|
President Beep posted:In all seriousness, as someone who isn’t very experienced and shares your general live-and-let-live take, I can say that there are some apparent film veterans here that dislike this kind of dabbling. It's not dabbling people are against, it's posting of uninspired photos. We all choose different films for their different qualities and employ them in our photography because we're after their aesthetic. You can use lomo purple or 30 year expired afga surveillance film to good effect, but if you're leaning on "Hey, look at this crazy film" instead of your subject and composition you're just moving horrible Instagram filters from post-processing to pre-processing and spending good money for the privilege.
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
Megabound posted:It's not dabbling people are against, it's posting of uninspired photos. We all choose different films for their different qualities and employ them in our photography because we're after their aesthetic. You can use lomo purple or 30 year expired afga surveillance film to good effect, but if you're leaning on "Hey, look at this crazy film" instead of your subject and composition you're just moving horrible Instagram filters from post-processing to pre-processing and spending good money for the privilege. Got it. Be inspired. Would you like me to go into a deep explanation about the rigorous of urban living and capturing the essence of the concrete jungle and it's surrounding illumination blaring at us to consume? I can do that if you want. This kind of attitude is what pushes people away from a medium becuase it's pompous as gently caress. Why do you need an explanation? The explanation should come from the viewer as well to interpret the piece on their own level. That's what I've seen since I posted the photos, a mixed bag of "I like it" and "it's poo poo". I'm fine with it. Photography is about capturing the moment and this was an experiment flexing the medium with the film. Why not take my post as "I've never used this film before, here are my results." I was testing the bounds of the colors it can produce and see what kind of effects it gives. All good though. Have fun and be happier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:23
|
|
|
ASSTASTIC posted:pompous as gently caress. welcome to the dorkroom!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:26
|
|
|
ASSTASTIC posted:This kind of attitude is what pushes people away from a medium becuase it's pompous as gently caress. I'd say the same thing about the photo if it was digital. No one needs your take on Cinestill 800. I can type that into Google and see page after page of equally bad photos as the ones you posted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:29
|
|
|
Megabound posted:I'd say the same thing about the photo if it was digital. Sounds good. Have a great life.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:31
|
|
|
I like the photos and not because of the aesthetic but because the look fits the scenes which are just as interesting as anything else posted here but then again these guys think cinestill looks like "Instagram influencers" and cant tell the difference in it and lovely orange/teal presets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:32
|
|
|
ASSTASTIC posted:This kind of attitude is what pushes people away from a medium becuase it's pompous as gently caress. this is a stupid take and we’re all worse off for you having posted it
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:57
|
|
|
ASSTASTIC posted:Got it. Be inspired. Would you like me to go into a deep explanation about the rigorous of urban living and capturing the essence of the concrete jungle and it's surrounding illumination blaring at us to consume? I can do that if you want. You're gonna have to, because the photo didn't really communicate that. Are you here in the Dorkroom because you want to take better photos, or for validation (of your photos, film choices, whatever)? The latter is in short supply around here, and that's a good thing. Plenty of people who just want validation do bounce off this subforum, and that's fine. There are plenty of photo club hugboxes on the internet already.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 07:57
|
|
|
you are contractually obliged to like my photos i'm posting on the internet
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 08:01
|
|
|
Huh, I thought those 2 pics were decent. Certainly no worse than a lot of other stuff posted here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 08:39
|
|
|
Megabound posted:It's not dabbling people are against, it's posting of uninspired photos. We all choose different films for their different qualities and employ them in our photography because we're after their aesthetic. You can use lomo purple or 30 year expired afga surveillance film to good effect, but if you're leaning on "Hey, look at this crazy film" instead of your subject and composition you're just moving horrible Instagram filters from post-processing to pre-processing and spending good money for the privilege. It goes way beyond the merit of any images posted though. I’ve shared stuff here and no one’s said anything off putting about them. Where I tend to run afoul of the unspoken orthodoxy is with regards to different ways of processing film, scanning techniques, etc. The kind of poo poo someone who’s been doing this forever may not want to mess with anymore and apparently doesn’t think others should either. The thing is, it’s fun to me, along with also trying to produce good images. I don’t just sit in my basement, shooting test cards. I value the whole process—striving to take worthy images using a medium that makes me be more considerate and deliberate, looks neat, and has a cool technical aspect to it to boot. In the end, if that’s really not what this thread is about, then I’ll just go elsewhere. It’s really not a big deal, and it’s not worth it to me to try swim against the cultural current here. It’s a slow thread, and squabbling over what’s a valid way to do photography and what isn’t can really bog things down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 08:47
|
|
|
no one is really dumping on them but some people are real turned up over the idea of them being dumped on
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 08:47
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:but then again these guys think cinestill looks like "Instagram influencers" and cant tell the difference in it and lovely orange/teal presets. of course there's a difference but neither makes your photos good, hth
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 09:17
|
|
|
President Beep posted:It goes way beyond the merit of any images posted though. I’ve shared stuff here and no one’s said anything off putting about them. Where I tend to run afoul of the unspoken orthodoxy is with regards to different ways of processing film, scanning techniques, etc. No one cares what scanner, film or developer you use. If you ask for an opinion on these things you will get one, but no one here is looking at the EXIF data on your photos in order to scoff at you for using a V600 to scan 35mm. People will judge photos posted on their merits. Some people will like them, some people won't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 09:33
|
|
|
Time is a flat circle in the Dorkroom.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 11:21
|
|
|
I liked the photos; they reminded me of a few disoriented and hazy nights in Tokyo a while back. Well, thanks for coming to my TED talk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 14:07
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:I'm still on the hunt for a small but durable point and shoot 35 with a decent and fast lens in the normal range. Any recommendations? It needs to be small enough to carry on my bike comfortably. This describes the Olympus XA series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
