Hello /p/
How do I achieve this look? I love the 70s on these. Do I need to buy a special old camera, or what?
>>2777785
shoot film or slap some fancy VSCO filters over your pictures
Gotta go back to 70's m8. It's the only way to do it
>>2777819
So what, the world just looked like that back then? My dad just to kid me when I was but a boy and say that the world was black and white back in the 70s because all the pictures were b/w.
But seriously, how do I do it?
>>2777824
You buy some cheap consumer film, get the store to make prints and then scan the prints. The resolution will be bad but you will get a similar retro look.
>>2777785
Just mess with the Curves until it looks like that, anon. Add some vignette too. Done.
>>2777827
Yeah but, the resolution in the first pic is great. Is it like Super8 film or what?
it's obviously 35mm film
just crush the shadows and raise the red curve, mostly in the shadows. add some grain. add a black border and some fake dust
>>2777830
But they didn't have computers or Photoshop or whatever in the 70s, did they now?
>>2777833
>But they didn't have computers or Photoshop or whatever in the 70s
What did they have retard? Film and shitty cameras.
Image related, it's you.
>>2777785
This was likely shot on some form of cheap or off-brand slide film. Something like Ferrania Solaris or Scotch Chrome. It strikes me as being something from the late 70s.
You can try various slide films nowadays like Digibase CR200 which will give an inaccurate but pleasant look, but that film tends to skew yellow rather than blue as your shot looks. You might have some luck with expired slide film on eBay such as Ektachrome or Scotch Chrome.
Ferrania is restarting their slide film production soon and who knows what that film is going to look like.
>>2778622
I'd lay money it's the fading of these old chromes that is giving the effect that op wants moreso than the emulsion used. Op, yer gonna have to buy some expired slide film, shoot it in a camera that vignettes heavily, process it poorly, then let it sit in a bad environment for 40 years, then scan it. You won't have to go through all the labor that would be involved in taking a digital picture and messing with the sliders in Lightroom for 2 or 3 minutes.
>>2777824
Not sure what part of the world you're from, but as a child of the 70's myself, and from a rural area of the U.S., 95% of my family's photos, both print and slide, were in color. The remaining 5% were done by family members that spent time in the darkroom.
>>2778622
Thank you, finally a decent ant informative answer.
>>2778645
I'm from an ex-soviet bloc country and still all our pictures were in colour from then.
dear OP, may you can get some inspiration by checking this:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/albums/72157622319483934
enjoy!
>>2777785
You need to understand that these didnt look this way when they were first developed they would have looked pretty normal.
Film gets fucked over time, so decades of exposure makes the colors all fucked up.
You can use lightroom or instagram filters to do this shit, or learn how to fuck with color curves correctly to do it. But honestly if you dont have a really good reason to make it look like they you just come off as a pretentious hipster.
70s filters wont make your photos good.
hey op, it's me from 2016, cut the crap
s t o p
t
o
p
>>2781924
You also forgot to mention that alot of the scans of chromes floating around the internet are of total shit quality. And not just resolution, but color fidelity. Some of these old slides probably look way better in person than what some shit scanners and shit scanner operators did to them in the digitization process.
