/film/

Wow, LF film ready to be wasted in your camera tests. Exciting!

File: IMG_9835 - IMG_9841.jpg (174KB, 553x800px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 553x800px

>>2856933
Where did this whole camera testing thing you go on with come from?
>Here's some 220 Velvia I wasted trying to test it's response to some nice afternoon sunlight on an empty couch. The dev failed, presumably because the chemicals were exhausted, so gave my very weird half neg/half pos images.

Where do y'all get your film developed? I'm doing a photography project that'll try to capture the essence of summer, so I'll be shooting portra and some fujishit

>>2856950
>photography project that'll try to capture the essence of summer

so, self portraits?

>>2856951
It's more trying to capture the vibe of the dog days of summer and the feeling of infinity. Plus I'm kinda giving away all of my camera stuff except for my olympus om-1 and make the move to Sony a7 or d700.

File: IMG_9824 - IMG_9829.jpg (245KB, 541x800px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 541x800px

>>2856948
>>2856933
It was a little disappointing, because the rest of the roll was stuff I actually wanted to turn out.
This is was the scans look like in colour, with a massive amount of red taken out.
Only photos that had massively overexposed sections of sky in them came out looking normal (as in brightly coloured, positive, transparent).

>>2856950
the place i go to in SF does mail-in, it's $7 a roll but they're a professional quality lab that won't fuck it up.

>>2856964
It must suck to have nothing but your lack of talent to blame for your awful photos.

How many stops above metered grey can Velvia 69 go before it clips?

>>2856951
Topest of keks

Just bought some rolls of Fuji 400h, what should i expect?

>>2857050
>>2857050
3 stops would be pure white without detail.

>>2856951
oh snap

File: crrt.jpg (428KB, 800x1021px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 800x1021px

>>2857070

unsaturated and delicate fuji palette. pretty comfy emulsion.

[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	7690
Image Height	3557
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	2016:06:06 03:39:22
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	1021

>>2857078

good, good. must use it wisely

I have an Olympus OM-1 and I prefer to have a working meter with it. I can't find any mercury batteries anymore and the lr44 adapter for it cost almost the same as the camera body itself.

Should I just sell the camera and get an OM-2 or a Nikon FE?

I'm tired of using my phone as a meter. Are there battery alternatives?

File: pinhole_05.jpg (293KB, 652x1000px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 652x1000px

>>2856926
I like my Linhof Technika, but haven't really used any other LF cams. It's nice that it's so (relatively) portable and it seems very sturdy. Speed graphics seem nice too, but lack back movements, which may or may not be important to you.

The Stupid question thread is ded, so I'll ask here if anyone knows what Kevin Barnes means when he sings «domino» in Women's Studies Victims
«I check my shutter speed, my aperture, my domino
Can't focus, can't stop staring at the face I used to know».

[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	2016:06:06 12:43:37

File: EBuntzenLake.jpg (1MB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1000px

>>2857078
It's a cooler toned film. Mine always seems to have an overall bluish/purple tint to it especially if shot in shady or overcast conditions.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5289
Image Height	5281
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
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	2012:11:17 18:21:40
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000

>>2857186
Just use a 1.5v battery and align the needle on the plus mark instead of the middle. At least that's how I use mine and my exposures are fine.

Or I think you can use hearing aid batteries with some filler in the battery cavity.

>>2857220
>seems to have an overall bluish/purple tint to it especially if shot in shady or overcast conditions
retard alert

File: ChurchRockwoodRes.jpg (287KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 800x800px

>>2857241
Enlighten me. Compared to Portra, which remains quite neutral, 400H definitely goes towards the cooler side in my experience. There's a noticeable overall hue difference when looking at the negatives on a light table side by side, with 400H going cooler/magenta.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	800
Image Height	800
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	416 dpi
Vertical Resolution	416 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:06 22:12:06
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	800
Image Height	800

File: BirdMotion.jpg (844KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

844KB, 800x800px

>>2857253
All 3 of my examples were taken years apart with different stock and scanned with different scanners yet they all have the similar coolness to them.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2491
Image Height	2500
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
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	2016:06:06 22:15:37
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	800
Image Height	800

>>2857232
>Just use a 1.5v battery and align the needle on the plus mark instead of the middle.

Won't using a higher voltage battery like the 1.5v LR44 damage the electronics of my camera?

>Or I think you can use hearing aid batteries with some filler in the battery cavity.

