Film General Thread, aka FGT.
>just posting in the FGT doesn't make you gay, unless you touch fixer
This is the thread for all of your stupid film questions, and to post your film snapshits without flushing them down the RPToilet.
It's OK to ask about film gear in this thread.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Lens Size 35.00 - 80.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF35-80mm f/4-5.6 III Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:04:03 09:03:35 Exposure Time 0.3 sec F-Number f/16.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/16.0 Exposure Bias 1/2 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 74.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1200 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Av-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode Manual Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Daylight Exposure Compensation 4 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2806876
Also, in other news
>hot new tip to massively improve the DR of your slide film or faggot digital
Use garbage lenses. Their low contrast compresses the tonal scale, allowing you to fit more on the histogram.
Top image - EF 100mm Macro (1/4sec@f11)
Bottom image - EF35-80mm f/4-5.6 III (1/3sec@f16)(cropped to show same fov)
Same flat curve applied to both.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Lens Size 35.00 - 80.00 mm Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF35-80mm f/4-5.6 III Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:04:03 09:33:31 Exposure Time 0.3 sec F-Number f/16.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/16.0 Exposure Bias 1/2 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 74.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1125 Image Height 1500 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Av-Priority Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Evaluative Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode Manual Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Daylight Exposure Compensation 4 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2806876
>stupid film questions
ok. what do i need to develop b&w and/or color? can you put a shopping cart together from b&h or the like?
scanning tips. printing tips. any resources on dev particular films. anything and everything
>>2806908
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+do+i+need+to+develop+b%26w+and%2For+color%3F
Do your own research, moron.
Simple shit like that is spelled out for you all over the internet.
>>2806914
>hey guys you can post all your stupid questions here
>I have a stupid question can you help me?
>fuck off do your own research, what thread do you think this is??
Wow
>>2806918
You didn't even take a second to get informed, don't expect anyone to spoon-feed you.
>>2806929
Since when does the OP of a general namefags as some sort of aggresive janitor? Jesus Christ, as if we needed this board to be even more shit.
Stop attention whoring, dslr cuck scanning cumlord.
>>2806929
>a fucking shopping cart for him
You know, that's one thing that's always kind of puzzled me. Why the hell don't these sites have an "I AM COMPLETELY NEW TO DEVELOPING FILM" all in one kit...why make it hard for people to give you their money?
>>2806923
And I OP the general because I have a shitload of film gear to put in the photos and I hate it when threads I'm interested in die because of poorly written or illustrated OP's.
>>2806930
>Stop attention whoring, dslr cuck scanning cumlord.
MMMmmmmmm, nothing tastier than a fresh glass of hurt, straight out of your butt.
I guess waiting for your isacon to scan 2-frame 'strips' of 120 give you plenty of time to get bitter about your bad purchasing decisions.
>>2806937
LOL
Sure guy, i am that "isacon" friend of yours lmao.
Good thread btw, top notch contribution to the board.
I don't even...
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2806985
preddy gud
>>2806985
kentmere right?
Finally processed the last 3 rolls of film from my backlog, now I just need to digitize 7 rolls to catch up.
>>2806931
-But they do. At least in countries that are free and not in the third world.
>>2807058
i wish i had rolls to develop. today i literally put a fresh roll in my pentax slr just to shoot (didnt even want to take photos) and get negatives. didnt make it, ill have to develop them next monday. i need film in my life at any cost ¡_¡
In your personal experience with developing, how do different film speeds affect the dev time (in the same dev, of course)? I mean slow vs fast, small grain versus GRAIN, etc~
I shot some test shots today to see if my Ilfosol 3 was still good. I opened the bottle about 6 months ago but it's been tightly capped with about 3/4th of the bottle still full and stored in complete darkness. I think it has gone bad by the way the grain is a bit extreme. I have no issues buying a new bottle because it only costs 9 bucks but if I'm still able to use what I have I would prefer to do that. I should also mention that the film I was using is HP5+. If I extended the development time by making a more diluted solution would it decrease the grain? Thanks.
My development times are as follows:
>5 Minutes 30 Seconds
>75 Degrees Fahrenheit
>1:9 Dilution
>Flip and Rotate every minute
you faggots make me sick
look how fuggen sharp this scan is
>>2807088
looks sweet, how did you scan it?
>>2807058
My current backlog is probably 20 or so C41 films.
Including the last bits of my Japan trip.
I would love to dev myself, but C41 kits are impossible to get in Australia at the moment, as far as I can tell.
Posting it all down to Hillvale in Melbourne seems like the only viable option atm, as they do dev-only C41 for $5 a roll, but I still don't want to sent my babies in the post ;_;
Just got my second SLR, pic related. First was a Retinette so pretty easy to use - in addition to shutter speed, you've got ISO and aperture too here. In what combination do you use them all? I know that wide open aperture means greater DoF but less sharp highlights and too low or high ISO means more grain, but that's about it.
>>2807109
Ahh, scanning 30-something rolls of Japan trip photos, good times. Made me want to kill myself while grinding through them though.
Here's the batch I'm currently expecting to have back by Monday. Budapest trip photos. Also fuck you whoever said the city is dangerous and one should never visibly carry a camera. Chink tourists with three Leicas each slung from flimsy leather straps walk around the city without a worry in the world. Hell, overall it was far safer (and cleaner) than any other major city I've been to bar Japan. And also photographic as fuck.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Jolla Camera Model Jolla Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 Vertical Resolution 72 Exposure Time 1/25 sec F-Number f/2.4 ISO Speed Rating 640 Lens Aperture f/2.4 Exposure Bias 1.8 EV Metering Mode Average Flash No Flash Focal Length 4.22 mm White Balance Auto
>>2807118
Why'd you shoot such a weird selection?
I came back with a pretty mixed bag from Japan, but that's because I found a bunch of weird shit over there.
I'd assume that you actually chose to take all that to Hungary though?
>>2807128
Some of those are locally bought. The negatives sans Pro 400H and the 120's are mostly dedicated for a uni project that was also part of the trip (traffic observations), so I just used whatever cheap stuff I had lying around. That said, I'm a horribly disorganized person and even when I do plan things out, I usually end up improvising anyway. In Japan I usually just stick with Superia Premium 400 for everything except night time street stuff. Man, I really want me some Venus 800 again...
