/film/
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
Film General Thread, aka /fgt/
Old one hitting post limit: >>>2869584
>just posting in the FGT doesn't make you gay, unless you use Caffenol
To start off, I'm trying to scan some negatives and they're extremely dark. Left side of pic related is my attempt, right side is the scan I got back from my developers. I'm using a CanoScan 8800f as its something I happened upon, but if need be I might purchase an Epson v600.
>>2874542
your developers dont even take care of their scanner? I hope you didnt pay for those
>>2874542
anon you do realise you can actually manipulate the scan that comes out of your scanner in any manner possible including making it brighter, right?
>>2874593
Sure, but it doesn't seem to bring out the colors properly, more so just wash things out. I don't know if its an error in my post processing or what. If someone wants, I can put the original .tiff on mega and link it.
>>2874542
Do you use scanning software or just the default canon import?
Get arcsoft or silverfast
Also your film devs scanner looks broken, is that a CCD smear?
>>2874699
Also keep in mind theres no need to get a second scanner, dev lab scanners usually have software that automatically processes the scans
Your scanner is fine, it'll just require some better scanning software and some touchup in PS
These are the scans I get back from my place. Kinda miffed with the lack of detail Any good places to cop a v550 in europe?
[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 Left-Hand, Bottom Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:06:21 14:26:09 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1818 Image Height 1228
>>2874716
Another snapshit. from my mju 1
[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 2016:06:21 14:26:09 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1818 Image Height 1228
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:07:03 00:12:39 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1000 Image Height 689
>>2874542
If you're shooting 135 film, both of those scanner you have and want are shit.
>>2874716
>lack of detail
What the fuck are you talking about and what the fuck are you expecting in regards to detail?
>>2874656
Could be you are not exposing correctly in the first place. What do your negs look like? Post a photo of them backlit.
So far it seems like your lab is doing a good job.
>>2874776
autism
they're clearly not underexposed if shitty lab scanning software managed to get that image
>>2874777
autism for calling someone out who's trying to be helpful
it's totally possible for a lab to give a scan that looks like that from an underexposed negative. fuck off.
>>2874777
I worked on a Kodak/Noritsu lab for a few years. Aside from that I hand process and scan my own film at home. <--- So that's my experience. How about you?
>>2874716
I got mine from eBay for pretty cheap from Germany.
>>2874699
Default software
>>2874776
135? I'm shooting 35mm and will be shooting 120 6x4.5 soon, what scanner would you suggest?
Here's the negative backlit against my monitor. For exposure I was using aperture priority on my Olympus OM-2n.
>>2874859
135 = 35mm
120 = 60mm
FWIW
The negative looks perfect. Make sure your scanner is only detecting the image on the negative. If it includes the clear outside areas (or worse yet, the sprocket holes) it will underexpose the scan.
>>2874716
you're not going to get detail from a v550 (if you're scanning 35mm)
t.previous owner of a v550
>>2874859
Yep it looks much more like the lab scan than yours.
Would suggest looking at the scan software settings. There's usually a preset specific to the film (or close) that you are using. Or an auto detect etc setting. If that can't be found then an exposure adjustment is needed. But... The other adjusted shots you posted don't look like exposure was adjusted. Or try different software.
So.. Same thing as some others have said, but it's good to look at the neg as a starting point.
>>2874886
Just to add.. You are adjusting the pre-scan and then doing a full scan right? Or are you trying to make adjustments in some other program after a full scan?
Ps. Optic film scanner is excellent and good value for 135 film.
Medium format.. Either stick with your flatbed scanner and sort out the software, or use a good camera with macro lens to make copies. Unless you want to spend heaps of money.
>>2874794
>trying to be helpful
>"What the fuck are you talking about and what the fuck are you expecting in regards to detail?"
yes being condescending and autistically pretending you didn't understand what he meant... so helpful
>>2874894
Don't be a shitstain mate.. an offer to help is an offer to help even if there is some swearing and name calling involved.
>>2874699
What ArcSoft software am I looking for? I found silverfast's pretty easily.
>>2874890
The default software with this scanner doesn't allow for adjustments so I probably need to use different software.
>>2874873
Looks like they were including the clear area, I'll need to use different software to adjust that. Thanks, anon.
Anyone have a Bessa R3A or similar?
How are they? Thinking of buying one + a nokton 40mm 1.4.
>>2874944
that nokton is heavy piece of glass for that body
get the rokkor f2 40mm
>>2874720
gg no re
>>2874944
I have a Bessa R3M with nokton 40mm 1.4
If you're okay with shooting film, it's fucking great, m8.
Note: if you're a glasses wearer, it's just not gonna work. Get a diopter correction lens and it's all cool.
>>2874956
It's not so heavy that you shouldn't pick up that lens on account of weight. If anything, the weird positioning of the neck strap lugs makes the camera's frontside flip up. I recommend using one of them black rapid slings instead.
>>2874986
I don't wear glasses
I only shoot film so it's what I'm looking for
How's the 40mm 1.4? A lot of people like 35mm but something about 40 is more appealing for me. I also shoot iso 100 film so how is it wide open?
>>2874882
can you post some examples? I'm contemplating which scanner to get and I'm kind of stuck between any Epson (550-850V) or a Plustek, which has the downside that I needed to by a flatbed anyways if I wanted to get into MF
>>2874542
cool light leak.
>>2875075
just use a dslr, much better quality and it has other uses.
>>2875120
I only shoot film and got a Fuji for digital. Also DSLR scanning just seems needlessly tedious (setting it up, moving the film while scanning, inverting every picture in PS/Lightroom), so I am really looking for a dedicated film scanner
>>2874776
I have a 8800f and it works perfectly you mong. OP doesn't know how to use it obv desu senpai.
>>2875116
cool retardation.
>>2875278
what scanning software do you use with it?
>>2875120
>just use a dslr
That would end up more expensive than a top-of-the-line dedicated scanner
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 3319 Image Height 2056 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2016:07:03 11:31:16 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1024 Image Height 634
>>2874988
I don't own a lot of lenses to compare it with, so my opinion on it isn't exhaustive. I've only had the opportunity to shoot it in bright daylight, so I haven't actually tried it wide open yet. But from what I've heard, the quality is best around f/5.6~8 so I have just been sticking thereabout. I like it.