Any idea how I can make a filler or where I can acquire such?

>>2857275
The difference in voltage isn't enough to do anything to the electronics, it will just throw the readings off somewhat.

>>2856951
sheeeiiit

>>2857220
>>2857254
>>2857253

400H is no T film, its pale, neutral and "airy", it shouldnt have that strong blue cast. if anything, fuji tends toward greens. youre doing something wrong.

Anyone here got experience with Minox 35 cameras?

Just got a GL for €1. I knew they often have shutter problems but I figured I'd take the risk for that price (and if it's completely broken I can always take out the sweet lens and adapt it).
I put in 4 SR44 batteries, which is a bit higher voltage than the old mercury ones but is supposed to work. The strange thing is that the meter seems to respond correctly, but when I press the battery test button the needle instantly goes to and stays at the bottom. Is this normal behaviour?
More importantly the shutter doesn't close after firing for some reason. I looked at the shutter mechanism and everything seems to be fine so I think it might be related to the above problem.

>>2857382
Fixed it.
After endless messing around with the shutter mechanism (and nearly breaking it) I finally found out that a small tab in the hotshoe wasn't in the right position.

Please post your film scanning setups, trying to find one that works

File: Film look 4.jpg (2MB, 3504x2336px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3504x2336px

>>2856926
Pretty proud of this one

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 30D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	unknown
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
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	2016:05:20 19:40:09
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/9.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	46.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2857451

i use an old v500. works pretty ok for everything.

>>2857490
jfc take care of your negatives

>>2857499
no

>>2857499
he's probably doing it on purpose for A E S T H E T I C S

>>2857496
Post sample scan pl0x

File: Film look 2.jpg (2MB, 3504x2336px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3504x2336px

>>2857505
This is correct.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 30D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	unknown
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
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	2016:05:20 19:28:00
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/9.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	46.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3504
Image Height	2336
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: copia.jpg (928KB, 1000x987px) Image search: [Google]

928KB, 1000x987px

>>2857506

this >>2857078

pic related is v500 too.

[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	7376
Image Height	7234
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Created	2015:01:04 23:41:12
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	987

Can anyone recommend a film processing/scanning postal service in the UK?

>>2857507
>>2857505
so basically a hipster who shoots garbage but needs validation for using film, got it

kill yourself my man

>>2857519
http://www.the-darkroom.co.uk/cont/E6film.php
decent prices, quick turnaround (post monday, get it back thurs usually).

>>2857554
Pretty expensive, £5 for developing, £5 for low res scans and £3.50 delivery.

£13.50 a roll

Sigh, I might invest in digital

>>2857509
MF?

>>2857559

pentacon six + ruski 45mm
160vc iirc

>>2857563
I see. I might start shooting MF sometimes myself, but for now I'm looking for something to scan my 35mm film with. Have you ever tried it with your V500?

>>2857532
haha, jokes on you, it's not film, it's a fucking edit you moron.

>>2857568
Yeh, its fucking abysmal

File: 19debdef-f12a-42b0-a147-19a22a48f783.jpg (1MB, 1280x1898px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1898px

>>2857451
For 35mm i use a plustek 7400 and an Epson v550 for medium format.

Pic related is 35mm.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 7400
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:07:12 17:02:57

File: IMG_20160606_232721.jpg (2MB, 2022x2055px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2022x2055px

Pic related is medium format scanned with v550.

File: IMG_4.jpg (1MB, 2000x1658px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1658px

>>2857610
Shot from an SQ-A sanned with a V500 and holders from BetterScanning.com

(I didn't notice a jump in image quality, but I did prefer working with the new holder, since the included Epson ones feel like crap)

>>2857613
do you develop your own?

>>2857605
Thanks my dude.

>>2857615
I do. Tri-X in XTol, no dilution.

>>2857617
I was thinking about it, I'm not sure I could be bothered with the effort.

File: 2f49bccf-cf8f-4100-b274-9ea9086bc4e4.jpg (419KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1280x1280px

>>2857613
Thats a nice scan.
Yeah I second that, the filmholders feel totally flimsy and the film never lays completely flat in them.
I actually thought about getting the betterscanning holder too, but I'm not 100% sure I want to keep the epson.
I'm kinda lusting for a Plustek120.

Oh and the Plustek7400 scan was Ilford FP4 in a Pentax Me Super with the 50mm f1.7. The V500 pic was shot with a Bronica S2 with the 75mm Nikkor.