>>2807113
By ISO are you perhaps referring to the shutter speed? You're shooting film, so your ISO is fixed. Other than that, you practically answered your own question. Aperture affects DoF, shutter speed doesn't do much else but determine the frame of time you're capturing. Try to avoid shooting at full aperture to prevent losing sharpness (lenses generally perform best when a stop or two from both ends of the scale). Also good choice, I have a Praktica MTL 5 and I love that thing down to the clunky, boxy looks.
>>2807129
Thanks man, that helps a lot. So you'd recommend generally shooting on say 2.8 or 4? Also by ISO I mean pic related, the dial goes between 25 and 1600 (I'm used to shooting on Blackmagics so sorry if it's a different thing here.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Right-Hand, Top Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3264 Image Height 2448
>>2807145
If your full aperture is 2, then yes, you should stick with 2.8 or 4 unless you really need the extra stop. As for the ISO dial, obviously you should just select the nominal ISO of your film indicated on the package. You can use a different ISO (like selecting 800 with a film rated as 400) with appropriate compensation taken during developing process, but that's another story. The important thing is to _never change your selected ISO_ when shooting through a roll, for instance you can't shoot frames 1-4 at ISO 400, then shoot 5-6 at 800, and then switch back to 400. Unlike with digital, ISO isn't a variable you can change during shooting. You set it once when you pop the roll, and stick with it to the end.
>>2807145
>I'm used to shooting on Blackmagics
>actually doesn't understand how a light meter works, or what ISO is
Holy shit, they let you play with some real big boys toys in the shelter, don't they?
>>2807153
I've shot a few images at 800 but my film specifies 200 - should I stick with 800 through to the end then?
>>2807155
Where in my post did I suggest either of those things? Also Blackmagics aren't exactly big boy toys; pretty much everybody who uses them is recommended to shoot exclusively at 800 to avoid grain or noise.
>>2807153
>If your full aperture is 2, then yes, you should stick with 2.8 or 4 unless you really need the extra stop
Holy fuck why isn't anyone reacting to someone like this giving advice to others. It's like an autist taking care of a retard itt.
Where the fuck did the "always use your lens wide open" bullshit even come from?
>>2807167
Why don't you explain how it works then instead of mindlessly shitposting? I asked the question because I'm new to film photography and haven't used manual aperture control before. Not everyone who doesn't have the same expert knowledge and experience as you is an autist or retard.
>>2807172
Because someone who buys a film camera and loads it with film and starts shooting without first even considering learning the basics of its use/operation looks like an utterly lost cause to me. The sole fact you can put together coherent sentences seems out of place given your approach to film photography. It's like buying a car before ever using one or taking any driving lessons ffs.
>>2807158
>I've shot a few images at 800 but my film specifies 200
those few shots are probably underexposed.
switch it to 200, and stay there for the rest of your film.
>pretty much everybody who uses them is recommended to shoot exclusively at 800
that just doesn't sound right. that depends on the film used, not the body.
>>2807174
>switch it to 200, and stay there for the rest of your film.
Thanks, will do.
>that just doesn't sound right. that depends on the film used, not the body.
They're digital cinema cameras, not SLRs. Sorry, completely different but it's what most of my experience is in. I bought the Praktica mainly because I want to start using M42 lenses for video.
>>2807184
Great contribution to the thread, well done.
>>2807079
That looks like average 35mm 400 speed grain to me. I wouldn't expect any miraculous decrease in grain from different developing techniques. Switch to a lower speed film or go to a larger format if this is unacceptable.
>>2807047
>>2807051
I don't even know how i managed that shot lol. I can't even figure out which way it was oriented. Must have been drunk. Yes it's Kentmere.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2807222
Well I can see from the awful light that your camera would have had to have been set to a tiny aperture and fast shutter speed, and from the bullshit angle that you probably just bumped the shutter by accident, and the camera settings gave you an exposure that worked.
What does it matter, it's delete in camera tier anyway?
>>2807227
Seems that it mattered enough for you to post a couple of sentences about it.
Hey guys, I got myself 3 rolls of some expired Kodacolor VR Plus 200 that was stored in room temperature (Not in a fridge), can some one give some some tips about shooting expired, thanks.
Pic related.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make BlackBerry Camera Model BlackBerry Z10 Camera Software BlackBerry 10.3.2.2639 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 31 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Right-Hand, Top Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:03 10:34:53 Exposure Time 1999/200000 sec F-Number f/2.2 ISO Speed Rating 68 Exposure Bias 0 EV Subject Distance 0.21 m Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.04 mm Comment DCCver0077 Color Space Information sRGB White Balance Auto Digital Zoom Ratio 1.0 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2807265
shoot as iso 100, enjoy generic colour film. If results after first roll are subpar, shoot at 50. One stop should work, though. You could always sacrifice the first three shots for bracketing and see what'll work best for the other 2 rolls.
>>2807273
Okay, thanks.
First roll of bulk loaded film.
>>2807519
I see.
I have my first bulk roll of HP5 sitting next to me right now, and some plastic garbage bulk loader from the 70s.
I'm a little intimidated by it, even though I know I shouldn't be afraid...
I mangle all of my real 35mm canisters with a can opener, so I've only got a handful of those plastic reloadable ones.
>>2807544
I don't even have a bulk loader, I just loaded it by hand in the bathroom.
>>2807547
>M A D M A N
>>2806898
No, you don't get any more range. You compress the range into a narrower band, but you don't get any additional range outside of that band. Also, you get fuzzy pictures.
opinions on these cameras? i might get one soon, but i dont know if they get some unworkable quirks with age.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information Uncalibrated
is $100 a fair price for a pentax k1000?
>>2807547
Explain how. That's dope
>>2807678
If you're going to buy one find one you can inspect by hand, or have a camera broker inspect. They have a few quirks such as the rotary shutter, but for the most part they're not too much different to any other SLR. Get it CLA'd when you buy it and it should service you for years. Can't remember if they use a mercury battery but if they do you'll need an adapter
>>2807699
Does it come with a lens?
>>2807728
yea a 50mm f2
I've got a problem I didn't want to make an entire thread about. I literally just started shooting with film, like I just finished my first roll today. There's some place near me that develops film (not walmart or cvs or anything, it's a photography place) and my problem is that I have a picture of some pot on there, and a picture of a bowl. I'm pretty sure they have to like, check I don't have cp on there, so if they see that, are they going to report me or something? Thanks.
>>2807678
I think the biggest problem would be the raging boner you strike up whenever you look at the thing.
I fondled a few in Japan, but never found the body and lense combo I wanted at a price I was willing to pay.