Looking for a scanner for 135mm negatives, looking to spend as little as possible while getting decent quality, i dont need amazing DPI as the pictures will probably only see instagram
is something like the QPIX scanner any good? apparently 3600 DPI which should be more than enough and only £40
any suggestions on what to get? thanks
Olympus OM40 + Zuiko 35-70mm
Ilford Pan 400 @ Rodinal 1+50
Scanned with an old HP Photosmart S20 film scanner from '99.
>>2875548
With orange filter.
r8 my scan
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3100 Camera Software paint.net 4.0.9 Photographer , Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:07:03 23:38:46 White Point Chromaticity 0 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 6553700 Lens Aperture f/1.0 Subject Distance 0.00 m Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Fine Weather Flash No Flash Focal Length 5.00 mm Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 4644 Image Height 3084 Exposure Index 0
>>2875725
Lpr/Imatra area.
>>2875735
>clipped highlights in that sun reflection
>blurry rims/trees
Learn to properly meter and focus before posting car snapshits. And turn your iso dial down for god's sake that shit is grainy!
>>2874656
Sure upload it please.
some questions about 35mm film
How much do you guys pay per roll?
what stuff should i get? fujifilm, kodak, etc?
Surely 100 ISO gives best quality so why does it seem to be norm to shoot in 200 or 400? are there any drawbacks to ISO100? And i am talking about daylight shooting, i know i will need higher ISO for night
Thanks
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS4 Macintosh Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2013:01:07 22:19:54 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 620 Image Height 414
>>2875857
>How much do you guys pay per roll?
Depends on the roll
>what stuff should i get? fujifilm, kodak, etc?
Depends on the film from each manufacturer
>Surely 100 ISO gives best quality so why does it seem to be norm to shoot in 200 or 400?
It doesn't give the least quality but it'll give the least amount of grain
>are there any drawbacks to ISO100?
Not if you have the right lighting conditions
My favorite film to shoot is portra 160 or 400 ektar 100, and for slide film agfa presica and velvia 50 but there's quite a lot of nice cheap film like superia
>>2875858
i just bought some superia 200 for my first few rolls of film
why is ISO 100 film more expensive and harder to find?
>>2875900
>i just bought some superia 200 for my first few rolls of film
You really cant go wrong. Fantastic performance from a nice cheap consumer grade film
>why is ISO 100 film more expensive and harder to find?
I cannot really speak from the technical side as far as whether the emulsion is more difficult to manufacture but it's mostly because there's less demand for really low iso film since you need closer to ideal conditions to use it
That being said ektar 100 is fairly cheap and fantastic but I'd still rather shoot portra 160 because if I need to I can push it further if needed
>>2875905
I probably should specify that you can also push superia as needed and I think superia looks particularly good at 800 like in this picture I saw a while back
fujica half shot with some ilford400 test roll
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make fujica half Camera Model half shot Camera Software paint.net 4.0.3 Photographer Copyright © grover webb photography 2016 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi
>>2875552
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 2400 dpi Vertical Resolution 2400 dpi Image Created 2016:07:04 19:16:39 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1000 Image Height 649
>>2875911
Reminds me of this picture I took a while back.
This is Provia 100F.
>>2875928
good job
>>2875928
>>2875911
Leaf snapshits?
Leaf snapshits.
Portra 400.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:11:02 09:24:15 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1203 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2875782
>clipped highlights in the sun reflection
like anybody gives a shit
>blurry rims and trees
It's called panning, try taking a car shot for once.
>grain
Color perfect likes to bring it all out
>>2875937
Snapshits? I can do snapshits.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3100 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 664 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:04 10:14:48 Exposure Time 1/200 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 1/3 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Focal Length 5.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Hard Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2875937
>>2875941
leaf snapshits!
Ilford Pan 400, Polaroid 170BV.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi
>>2875938
Amazing.
>>2875981
you got a problem, cunt?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 712 Image Height 1000
>>2876124
You should have a model sit in that. Then it would be a great picture
>>2874542
Page 4 and 60 replies after 3 days is what happens when fucking moron newfags try and make generals.
2 unprocessed RPT tier snapshits next to one another does not qualify as an appropriate OP image.
You didn't even copy all of the OP text.
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
I have tried looking on google but there's no answers.
My shutter button gets stuck and won't depress until I advance the film lever. What could be causing this?
I'm using a Yashica Electro 35. The Pad of Death issues comes up a lot but that's more to do with a dodgy advanced lever rather than a sticky shutter.
Any suggestions/remedies?
>>2877618
>My shutter button gets stuck and won't depress until I advance the film lever. What could be causing this?
did you just word this weirdly... ?
you know that the shutter has to be cocked for it to fire right?
Also I'm thinking of saving up and getting another medium format camera, I'm thinking of getting something more mechanical so I'm eyeing up something like a Bronica s2a or a Hasselblad 1000f, has anybody had experience with either of them?
So, about scanning with DSLRs. I only have a t3i rabal with the kit lens, and the scans come out in a very mediocre quality and are hard to post-process.
However I've read/heard people saying that even a rabal with a kit lens is enough to get a flatbed quality scan. How much of this is true? Should I put more effort in how I scan my pictures? Maybe fabricating a makeshift light diffuser rather than using light from my tablet as I've been doing now.
Of course ideally I'd get a macro lens, but since I've seen people talking about doing it with a kit lens, it got me curious.
Also, how would a rabal+macro lens compare to a flatbed?
>>2877660
Reverse your kit lens and you'll get a macro lens.
>>2877662
How about the quality of it?
>>2877644
>>2877651
No. It's only just started doing it.
Normally the shutter button should press in and then pop back up once the picture has been taken.
What's happening is the shutter button isn't popping back up until I advanced the film. It's getting stuck once I remove my finger from the shutter. It should just instantly pop back up. It always has for the 6 months I've owned the camera.
just started playing with medium format
>>2877815
>>2877816
>>2877702
ah, I understand now.
why is this a big deal though? what practical difference does it make?
>>2877660
if your main problem is with the post processing, the problem is probably the lighting. use a strong and even light source. other scanning tips
>keep the film flat, ideally with a rigid frame or anti-newton glass. this glass works ok too
>use a macro lens ideally, but any lens with low barrel distortion and high sharpness across the frame, (most [email protected] work well) with extension tubes.