Pic related is Portra400 in a Yashica Mat124.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:10:20 14:00:56

>>2857618
For black and white, it really can be quite a cost savings. It's a little annoying, but really doesn't take THAT long. For me, developing was more fun and more emotionally rewarding than scanning. It's certainly not difficult though.

Color film, I never got into. With B&W you can make little changes that will make positive affects on the result, but with C-41, you either do it perfectly right and it looks right, or you mess it up and it looks worse.

>>2857620
Lately I've been shotting film exclusively, but I'm starting to think in the long term getting it developed and scanned will be too costly.

To be honest, I think I'll keep my film camera and just use it for special occasions. In the meantime, I might buy a portable digital, the ricoh gr for example.

>>2857622
shooting*

>>2857619
>Thats a nice scan.
Thanks. Everything sort of came together on that one, and it's what I think is my sharpest most detailed scan I have. Most others are far more mushy. I could never really nail down where my issues were coming from before more or less giving up on shooting film in general. I think it was a mix of camera technique and scanner poopiness.

>>2857622
>but I'm starting to think in the long term getting it developed and scanned will be too costly.
Yeah, when I started off, I was having a lab do it all for me, and a single roll of TriX was costing me close to $20, start to finish. On medium format, that was close to two dollars per photo, and I was out shooting at least two rolls a week. It was adding up. I got my own chemicals, and a scanner, which got me my results faster, got me more consistent results, and cut my costs down by about 65%, but it's still giving up time and a bit of storage space. I don't regret doing it, but I also STOPPED doing it, so...

>>2857607
looks pretty okay, good enough for 4chan posting certainly. Seems like the Plustek7400 is sold out on Amazon though, would the 8100 do a similar job?

>>2857626
Although how would we ever know without trying?

I think combining a mixture of digital and film will be a happy medium, hopefully

File: a71f4755-38fa-4d1b-870b-e998645e7090.jpg (394KB, 1280x873px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 1280x873px

>>2857627
Absolutely,its basically the same scanner sold with different software.

Another Plustek7400 scan.

[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	2014:12:10 23:24:41

>>2857613
I do like that nice crispy detail on the bark in the middle.
Is that more a sharpening in post effect, or a Tri-X in X-Tol effect, or a taking photos in good light effect?
>inb4 all 3

>>2857197
Yeah, I fiddled with a Technika IV and a Crown Graphic at the camera fair where i bought all the film, but they all wanted collector's rates for them, and nothing was what I would call *mint*.
I will say though, that for an old machine that hadn't been kept in pristine condition, the Linhof still felt like a fine precision instrument.
At the moment though, I think I'm leaning towards a Tachihara.
>so pretty
Although I'm not sure you can fold them away with a lense attached, which would be a PITA.

File: focusbench.jpg (324KB, 1000x685px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1000x685px

How'd I do

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Officejet 4500 G510n-z
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2532
Image Height	3490
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:06 16:35:59
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	685

>>2857642

Directional light to cast good shadows, camera on a tripod at f/5.6 or so with mirror lock-up and a cable release.
TriX in XTol without dilution, and then down-sampled fairly cleverly to maximize detail. I down-sample in increments of about 15% from full resolution down to around 1500 pixels doing light sharpening at each stop.

What's the cheapest place to buy Ektar and Velvia in 120 (or 220) in Jakarta?

File: image.jpg (814KB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

814KB, 2448x2448px

Hello everyone, spent a good bit of time in the darkroom today, printed up 8x10s of everything from the most recent rolls, and a few 11x14's, pic related. Tri-X in XTOL with a number 3 contrast filter is the magic combo honestly.

Thread coming soon for my series, sorry for the size/quality, posting from my phone.

[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	2448
Image Height	2448

>>2857668

looks pretty fucking good.

File: 23.jpg (886KB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

886KB, 3000x2000px

Went for a grittier, contrast-ier look with this one. Is it too much?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:06 21:08:49

Is a fuji gw690 a bad idea or am I missing something

>>2857718
I think it looks noice

>>2857726
Depends on what you use it for. Most regard it as having a very sharp lens. 6x9 is a pretty cool format, plus it's a rangefinder. No meter though, so use a handheld or just guess. It would probabakt be really cool with slides for landscapes.

>>2857732
Would mostly use it for landscapes and lots of city stuff

Bummer it has no meter especially since I'd love to use it for a lot of night stuff

Anyone know a good 6x9 that has a meter that's not too expensive?