>pen f + 42/1.2
>>2807742
They most likely will not care. Maybe let them know before hand. If you're really paranoid use a different name, but I doubt they're going to call the police on you for less than a gram of pot which you don't even have in your possession any more
also dude weed lmao
>>2807733
$100 isn't a bad price then. As long as it's in pretty good working condition then go for it. You might consider looking for cheaper members of the Pentax family? The P30 / P3 is an excellent camera, has an awesome meter, will take the same photos as the K1000. Only real, functional difference is that it doesn't have an ISO dial as it reads the ISO from the DX code. I got mine for $40 including a 50mm 1.7
>>2807754
cool i'll take a look into it. thanks.
>>2807742
Breh. You're a moron. How did you not think about this in advance?
Buy the chemicals from the shop and develop it yourself.
>>2807763
It's his first roll, and likely C41 which isn't that easy. The lab wont care, they've seen worse
Source: ex lab tech
>>2807764
I suppose there isn't a way to request to not have a specific picture developed, is there?
So I saw a discussion last thread about the MOD54 spools for developing 4x5's. Has anyone tried the larger Jobo kits where the negatives slide onto something more like a traditional paterson spool? They caught my eye because they look to be gentler on the negative. Twice the price, though.
>>2807742
people send in nudes all the time your high schooler's first drug TM wont raise any bells
>>2807080
> not using a yellow filter
>>2807742
Out of curiosity - where do you live?
Shot on a Nikon F2; Expired FP4 Plus.Developed for 11 minutes in Ilfosol 3 at 20°.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Image-Specific Properties:
>>2807917
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Image-Specific Properties:
Found a few rolls of Fuji C200 in my parents' house. They're from the late 90's iirc. Shot at ISO 200 and I think they came out pretty good considering they were stored at room temperature.
Adjusted curves in Lightroom after DSLR scanning the negatives.
Also, has anyone got experience with the ColorPerfect plugin for Photoshop? It's 60$ iirc which doesn't sound excessive and seems to have a more reliable and straight-forward process than playing with curves.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 664 Image Height 993
>>2806876
what is the difference between film camera bodies where it comes to the look of the picture?
i know they have different features but if you have the same parameters set on both bodies, use the same lens, same film and take the same photo how will it be different depending on what body i use?
>>2807918
And without the gimmicks, it's revealed to be: Nothing.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 889 Image Height 889 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:04 10:58:24 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 823 Image Height 555
>>2807972
None. Your framing may differ if the viewfinder shows a different fov than the lens or if the groundglass coverage is smaller than the film frame's - this happens on many SLRs, i.e. Zenits.
Other than that, if you point two very different bodies with the same lens/lens mount in the same spot and set the same shutter speed/aperture and develop them at the same time or in the same process/chemicals/etc you'll get two identical photos.
All film camera bodies are glorified light-tight boxes with a shutter. The picture depends on the film you put in, solely.
>>2807978
that is exactly what i thought, thanks for confirmation anon
>>2807917
Obvious life preserver subject ruined by framing and distracting elements. Actually interesting reflections ruined by all the extra shit in the frame (life preserver and tree)
Worry about your development and processing after learning what to point your camera at.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 889 Image Height 889 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:04 11:15:21 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 859 Image Height 597
why is there cum on my photos? what is this and what could have done this?
i suspect that the lens, it's my first roll with this body and lens, cosina ct-1 with kit 50mm f/2.0
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2016:04:04 17:28:09
>>2807999
Highly doubt it's the lens, looks like the emulsion got ripped off somehow, maybe the film got stuck together somehow?
>>2808004
the film is new, kodak color plus 200 expiry date in mid 2017, it can't be randomly ripped, the white spots make a pattern on most photos
>>2808020
Could be scraping in your camera, or in the development stage.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model NEX-6 Camera Software RawTherapee Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.5 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 42 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4419 Image Height 2946 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:04 15:23:54 Exposure Time 1/25 sec F-Number f/4.5 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness 4.2 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 28.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model NEX-6 Camera Software RawTherapee Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.5 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 40 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4082 Image Height 2721 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:04 15:27:24 Exposure Time 1/25 sec F-Number f/4.5 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness 3.3 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 27.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
Developed and scanned my first roll of film the other day and the results are...well meh
It seems very washed out desu. Could this have been because of the scan or because of the development process?
Film was Fujifim Superia 200
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-E1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:04:04 18:23:13 Exposure Time 8 sec F-Number f/1.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/1.0 Brightness -8.8 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2808034
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-E1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:04:04 18:23:36 Exposure Time 8.5 sec F-Number f/1.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/1.0 Brightness -8.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2808037
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-E1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:04:03 22:39:34 Exposure Time 5.3 sec F-Number f/1.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/1.0 Brightness -8.3 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2808042
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Camera Model X-E1 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:04:04 18:24:53 Exposure Time 9 sec F-Number f/1.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/1.0 Brightness -8.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2807911
Pennsylvania
>Olympus OM
>Nikon FE
>Pentax K1000
>Canon AE-1
>???
Which should I get? I know how to manual and want exclusively do that. No battery reliance preferred. Would prob use it exclusively with a 55mm. Don't wanna spend hundreds for the lens because leica.
Street photography. Aesthetics matter. :^)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Apple Camera Model iPad Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Macintosh) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 35 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:06:18 19:37:14 Exposure Time 1/15 sec F-Number f/2.4 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 50 Lens Aperture f/2.4 Brightness 2.8 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash Function Focal Length 4.28 mm Color Space Information sRGB Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2808229
Leica M4-P
>>2808230
I'm poor familia.
>>2807678
great camera if you can find a clean one. go for the original f if you don't need a meter
>>2807959
Really tasty
>>2808034
Looks sligthly underexposed and unedited, otherwise what I'd expect from Superia. Try shooting it at 100 or 125 and it should look better.
The softness looks like a scanner issue.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:04 23:30:46
>>2808229
Canon FTB, all mechanical with a meter and the FD lenses are cheap, sharp and widely available
just found an old Canon A-1 with no battery door and drained battery, is buying the parts and a bunch of film worth it?
>>2808242
Thanks. The black one is gorgeous too.
>>2808229
pentax mx
>>2808229
Seconding the canon
FD lenses are great and the ae-1 is really nice but also look at the a-1 and f-1
>>2808243
Worth. I absolutely love mine. The battery is nothing and the battery door you could probably find easily. Hell I'd send you one of my extras if you didn't mind it being from a broken ae-1
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make PENTAX Camera Model PENTAX K-50 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Windows) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 52 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:03:29 08:36:06 Exposure Time 1/30 sec F-Number f/6.3 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 3200 Lens Aperture f/6.3 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Hard Saturation Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Macro
>>2808240
hmm I think I will just go for a flatbed scanner, might be too retarded for the whole DSLR scanner thing. Any recommendations?
