|
I may have to admit a problem as well: - Pentax k100d super - Panasonic DMC-LX3 - Pentax p3n - Pentax ME super - Olympus Pen-EEs EL - Weltaflex - Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII - Mamiya 645e - Bronica SQ-Ai - Kodak Junior Six-16 Series II I'm more than happy to write a review of most of these cameras if anyone is interested.
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2010 10:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
ScreaminKing posted:Quick question about travelling with film (why can't I search the dorkroom??): I've traveled with some relatively low speed film (Portra 160VC) and had to go through the x-ray scanner 5 times, long-haul flights between Australia and the UK and domestic flights in Australia, and the film has been fine. I've read that Kodak suggests you only travel with 400 speed film or slower and never put any film in checked luggage as the airports really go to town with the x-rays. I must say that after a very long flight, all you want to do is get to your destination, as I was feeling in Terminal 5 Heathrow. I wasn't about to kick up a stink about having hand luggage checked, with the few hundred people behind me eager to get out of that hell hole. If you're in western europe go check the flickr groups for those areas and you'll find in the discussions lists of places that sell film.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2010 00:04
|
|
|
Just came back from a recent trip to the Highlands in Scotland, and I was shooting some Kodachrome, at least I thought I was. The film didn't catch in the sprockets properly and I ended up not shooting a whole roll, so many shots missed  The only positive is that the roll of Kodachrome should still be okay.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2010 13:05
|
|
|
oncearoundaltair posted:My whole life is a wide range of deep colours. I'm pretty excited to be getting back two rolls of Kodachrome early next week. Little bit nerve wracking sending them to Switzerland but it's all gone to plan so far. Hopefully some good shots of Scotland and Ireland to come soon.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 18:21
|
|
|
unixbeard posted:just out of interest, where in switzerland did you send them? This is the GB Kodachrome site from Kodak, the address is in there. From what I've read around the place, even if you send it to Dwyane's direct, they send it back to you via Switzerland. Crossing my fingers they weren't x-rayed to death.  http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=6879&pq-locale=en_GB
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2010 22:51
|
|
|
Just got two rolls of Kodachrome back from their round trip from Scotland -> Switzerland -> US and back again. Only charged 7.50 GBP for processing and shipping back to me.  I can't believe how good the slides look held up to the sunlight, tempted to skive off for the day and go and scan them right away.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2010 10:21
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:Where did you buy yours from? I bought mine through an amazon reseller just by looking through google shopping a few months ago. The films were from the US so they had no pre-paid condition on them, so I just sent some Euros to Switzerland with the film and Kodak sorted out the rest.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2010 21:15
|
|
|
Some scans of the recently received Kodachrome: Near Castle Stalker  Glen Coe in the Highlands 
Spedman fucked around with this message at 13:39 on Jul 28, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2010 22:51
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:Hm, £15-18 / roll for in date Kodachrome, or $7.95/roll for expired in 2007 stuff... The scans you see above were from the 2007 vintage, and I only purchased them earlier this year, I would go that one and get more rolls of it. Spedman fucked around with this message at 13:40 on Jul 28, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2010 13:37
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:These are beautiful. The underexposure really seems to work for the first one. Thanks, I've fixed the landscape shot, the scan was far too dark, just needed a fill light lift.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2010 13:38
|
|
|
I've been looking through my old scans of film, both 135 and 120, and I've been noticing particular lens' and films working together quite well, and others not so much. In particular, my Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII with its Rokor f/1.7 lens shoots Ilford XP2 really nicely, yet I've tried both Fuji and Kodak colour negatives/slides and they just don't seem to work so well, the colour never seems right. Also going through the Kodachrome shots, I've found that images shot with my Pentax-SMC 50mm f/1.7 have much richer colour compared to the 28mm f/2.8 that I used on a number of landscape shots. Does anyone else have recommendations for film/lens combinations that work well?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2010 13:16
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:
What lens is that on the k1000? it looks huge!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2010 18:31
|
|
|
ZoCrowes posted:
You won't be able to stop holding them up to the light and stairing at them, doesn't matter what you've shot.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2010 22:30
|
|
|
fygar posted:I just came across an old Canon Canonet rangefinder (the original with the film advance on the bottom of the camera). The self timer is stuck and the leaf shutter doesn't fire. Aperature blades seem to work in fits and starts. The light meter probably doesn't work, but I can live with that. Viewfinder glass is fogged. Would it be worth having a professional give this camera a CLA? I only ask, because I'm convinced that I'm never going to find another inexpensive rangefinder camera. You could also try the Minolta Hi-Matic's too, I've got a 7sII, great little camera, plus John Glenn took a version into space with him.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2010 10:05
|
|
|