>>2857737
Do you have a dslr? You could just use it to meter. Or buy a handheld meter on ebay for like $10

>>2857738
Yeah I have a dslr that's a good point

Is there anything different as far as exposure goes with 6x9?

>>2857741
I wouldn't think so. If ISO is set correctly on your DSLR it should work fine. You can even look at your histogram on there to get more accurate readings.

This guy had only ever shot digital and he rented a Hassy and used his DSLR to meter. Got some good looking shots.
https://fstoppers.com/editorial/dslr-shooters-guide-medium-format-film-50387

>>2857741
Yes! If you focus closely, you'll lose stops of exposure. If you stay further than one foot it shouldn't matter. Also it's worth a test to see your lens' T-stop, but otherwise I would increase exposure by 1/3 stop for negative (but probably not for slide.) (And I doubt the Fuji lens has bad transmission)

So if you can keep an eye on those things, exposure should be easy.

>>2857742
>>2857743
Thanks a bunch. I think I'll definitely stick with they fuji since they're very cheap and seem to be fantastic

It's not even that expensive to shoot portra 160 120 but I'd definitely like to get some nice slide film through it once I've got the hang of it

>>2857748
Light Meter Free+ app is killer for your smart phone.

>>2857317
I'm not saying it has a strong blue cast, just that when put side by side to Portra it is cooler looking. Nowhere near T film blue though.

File: scan copy.jpg (264KB, 1000x702px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1000x702px

I scanned this physical print into my computer. How do I crop it since the image I want is tilted?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Officejet 4500 G510n-z
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2550
Image Height	3300
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:06 21:49:18
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	702

>>2857810
Straighten

>>2857186
Just compare with a camera you know has accurate metering and compensate with the iso dial. Usually 1 stop and a bit lower.

Alternatively you can fix the problem permanently by soldering in a small voltage reducing diode right after the battery chamber. If you know what you're doing it's a 5 minute job, really easy. I don't recall the exact spec of the diodes I used, but you can easily google it.

How large can I get 35mm prints before they start looking overly grainy and shit?
Mostly shot using ektar 100 and I want prints say 12"x12"

>>2857519
AG photo lab.

>>2857958
12x12" should be fine. I can only fit 8x10" paper in my easel but those still look superb. Of course it won't ever be like printing 120mm film to the same size paper but it should still retain excellent quality up to that size.

Source: limited experience in my own small-scale darkroom

File: A009762-R1-37-35A-1.jpg (893KB, 624x1000px) Image search: [Google]

893KB, 624x1000px

This is more or less un-post-processed from the film. Reckon I should desaturate?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:07 13:06:31

>>2858019
Well what are you going for? This gives me heavy 90s vibes being so heavily saturated. Slap some Window logo and a lensflare on it.

File: it's all in your head.jpg (288KB, 838x671px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 838x671px

>>2858029
it's all in your head

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:07 14:08:40
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	838
Image Height	671

>>2857958
It depends on the film, your scene, and your technique. Optical printing? or scans? What type of paper?

>>2858032
Sick mate.

>>2858032

S A D B O Y S
S E S H

File: emotions_0_0.gif (783KB, 580x276px) Image search: [Google]

783KB, 580x276px

>>2858042
LOL

File: ADOX_Scala_160.jpg (767KB, 1600x1600px) Image search: [Google]

767KB, 1600x1600px

So how do I develop this at home?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D800
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Photographer	Giulia Degasperi
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	922
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	50 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:19 10:57:37
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1600
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2858047
Depends if you're a leftist hippie or a conservative right-winger. If the prior, go the potassium permanganate route and enjoy the stains, if the latter, the potassium dichromate route and enjoy your cancer and environmental pollution. Bonus points if you only plan on doing this once or twice, get the ilford reversal kit or the kodak tmax reversal kit online. Or you could, you know, use google.

File: _DSC3740.jpg (2MB, 1920x833px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x833px

How do you guys get the color reproduction on point?
I scan with my d3200 and that part i got it covered. But i cannot seem to get the color just right.
I use darktable on Antergos if that info is of interest

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3200
Camera Software	darktable 2.0.4
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.6
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	22852
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	51 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2016:06:03 20:26:20
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Fine Weather
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	34.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1920
Image Height	833
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
ISO Speed Used	400
Image Quality	RAW
White Balance	SUNNY
Focus Mode	AF-S
Flash Compensation	0.0 EV
ISO Speed Requested	400
Flash Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
AE Bracket Compensation	0.0 EV
Lens Type	Nikon G Series
Lens Range	18.0 - 55.0 mm; f/3.5 - f/5.6
Shooting/Bracketing Mode	Single Frame/Off
Noise Reduction	OFF
Camera Actuations	4436

>>2858078
pic unrelated btw

>>2858078
What's your light source?
If your source is good, usually the issue comes from a white-balance issue.

