|
Yond Cassius posted:Have you tried Perceptol? I've had good luck with Microdol-X, which should be about the same. You lose a little speed but you're not shooting Pan F for the speed anyways. I suppose that's an option, but I'd rather rate at 25 and pull and use a developer I have on hand already or just shoot a lower contrast film to start with.
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 19:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
I found a random roll of used 120 film and this is what Ultrafine 400 looks like 7 years after its expiration date.  Probably improved the shot to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
Looks like an illustration from a children’s scary stories book. I really like the look!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
Must be my underfunded public school background talking, but i do like the triple xeroxed look.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 13:02
|
|
|
Couple weeks back I was sitting on the beach with a buddy and happened to see an engagement about to go down. Ran over and snagged these (their family was just left out of frame, I wasn't intruding or anything) and just got them back. Couple was thrilled and booked me for their wedding  Fuji superia x-tra 400 on Canon AE 1. Indie Film Lab did the scans.   
Bottom Liner fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Jun 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 05:36
|
|
|
I got one of those single reel auto-loading daylight tanks. It's a Soviet 'Sputnik' tank which is effectively identical to the Rodinax and Leica ones, except that it's made of about 3kgs of bakelite.  8Z8A0035.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
I had this roll of film that came out of a point and shoot that broke down half-way through the roll, then I thought I fixed it and it broke down 5 or so shots in. So when I was after some film I didn't really care about to test out a new X700 body I went straight to it. These two that came out of that hot mess I kinda like.  and as a bonus the new body is behaving itself well. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
Would any of you happen to know (or can measure) the diameter of the filter glass in a Bay 1 filter? There's a local shop that's got a box of cracked or scratched Bay 1 filters for nearly nothing and I've got loads of 30.5mm filters I have no use for anymore who's glass just about looks like they would fit inside a Bay 1 frame... and a pair of TLRs with Bay 1 mounts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 03:39
|
|
|
Sauer posted:Would any of you happen to know (or can measure) the diameter of the filter glass in a Bay 1 filter? There's a local shop that's got a box of cracked or scratched Bay 1 filters for nearly nothing and I've got loads of 30.5mm filters I have no use for anymore who's glass just about looks like they would fit inside a Bay 1 frame... and a pair of TLRs with Bay 1 mounts. Bay 1 is notionally 30mm, so it might or might not work. You might be better off getting a filter adapter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
Oh that would be even better. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 05:36
|
|
|
I have the worst luck with light meters. The CLA’d Yashicamat I just got whose light meter was supposed to be one stop off actually doesn’t move past say, 1/3rd the way across the meter range. But that’s okay because I got an excellent rated Sekonic L-398a from KEH at the same time aaaaaand that is under exposing by 2 stops when I test it with a DSLR. Good times.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 19:27
|
|
|
A few 35mm cine film shots, not many keepers from this lot but I think that's mostly due to my DSLR scanning backlight being lovely/uneven.  
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 10:57
|
|
|
Blackhawk posted:A few 35mm cine film shots, not many keepers from this lot but I think that's mostly due to my DSLR scanning backlight being lovely/uneven. Did you go for the 50 ISO?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 16:00
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:Did you go for the 50 ISO? No I got the 250d stuff, which I really don't hear anybody talking about but it does the job just fine. I wish they still sold bulk rolls of regular colour film though, the remjet isn't too bad but it's just one more thing to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
For the  goons Downtown Camera has a loyalty program that actually makes buying film in Canada reasonable versus ordering from B&H or FPP if you're a heavy shooter. I didn't know about it until I got a Paypal message today refunding 25% of my order and an email from a Downtown Camera staff member telling me about the program and my new membership in it. You break even on it at about ten rolls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
Looks like 50 rolls of portra will cost you the same at b&h vs downtown camera Not Bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
I've been DSLR scanning my negatives using a dodgy aliexpress LED tracing pad for a while but I've always suspected that it's got a pretty lousy CRI (colour rendering index, basically how 'complete' the light spectrum it emits is). I ordered a 50W 95% CRI LED (again from Aliexpress) and tried that out tonight. On the plus side it definitely seems to have made a difference to the colours, normally when I invert the neg using negative lab pro the colours are way off and it can be pretty hard to get it looking OK. This time they were all nearly perfect, clicking the 'auto colour' button basically did nothing. On the down-side the LED runs directly from 240V AC power and it's definitely flickering, I think at 100Hz. When I was trying to use it as a light source with my mirrorless I was getting really odd black bands in the picture that would slowly move up and down, like some sort of rolling shutter artifact. I managed to get them to go away by stopping down to f22 but then my images were soft from diffraction. I think the difference compared to the tracing pad is definitely worth a bit more effort trying to get it working though, I might have to see if I can get an equivalent LED that runs from DC so that it wont flicker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