>>2808229
Minolta SRT-101
>>2808266
A flatbed scanner wouldn't do you much better I think.
Looking some more at your picture it seems like the scan is not that bad really and it may be your post processing that's lacking.
Why don't you post a raw file on http://wetransfer.com or something and let some of the people here have a go at it?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:05 00:19:42
>>2808232
>go for the original f if you don't need a meter
i need the auto for funshooting, the boring slow shooting is covered by medium format.
>>2808284
original f has a better, brighter viewfinder and metered f's are probably massively out of whack by now.
>>2808286
okay. i might get the original f then. maybe only for the wide angle lens.
>>2808274
Here's what I get. I didn't futz with sharpness or dust.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2808274
I would edit it something like this, even if it may be a bit blue for some people's taste.
The softness looks like it's due to camera shake, either on the original neg, or in the scanning camera.
The light looks uneven too, you can see the sprocket holes being bounced back over the picture part of the frame.
How are you lighting this?
>>2808315
Briefly: Lightroom>VueScan>Lightroom
>>2808297
>I would edit it something like this
>uploads worst edit ever
stop giving any advice, thank you.
>>2808326
I will.
I was mostly trying to get rid of the soft look in OP picture, didn't bother too much with the colors, but I do think Superia looks better faded than with more pop.
Of course my æsthethic preferences rarely coinside with /p/'s, which is just as well I guess.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:05 01:14:54
>>2808267
There's one at my local goodwill for 70 dollars
should I buy it
>>2808348
WAY too much unless it has something like a 58/1.4 lens in front of it. You'd be WAY better off getting a minolta body off of KEH and get a 50/1.7 which is VERY good and VERY cheap. This way, when the camera doesn't work, you send it back to KEH and they send you one that works.
>>2808350
>58/1.4 lens in front of it
It does have that
>>2808351
If you're absolutely sure it's that lens then yeah pick it up. The lens is worth about $70 usd on it's own
>>2808020
>it can't be randomly ripped
You're right, but it can be ripped going into the canister, being taken from the canister, being spooled onto a reel, or being stuck to something while still wet or drying.
In fact. It's not random at all!
>>2808229
I'd go for the Canon if it was my first camera
If it was a camera for me, I'd 100% go for the Contax, Rollei or the M4-P. I have a hard on for M4's but can't seem to find nice ones for cheap.
Hey /p/haggots,
I've been having this non-frequent problem on my camera.
Sometimes, the frame counter rolls back 5-7 frames, so say I'm on shot 13, after a day or so it rolls back to 8. It doesn't happen all the time, but it happened two-three times and it's annoying not knowing exactly how many shots I have. Do any of you guys know what the problem may be?
Camera body is a Sears KSX-1000, a copy of the Ricoh KR-5 Super.
Also, what film can you recommend that has warm tones? Something similar to pic related, which was Lomography's ISO 800 film.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Noritsu Koki Camera Model QSS Camera Software Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.3.9600.17415 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Image Created 2015:12:23 00:29:41 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2048 Image Height 3045
Dumping.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2808408
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2808408
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2808408
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
>>2808408
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
The Canon FD system is so god damn killer.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 1799 Image Height 1229 Compression Scheme Unknown Pixel Composition Unknown Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:05 12:29:42 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 800 Image Height 533
>>2808440
My scanning skills are not.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Nikon Camera Model Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 9000 ED Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 1200 Image Height 1800 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 266 dpi Vertical Resolution 266 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:05 12:37:07 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 800 Image Height 533
contributing some film snap shits.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 8240 Image Height 5840 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 1200 dpi Vertical Resolution 1200 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:05 01:27:42 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1250 Image Height 900
>>2808483
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 5807 Image Height 8272 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 1200 dpi Vertical Resolution 1200 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:05 01:32:14 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1250 Image Height 1759
>>2808484
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 8223 Image Height 5840 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 1200 dpi Vertical Resolution 1200 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:05 01:34:56 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1250 Image Height 902
>>2808484
please tell me you don't knead that dough
Also, have a contact sheet. Don't whine, it's under 1mb.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 9403 Image Height 11859 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition Unknown Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 1200 dpi Vertical Resolution 1200 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:04:05 02:44:08 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1586 Image Height 1862
>>2808394
Sounds like a minor mechanical problem with the ratchet for the frame counter. If you took it to a camera service place they could fix it easily but it would probably be reasonably costly (i.e far more than that camera is worth).
Warm tone films: Ektar is my favorite, really accentuates reds and oranges. Most film will get a warm tone if you overexpose it slightly. I usually shoot Fujifilm C200 (Superia 200s shitty cousin) at 100 and it comes out wonderfully.
>>2808516
These look really nice. Is this a proper enlarger contact sheet or a scan?
Either way these are some nice photos
>>2808521
This is a scan of an actual contact sheet. Thanks for the compliment, I'm starting on the full size prints tomorrow probably.
>>2808496
What a masochist, he kneads the dough, and she goes and eats the whole pie
I need your help guys.
I'm going to central Africa for a month or two this summer and I can't decide which film to take with me.
I usually shoot the Fuji Pro 400H and the Kodak TriX, the speed is perfect for my northern European weather, I'm afraid that it will be too sunny for that stuff in Africa.
Are my worries unfounded and the difference could be fixed by reducing the exposure time? Or should I start looking for alternative films? If yes, any suggestions?
>>2808575
id bring some iso 100 rated slide film. hp5 because its what i use. and if c41 is a must, some portra. 400h ive found it to be great for uncontrasty pale stuff, but lacking for actual colorful stuff.
>>2808575
Does your lens stop down to F22? Do you have an ND filter? If you answered 'yes' to either of these questions, you'll be fine
>>2808551
Thanks. I really love the contact sheet look so I always try to arrange things in a nice way, pic related.
>>2808575
In the realm of black and white, you can take your pic of any 100 speed film. Pair it with a yellow filter and you'll be set. If you really want to use tri-x, or any other faster film, get a red filter. Just don't take any portraits with it on, unless you want people to look like aliens. Or do what >>2808580 said and get an ND filter.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 5751 Image Height 7210 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition Unknown Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 720 dpi Vertical Resolution 720 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:03:14 00:06:15 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1200 Image Height 946
>>2808578
I love the pastel look the 400H, I wasn't really able to recreate that with porta, but I'll look into it again and get some practice.