President Beep posted:It goes way beyond the merit of any images posted though. I’ve shared stuff here and no one’s said anything off putting about them. Where I tend to run afoul of the unspoken orthodoxy is with regards to different ways of processing film, scanning techniques, etc. The kind of poo poo someone who’s been doing this forever may not want to mess with anymore and apparently doesn’t think others should either. The thing is, it’s fun to me, along with also trying to produce good images. I don’t just sit in my basement, shooting test cards. I value the whole process—striving to take worthy images using a medium that makes me be more considerate and deliberate, looks neat, and has a cool technical aspect to it to boot. You do you bud. Just might have to recognize that what makes you interested in a photo isn't what makes others interested in a photo, which is fine. You and aa are somewhat talking past each other I think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
Just don't do Fomapan. My buddy snorted a line of it at a party and now he's dead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:You do you bud. Just might have to recognize that what makes you interested in a photo isn't what makes others interested in a photo, which is fine. You and aa are somewhat talking past each other I think. You’ve misunderstood me. What you say above is exactly the point I’m trying to make. I 100% agree with you. -Have fun -Share what you find interesting -Offer helpful critique when you have the opportunity (Ansel’s remarks upthread about why you shouldn’t rely on things like red halos is an excellent example of this which I found really helpful) -Don’t just threadshit President Beep fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Nov 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
Anyway, I’ve said my peace. After not having time to do much of anything with film over the past few months I’m finally ready to develop a few rolls on Monday. Looking forward to seeing if anything’s worth a drat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
I like Cinestill. Is that allowed here? Please don't hurt my feelings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
cinestill is what it is
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 03:51
|
|
|
How come none of those films with the light leaks preapplied are ever available in 120  .
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 04:05
|
|
|
its because 120 is for squares
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
Being way late to the dogpile, as usual. I just want to add that I'd never consider shooting cinestill, not even because of its gimmick - but due to the simple fact that each film has a look and unless I want my pictures to be a haphazard hodgepodge of stuff it's not worth it to commit to a film that expensive. Especially since I regularly get rolls that are just nothing-burgers. It's painful with Portra 400 but I'd hate thinking about it with a Cinestill 800T priced film. I'd probably switch to digital. Basically, if you think you're getting more than 0-1 great and 0-3 decent shots per 36 roll one would have to think that you're either delusional or inexperienced.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2019 09:28
|
|
|
But did not see those halos? Every frame instantly becomes bladerunnner dystopian neo tokyo. It's all keepers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
The Darkroom put together a pretty neat index of most of the commercially available films if you want to compare them side by side a bit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
sure wish Kodak made their consumer 800 still rather than just the pro stuff - that darkroom list confirms to me it’s slim pickings around 800 iso these days
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2019 13:47
|
|
|
Shoot portra 400 at 800 and tri-x 400 at 800 (or nearly any other iso with those two films)
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 08:22
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Shoot portra 400 at 800 and tri-x 400 at 800 (or nearly any other iso with those two films) Seconded. Also works for TMax 400 which is very fine grained to begin with. However you'd better use TMax Developer as well to get the best results with that. Portra 400 @ 800 doesn't need a development push either. Yes, it will be a bit more grainy and saturated but it's entirely within acceptable bounds. Heck, I've got "emergency" shots from Portra 400 at 1600 that turned out fully printable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
Hey y'all, I'm planning to take my shiny new (old) ME Super with me next month while I travel in Japan. Should I get film beforehand to take, or am I better off just waiting and grabbing all my film while I'm in Tokyo? I'll probably shoot Tri-X and Portra 400 because I'm a thread lemming. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
Fujis Across II will be out in Japan by then so you'll have to pick some of that. Otherwise there's no real benifit to buying while there other than it might be easier to find Fuji.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
You'll want to be mindful of what undeveloped film you bring back with you too. The higher the ISO, the more sensitive to x-rays it'll be. I've gone through multiple security checkpoints with 400 speed film before and didn't see any fogging, but your mileage may vary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
President Beep posted:You'll want to be mindful of what undeveloped film you bring back with you too. The higher the ISO, the more sensitive to x-rays it'll be. I've gone through multiple security checkpoints with 400 speed film before and didn't see any fogging, but your mileage may vary. In general they'll tell you that anything under 800 should be fine, but I always ask for a hand check anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
President Beep posted:You'll want to be mindful of what undeveloped film you bring back with you too. The higher the ISO, the more sensitive to x-rays it'll be. I've gone through multiple security checkpoints with 400 speed film before and didn't see any fogging, but your mileage may vary. I was nervous about this as well. Maybe I'll just bring higher ISO film and request a hand check like the other poster. I'll definitely grab some of that Acros II film, seems 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 01:34
|
|
|
DJExile posted:The Darkroom put together a pretty neat index of most of the commercially available films if you want to compare them side by side a bit. Also, there's https://filmtypes.com/ I want to shoot every film there is. I like the look of CineStill 800T and I like halation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
I developed my first push roll last night and as I'm going through the frames I like what it did for the HP5's contrast. One thing I'm getting on a few frames is a lighter spot or marks. I'm trying to figure out if I agitated too much, or didn't fix well or what it could be. Here's an example... Anything I did to cause that "swoosh" in the sky?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
Almost looks like some kind of weird flare. Show up anywhere else?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
Yeah there's some other frames where a lower corner of the frame will be lighter. I was wondering if it could be flare. E: here's another one...  I took this one twice (different aperture and shutter on the other) and the other one doesn't have anything. Dudeabides fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Nov 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 03:32
|
|