|
Popped it out of the canister by accident. Forgot to hit the fun rewind button and couldn't figure out why there was so much tension...
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:20 |
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:gently caress, I just destroyed an entire roll of film. This is what happens every time I shoot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
You actually shoot? Looks like we have an artist over here I don't even put film in my camera, just unroll it into the sunlight. "High key"
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
I just developed my first roll of film. I've been wanting to do it for years but never really had the courage. Of course, because I'm me, I had to try something weird and do stand development. How'd I do?     Contax T3, Tri-X 400. Rodinall 1+100 for 60 minutes, with 30 second agitation at 30 minute mark. Anyway, some of my images had this light band across the frame. What causes that? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:I have a Nikon FM, and I had a situation today where I couldn't get a proper light reading at any aperture. I finally got it so 250 was overexposed and 500 was underexposed I think at f/16. Moving the shutter speed dial between the two settings indicated correct exposure, and allowed me to fire the shutter so I took the shot. Does that actually work or does it have to be clicked into either 250 or 500 to be accurate? LooksLikeABabyRat posted:I just tested again: pointing the 200mm out the window (it's bright and sunny today) I couldn't get the middle circle to light up at f/3.5, f/22, or f/11. When I turned inside and pointed it towards my darker kitchen, I was able to get a circle reading at f/11.  See that 12mm circle? The exposure reading is weighted by whatever's in the circle. Since the field of view for a 50mm and 200mm are drastically different, you're mostly like gonna get varied meter readings 'cause what you see in the viewfinder (and therefore, what's in that weighted circle) will be different between the two lenses. e: On that note, you shouldn't rely 100% on the TTL meter until you understand what it's doing. krnhotwings fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
krnhotwings posted:Sounds to me like you're trying to get a perfect exposure by having the middle-o lit up. Since the shutter speeds and aperture settings (at least for the Nikkor lenses..) go by full-stop increments, you won't always be able to get a "perfect" exposure based on the TTL meter reading, in which case you're just gonna have to settle for under or overexposing a little. But given what you've described (ISO 400, f/16 on a sunny day,) that sounds like the ideal situation to apply the sunny 16 rule, so it sounds to me like your exposure reading was more or less correct. Also, personally, I wouldn't let the shutter dial sit between the indexed speed settings. I'm assuming that it actually works, but I wouldn't rely on it since it's not accurate. Just stick with the full-stop increments. Thanks for the explanation! I didn't know that the meter worked with such a narrow section of the image.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:Thanks for the explanation! I didn't know that the meter worked with such a narrow section of the image. The meter gets 60% of its guesswork from that 12mm center and the remaining 40% from the rest of the frame. Or something to that extent. http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikonfmseries/fm/part4.htm
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 09:35
|
|
|
Marvel posted:I just developed my first roll of film. I've been wanting to do it for years but never really had the courage. Of course, because I'm me, I had to try something weird and do stand development. This is going to be me this weekend, except out of an Olympus RC. Brought it to New Orleans to snap night shots for a friend's bach party, set to F8 and focus at 7ft and shot away. I figured stand would be best. I have an old roll of Tri-X that I found at a realtor office I was grabbing some salvage from, so I'm going to run that first to work the kinks out. Bud fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
LooksLikeABabyRat posted:Thanks for the explanation! I didn't know that the meter worked with such a narrow section of the image. If you haven't already take a look at understanding exposure, it gives a bunch of tricks of how to best use meters like yours.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Bud posted:I'm going to run that first to work the kinks out. It's pretty tough to screw up. The first time I did it, I was amazed at how simple the whole process was. The hardest part is just getting the film on the reel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Bud posted:I have an old roll of Tri-X that I found at a realtor office I was grabbing some salvage from, so I'm going to run that first to work the kinks out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Wait, what? Did you ransack an abandoned building? UrbEx isn't supposed to work that way... Haha no, they are still a functioning office, just consolidating their space. I bought some furniture from them and saw the roll in a waste pile so I grabbed it for this exact purpose. I imagine it will be full of 80's properties in the Princeton NJ area or homegrown. Bud fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:If you haven't already take a look at understanding exposure, it gives a bunch of tricks of how to best use meters like yours. I've got that. Need to re-read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Bud posted:This is going to be me this weekend Awesome! It was way more fun than I thought it would be. I got a Hewes reel because I heard loading the reel is the hardest part. I practiced loading the reel a few times with my eyes closed and have had 0 problems whatsoever. I just turned off all the lights in my apartment and went in the closet where it was pretty dark since I didn't want to buy a bag.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