Totally forgot about the HP5, I even have some leftover rolls in my fridge, thanks!
>>2808580
I'd rather not stop down to F22 as I only shoot 35mm.
The ND filter is a great idea, buying one right away.
>>2808604
400h has a very recognizable look indeed.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make EPSON Camera Model GT-X770 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4526 Image Height 3525 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 1600 dpi Vertical Resolution 1600 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2015:10:27 01:51:43 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1200 Image Height 935
>>2808604
Might as well get a proper ND filter set if you're going to be shooting landscapes. An adjustable one is invaluable when you need to reduce the dynamic range, especially if you're shooing slides
>>2808608
That looks pretty cool, any shots with flash?
What film would you guys recommend for me to shoot in my new AA35 half frame when I finish my test roll (of expired Vista 200 shot at 100)? I've mostly shot expired film on my other half frame (Agat 18K) so far because I mostly just use it for fun snapshots, but I want to try something different now that I have a "proper" one. Was thinking maybe Ektar, but slide could be cool too... and as I'll probably get about 80 shots on the roll, not too expensive per shot.
I want to try some color for now, but I'll switch to black and white later. Hoping I get that '71 New York look.
>>2808623
>any shots with flash?
nope, just shot one roll of that and it was all overcast daylight.
>recommend for me to shoot in my new AA35 half frame
first of all, i have to address tham im fucking made of jello right now. thats some sweet ass camera.
now, about recommendations, my rule for half frame shooting is to get the most fine grained film for color, and the coolest grain looking for b&w. that said, asa 100 slides work excellent, portra 160 would look superb too. i dont like ektar too much so i cant comment on that.
Need camera that has:
>meter
>manual control
>good looks
>cheap easily found lens
Pls repond
>>2808635
Is a Zenit 11 too basic for your needs?
>>2808635
>good looks
you need to grow up, first.
I'd recommend a Contax G2 but it depends what you consider "cheap".
>>2808635
Based Pentax
>cheap
>cheap, good lenses
>you can use every Pentax lens ever made, bar 4 (if I remember correctly) which have internal aperture control
>the meter is based (mine tells me the exact shutter speed I need to be on for the aperture I have selected and the film speed I have
>built like tanks
>look great
literally what more do you want. mine was purchased in 1985, used by my mum up into the mid 2000s, passed down to my sister, passed down to me. In that time it has suffered some pretty bad abuse, and never missed a beat. Never been serviced, never babied and still works like the day it was made
>>2808637
The meter on it is shit tho.
>>2808639
500 ish bucks for body only is no one's idea of cheap
>>2808649
these are cameras, not chocolate bars or USB sticks
If you want a cheap camera get an FED 2 from ebay. £40. The lens *could* be sharp.
>>2808651
Mate you can get fully functioning big name film SLRs with a nifty fifty for $30 all day long. Unless you need one of the more advanced features that the Contax provides (not sure what that would be, exposure bracketing maybe?) then the SLR will do exactly the same job for $470 less, and will likely last far, far longer than the very electronic G2
>>2808635
Praktica MTL5B
>>2808655
Yeah that is a fair point; my apologies.
>>2808696
I use a Pentax P30 / P3. I think I've already advocated for it earlier in the thread. Shutter speeds 1 second to 1/1000th, bulb mode. Meter reads from the center of the viewfinder, however it has meter lock so you can get it to meter for the shadows. I rarely 100% rely on my meter these days, but it's very accurate and pretty much foolproof for the beginner film user. Select your aperture, half press the shutter and the meter shows up on the left side of the viewfinder, highlighting which shutter speed you should select. If there is too much light, or too little light the speed will flash, and you adjust the aperture until the speed is not flashing. Pretty much takes any difficulty out of metering. Film and advance and rewind is traditional SLR style. Autowinders are available but you won't need one. The body is fully metal apart from the viewfinder eyepiece which is plastic. The film loading is made easier since it uses a 'sticky roller' system rather than a traditional uptake spool. So you pretty much pull the leader across and down the far edge of the sticky roller, close the back and the force of the back combined with the friction of the roller will allow the film to be advanced without checking if the uptake spool is taking the film. I always get 38/27 shots out of my rolls because of this. The camera has considerable heft to it. It's at least as heavy as my Nikon D5200 despite being quite a lot smaller. This is a good thing. The operation is very mechanical. The shutter clicks satisfyingly, the aperture ring has clicky stops and half clicky half stops. The advance lever ratchets, and the film door pops open with a nice mechanical sound. Par for the course with these sort of cameras. Again par for the course is the thunderous slapping mirror and curtain sound of the shutter. It is very loud. You won't press the shutter and think "I wonder if I took a photo then", since everyone in a 10 meter radius just heard you do it
>>2808713
2/2
As you might have guessed, this camera was aimed at the entry level market. This does not mean it takes poor photos, it just means it was designed with ease of use in mind. There is no ISO dial as it reads the DX code. If you want to push/pull film either make a custom DX code or just do the math in you head based on the metering. It also has an automatic mode if the lens you're using supports it. Turn the aperture dial to A and the camera takes over. I used this for my first roll, and it came out spotlessly. No autofocus though, you probably already know this. Comes with a good quality split prism focusing screen. Very accurate, very quick. Tip: when manually focusing keep the lens at infinity until you focus, as it's much easier and faster to back the ring off in one direction until it's in focus. With time you'll become very fast at this
The Pentax lens range is incredible, and you can get one of the many 50mm lenses made for the K mount for basically nothing. I use the 50mm Pentax-A SMC 1.7, but pretty much any lens with the Pentax name on it will be good.
Overall I would recommend this camera and system to someone new to film or someone who just wants a no bullshit camera. It'll hold your hand if you want it to, otherwise you're free to do what you want.
>>2808320
a bit less briefly maybe?
>>2808297
alright here's my setup
Basically It's a headlamp lighting an acrylic piece of white translucent plastic and the film is slid into the paper holder (wanted to get a proper 35mm holder but I can't seem to find them everywhere)
Camera I use to scan is a Fuji XE1 with an MD-FX adapter with a 50mm f/1.7 lens and a 2x macro teleconverter
>>2808720
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Model HTC One X Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.7 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Unknown Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:05 16:54:53 Exposure Time 499/10000 sec F-Number f/2.0 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 320 Exposure Bias 0 EV Subject Distance 0.00 m Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 3.63 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1840 Image Height 3264 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Lens Aperture f/2.0 Brightness 0 EV Sharpness Soft
>>2808516
woah how short is she? She looks like a tiny person.
