it's the lens (105 2.4) being out slightly out of focus or not as sharp as I'd hoped for. Something just doesn't feel "right" visually, if that makes any sense. It's not your gear. How are you scanning and what's your color workflow?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
Anyone have any tips for a Polaroid 80 back that doesn't want to lock on to a 500C/M? Just got it from eBay and a push on the little tab doesn't seem to move the little blocker things out of the way enough to accept the prongs from the back of the Hasselblad body.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 09:04
|
|
|
So, I fell in love with the idea of a LF camera over the winter. I also like to build stuff, so the original plan was to build my own, but other more important projects kept getting in the way, so I finally caved in and ordered an Intrepid Mk4. I now that there's cheaper options on ebay, but I was keen on a field camera, as I plan to take it with me hiking in the mountains. I did do film photography some 25 years ago, including development/enlarging, so I got some idea of what I'm doing...but probably not as much as I should. I got a local lab that can develop at a reasonable price ($6/shot), which is fine. I have a lens (135mm), 5 film holders, shutter cable/trigger. I'm planning to just get a box of HP5 to start with and I'll use my OMD-5 for light metering. I still need to buy a changing bag. What do you use for focusing hood?. Do I need a loupe?. Any other bits that will be handy?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:So, I fell in love with the idea of a LF camera over the winter. I also like to build stuff, so the original plan was to build my own, but other more important projects kept getting in the way, so I finally caved in and ordered an Intrepid Mk4. I now that there's cheaper options on ebay, but I was keen on a field camera, as I plan to take it with me hiking in the mountains. I have a BTZS hood but you can use a black t-shirt. You definitely need a loupe if you care about critical focus. $6/sheet is not a reasonable price for development unless you're unwilling to develop yourself or mail to Citizens Photo, which will do it for $2.50/sheet. (edit: your post history suggests you're Canadian, in which case I'd still recommend developing yourself - look up the taco method) I have had and heard nothing but bad experiences with Intrepid products. If it's not too late, cancel the order and get a Crown Graphic instead. The extra ~2 pounds isn't that much considering each film holder is half a pound and you'll probably be taking more than one. MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 21:32 on May 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 21:30
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:I have had and heard nothing but bad experiences with Intrepid products. If it's not too late, cancel the order and get a Crown Graphic instead. The extra ~2 pounds isn't that much considering each film holder is half a pound and you'll probably be taking more than one. My impression is that Intrepid is like the Lomo of Large Format. The defects and light leaks are "part of the charm", but you can work around them with some electrical tape and determined tinkering if you expect your light-tight box to be light-tight for some perverted reason. ( To be 100% fair to Intrepid, they seem to mean well and keep improving, but there's only so much you can do once you've accepted their design brief. )
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:So, I fell in love with the idea of a LF camera over the winter. I also like to build stuff, so the original plan was to build my own, but other more important projects kept getting in the way, so I finally caved in and ordered an Intrepid Mk4. I now that there's cheaper options on ebay, but I was keen on a field camera, as I plan to take it with me hiking in the mountains. If you don't hate the idea of developing yourself, the Mod45 holders are a relatively new invention (last ten years) that allow you to develop 6 sheets in a regular Paterson 3-reel tank. I quite liked using a Grafmatic with it - the six-shot magazine made my developing workflow easy. I typically just used a jacket for a focusing hood, and a reversed 50mm prime for a loupe. The real articles will be nicer, of course. You might consider a spot meter.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm in Canada...so call it $4 USD  .I don't hate the idea of developing my own, but I'll wait until I actually know how to use the camera I had mostly seen positive reviews for the Intrepid...but then most of those were linked off Intrepid themselves. I'll dig around some more, but I have fallen in love with the look/design. There's currently 6 weeks wait, so cancelling is definitely an option. I'll dig around for a loupe...seems to be about $100USD?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Yeah, I'm in Canada...so call it $4 USD $100 is about right. Make sure you get one that doesn't have clear sides (for viewing film/slides). At $6 (or even at $4) per sheet just for developing, cheaping out on a camera that has a good chance of not being light tight is a mistake. Avoiding false economies is especially important with large format.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:I'll dig around for a loupe...seems to be about $100USD? Get yourself a 5X EMO Macromax (later rebranded by Leica). They're the best all-around loupe I've used, comparable to last-generation Rodenstock and Schneider loupes that ran ~$275, but they run $65-85 on eBay (add ~$75 Red Dot Tax if you're silly). At that price I bought (and continue to buy) extras in case anything should happen to mine.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
My intrepid is a leaky piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2019 16:17
|
|