I knew film was supposed to still be somewhat a thing in Germany but I didn't expect to find 5 different film stocks in a cosmetics chain just by the french border, including agfa precisa, Kodak gold and b&w film. It's also all cheaper than most online stores. I grabbed some knockoff color film that's 1,5€ a roll and probably shite  e:maybe a Fuji rebrand and not poo poo according to some googling. I'm lucky if supermarkets here sell 3 packs of fujicolor 200 for 20€ unpacked robinhood fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Feb 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
For a fun little lightweight film shooter, would you guys go Konica Hexar or Contax G1 (with either the 28 or the 45)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
What would be better for developing pictures taken in the snow, Rodinal stand or just regular process?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Generally non-stand development has finer grain and better contrast. If you are worried you blew out the white of the snow then stand in Rodinal will help take the highlights and all the downsides can be fixed after scanning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
mulls posted:Generally non-stand development has finer grain and better contrast. If you are worried you blew out the white of the snow then stand in Rodinal will help take the highlights and all the downsides can be fixed after scanning. I was just using aperture priority, never shot in snow before so I don't know how it turned out. I'll do stand development, assuming Southwest ever gets me give... I'm up to my third cancelation in 5 days.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Helicity posted:For a fun little lightweight film shooter, would you guys go Konica Hexar or Contax G1 (with either the 28 or the 45)? The Hexar is a cooler camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Utterly subjective and trite: When I look at a picture of a Hexar I see "1978", when I look at a picture of a Contax G1 I see "1984". Which year is better for you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:I was just using aperture priority, never shot in snow before so I don't know how it turned out. I'll do stand development, assuming Southwest ever gets me give... I'm up to my third cancelation in 5 days. Auto exposure of snow is generally underexposed because the camera is trying to turn white snow into an 18% gray patch. Whatever development you do, you should think about pushing by a stop or a stop and a half.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Marvel posted:Awesome!  Yash_Delta400_DDXBox005-Edit-2 by Bud_lish, on Flickr  Yash_Delta400_DDXBox006-Edit by Bud_lish, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Shot some Sensia that was 15 years past it's expiration date. Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr Untitled by Dev Luns, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
Bud posted:It was! Haven't scanned any 35mm yet but pretty happy with my first roll of 120. I really like those tones. From the tags I'm guessing it's Delta 400, but what sort of exposure and development?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
nielsm posted:I really like those tones. the names of the photos also say "Delta400"
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
nielsm posted:I really like those tones. Ok, so it is Delta 400 but I thought I had loaded Acros so I shot at 100 with a yellow filter. Dev in Ilford DDX 1+4 for about 5:15 to pull about two stops. Then played with the curves in LR for a bit. I'm still very lost when it comes to the subtleties of B&W tone but trying to figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 13:08
|
|
|
I finally broke down and ordered Understanding Exposure, which showed up last night. So far it's mostly stuff I already knew but the examples are neat and he's got some good tips. I haven't tried shooting the ME Super in full-manual mode ever, just Aperture Priority, but maybe after some practice with my DSLR I'll give it a shot. Also, somebody please make a printing thread, I need inspiration to set up the enlarger again. Also need to order cyanotype chems. Edit: I will make the thread myself if I can get the enlarger set up solidly on a table, gently caress lying on the floor to make prints. Pham Nuwen fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:I finally broke down and ordered Understanding Exposure, which showed up last night. So far it's mostly stuff I already knew but the examples are neat and he's got some good tips. I haven't tried shooting the ME Super in full-manual mode ever, just Aperture Priority, but maybe after some practice with my DSLR I'll give it a shot. This has been helping me a lot with manual exposure too. Metering has been challenging for me when it's not in camera. http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Everyone should try shooting full-manual for a decent period of time. After a while you realise how simple metering and exposure really is and you can concentrate on taking better photos.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