>make sure the camera is stable and well aligned with the film plane
>use the lowest iso available, aperture at its sharpest (depends on the lens, between f4 and f8). with a good lighting source, with iso 200, f5.6, you should be around 1/125 with well exposed film
>edit the raw negative scan in photoshop, I follow the method described on http://4nalog.blogspot.ch/2015/09/working-with-c41-linear-flat-scans.html, his b&w tutorial is cool too.
Thoughts on this poorfag film? I just copped the last they had from Poundland.
Is it comparable to Fuji Superia?
I don't know if this is better suited in the stupid questions thread but ironically its usually full of greenhorns, not to mention Sugar.
For anyone that develops their own film, what was the best book/website/collection of articles/whatever that best helped you get your feet off the ground and actually do it? There's so many people on this board who think they know what they're doing (I know many of them do) but i don't want to get confused in the process of doing so. If there's a go to book that really helped you get a grasp of the basics, I would love to hear some recommendations.
Guys... I just found out after some extensive research how to read characteristic curves from film specification sheets, and it's ridiculously useful.
I was surprised I had to dig sooo deep to find consistent and practical information about it. Why isn't it more readily available?
>>2878213
Massive dev chart (google it), not being a moron.
If you can find the TimeLife book series on photography from the 70's, that's reasonably useful too.
I think you can buy all 20 books for like $4 on Amazon.
>>2875198
I moved from scanner to dslr because scanners are slow, picky, noisy, give bad quality files, take up loads of space and frequently shit the bed.
A second hand nex c3 or xa1 and manual focus legacy macro would set you back abput £150 and be useful. You can use raw files on vuescan to do all your colour corrections if you have no adobe-fu
>>2875395
No, coolscans are overpriced as fuck, mediocre quality and a one trick pony.
>>2875782
Looks good to me, except the image feels very flat, don't be afraid to play with contrast, dodging and burning, they're vital tools in the darkroom, no reason not to emulate them on film.
>>2875782
You're a moron, this is film, not digital.
>>2877660
Your kit lens won't focus close enough for "good" results, a cheapo 50mm and extension rings would be better (about £50), a cheap macro capable of 1:1 would be better yet (sigma 50 2.8 is often under £100)
For a light diffuser i use my phone on white screen with a piece of opal acrylic spaced slightly in front, it is more than adequate.
Another issue is light exclusion, if you can you don't want any stray light. A couple of pringles tubes and matte black paint make for a quick, adjustable fix.
Colour correction can be tricky to get to grips with in adobe, download vuescan to see if your source images are "good enough" for colour correction. If they are, go into adobe, wb off blank film, invert rgb curve, top and tail r, g and b curves so that you match peaks and troughs on your histogram, edit to taste.
The rabal is fine for scanning, properly setup the quality can be far superior and faster.
>>2878196
I use it sometimes, pic related is a comparison (albeit a bad one due to the different subjects). It's not even a bad film and it's really cheap so you could use it for practicing purposes. I started with it as it's the only kind of film they sell in town here. It's not really Agfa though, somebody just bought the rights to the name.
Superia gives a crisper image and a nicer contrast, but the Agfa has some nice colours for such a bargain.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 6400 dpi Vertical Resolution 6400 dpi Image Created 2016:07:03 15:08:48 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 8725 Image Height 5589
I use nex and 50mm lens with macro rings for scanning. But I'm thinking of getting some mid-tier enlarger lens since I'm gonna get enlarger anyway. It's crazy cheap compared to a good macro lens and I think it would be perfect for scanning negatives. Thoughts?
>>2878338
If you want to use an enlarger lense, remember that they don't focus on their own, so you'll need to get a bellows and an L39 adapter, or an L39 helicoid adapter. Either option will probably cost you more than the lense itself, however the bellows will be more versatile.
Also, you'll need to tape over the aperture ring to stop light leaking in through the side of the lense.
Also, remember that enlarger lense are practically worthless these days, so don't bother fucking around with trash lenses; 6-element and multicoated all the way.
>>2878375
I only use manual lenses anyway, I don't have money to blow on decent modern lens, unfortunately. And adapter from L39 to Sony E is cheap, I already own macro rings. Instead of using belows I just adjust height of a tripod (I lay negative above a tablet). Getting pretty decent results with a 50mm/1.7 rokkor, I think that a enlarger lens that has less distortion will simply be an improvement over what I already have. Pic related - one of my recent scans, natively it's around 3000px wide, I don't use the full frame to avoid heavier distortion nearer the edges.
>>2878196
Agfa does not produce film anymore. Agfa Vista is rebranded Fuji, probably C200, maybe superia 200. So yeah vista 200 and 400 are bargain films that can give you really nice results.
Puc related. Vista400
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Plustek Camera Model OpticFilm 7400 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.4 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2014:08:21 20:18:38
>>2878389
is 400 not real shit quality, fair enough for bad lighting, but if you are taking landscapes in broad daylight then 200 is as high as you wanna go?
this photo lacks so much colour and detail
>>2878422
>landscapes in broad daylight
velvia 50
What's an inexpensive film SLR compatible with the Nikon 50mm AF-D?
Preferably something not bulky and heavy.
>>2878239
>I was surprised I had to dig sooo deep to find consistent and practical information about it. Why isn't it more readily available?
what are you talking about...?
spec sheets from kodak are literally available in PDF form in the first results from a google search
>>2878196
Martin parr shot only agfa if i recall correctly
Expired consumer films are kind of sought after, you'll get cool results from those
>>2878422
My landscape is bomb you fag. Your mom lacks detail.
>>2875537
DSLR ghetto rig
>>2878267
>I moved from scanner to dslr because scanners are slow, picky, noisy, give bad quality files, take up loads of space and frequently shit the bed.
I ended up getting a V600. Quite satisfied with the results, 30 minutes for a 35mm film is not too bad since I don't shoot and develop film that often and the color correction is pretty good with the standard Epson software
Pic related is Kodak Gold 200 as far as I recall
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi
So can expired (2010) Fujicolor 100 ASA stored at presumably room temperature be shot at ASA 80?
>>2878647
>30 minutes for a 35mm film
Fuck me. I DSLR scanned 7 films in an hour yesterday. including 2 that my mate had somehow fucked by tearing the sprocket holes off of one side, which could never have fitted in a dedicated scanner or a shatbed frame.
>srsly tho, wat do you shatbedders do about damaged/nonstandard sized films?