Is there anyway you could rig up a flash as your light source? Even a cheap flash should have a CRI and colour temp pretty close to sunlight and the pop of a flash would eliminate any issue of vibration or movement. I use a flash and a Nikon ES-2 to "scan" 35mm film and it works extremely well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
Lol get a fuckin scanner dude
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
No I wanna spend more money to do things in the most complicated way possible that gives inconsistent results
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:No I wanna spend more money to do things in the most complicated way possible that gives inconsistent results Well I mean this thread is literally about shooting film so uhhh yeah?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
And then photographing that film with a dslr 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
Think of how hard you can flex on the Epson plebs if you buy a flextight
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 21:02
|
|
|
Since we're on the topic of scanning, any recommendations for film holders to use with the v550? I shoot both 120 and 35mm and am real tired of the crappy ones that come with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
Just get a scanner for your scanner dude.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:Since we're on the topic of scanning, any recommendations for film holders to use with the v550? I shoot both 120 and 35mm and am real tired of the crappy ones that come with it. For 120 I use this: http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/models/v500.html And I bought some glass inserts from eBay for the 35mm holder. Both have been a worthwhile upgrade, but I wish I got my 35mm glass inserts from Better Scanning as thier quality was way better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 22:44
|
|
|
I use the betterscanning holders with my Epson too. It works well. I got the glass inserts and yes they are nice. It's more expensive than a dodgy Aliexpress lightpad running on the wrong voltage next to a pile of flammable negatives, but it works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
CodfishCartographer posted:Since we're on the topic of scanning, any recommendations for film holders to use with the v550? I shoot both 120 and 35mm and am real tired of the crappy ones that come with it. The Betterscanning holders I got for my V500 made a noticeable difference for me and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them (though I found the extra 2 surfaces to keep dust-free somewhat aggravating), but what made much, much more of a difference for me was upgrading to a V700. If you can justify the price, do that. Krispy Wafer posted:flammable negatives Nitrate film hasn't been available for 60+ years.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
Thanks for the recommendation, I'll definitely pick up the betterscanning stuff! I would upgrade to the 700 but can't quite afford it at the moment, and I'm not super disappointed in the quality, more annoyed at the flimsy holders than can't even keep film in place / flat. Unless you're recommending the 700 for reasons other than just scan quality?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
The V700 will handle 4 strips of 135 or 2 strips of 120 at a time as well as being able to scan 2 4x5 negatives, also it has an optional fluid mount for reducing dust and newton rings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 04:37
|
|
|
it also comes with better film holders so you dont have to buy more film holders
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 05:11
|
|
|
The default 4x5 film holders that come with the V700 are really good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2019 07:58
|
|
|
Any Boston-area folks want a couple of free Pentax SMC-A 50mms, one 2.0, the other 1.7? Aperture ring one on one is a bit sticky, and on the other it doesn't go any smaller than 8. Might be fun for rehab/learning. Not sure if they're worth shipping, but I'd consider it if no one local pipes up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
Insanite posted:Any Boston-area folks want a couple of free Pentax SMC-A 50mms, one 2.0, the other 1.7? Aperture ring one on one is a bit sticky, and on the other it doesn't go any smaller than 8. Might be fun for rehab/learning. Unfortunately I'm no longer in Boston, but I'd be willing to still take the 1.7 off your hands if no one has claimed it. Also as a general question, I want to experiment with pushing my film in development. Does that mean I need to also push in-camera or can I shoot box speed and push a stop? I'm using 400 speed film.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
Sure you can develop for longer. It will increase the contrast though too much will block up your highlights. The graybeards would call that expansion or N+ development and use it as a way to expand the tonal curve of a low contrast scene (Eg. Overcast). Use exposure in camera to anchor your shadows on the "histogram" and development to move the highlights where you want them. Sauer fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Sep 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