>>2858078
I get white balance by shift clicking on things that I know are supposed to be some shade of gray, and it gets the white balance approximately in the ballpark, then drop color samplers, and tweak the WB until I get the RGB values within a range of 10 units. That gets it approximately right. I also have a color calibration hardware system (Eye-1) that I use to calibrate my monitor. Even with all of that technical stuff, it often comes down to personal preference, and fine tuning as such. If you have Ps, you can edit even jpegs in camera raw, where white balancing is really easy, with sliders and thats where the color samplers are too.

>>2858047
It's literally the same emulsion as silvermax 100. They're just marketing it as new scala because with its clear base and characteristics it works very well for reversal. If you want to develop it yourself, either do it as a negative using silvermax times, for reversal you'll need to buy a reversal development kit. Foma make a easily available one, but there's others out there. Results seem to be better when the fogging step is done chemically and not through second exposte, so watch out for that. If you really want to go diy, you can mix the chemicals yourself, a few people online came to with formulas and steps that yield good looking results. If you're not interested in diy and just want transparencies, there's a few labs that do it quite well. Dr5 come to mind, they have a proprietary development that works with tons of emulsions, they can make great transparencies with film like hp5 pushed to 800 apparently.

File: R0000020.jpg (419KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1000x667px

How does this look?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: flash.jpg (77KB, 623x900px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 623x900px

I have this canon 300EZ, and I want to use it for some flash pictures on this OM-10. I know the flash fires when the shutter is pressed, but will leaving it on its auto mode work? The OM-10 uses an analogue integrator to close the shutter when enough light has been reflected off the film, so I don't see why it wouldn't work, other than the flash firing before the integrator starts integrating.

If it doesn't work automatically, how do I work out manual settings? I'd go for 1/200, f/9 at ISO 200 but that's just an eyeball. Can anyone suggest a rule? The Olympus flashes had a sync speed of 1/60 (as is indicated in the viewfinder) so do I need to set it to 1/60 and put the aperture down to f/16?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Chairman Mao
Image-Specific Properties:

Calling all darkroom fags, need some opinions about Fiber vs. RC.

I'm going to be printing up something like 15-20 11x14 prints and I'm ordering my paper. I've exclusively used ilford RC papers in the past, both pearl and glossy, and I've been more than happy, plus I know how to work with the paper. I've never used fiber before, is it worth the extra trouble and expense to use it?

Also, thinking of ordering the double weight "portfolio" paper if I go RC, any opinions on that?

These prints would be for gallery display.

File: 1399395513577.jpg (17KB, 205x205px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 205x205px

>mfw when my Lomo Lubitel 2 negatives shit fury over my Leica negatives in terms of quality

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2010:01:31 20:33:52
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	205
Image Height	205

Random question: Does anyone with a Pen FT know if the rewind lever is supposed to turn as you advance the film?

I know on a lot of cameras you can see it turning, but with this one it doesn't seem to turn at all.

I made the mistake of opening it up, and the film did seem to have advanced though.

>>2858165
[citation needed]

>>2858164
>These prints would be for gallery display.
go for fibre based paper

its not really that much more difficult to use than people act like it is... just wash for longer (which requires no effort on your part), and place some heavy weights on it to dry flat

>>2858207
Thanks for the opinion. Honestly I just ordered 50 sheets of the RC paper I always use, but I'm going to order like a 10 pack of fiber paper and try it out. I don't have a screen or anything with which to dry it flat anyway.

It's not a high-brow or serious gallery setting, so I think the quality of the prints should be fine for that.

>>2858139
That's not a good flash to be using, as there's no way to control it's output, or even work out what it's going to be, and it doesn't have any auto functionality except on an EOS camera.

If it's your only option, however, set the camera to 1/60th and use an aperture of f/4 for subjects about 3 metres away, f/5.6 for closer, with 100 iso film.
With 400 film, use f/8 for subjects 3 metres away, use f/11 for closer.