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 08:00:29 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1192 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2878655
well 7 rolls is what I shot in the last 4 months or so, so speed doesn't really matter that much to me. Also, the scanning process takes up 90% of that time anyways, in which I can do other things.
>>srsly tho, wat do you shatbedders do about damaged/nonstandard sized films?
no idea honestly, I only shoot and develop my own 35mm films which I normally don't fuck up and might get into MF in the near future
>>2878655
I place them in the frame. If I don't feel like placing them in the frame, I place them under ANR glass.
What do you DSLR shitters do when you're not shitposting about flatbeds?
>go test new shitbox
>feeling it, one of those days you know they are looking good
>the fucking thing breaks the roll
Well, at least the other camera didn't break it, film should be out on saturday, hopefully the camera meter worked right.
>>2878739
>What do you DSLR shitters do when you're not shitposting about flatbeds?
kek
In other news, I shot and dev'd a short strip of the bulk roll of Fuji IT-N I got for $10.
1995 expired.
ISO 6 seems about right, 2 stops under is a little thin, 2 stops over is also OK though.
Colour balance is a little weird, as you might expect, being a tungsten film.
Looking forward to shooting wide open day for night with an orange gelled flash...
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 00:55:38 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1206 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2878753
Actually, I prefer the 2 stops over file.
ISO 1.5
I believe this was 1/15th @ f/2.8.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 12:19:11 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1196 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
Using film makes your pictures be even shittier than they already are.
>>2878800
nah brus.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 12:51:10 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1202 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2878647
30 minutes for high contrast jpegs, pretty brutal. Using my dslr rig i can scan a whole roll of 36 shots in about 3 minutes, the first shot will take 10 mins to dial in the colours, but then those settings can be pasted onto the rest of the roll. And i have permanent raw copies for the future.
>>2878522
Yeah, but to actually interpret information from it. Normally people's questions about dynamic range from a specific film stock is "just try it out and see what works for you!"
Pic related, there's not much info on how to read these.
The curves for ColorPlus explained why I had such drastically better results rating it at EI 160 rather than 200.
>>2878522
>>2878938
forgot pic
What's a good compact point and shoot? Something like the Contax T2 but affordable if that exists.
The cheaper the better.
>>2879010
Wrong kind of film you dumb faggot, also reported for underage, also the 7 seconds i watched made me want to kill myself.
>>2878951
There's a ton, mju still remains cheap and it's a common recommendation.
Okay I need some clarification just to be sure. I feel like a noob.
My film tank says 290ml for 35mm. Does this mean I need 580 for 2 reels? And when developing one roll, do I need to add the second empty reel?
>>2879246
It also says 500ml for two reels, you fucking moron.
Follow the instructions on the box...
And yes, when developing one, you should put the empty reel on top, so that the loaded one doesn't slide up the shaft and sit out of the chemicals.
I'm thinking of saving up and getting back into 35mm photography and I'm wondering which camera I should get. Should I get the Olympus OM4 or the Leica R4? What are the pros and cons of each body? Has anyone here had experience using either of them?
What are the filters that make your indoors photos not yellow called? My google fu is failing me.
>>2879383
I wouldn't go for the Leica R4, it's solid and everything, but it didn't convince me.
The Olympus is great as a system, but fuck expensive, good luck finding glass for a fair price now that everyone is buying zuikos for their mirrorless.
Also the OM is tiny, which helps a lot, but if size and budget is something to consider, why not go the Pentax route?
>>2879418
>why not go the Pentax route
It's mainly because I don't get a lot of listings for their stuff where I live and their film bodies don't seem all that special. If I were to get a Pentax that had the features I wanted I would have to get an LX which is crazy expensive but I don't want to spend $400 on a film body and would rather spend around $200 at the most
>>2879422
Though lately I use mostly a Nikon F80 (because my digital is a Nikon), I have an OM with three primes: 50, 35, and 28.
That said, the OM is my homeboy and it's amazing with that pristine and huge as fuck magnification through the viewfinder. Had it before the Nikon, and if I had to slim down, I'd keep it over the rest, but I'm biased.
>>2879387
Blue? 80A, 80B.
>>2879383
Olympus all day every day. Aside from the R-series cameras being basically just plush meneltas, OM glass is quite good and reasonably affordable, whereas R glass is actually pretty middle of the road (again, plenty of it is menelta), and ludicrously overpriced.
>>2879418
>why not go the Pentax route?
kek
Maybe if literally all you wanted to shoot was 50mm, and only on an LX.
Anything more exotic than that glasswise is stupidly expensive and hard to find as well, and pretty mediocre most of the time.
The 85mm Quartz Apo is probably the only Pentacks lense I'd go out of my way to own.
Even the FA-Limited primes, which are admittedly sexy to look at, are just soft, abberrated garbage on full-frame.
>>2879450
>whereas R glass is actually pretty middle of the road (again, plenty of it is menelta), and ludicrously overpriced.
I'm not sure about the lenses all being rebadged Minolta glass, I think Leica really only used the basic body frames for the r-series, and even then that only lasted through the R3 to the R7. The only time I think they rebadged Minolta glass was the 40mm f/2 for the CL and CLE cameras
>>2879450
>80A
Heh, I googled it without adding 'filter' first and got pic related.
Thanks for the help.
Just bought a Nikon FE for my first film SLR. I've got a couple of AF D lenses from my DSLR setup which I think are compatible.
Was it a good choice?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1024 Image Height 680 Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2879578
Well, how much did you pay?
What's the best/easiest setup for scanning film with a DSLR?
I've seen the peta pixel one but it's a bit long winded and he's built some crazy laser cut box.
Will this work as well? http://nonphotography.com/blog/creative-photography-2/experimental/if-you-don´t-have-a-film-scanner-then-diy/
>>2879580
£50 which don't think was too bad considering they're going for 60-100 on eBay.
>>2879578
You did good. I have an FE2 and it's lovely to use.
>>2879581
Depends on what you have at hand.
It comes down to creativity in the end but common set ups include a film holder of some sort, cardboard for example, a mount which would be the tripod, and some diffused light which can be a very bright computer screen (but don't put the film directly on it, it'll show pixels, bands, and other shit), a bounced in camera flash (from behind, make sure it doesn't leak above or in front), if you have a speedlight that can be triggered wirelessly then that works great too (plus your exposure won't need to be long).
>>2879582
Sounds good. I also want an FE, but haven't found one for a good price and I'm currently spending on glass.