Zombotron posted:I've just come into possession of a Pentax Spotmatic SPII with a 50mm f/1.4 S-M-C Takumar lens. (It's got a black finish as well!) Cost me $100 and the only issue is some mild yellowing of the lens. I've loaded it with Tri-X for a true old-school feel. http://www.keh.com/camera/Pentax-Screwmount-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-PS060108005620?r=FE Looks like a pretty reasonable price if in good condition, Keh have some others selling at around $60 in EX condition.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2010 10:53
|
|
|
I was making an order for some chemicals and I noticed the shop I was buying from had a big range of Rollei films (new, not expired). I picked up 3 rolls of Ortho 25 in 120 to play with. Does anyone have any experience with this film? Any tips?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
Gnomad posted:Which shop? I have a project in mind that ortho would eb perfect for. It was FirstCall Photographic in the uk, I think Freestyle sell it as well. Go to the Rollei site and they've got links to resellers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2010 09:20
|
|
|
Did my first bit of film processing ever last night. Got some Rodinal and some Formapan (I didn't want my first roll to be of some good stuff) and had a play in the bathroom. Thanks for all the tips in this thread, invaluable.  Here are some results:  Flair, scratch and grain by mr_student, on Flickr  Princess St by mr_student, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2010 11:07
|
|
|
I just finished of my last roll with my trip back home to Oz, will get them in the post tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2010 12:53
|
|
|
Thought I'd try out pushing Tmax 400 out to 6400 on the weekend, didn't quite work out the way I'd like. The light meter I have doesn't do low light very well so the shots were very underexposed, only a couple came out okay. And I did a stand process in Rodinal for 2hrs in 1:125, with a swirl every 30mins. Under the Tay by mr_student, on Flickr (cross posted with SAD)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2010 09:08
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Tmax 400 pushes like poo poo after EI 1600 (I don't even like it that fast). What b&w films would you suggest for versatility? And more importantly pushability?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2010 14:07
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:The V500 is faster (has an LED light source, no warm-up time) and probably has better dynamic range, as well as a better max res. And scans 120 film too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2010 14:37
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:You know, this is 100% true. I get frustrated with some of my photo-buddies for buying $100 Holga kits but it's still less annoying than 100 eV HDR's. At least their looking at having fun with photography rather wasting their lives on their computers merging 100 shots to make a turd. On that note I'm this -><- far away from getting one of those 360 degree spinner cameras, they do look like fun.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2010 21:12
|
|
|
Spedman posted:On that note I'm this -><- far away from getting one of those 360 degree spinner cameras, they do look like fun. I have relented, should be here tomorrow ready for some shooting of expired Velvia 100f on the weekend. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2010 12:42
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I think using non-interlocking cameras is pretty much a matter of doing it til you've built the muscle memory. I feel a bit odd when I go back to a DSLR and automatically try and wind the film on with my thumb and find nothing. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2010 14:35
|
|
|
I had a play with my new Spinner 360 (lomo I know ), had some expired velvia kicking around and took a few shots around town, it is plenty fun. 360 ruins #1 by mr_student, on Flickr  360 ruins #2 by mr_student, on Flickr Please excuse the rubbish haircut/expression.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2010 18:51
|
|
|
Rednik posted:Light leaks. There not light leaks, its how the spinner gets up to speed on the first little bit, over exposure, and than again at the end of the spin. Its a little odd between frames, where its white rather than black.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2010 20:03
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:my negatives with acros always come out a but purpleish with hc-110. sometimes when i rinse my film with water prior to developing i see a lot of nasty blue water come out. figured it's related v I freaked out when I rinsed some Rollei Ortho 25 and all the water came out wonderful royal blue  But the film did feel a bit sticky while it was putting it onto the reel, so I guess its some kind of red-filtering layer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2010 10:30
|
|
v
|
Fiannaiocht posted:I think I'm going to shoot film more seriously instead of spending more money on a new DSLR. It seems cheaper in the long run. I made the same decision recently and haven't regreted it for a second. I picked up a bronica sq-ai kit for 200 quid, saving 800 quid on the dslr I wanted. if you need digital get a good point and shoot like a cannon s95 or panasonic lx5.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2010 09:06
|
|
|
I HATE CARS posted:I shot my first (and second) roll of colour film in 3 years and had it processed the other day. Process your own colour, its a piece of piss.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2010 12:48
|
|
|