deaders posted:Everyone should try shooting full-manual for a decent period of time. After a while you realise how simple metering and exposure really is and you can concentrate on taking better photos. Allow me to expand: Actually, I think everyone should be shooting full manual most of the time. (For film, for most digital cameras, they put the controls in such a way that this is actively annoying. Good job camera makers!) It will help you to get a much more wholesome understanding of the nature of light and will make you much, much more confident as to what's going on with the light and give you the ability to make changes on the fly without relying on a light meter. Furthermore it will allow you to distil ideas as to what you want from a picture right at the moment of taking it, instead of fiddling around with it in post. This confidence will also help you with cameras where you can't always be sure where the heck it is metering off. (I'm looking at you Mamiya7!) Since this is the film thread we can assume that you are shooting film. For indoors or outdoors scenarios the light doesn't change that quickly that you couldn't keep up with it manually. Also most negative film has a decent enough latitude that you just need to be within +/-1 stop of 'correct'. Wet printing may get hard once you leave that bracket, but scanning should be fine for an even wider range. I put 'correct' in scare quotes, because what is a 'correct' exposure anyway? According to your camera it is exposing the scene or measured spot to a general 18% gray illuminance which may or may not be what you are going for. Obvious snow, wedding dresses, coal mine and black cat scenarios aside, sometimes overexposing or underexposing may actually give you the look you want. The fierceness of a hot summer day probably comes out better if the picture is slightly overexposed, night pictures usually benefit from a bit of underexposure as it gets them closer to how we actually see at night, allowing for the atmosphere to come trough. Also film is not digital and does interesting things when over- or underexposed. You might even stumble on a look that you find appealing. Books like "Understanding Exposure" are very useful as a primer, but cant replace personal experience. So, please don't use them as some sort of holy dictum that can't be broken. Last but not least, going manual also means consistency, as I am much more likely to actively think during the process, vetoing the meters readout more often. In fact, these days I rarely use a meter at all. VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Metering has to be THE dorkroom hot button issue when it comes to technique. I think it comes down to people not having a fundamental understanding of what their camera/meter/phone is doing when metering a scene, and what the device is trying to achieve. And the biggest issue is people getting their head around that metering is a decision, not a solvable mathematical problem with only one solution for a given scene. I do miss the spot meter arguments with Mannequin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
deaders posted:Everyone should try shooting full-manual for a decent period of time. After a while you realise how simple metering and exposure really is and you can concentrate on taking better photos. Pretty much this. You end up checking your meter when you head out or if you're trying to figure out something weird, but you get to know what exposure settings work in different conditions pretty quickly and those end up becoming your shorthand for adjusting to unknowns. I've been doing a bunch of long exposure stuff lately without a meter and as long as you have even a ballpark idea of your film's reciprocity failure, you're fine. I'd definitely be more anal about metering with slide film or if I was doing studio photography, but I haven't had any issues with Portra/Tri-X.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
My ~printing station~ is back up... Time to waste some photo paper on lovely pictures.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
I think this HP5 all expired before I was even born     
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
ape posted:I think this HP5 all expired before I was even born I'd hit it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
   
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
how far are those pushed? my love affair with delta3200 makes me not happy about how hp5 pushes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
I shot those a few years ago so I don't remember exactly, but I think I rated it at something like iso 200 (most of those are sunny 16 guess exposures) and developed them in D76 for around 10 minutes. This is really old HP5 film from before HP5+ came out that I got from my grandmother's freezer. I think they discontinued it in 1989 so it's at least that old. God only knows how accurate the shutter is on that camera as well, it's from ~1962.
ape fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:20 |
|
|
I think the normal dev for ilfosol 3 is 7.5 minutes, so maybe pushed a stop? edit: oh, don't they say a stop a decade? So I guess that might be 200. either way, awesome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2015 06:38
|
|