>>2879585
Yeah I've got a Yungnou flash so I'll probably just diffuse that through some paper or something. Should I just blast it at full power with a shorter exposure?
>>2879597
Well, first try exposure set to flash, then go up as needed depending on how hard you diffuse the light.
I wouldn't use white paper, it's not great imo.
Use wax paper (the one sold in craft stores) or parchment paper (the one used for baking, get it white obviously, so supermarkets should have it), if you can get ground glass (like from a local store nearby, or a piece of glass around the house) that works great too.
If you can't get any of that, white paper but don't shine through it but rather bounce of it, you'll need to keep the flash a bit far from it otherwise you'll notice a bright spot instead of properly diffused.
Recommendations for light meter apps? on android.
Had a cheap one but the needle went kaput.
>>2879601
Okay I'll get some wax paper. Is tracing paper basically the same thing? I might have a piece of Perspex I could use actually from an old light box.
>>2879597
Paper has too much texture. Opal acrylic is a couple of bucks and the correct product.
No, dont blast at full power, set to iso 100, f7ish, shutter speed half a stop down from max flash sync (prevents misfires), flash about 8" from your acrylic, start at the weakest and work your way up until your histogram is mainly populated in the centre and there's no blown areas in the r, g or b channels (be careful of every channel. Not just white)
Make sure your film is flat and not touching anything.
>>2879603
Light meter tools pro, its worth the £2
>>2879604
>Is tracing paper basically the same thing?
Yeah, with wax paper I just mean some sort of translucent kind of paper.
>Perspex
Might work, might not work, because it's acrylic.
Im new to the whole photography and started with film because that's i have, what do you think any critiques. im using a nikon n6006 with nikon nikkor 28-85mm 1:3.5-4.5 with fuji film superia 400 . i made the mistake just after i got the processed film that i used matrix metering for portraits instead of spot for this picture.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make FUJIFILM Corporation Camera Model Frontier SLP1000SE Camera Software FUJIFILM Corporation FEII software Maker Note Version 0130 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:06:02 12:05:15 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1818 Image Height 1228
I've been doing a lot of C41 developing recently, but now would like to try out some B&W as well.
Got some, what I think is the equivalent of Rodinal Developer and some fixer from the same company. The film I want to develop is some Illford Delta 3200 shot on a shitty compact.
I heard that I should only dilute the chemicals as I need them (as opposed to c41 where I just keep them stored in bottles) is this true? Are there any other things I should keep in mind, temperature and time wise? Thanks!
noob here but when i am removing my 35mm film from the canister i read its good to use a bottle opener?
also does this all have to be done in the dark? like scanning and all, or does it not matter once the pics have already been exposed?
>>2879803
What?
>>2879814
are those not pretty straight forward questions?
>>2879803
>noob here but when i am removing my 35mm film from the canister i read its good to use a bottle opener?
yes
>also does this all have to be done in the dark?
no, only placing the film in the developing tank has to be done in the dark, once the negatives are developed you can expose them to light normally
>>2879829
thanks
i just opened my first roll of 35mm film and its completely blank, the film was definitely advancing as the rewind lever was turning each time, also the shutter is opening as i checked with no film and the back open, and the lens cap was definitely not on
i just shot through a whole film to check the new camera but have got nothing
any solutions?
>>2879832
Post a photo of the negs please.
>>2879832
did you develop it?
>>2879845
>no, maybe im retarded, do they need developed before i am able to scan them?
umm..yes. You need to develop film first before you can do anything with it
>>2879849
fuck that was retarded, so can i do this myself easily? or do most people send theirs away and then get negatives back?
>>2879851
well that film roll is dead, you killed it with light
It depends upon if you have a local place and if they're decent. I have my film developed locally, some people who aren't as lucky send it out.
>>2879851
Jesus Christ. You opened up a canister without developing it and expect to scan it?
What do you think they do at photolabs?
You have to develop the film (in the dark). Then once the film is developed it isn't light sensitive so you can scan/enlarge it.
>>2879581 here
Right I've just tried scanning a test film with a DSLR/flash. I'm diffusing it through a sheet of faded perspex (from an old lightbox).
The settings I'm using are:
Flash at 1/128 about 30cm from the negative
1/125, ISO 100 and f/16 + f/22
f22 is on the left and f16 is on the right. I tried f8 at first but everything was completely blown. The tutorial I followed said to set your WB to the warmest it goes. Is everything looking correct?
Slightly unsure of how I turn that super-blue inverted version into a usable photograph.
>>2879940
For reference here's the one that came from the lab scans. The detail in my DSLR scan is certain better. I just don't know how I go from the super blue inverted shot to something usable. Any tips?
[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-016 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:05:23 12:55:02 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1840 Image Height 1232
>>2879940
Sorry that's meant to be f16 on the left, f22 on the right.
>>2879943
Learn how to fix the levels in Photoshop, colour management shit, loads of tuts on YouTube
>>2879940
Well, to start with you can always speed up the shutter if it's blown out, obviously mang.
But if you don't see any chromatic aberration or whatever from a high f number then no biggie.
That said, it comes out blue because this is what your red channel looks like.
>>2879940
You're going to lose detail from diffraction shooting with that high of an f-stop. Is 1/125 your max sync speed? Maybe try more diffusion material to get back down to f/8
>>2879766
>I heard that I should only dilute the chemicals as I need them (as opposed to c41 where I just keep them stored in bottles)
I'm not entirely sure what you mean, since I've never devved C41, but generally you mix a "stock solution" which is stronger, and then dilute a little bit with water each time you develop film ("working solution"). but it depends on the developer; some developers don't have to be diluted after mixing at all (e.g. Xtol) while other need to be diluted SO much that you need a syringe to properly measure it (e.g. HC-110 which has asshat dilutions like 1:60)
for temperature, its not a big deal. you can use it room temp, or hotter, as long as you adjust development times. just DON'T freeze it, which causes the chemicals to precipitate and its very hard to mix back up.
time-- depends on the developer. you can google it
but the most important thing is to keep your developer safe from oxygen. keep the bottle tightly closed, or use a tank with a floating lid. if the bottle is halfway or less empty, I recommend using a can of inert gas (like dust-off) and spraying it in the bottle to replace the oxygen before you close the lid.
also, your water will affect the results (not usually won't ruin it). things like mineral content, pH, etc. I use distilled water just to be safe, but that might be overkill
Can't seem to find anything about this on google so I was hoping someone could point me in the right direction.