Cannister posted:What goes into processing color? How is it different than B&W processing? You need a colour kit, like this: http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/products/618/tetenal-colortec-e6-kit-1-litre The process takes one extra step over B&W, you have a 1st developer (which is actually a B&W developer) then the 2nd developer which is the colour developer, then a fixer/bleach mix, followed with lots of rinsing and a stabiliser. All this comes in the kit and is very straight forward to mix up. All I do with the chemicals is mix them up to the full 1 litre and store them in accordion style bottles so you can squeeze out all the air, and just decant whatever I need when I'm processing. The main issue is getting the temp right. All I do is have a big plastic basin (about the size of a regular kitchen sink) fill it with hot water and put the chemicals in their individual bottles in the basin to get warm (about 37C) along with the processing tank. The next issue is the timing, as you are supposed to start counting as soon as you start pouring the chems in the tank, and then that step stops when you start pouring in fresh water after you've got the chems out. I've found giving yourself 15secs to pour out and starting pouring in works well. The actual processing is a little different to b&w, when the chemicals go in you do 15sec worth of inversions, then one inversion every 15 secs until time is up. I also hold the tank in the warm bath between inversions to keep the temp stable and it seems to work well. Its very satisfying pulling out a 120 roll of ektachrome from your tank and seeing all the pretty colours, and all for only about 30mins of work. Hope that made sense.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2010 15:55
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Some guy on RFF was using an old crockpot for the hot water bath, seems like a pretty workable solution. Another good DIY solution is a fish aquarium heater in your bath, apparently they work like a charm.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:How many rolls does 1 lt last? I'm guessing 12 films means 12 rolls of 120? Yep 12 rolls of 120, I've read people getting 20+ out of 1 litre kit, you start to get a little bit of colour shifting in the last few rolls. The current kit I've got I've put through 12 rolls, some 35mm, mostly 120 and a roll of c41 film too, and I'll be putting through a few more rolls before I get rid of it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2010 22:30
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:Ok 2 more q's because now I'm seriously entertaining ruining a bunch of my rolls. I get away with disposing of the chems at work with all the other evil stuff we use. Taking to the local dump is probably a good idea, like Reichstag said. I've never heard of people diluting the chems and I couldn't really comment on the linearity of them either. I've only being doing my own colour for a relatively shot time, and I haven't ruined a roll yet. I think all the fear comes from people who are nuts about getting the most precisely correct colour balance, but we all know how inconsistent labs can be, so give it a go.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 08:34
|
|
|
I recently got 20 rolls of Ektachrome in 120 size (slightly expired) for 36 quid of Ebay, hunt around a bit there is always good cheap film on offer.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 09:25
|
|
|
HPL posted:As much as Lomography gets a bad rap sometimes, they do have some crazy off-the-wall stuff that might interest you. I'm starting to warm to the whole Lomography idea. Firstly it gets people buying and shooting film, and secondly the whole process and result is a lot more fun than using a typical $200 p&s. A big part is I'm probably becoming less of a snob about it all. On a different note, if you're after a Leica copy and want something a bit edgy, check out this 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2010 14:42
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:E-6 at home is totally doable. I am the worst and laziest chemist, and my first roll through the Arista 3 bath kit look reasonable. I think I didn't agitate quite enough, and my temp was a bit low, so my shadows are lacking detail and there's a slight colour shift, but that's easily remedied next time. Once you do it a couple of times you get a routine down and it becomes as easy as B&W, the best bit is taking the roll of slides out of the stabiliser and seeing them for the first time.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 15:05
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:Spedman, On E6, the three bath kit you posted earlier only seems available in the UK? I'm a little surprised by that, I've seen them for sale in Australia (home for me) where film/film stuff is tough to get sometimes. They appear to be a German company and they don't seem to have any distributers in the US. By the looks of things the Arista kit looks to be worth playing with. The other cool thing is that you can do your own push and pull processing, and I know with the Tetenal kit it gives you a little guide with respect to how many stops you need to go too. I did try some x-pro with a C-41 film and it didn't work so well, (Fuji Superia 35mm), it came out very blue and dark (probably wasn't helped by my dodgy exposures on that roll!). But I did develop the roll of C-41 with a roll of E6 film at the same time and the E6 (Fuji Velvia 100f) came out great.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2010 13:41
|
|
|
I went down to local camera shop today who have some cool second hand cameras. I was looking at two Zeiss Super Ikonta's in fairly good condition and asked for a price, $1200 and $1500 AUD, "they hold their value" he said. I said "cheers" and walked out. Are dealers just not aware of real market prices? (keh values, not eBay)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2010 10:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 00:08 |
|
|
8th-samurai posted:If you had shot B&W backwards it would just look a little fuzzy since the antihalation layer is in the way. Color film though is designed in layers so backwards the red layer gets way too much light. Backwards shot BW apparently doesn't look too bad at all from what I've heard, in that it doesn't look any softer, but it is 2 stops or so under exposed. There was a guy I saw on flickr a long time ago who was doing this on purpose (shooting through the antihilation layer) and getting some cool results.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2010 04:30
|
|