|
dude ranch posted:__⚡__ This is good. 404notfound posted:welp, I bought it Nice! I may pick one up in a couple of months. How do you like it so far?
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Whitezombi posted:Nice! I may pick one up in a couple of months. How do you like it so far? Really digging messing around with the bulb and double exposure stuff. I haven't used an instant camera since I was a little kid, so I've forgotten how neat it is to have a physical copy of your picture, right after you take it (and wait for it to develop). People are a lot more open to a selfie with it, too  (and the macro mode operates at the perfect distance for that)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
404notfound posted:welp, I bought it I might have to get one of these too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
This is one of the double exposures I did. I haven't done many double exposures before, so I just went with the pretty safe trick of black on white plus a pattern to fill in the black. One thing the mini 90 does is that putting it in macro mode will actually stick a mini-lens into the viewfinder, to correct some of the increased parallax effect that you get from up close. I still kinda missed it a bit (hence the left and bottom edges), but being able to do an instant double exposure is pretty dang neat. 404notfound fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Jan 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
I really want one! Did some test shots with a Fotodyne Electrophoresis Gel Camera Polaroid. This is one difficult camera to shoot with. Fixed focal length of 12" & no viewfinder.        Whitezombi fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Jan 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
Fuji FP-3000B $14 & Free Shipping http://www.phototools.com/product/FP-3000B-Super-Speedy-BW-Instant-Film-3.25-x-4.25-ISO-3200,-10-exposures/15200772/3168.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
I know instant photography in this day and age can be a little cheesy, but this is ridiculous!  
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 12:01
|
|
|
I see your cheese slicer and I raise with this. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Whitezombi posted:I see your cheese slicer and I raise with this. Just like my real photos. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
If that's how your photos look, maybe you should get a light meter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
 i caught the instax bug too. cool fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 10:32
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Portland Comic-Con        
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
  Reclaimed FP-100C. bellows lugosi fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Jan 31, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Reclaiming FP-100C Negatives Suggested Supplies: 
 Cut off the excess paper on your negatives. Try to remove as much as you can and trim them down - peel back the white paper attached to the 'handle' end. That's the leftover seen on the left.  Tape the negative to your glass plate. Make sure the tape is pressed down firmly. If you look carefully, the area between the negative's border and the image are is visible where the paper covers were removed. Place the tape carefully so that you cover up minimal image area.  Place a dab of bleach paste on the negative, I use about a half dollar size.  Use a foam brush to carefully spread the bleach across the negative. Keeping brushes clean will prevent scratching. Let the bleach sit for about 30 seconds until it begins to bubble and turn grey. At this point, continue moving the foam brush gently across the negative to remove the backing - the bleach paste will turn black as you remove the backing. Make sure your corners are clear. If you haven't used much bleach at this point, hold it up to a light to see if your negatives are fully clear.  Using a small stream of room temperature water, wash the bleach off. After you've washed the bleach off, remove the negatives from the top down under running water - this prevents any excess bleach caught under the tape edges from getting under the emulsion of images below. Once this is done I always use a second brush (that hasn't touched bleach) to carefully remove the coating from the other side of the negative. A few sweeps under running water will remove the coating easily, although it's important to be careful here as the emulsion is easy to scratch with fingernails. Hang the negatives to dry and scan. Enjoy! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2014 08:39
|
|
|
I did some reclaims a little while ago and was pretty happy with the results, always get more out of the shadows. These days I keep the negatives always with the intention of reclaiming them... Negative 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
If you're interested in getting rid of the color cast easily, adjust the black and white points for each channel in curves individually. I find all of the images scan in as a blown-out yellow if I don't do each curve.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
I have a feeling I scanned this before worked out how to do levels properly in PS, and was just playing around in lightroom with temp/hue in LR. I did actually try and wet print one of these negs with RA4 paper/chems, but there just wasn't enough conrast in the neg to get anything worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2014 12:52
|
|
|
My question to those that shoot on the streets, and reclaim their negs: how do you store the peel aparts after shooting? These things take forever to dry in my experience, and having the alkaline residue touching anything can create some very unfortunate effects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
I haven't found a good way to store 3000B sheets but I haven't had bad luck putting the 100C negatives in a box. If you're reclaiming and doing the final wash on that side of the negative you should be able to remove any of the sticky gunk that sticks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
I've tried putting the "negs" in the box, but then the moist negative sticks to the side of the box or another negative and the contact area in my experience creates... these splotches that look like this: _DSC5673 by Stingray of Doom, on Flickr Now this is a clean negative with the alkaline side washed and the backing completely bleached out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 10:10
|
|
|
having issues scanning 210. The border is nice and focused but the image is horribly out of focus. any way around this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:having issues scanning 210. The border is nice and focused but the image is horribly out of focus. any way around this? it's at the same height as the rest of the image, so the picture is out of focus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
just seems like the image on my instax is a lot sharper than the image from the scanner
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Are you enlarging it, or is it the same size on your screen as in real life when you view it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
same size, but comparitive to your, say, comicon shots, the blurriness is unbearable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
None of his comic con shots are sharp. The instax isn't sharp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Make sure you are selecting infinity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
dukeku posted:None of his comic con shots are sharp. The instax isn't sharp. It's pretty easy to mistake contrast for sharpness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
Got a Colorpack II and it's great! scan0001 by LargeHadron, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Prolonged exposure to extreme cold and snow is bad for Polaroid plastic. 3 hours in -20 or so wind chill at 11,000 feet. This was the 2nd Polaroid camera I picked up and it got me hooked on instant photography. I got one last b&w shot off before it died. Threw some FP-100C in it and it fell apart. The Instax 210 I took fired off 5 shots with no problem and looks fine.   RIP Colorpack II by natebol, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
 Glass Glass Glass by mr_student, on Flickr  Portrait by mr_student, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
Spedman posted:
oh yeah dude. Is anybody else still waiting on/crying about backordered fp-3000? I passed up on a cheap big swinger (hilarious) at an antique shop because it's 3000 only. bummer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
I bought a shitload before it jumped in price and I regret not buying more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
How do you guys scan your negatives? I, uh, yeah.... scan0004 by LargeHadron, on Flickr  scan0002 by LargeHadron, on Flickr I probably messed up the reclaiming process anyways, but what I did to scan it was put it on my flatbed scanner, cover it with a piece of printer paper, and shine a desklamp on it while it scanned. I mean it looks kind of cool and all, but only because it looks like it was taken in 1859.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
The best option is to get an actual scanner with a backlit lid, but if you want to do the printer paper method, you have to use an incandescent light, the CFL's color and that they flicker cause some of that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
 scan0003 by LargeHadron, on Flickr Ok, I figured something out. Instead of paper/lamp, I put my iPad facedown on the negative and created a backlight with the white screen. Looks a lot better, and yeah I definitely hosed up the reclamation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Looks like you just didn't finish fully bleaching the backing off (let it sit for a while, it won't hurt if your tape is on right) and had bleach leak under your tape on the top.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
 Untitled
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:56
|
|