I know you can make photograms by leaving photo paper in the sun, or exposing it to light for a long time, without development, then scanning the image before it eventually disappears. Can this same principal be applied to film as well? If I was to lock open the shutter of a camera and let it sit pointing at something for a few hours, or days, would an image appear on the film without development? Then I could scan it quickly before it disappeared.
Also, anyone have experience with pinhole cameras? Is it possible to mount a lens from a 35mm camera into a cardboard box, instead of a pinhole?
>>2879974
>Well, to start with you can always speed up the shutter if it's blown out, obviously mang.
>doesn't understand that shutterspeed has no effect on light output by a flash.
The only way changing shutter speed would help is if he got it slow enough to where it started allowing ambient light in...which would then completely negate the point of using a flash in the first place.
>>2874542
ur scans fine, pump up those numbas
>>2880032
>Can this same principal be applied to film as well?
theoretically you could make photograms on sheet film, but you are going to have a very hard time finding film with a low enough sensitivity to be able to scan it (ISO 25 perhaps, but something more 5 would be ideal)
>If I was to lock open the shutter of a camera ... would an image appear on the film without development?
no! that wouldn't be a photogram. your film would reach its maximum density very quickly, without time to even see a latent image. look at your film leader, sticking out of the roll
>Is it possible to mount a lens from a 35mm camera into a cardboard box, instead of a pinhole
theoretically... sure. it would be extremely difficult and take a lot of calculations and precise measurements to get anything even remotely useful-- no idea why anyone would want to do this. you're just trying to build your own (shitty to the point of being useless) camera?
>>2879943
I gave a guide to colour correction earlier in this thread.
Sboot in raw
Set wb off border
Crop to just the image (no sprockets, no border)
Min highlights, max shadows, hold alt to set white and black points
Invert rgb curve
Top and tail r, g and b curves so your histogram lines up its troughs and peaks
(histograms are much more useful than the photo itself for this process, this is usually the first point i look at the image, if you're not very familiar with curves, you will be after a month of conversions)
Tweak
If you fail continually, try vuescan, just be aware it sucks for raw conversion.
>>2880092
>look at your film leader, sticking out of the roll
You will see a colour change on unexposed film if you pull some out of the roll in bright light, but it is far too faint to ever be used for picture taking purposes.
There ARE, however, certain B&W films that will give a weird, solarised half-positive image if overexposed long enough. Try taking an overexposed image of the sun with a tele lense, for an example.
how is the flash being used when scanning with dslr? ive just been using a lightbox
>>2880098
>Try taking an overexposed image of the sun with a tele lense
Are you trying to make me set fire to my camera?
>>2880102
<:^)
I would kek significantly if you did, but also I'm being legit.
You can often see the phenomenon in larger overexposed light sources.
I'm not 100% about the mechanics/physics/chemistry behind it, so I haven't been able to find documentation or articles about using it for creative purposes, but it's real.
>>2880102
>>2880092
I swear I saw a link on here once with a ton of info about this, specifically the black and white.
I'll just stick with a pinhole for now, the end goal isnt to make a quality camera, but to experiment with light painting and photo grams on paper, not for direct replication like a camera would.
>>2880104
Looking specifically for this with color film (since I have a bunch of expired shit I got for free) Maybe I'll just shoot it and see what happens . Not looking to develop the film, just see if an image eventually forms, could take hours
>>2879974
>>2879998
>>2880052
>>2880097
Thanks for the advice.
I'm using a cheap Yungnou flash so I'm limited in terms of sync speeds. I think probably the only thing I can do is diffuse the flash some more if I definitely need to shoot at f8. I've got a clip on diffuser which can use as well as the Perspex sheet.
I'm also using a 50 1.8 prime lens with extension tubes. Should I stick with this or trying the 18-55 kit lens instead?
>>2880130
Stick to the 50mm will be sharper than the kit lens. You could as someone previously said use a couple of layers of wax paper to help diffuse it more.
>>2880130
Light drops one stop for every doubling of distance.
Focus on getting sharp, even results that can be colour corrected before worrying over your lens.
>>2874809
I fuck way more girls than you bro, shut the fuck up
>>2880181
>I fuck girls
pleb
Hey guys, finally got the Canon 50mm 3.5 Macro for my A7 so I can start digitizing my photos! What's the most cost effective way to backlight the film? I don't want to buy flashes. I'm thinking getting some sort of white acrylic and using my computer screen. Think that would work?
Crap scan with artifcacts from my phone screen making things ugly. I'm really excited to finally have found this lens locally. I have over a dozen developed rolls that I haven't even been able to make proofs of yet.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 6000 Image Height 4000 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 2016:07:10 21:10:59 Exposure Time 0.4 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness -1.9 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Tungsten Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 800 Image Height 600 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2880183
Opal acrylic
>>2880182
yeha, i bet you yuo rb hand bro fuck oi could fight you in real life in an day in a camera competition bro
>>2880183
Why do you keep fagging about this lense?
What makes it so special for you?
Pic related, it was the taking lense.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 00:32:00 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1206 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
I developed my first roll 2 days ago and it came out perfect. After the fix I checked a few pics and they were all grainy so I thought I fucked up, but after washing it was all good. A few overexposed pics but this was a test roll anyway.
But I've had a few "empty" photos? Not sure why. Gotta test the shutter again, I thought all shutterspeeds worked. It is a Ricoh 35 ZF, got it for 1 euro so it might have its flaws.
Now off to "scanning" them with my DSLR I guess. Anyone have a simple good DIY link?
>>2878383
I recently used portra 400 for my 35mm rangefinder. Does that look like portra to you? Is it worth spending so much for portra for 35mm? Wondering if any of you actually use it for smaller formats.
This might be a stupid question.
Is there any point in spending more money on expensive film when you can just get the nice colours you want in post? Other than finer/smoother grain of stuff like Portra does it really matter about colours when I fix them with curves?
>>2880282
nah not a stupid question, you're right
the money you spend on film at this point isn't about colour quality but you should be concerned about things like grain, latitude, how easily its processed, detail, sharpness, and how easily it scans (!)
Popped to my local craft store today and got some 5mm opal acrylic.