>>2808635
Need camera that has:
>crutch meter
>isn't a point and shoot
>makes me attractive to girls
>cheap lenses because I have no job
Sounds like you want just about any fucking SLR desu, pick one, choose what's important to you for shutter speeds and flash sync and take some fucking pictures.
>>2808720
yikes, that's probably the worst scanning setup I've ever seen
>teleconverter
>shitty spot light source
>film is not flat at all
>shit lens
fix these ffs
>>2808773
>teleconverter
what's wrong with a teleconverter? Some people use extension tubes, are those better?
>shitty spot light source
but it gets dispersed with the acrylic, parts. Anything else I should use here?
>film is not flat at all
trying to fix that, but it's hard to find a 35mm film holder
>shit lens
?
>>2808773
>that's probably the worst scanning setup I've ever seen
You've not seen my scanning setup yet :^)
Mainly because I've not got room to set it up properly yet. Having issues with holding the negative at a reasonable place and diffusing the light.
>>2808779
I'd use an extension tube over a teleconverter. You're putting more glass in the way and IQ will fall.
>hard to find a 35mm film holder
Pick up one of the frames on ebay or amazon for the household 135 scanners.
>>2808779
>>teleconverter
>what's wrong with a teleconverter? Some people use extension tubes, are those better?
>>shitty spot light source
>but it gets dispersed with the acrylic, parts. Anything else I should use here?
>>film is not flat at all
>trying to fix that, but it's hard to find a 35mm film holder
>>shit lens
>?
drop the excuses you shit faggot.
>>2808720
>a bit less brief maybe?
I'll type something up later when I get home. Just wanted to make sure you were interested.
>>2808783
will try to get my hands on some extension tubes for the MD mount if I can sometimes
Something like this?
http://www.amazon.de/Ersatzteil-Epson-Holder-Slide-1423040/dp/B000JD3DKC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1459875838&sr=8-1&keywords=35mm+film+holder
>>2808785
no need to start being rude m8, I was just asking some questions since I'm new to the whole film scanning film and I wanted to make sure that I'm understanding things correctly
>>2808790
thanks, appreciated!
>>2808793
Ye, similar to that. I bought one of these:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3-Pack-Additional-Negative-Holders-Scanner-USB-Digital-Color-Photo-Camera-Film-/281672103977?hash=item4194f73829:g:qH4AAOSwqu9VOkeM
Just cut/sanded down the frame guides so I could scan pano stuff.
What do I get with one of those package-cameras like a Linhof Technika III or a Crown Graphic vs. a field camera? Is it just a little extra movements?
I'm looking at getting a Crown Graphic because of cost compared to proper field cameras, but I'm worried that I'm missing out on something important.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 2089 Image Height 2639 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition Unknown Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi
>>2808815
did you agitate that negative with a flailing cat, in its litterbox?
>>2808800
Alright will try to get one of those
Hopefully that and the extension tubes will help with the softness
>>2808815
I think that's what is it yes. Same deal, field cameras are just a little easier to carry around and sacrifice movement for it.
>>2808853
Yeah I'm semi-regretting my monorail purchase. You have more freedom of movement than you could use unless you shell out for 8x10-appropriate lenses. Image circles on most 4x5 lenses aren't big enough to cover ridiculous tilts and swings. It was good and cheap at time of purchase, and it has left me yearning for more portability.
>>2808826
No, it's xray film. The emulsion is very very vulnerable. In the process of cutting them down to size from 8x10, you scratch them. They take on tiny cuts when you load them. Tray development cuts them to shit the most. I've found better results developing them taco style in drums, but I haven't scanned any of those ones yet.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 2083 Image Height 2630 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition Unknown Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi
>>2808520
I feel you, I think I'll get a quote anyways. The body was $20 on ebay and I'm happy with it other than that issue.
Yeah, I just got another Lomo 800 roll back and the tones are slightly bluer because I didn't overexpose it like it did the other one. I'll definitely check out ektar.
Pic related, my most recent roll of 800. Although some of them came out fairly warm, I was "metering" with my intuition rather than with an actual meter because just snapshits.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Noritsu Koki Camera Model QSS Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3045 Image Height 2048
>>2808859
Here's a warmer one.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Noritsu Koki Camera Model QSS Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3045 Image Height 2048
>>2808859
>>2808862
hm
Forgot to resize
Here's another from the same roll
The tones are bluer than I would've liked and there's some missed focus shots but my girlfriend seems to like them and I have a couple I do really like so I guess it's okay. They're just snapshits anyways.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Noritsu Koki Camera Model QSS Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3045 Image Height 2048
>>2808773
Rate mine :^)
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ST21i Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi ISO Speed Rating 0 Focal Length 1.15 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 600 Image Height 800
>>2808859
This is minilab scanned. There isn't a chance in hell that the auto level algorithms are going to get color balance correct with those massive light leaks. The far left of the frame is orange and the software averaged that out and gave you blue green on the right. Here's what auto color does with the light leak subtracted. Not saying it's correct or as you would wish it, but it's closer to what the noritsu would have done with a properly functioning camera.
tl/dr: Fix your camera before playing hopscotch with different emulsions.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Noritsu Koki Camera Model QSS Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 3045 Image Height 2048 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:05 15:08:56 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2148 Image Height 2048
>>2808745
She's around 5'5 I think.
Is it a bad idea to start photography with a film camera ?
Considering the fact that you can't see your mistake right away and that it could be expensive to ruin dozen of rolls before understanding a bit the art of taking pictures.
>>2808914
Back in the days everyone learned that way and they didn't piss money away. You're not going to completely fuck things up most likely.
I have the choice between a Canon FTB, Canon AE1 and Pentax K1000. I haven't shot 35mm in years and want to get back into it. Which of these would you get and why?
>>2808916
I'd recommend either the ftb or ae1. Personally I really like the ae1 and fd lenses are very cheap and easily available
You can get the 50 1.4 ssc and 28 2.8 for very cheap
>>2808914
Bad idea? No, not bad. But worse than digital in literally every way. More expensive, harder to learn, slower, more sloppy, can't tell whether you fixed your issues or not, etc.