Hey friends. I'm looking to get back into shooting film. I've only ever shot film on my old Zenit behemoth that I have, but after carrying my Fuji X100 for a while, I'm really spoiled by its tiny size and portability, so I'm looking for something more compact. The thread-favorite Pentax ME Super seems to fit the bill given that it's almost the same size as the X100, but I'm also looking at the MX. What are the main differences between them? Is it just the full-manualness of the MX versus aperture priority on the ME Super? It seems like the MX will last forever, being fully mechanical, so I'm leaning in that direction, but I thought I'd ask y'all what you think. Either way, I'm thinking about nabbing a 40mm pancake lens to mount on it since I need it to be really portable. Has anyone in here used the old Pentax 40mm prime, and can comment on it? Keret fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Sep 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
The major difference is like you said, the MX is fully mechanical. I've got a gaggle of MX's and they're probably the only SLR I'll ever use for the rest of my life for any situation that doesn't call for fast auto-focus (Nikon F100 for that). It also has a horizontal travel cloth shutter so maximum shutter speed is limited to 1/1000th and flash sync is 1/60 while the ME Super can do 1/2000th and 1/125th sync with its metal vertical travel shutter. The ME Super is a shade smaller (about 8mm in length shorter) and about 50 grams lighter. I personally find the ME Super has a better viewfinder as a glasses wearer but the MX is also quite good. The winding lever on the MX pokes my glasses frame if I don't push it back flush with the body after winding while the ME Super doesn't. The ME Super is about as point and shoot as you can get with a manual focus camera while the MX is slower most of the time. They both use the same lenses and they're pretty much all stellar. A serviced ME Super is reliable. Its reputation for inevitably failing is from folks grabbing their parent's camera that's been sitting in a box for 30 years and tossing it because its gummed up and jammed. It was also one of the consumer grade cameras of the 'M' lineup so it doesn't have as many ruggedness features as the MX has such as ball bearing film transport and beefy springs. Taken care of they work just fine. The MX is one of the most reliable mechanical SLRs available. Pentax designed it to be a foolproof backup camera for professionals and prosumers when their fancy new electronic cameras crapped out on them. They still need to be serviced from time to time like any machine but you could probably just dunk the whole thing in kerosene, shake it and hose it off and call that a CLA. I have owned and sold the 40mm pancake twice. Both times thinking I would really like to have a more compact lens and both times finding it way to compact. The focus ring is practically not there and its real easy to knock the focus or aperture ring out of place while operating the other ring. It does have pretty good image quality if you're not a hardcore MFT graph consumer. Not the best out of Pentax's lineup of primes but perfectly fine. The 50mm f/1.7, 35mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/2.8 are all very small lenses for an SLR. Hello I'm Sauer and I like Pentax cameras. Coincidentally I have a bunch of 35mm cameras I'm going to be selling over the next little while and a (Serviced) ME Super is one of them. I'll put a post up in Buy/Sell once I'm done taking pictures of it. Sauer fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Sep 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
Sauer posted:Hello I'm Sauer and I like Pentax cameras. Same here! My first SLR ever was an SP1000 that my uncle gave me when I was 10. I still have it on my shelf but I primarily use an ME Super with a 50mm 1.7 lens and it accomplishes most of what I want to do with a 35mm camera as of now. I have a macro 40-80 lens that is getting some filaments in it so that needs cleaning. My other active use camera is a canon EOS 1n and that’s just a wonderful unit for rugged and extreme conditions
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
Sauer posted:The major difference is like you said, the MX is fully mechanical. I've got a gaggle of MX's and they're probably the only SLR I'll ever use for the rest of my life for any situation that doesn't call for fast auto-focus (Nikon F100 for that). It also has a horizontal travel cloth shutter so maximum shutter speed is limited to 1/1000th and flash sync is 1/60 while the ME Super can do 1/2000th and 1/125th sync with its metal vertical travel shutter. The ME Super is a shade smaller (about 8mm in length shorter) and about 50 grams lighter. I personally find the ME Super has a better viewfinder as a glasses wearer but the MX is also quite good. The winding lever on the MX pokes my glasses frame if I don't push it back flush with the body after winding while the ME Super doesn't. The ME Super is about as point and shoot as you can get with a manual focus camera while the MX is slower most of the time. They both use the same lenses and they're pretty much all stellar. This is great info, thanks! Good to know about the 40mm. I'll likely just accept a slightly larger footprint and go for the 50mm f/1.7 lens, since I like shooting with a 50mm already. I'd be very interested in that ME Super when the time comes. I don't have PMs, but feel free to email me at hello@kristophernicholson.com and I'd be happy to talk about it in the interim.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
Keret posted:This is great info, thanks! Good to know about the 40mm. I'll likely just accept a slightly larger footprint and go for the 50mm f/1.7 lens, since I like shooting with a 50mm already. Good news then!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 00:39
|
|