Here's my super ghetto scanning unit made from an old shoe box. Hole in the back is for the flash and the hole in the top is for a lamp to illuminate the negatives so I can correctly focus.
Will give a shot this week and post results.
anyone in the uk recommend an online place to get my photos developed? or do most of you do it locally?
i also got some afga vista plus 200 from the pound shop today, couldnt resist at that price, is it any good or cheap rubbish?
>>2880307
agfa vista plus is just rebranded fuji superia, no?
>>2880309
from what ive heard, fuji superia gets good reviews, so if thats the case then great, maybe someone else can confirm
>>2880307
It's absolutely fine. It's rebranded fujifilm.
If you've got an asda close to you, they'll probably be about the cheapest. £2.50 per roll for process only.
>>2880332
might have to get some more while they have it instock then
do they do it instore?
do they do it instore?
>>2880335
Stores with a photo counter, I know other stores used to send it away.
You can use the store locator to find your nearest photo store iirc.
>>2880338
just looked it up and the closest is quite far, is it possible to send it to them?
>>2880307
It's alright, actually got a roll developed today. Will post a few now. I just got it developed/scanned at Max Spielmann, £6.50 for an hour service. They only scan in at 1800x1200px which is fine for web. Any that I really like I'll do a proper DSLR scan.
1/5
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-016 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 960 Image Height 640 Scene Capture Type Standard
Sat in a deck chair, with an umbrella, eating an ice cream. Typical British Summer.
2/5
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-016 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 960 Image Height 640 Scene Capture Type Standard
Grain is pretty shitty in the shadows for a 200 film. Might be partly due to bad scanning. Have tried to tidy it is as best I can in post.
3/5
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-016 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 960 Image Height 640 Scene Capture Type Standard
Shortly after I took this he asked why I was taking pictures of bins.
4/5
I'd probably say it is comparable to Superia 200 but slightly grainier in shadows. Can't go wrong at £1 a roll though. I just wish they did it as 36 exposures.
5/5
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-016 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 960 Image Height 640 Scene Capture Type Standard
Is this kino??
https://vimeo.com/173037414
>>2880409
not enough rain for an english summer, although the fucking depressing back drop definitely is
>>2880415
looks nice enough, cant complain for £1 a roll
will have to find somewhere tomorrow to process my first roll i shot today
anyone ever used a kodak express shopto develop 35mm film?
seems to be the only place in my town to get it done
>>2880421
It was drizzling lightly when I shot this and then absolutely pissed it down so everyone ran inside.
>>2880332
How much is it to get scanned as well? Cheapest I've found is my local photolab which is £6 for develop + scan of a 36 roll sameday.
How many 'keepers' do you guys get on average from a roll of film? I've only been shooting for the past four months and about a quarter of my shots I'll probably use, the rest are usually shit.
So that's usually about 5-6 for a 24 exposure roll or 7-9 for a 36 exposure.
I guess the more I shoot the less wasted shots I'll have?
I'm also shooting with a rangefinder which has taken a bit of getting used to as I've only used SLR's in the past...
>>2880447
dont take a shot if its not worth taking, then most of your film will be keepers
i usually just think is this photo actually gonna be any good or is it a waste of time and film
>>2880226
And another.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 08:53:03 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 536 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880447
Well, even if you take care and plan shots, good pictures still come out being very few.
36 aren't that many, if you bracket a lot in difficult settings you're getting something like 12 actual shots.
Taking pictures will give you experience of course so take as many as possible. But do think about them, don't just point and shoot (well, obviously not a rule, point and shoot all you want, it's also a whole style by itself), part of the "magic" of film for a lot of people is that they stop and think more if it's worth it or not.
scans have very inconsistent quality lately. i dunno if it's a processing or scanning issue but i'm seeing a lot of grain and unusually high contrast. throwaway shot attached for reference.
>>2880503
oh god MOAR
>>2880503
>attached for reference
Keep your reference tbqh. It only matters if you're telling us how you're digitising (how much control you have) or any potential change in negative density.
>>2880430
I use Kodak for my E6 or C41 120 whenever I'm lazy, they're not too bad but they are slow where I am.
>>2880443
Like £1.50 or something. I don't get them to scan mine though.
>>2880447
Depends on the day or what I'm shooting but generally I have about a 70% hit rate. Though some of that is me feeling the need to finish a roll because I want to process it.
>>2880475
And another.
>ok it's not that bad a lense
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 09:52:27 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 800 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880523
what sort of prices do they charge, for c41?
>>2880528
This is the Fuji HD-M. Also an excellent lense. An 38/2.8 Fujinon.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:09 17:02:49 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1240 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880515
sure
>>2880523
i have zero control as a lab scans it for me. film is tri-x 400. usually it comes out with much lower contrast, almost grey and white. no noise, also much, uh, crisper, if that's the right word. recent ones look comparatively blurry. i'm just not sure if its development or scanner that's doing this.
>>2879766
In my experience the developing times found in the official data sheet for Delta 3200 are a little bit undersetimated. The sheet says 9min in Microphen, I usually do 11.
>>2880538
LENS
WITHOUT AN E
>>2880552
The lense on the Pentacks PC-555 is not quite as sharp and has a little lateral chromatic abberation, but still very good for a 50 cent compact.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1193 Image Height 800
>>2880569
Oh you're just pretending to be retarded
You sure got me, anon. Congrats on another conquest
>>2880571
Pay attention niqqa, all /p/ros use the patrician spelling.
This is another with the FD 50 Macro.
I shot these on the T70, which is about as nice to use as a barbed wire dildo, however all of the exposure were spot on using the Program mode. And the option to program shift between wide normal and tele was neat too.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 12:05:46 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 800 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880184
Cool thanks!
>>2880226
It's a not well known lens with fantastic optics that were designed for flat field reproductions. Basically the exact type of macro lens you'd want for scanning film. It gives 1:1 magnification with the FD 25 extension tube, a sub $100 bundle.
I'm just excited I found one locally. Not exactly the most common lens to find. I think I've mentioned this lens twice on /p/ in the past ~4 mobths btw. Not exactly "fagging about it".
>>2880619
Well that would be 2 more times than anybody else has, including myself who already owns one, and congrats you just described every single manual focus 50mm macro lense ever.
It just seems a strange thing to specifically seek out.
Got back my first roll of T-Max 400. It's rather lovely. Shot most of it on a weekend away in the country, worked quite well.