Once you've learned the basics of exposure, some people will tell you that shooting film helps to slow you down and think about your shots more, since each frame is expensive and you only have as many shots as you brought with you, but you can be just as mindful and slow with digital, all you have to do is force yourself. Tell yourself only one shot per intent, or use a small memory card, etc.
>>2808876
Post some pictures
>>2808941
I do. It's very frustrating to cut because 4x5's are actually slightly smaller. If you don't trim the edges of each, they won't fit into your holders. Right now I'm working out of some shitty community darkroom where their art-board-cutter thing is dull as a motherfucker and can't make straight cuts.
I used to live in something like a broom closet before I bought my monorail.
I got a filter to cut out the red light on my meter. The idea was to get more accurate readings that paralleled the orthochromatic sensitivity of the film. These photos are tests trying to nail down an approximate ISO.
>>2808890
Good to know. Thanks!
>>2808958
I'm >>2807959. This is the first roll I have DSLR "scanned".
My main concern now is processing the negatives as I said on my previous post. I'd rather use a more straight forward process that doesn't involve playing with curves and hoping for everything to turn alright.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 665 Image Height 1000
>>2809024
>>2808790
Ok, less brief info incoming. First off, when I do my own negatives, I use Capture One rather than Lightroom for the first step, but using your negative as an example, I have to use Lightroom because my C1 is Sony only.
Step 1, import raw to Lightroom, crop image, look at histogram and ensure no channels are clipped (important), export as full sized 16 bit tiff.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Jane Image-Specific Properties:
>>2808632
Haha, it's a funny camera. Feels like taking photos with a cassette walkman.
We have a bulk roll of Portra 160 loaded in the fridge, so I'll be shooting that for sure at some point. Think I'll try slides first, I think the store I go to has at least Provia and Precisa. Or there's one roll of Rollei CR200 in the fridge too, might try that.
>>2808914
Yes and no, I did it (though I shot a lot with my phone too and borrowed my gf's 7D a bunch). My issue was exactly that I so rarely saw my pictures, because I so rarely got film developed. I still have about 20 exposed rolls in the fridge. Scanning sucks and I hate it. Old cameras not working well also sucks. But it was fun to me and entry costs were low, and I was really just having fun anyway, and not seriously interested in photography.
>>2809075
Step 2, import to VueScan. Click "default settings" in the "Color" tab, click "Auto Levels" in the "Color Balance" drop down, press preview. Pic related is the result. At this point there are many different ways you can go about things, and a lot of them involve a LOT of time practicing with VueScan and dealing with its quirky nature. We'll keep it simple on this walkthrough. Next up: White Balance.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Jane Image-Specific Properties:
Anybody have an idea of what's going on here? I have a Canon P and a Jupiter-12 35mm LTM lens. Looks like the lens threads on a quarter turn too much. It's the same deal with my LTM Canon 50mm 1.8 lens.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Apple Camera Model iPhone 6s Camera Software Pixelmator 3.4.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 29 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:05 16:04:37 Exposure Time 1/15 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Brightness 0.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.15 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 750 Image Height 1000 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2809092
To white balance, point and right click. I chose the corner of that building that I circled. In this example, it worked out pretty well, but thats not always the case. Again, special cases involve learning to tame VueScan.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Jane Image-Specific Properties:
>>2809075
Hey Jane not the poster above you who you meant to reply to but >>2808720
Thanks for the info though, I'm also struggling with processing
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D5100 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Macintosh) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:04:03 22:26:23 Exposure Time 1/10 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Comment Una foto muyVINTAGE Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 661 Image Height 988 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2809109
Step 3, From here on it becomes mostly a matter of personal taste. You could adjust it to your liking and export a finished product directly from VueScan, or you could leave it somewhat flat, export as tiff and take it back into Lightroom for further processing. Here I took it back into Lightroom and gave it a little more contrast, exported to 1000px wide and uploaded to /p/. Takes 2-3 minutes when there are no special color issues.
I'm horrible at doing the "tutorial" thing, but I do much better answering questions, if any of this wasn't clear. I'll be glad to help out with what knowledge I have with VueScan. I've been pissing with this for over a year now, and I'm pretty convinced this is a solid workflow, especially when there is need to keep multiple images within the same color scope. Also, if you do buy VueScan, you get all upgrades for life, it works on nearly every scanner built in the last 25 years etc, etc. It's a pain in the ass to learn, and has quirks, but it is very powerful.
>>2809123
Sorry about that anon! Hopefully it helps though!
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Jane Image-Specific Properties:
Ok guys im going for hitch-hiking. Simple question OLYMPUS XA OR XA2?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 150 dpi Vertical Resolution 150 dpi
I wanna use my Pentax 35mm f2.4 on a 35mm film camera for my photography class. I know that this particular lens works pretty well on FF. However, in case there IS a little vignetting, is there a way to fix it?
Secondly, the film camera I'm using has a busted metering thing. Even with new batteries, it doesn't seem to be working. Is there another recommended K mount film camera besides the K1000?
>>2809131
XA is a much more capable camera.
>>2809133
>capable
but focusing system works better on XA or XA2?
>>2809131
xa2. you wont be "precision focusing" while hiking.
Okay /p/ help me out
The streak through the center is a lens flare, correct? Is this caused from a dirty lens (such as fingerprints and whatnot caked on the lens) causing the light to be all fucky or am I just bad?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Noritsu Koki Camera Model QSS Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3045 Image Height 2048
>>2809139
that is what i thought. but i can make red stripes on focusing dial and use it as zones? im really concider xa because its more powerfull for streetphoto
>>2809143
Nope. Light leaks. Reseal your camera.
>>2809137
XA is a rangefinder, XA2 is a zone focusing point-and-shoot.
XA has aperture control, XA2 does not.
You can just set hyperfocus on the XA if you don't want to fuck around with actually focusing.
>>2809148
I always thought light leaks were orange in color (like on the left edge of the photo), I've never seen a blue one, and certainly not in the middle of the image.
I'll get it resealed this weekend.
>>2809143
No, it's a light leak, caused by the camera back not sealing out light.
Almost certainly on the hinged edge of the back near the takeup spool.
People talk about replacing light seals, but most of the time that's a total fuck around, esp. if you have a few cameras. Just put some black gaff over the gap once you're loaded.
>>2809155
Orange light leaks are where the light comes through a layer of film on top of it on the takeup spool.
>>2809155
>I always thought light leaks were orange in color (like on the left edge of the photo), I've never seen a blue one, and certainly not in the middle of the image.
orange leaks are for cocksuckers. patricians get blue ones.