I'll post a few of my snapshits for you faggots to look at
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make AgfaPhoto GmbH Camera Model d-lab.2/3 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows) Photographer Only the Best :-)) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 15:53:49 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2880680
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make AgfaPhoto GmbH Camera Model d-lab.2/3 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows) Photographer Only the Best :-)) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 15:53:48 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2880684
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make AgfaPhoto GmbH Camera Model d-lab.2/3 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows) Photographer Only the Best :-)) Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:08 15:53:51 Color Space Information sRGB
>>2880658
I only shoot FD on my A7 so it was an obvious choice.
>>2880716
>I only shoot FD on my A7 so it was an obvious choice.
Garbage goes with garbage. You're absolutely right about how obvious it is.
>>2880725
nice b8 m8
>>2880607
And then there are times when I struggle to see the worth of it.
Spending an hour to process scan A into snapshit B really just seems like a waste of time and energy.
Does anyone feel like improving on my efforts?
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 17:59:19 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1069 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880716
I got an FD nex adapter as I had some FD glass, however the adapter won't let me open up the aperture completely, it stops about 2 stops from being fully open regardless of the lens native aperture.
Have you seen this problem? Have you resolved it?
>>2880792
Don't bother editing snapshits. Shoot them for the enjoyment of shooting anon.
I personally wouldn't bother editing that photo.
>>2880816
That's strange anon, never had that issue. My adapter has a lock/unlock mechanism and I'm pretty sure that's necessary for FD lenses, otherwise they stay stopped down a few stops from wide open.
>>2880447
I consider it a real success if I get 6 pictures worth printing
>>2880821
I mainly prefered the look of the negative too.
>>2880816
Check the lense is mounted all the way on the adapter.
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 17:44:42 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1194 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880684
Did you use a filter for this one or not? yellow or uv?
I'm asking since I'd like to know the effect of uv filter for long distance shots (landscapes) where UV light might wash out the scene.
>>2880832
>lense
It's lens, anon. There is no word called 'lense'. There's only the plural of a lens which is 'lenses'.
>>2880842
Look at it more objectively; when I use the word lense, my meaning is clear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lense
Were I to use the term "lens", it may be construed as the plural form of "len", or indeed many other synonyms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens
For the sake of clarity, I'll stick with the less conventional, but equally correct, and more abundantly clear, lense :^)
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 21:57:56 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 632 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880837
No filter on this shot. Realistically I probably should have, but the light was just right for the shot.
I can't really be fucked carrying a filter set with me so I rarely shoot with them
>>2880874
No you dumb faggot.
Even wiktionary lists it as an incorrect spelling
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lense
Worse than misspelling lens, is pretending you're intellectually superior and have more knowledge than others, Isi has fulfilled our dunning-kruger quota thankyou very much.
>>2880916
>it never gets old
>unlike the Canon 50/3.5 Macro lense I used for this shot, which may be anywhere between 30 and 40 years old
[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 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 22:45:55 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1191 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2880919
>go to kodak express shop today
>"do you guys develop film?"
>"yea, we do"
>"£10.80 for 24 hours or £8.50 for 2-3 days"
>leave shop
wheres good online in the uk to send my films to?
>>2880920
Peak imaging is industry standard pretty much. Im in bristol and can get dev and scan for £3 in a camera store in town run by an old boy that tells me when he puts fresh chems in and shit, will even do hand processed b&w for a fiver.
>>2880922
no where near me develops film anymore, went to a few this morning and kodak where the only ones but not for that price
anyone used photo hippo?
http://www.photofilmprocessing.co.uk/
>>2880913
I'm gonna do a day where I do landscapes in B&W using an UV and Red/Yellow on and off for the same shot to see how it works... I think the filters should enhance the contrast from far away subjects, given how they tend to have this blue haze and probably the washed out look in B&W.
We'll see though, I haven't landscaping in a while.
Badly DSLR scanned photos incoming. Tripod is broken so the usual set up can't be used, I did super shitty one right now with carton and the computer screen but it was too close anyways so it's still somewhat visible.
Used an expired BW400CN, then let it sit in the room without developing for a while and just had it done during the weekend because I'm lazy. I didn't know it was taken out of production until today.
I was just testing an F80, turned out ok I guess.
Also tried my hand at tagwhoring, I feel dirty, tomorrow I'll use even more community tags to see what's up.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 678 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 16:50:17 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 671 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2880937
I thought the flowers and concrete would shine better with b&w contrast but I should have gone closer for more detail maybe.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 678 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 16:51:13 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 672 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2880938
Should have bracketed for the inside. Maybe I'll expose the same one for the inside and HDR it if the interior isn't too boring.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 678 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 16:52:28 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1000 Image Height 674 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2880939
Another detail of the berliner philharmoniker.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 678 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 16:54:16 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 681 Image Height 1000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2880943
I was taking a friend of a friend on a casual tour around town, hence the touristy spots.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 678 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 16:57:09 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1000 Image Height 671 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2880945
Said friend.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 678 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:11 16:55:40 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1000 Image Height 675 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2880920
Boots, Asda, Max Spielmann
There's loads of places unless you live in a remote area.
>>2880571
this fuckin guy
>>2880939
Apply yourself, slacker.
If you don't care about your images, why should anyone else?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D3000 Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 674 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:07:12 08:39:01 Exposure Time 0.4 sec Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 979 Image Height 652 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2881148
They were just quick scans, sort of like a contact sheet.
>>2881152
And yet you put them on a photo sharing website, kind of like publishing work?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.6 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:08:29 08:59:21 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/11.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/11.3 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1270 Image Height 2000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Daylight Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2881160
Sorry senpai, I didn't put that much thought into it.
Sort of like taking your contact sheet to your m8s/professor and then having maybe a quick review and see what's worth to work on or not.
Plus, this is four chang, not some sort of professional folder.
>>2881164
>a quick review and see what's worth to work on or not.
Well none of these then.
Come back when you take some photos YOU care about, and maybe we can muster some interest as well.
>>2881169
Thanks, will do.
>>2880920
>go to my local kodak express
>3.50 for 2 day process only
The important thing is to state that it's only processing you need. These paki fucks make their living off of selling you prints and shitty scans.
>>2880226
What film is that?
Is film much more important than lens in regards to photo quality?
Like if I shoot a Leica with an expired colorplus vs. shooting a Canon AE1 with a Kodak portra?