>>2809156
Sounds good, I'll just throw gaffer's tape over the hinge gap. After inspecting the camera the light seal on that one is certainly fucked and that's probably the only seal that matters the most correct?
I could probably leave the tape on permanently as well, no?
>>2809159
Looks like I'm a cocksucker patrician then.
>>2809155
Light leaks are hard to predict. It depends upon what temperature of light struck the film. And beyond that, the algorithms that determine the color balance at scan time are skewed when light leaks are present adding additional confusion.
Hi guys, I need some help. I just got a Chinon CG-5, does anyone have any lenses they could recommend me to get? A little on the cheaper side would be better, but I appreciate any suggestions, thanks.
Heres a weird question.
I have just got a MF film camera and have one roll of TMAX 100.
The person who sent the camera did not send the spool like it said in the description.
Is it possible that I could just load the film on the wrong side, unroll it in a darkroom and sit it loosely rolled up on the side your meant to load the film?
Shipping a spool would take at least 2 weeks.
Camera is a Kiev 6C meme.
>>2809299
dont do dumb stuff. wait for the proper spool. or ask a local guy for a spare one.
>>2809299
I don't know if there would be enough tension to make the film sit flat if you do that. If there's a lab that develops 120 nearby you could go there and ask them to give you an empty spool, but I guess there aren't all that many labs out there.
>>2809302
I guess I should.
Just wish the cunt sent me the spool like he said he would or I would've brought it.
If I do what I said though, it wouldn't break the camera in anyway I can think of.
And if the pictures didn't come out I couldn't give less of a shit cause its a free roll of TMAX and then I would have a spool.
I just don't want to waste a good roll.
>>2809304
I develop 35mm myself and will also dev the 120
2 days.
>>2809309
Yes, but you could still go to a lab and just ask them to give you a spool since they have to throw one away every time they develop a roll of 120.
>>2809320
dont have 120 labs, only 35mm
Should I get something completely point and shoot for shooting around the city? Or will something like the canon ae1 and ftb do? I mean how hard is it to focus on the fly, not talking about setting aperture and shutter speed.
>>2809385
You sure about that? Where do you live?
Posting a few snapshits from my first roll with a Ricoh FF3
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:09:11 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2809507
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:09:33 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2809509
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:10:12 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2809512
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:19:55 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2809514
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:11:06 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2809518
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:11:46 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2809522
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:04:06 14:08:34 Color Space Information sRGB
I have this roll of expired Kodak Colorplus 200 developed and scanned by a local developer.
Do you think I can improve the quality if I scanned it on my own using a DSLR+Macro extension tube+50mm f1.4?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. Camera Model SP-3000 Camera Software FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-014 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:03:28 17:53:08 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1818 Image Height 1228
>>2809618
Here's another one
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. Camera Model SP-3000 Camera Software FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-014 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:03:28 17:53:24 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1818 Image Height 1228
>>2809393
"If you use a SLR, you see things like this [holds camera to eye]. And when you do this, you want to have perfect focus.
The moment which you want to capture does not fit your feeling, if you do this. If you are using a compact camera, it is simple.
[While holding SLR to eye] Also furthermore, if you [use a SLR in front of your eyes] many people in Shinjuku, people turn their faces, or flee.”
>>2809311
what lenses you getting with it
>>2809104
thread mount lenses are usually whacky like that, not much you can do i'm afraid, shouldn't affect the rangefinder coupling however its just a pain in the ass .
>>2809633
But does he shoot from the hip?
>>2809646
From the hip I don't know but he doesn't always raise his P&S to the eye in order to frame, it depends on what he's shooting and how he wants to capture it.
>>2808941
Who is this broom closet poster?
>>2809075
>>2809092
>>2809109
thanks for taking the time to writing this up, but for me, Vuescan is completely different somehow
>Step 2, import to VueScan
just to be sure, by this you mean just picking the file in the input tab under the "files" order right? What do I do afterwards? Do I hit "Preview" or "Scan"?
The tab in Step 2 also looks different, I have non of those options below...which version are you using, could this be an issue?
Sorry for all the questions, you were really helpful m8
>>2809661
Yes preview first. I don't have in front of me till I get home, but from memory, go to input tab, scan from file, transparency, 35mm film, color negative. I'll post some screen grabs when I get home if that didn't work. Post a screen grab of your input tab if possible.
Alright /p/ let's see if you can help me
I'm looking for new glass, preferably 35mm for my snapshits. Has to be cheap, so probably Russian.
My problem is I have an SLR so any range finder lens is out of the question. I almost pulled the trigger on a mint Jupiter 8 before I realized that these were rangefinder lenses and wouldn't work in a SLR.
>>2809743
What kind of slr do you have? That's sort of a crucial point.
>>2809745
Right, sorry.
It's a Ricoh KR-5 Super (A clone of it, at least), uses a Pentax K Mount although I'm sure adapters could be bought to fit an M42 mount lens on it or something.
What else do you need to know?
Any printing wizards here? I'm trying to jump back into the darkroom after letting my equipment sit idle for a few years. I picked up a huge stash of old paper from a garage sale. Fog isn't terrible, I was able to get a blank sheet to remain pure white after development by adding 1g benzotriazole to Dektol 1:2, but now the contrast is nonexistent, even though it's grade 3 paper. Should I just toss it or is there something else I can dump in the developer to get the contrast back? I had no problems printing with unaltered dektol 1:3 in some much more fresh ilford paper, so the problem is definitely the paper. The only fresh paper I have is 5x7 though and I want to make some bigger prints.
>>2808963
>>2808963
>trying to nail down an approximate ISO
Dude, make, buy or borrow a step wedge, take a photo of it, give it normal development. You now know the ISO of your film.
Another thing you could do is use a flash with manual power adjustment, and a darkslide, to gradually expose parts of the film. Bracket 2 stops either side of 25, I reckon.
For the ortho-ness, don't worry about making adjustments, they will only confuse the issue.
Flash and daylight will work fine, it's just particularly warm light sources that don't render well.
>>2809847
Stepping up contrast would probably require a stack of underexposure and over development.
My solution would be to just use contrastier negs on it?
>also, new paper isn't *that* expensive
>>2809618
>>2809620
If all the negs are as shitty as those (blurry and underexposed) then it probably isn't worth the extra effort.
Make adjustments to these scans, and put in more effort next time to hold your bloody camera still.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. Camera Model SP-3000 Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:04:07 08:39:25 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1184 Image Height 800