>>2858166
Some cameras disengage the rewind crank when it's pushed in or the handle's folded away.
My Canon F-1 does this, presumably so it doesn't present some kind of spinning deah hazard with one of the psychotic optional motor drives attached.

>>2858218
Hmm it may be that then. I've never noticed it not turning on any of my other cameras, which is what prompted me to open it.

I'll see how the roll came out when I pick it up tomorrow.

>>2858164
>>2858207
FB paper is just a bit lusher and more fibre-y.
Matted behind plexi, nobody would tell the difference unless their nose was right up against them, which for 11x14's they probably wouldn't be.
For smaller prints, or ones that would be handled, the fibre is just a nicer option though.

>>2858300
>nobody would tell the difference unless their nose was right up against them
there are differences in image quality, but you are right most people would not notice. only seasoned photographers who have used both

however, that isn't why I recommended fibre paper for gallery work. fibre paper is archival and will simply last longer and retain its quality without eventual tone distortion, fading, darkening etc., which is especially important if you are going to be selling your prints for a reasonable amount of money (such as through a gallery)

Did anyone try Portra B&W? The mere idea of a B&W film developed in C41 makes me reject it immediately, but maybe its somewhat good.

>>2858080
i use a Yongnuo yn560 IV, i place the film holder on top of the bounce plastic, and set the camera wb to flash, i know the source is not the problem, the scans are pretty good.

>>2858096
i'll take that into account, for now i just invert the tone curve and fine tune it with a gray/white spot, but they seem to be a little off/shifted sometimes

>>2858166
it only advances occasionally. loading the film properly isn't hard, so just do it right and you don't have to worry about the lever turning.

>>2858032
nice

I've got a defective Pentax ME Super with a shitty Tokina 70-210 lens that has haze.

Some guy wants to give me 5 Fujifilm Superia 400 for it. Is it a good deal?

>>2858630
>Some guy wants to give me 5 Fujifilm Superia 400 for it. Is it a good deal?

ask for more.

>>2858630
Define defective, something like a failing light meter is different from a stuck mirror/broken shutter per se. If the camera is trashed ask for more, if the camera is in working condition he's stealing you

>>2858630
>5 fujifilm superia 400
that's like, $10.

>>2858820
>>2858838
>>2858846
Ok this is what happened. I actually didn't ask for more. I told him that the camera still works on the manual setting and the lens has haze. He suddenly backed out and said things like I should include a lens and he'll give me a portra 400.
I then told him I have no other lens so he chickened out even though I already agreed with the deal.

Oh well. I just want to let go of the cam and have some money from it to buy for some films. I already have a Pentax MX.

I have film G.A.S. /film/

What can I do?
My film cameras:
Olympus OM-1, Nikon FE, Nikon F100, Pentax MX, Pentax KM, Konica Auto S2, Yashica Mat 124g, Canon A-1

I don't want to part ways with any of them but I would want to acquire more. There's someone selling me a Yashica Electro 35 GSN for $20. What do?

>>2858846
>$10

thats $0. any 400 asa consumer film is garbage.

>>2858865
Get it

>>2858867
Tri-x, Portra?

>>2858857
>I told him that the camera still works on the manual setting

thats a working camera you cuck.

>>2858870

these are pro films.

>>2858865

thats a steal. get it and then stop with the 35mm meme and get MF goodness, ur mundane as fuck right now.

>>2858878
What constitutes a pro film? What about ultramax or gold 400?

What's wrong with superia 400 and what makes it a consumer film? Is superia xtra 400 a consumer film?

I have so many questions

>>2858869
>>2858880
Actually my bad it was $25 and I'm not sure if it's still working.

> stop with the 35mm meme and get MF goodness

MF film cost a lot of money and I don't know where to develop them...

>>2858894
>MF film cost a lot of money

Not really, you can get portra 160 120 for 5$ a roll

>I don't know where to develop them...

This is slightly more difficult

>>2858882
>What's wrong with superia 400 and what makes it a consumer film? Is superia xtra 400 a consumer film?

yes they are. the entire superia line is done for vacation snaps and everyday snapshitting. hence the price. reala, 160ns, 400h, all these god tier films are professional, as they give finer grain, more stability, better dynamic range, lots of those are optimized for skin tones and professional portraiture. they print better too.

>>2858894
>I don't know where to develop them

do you live in the middle of fuckall?

File: DSCF8735.jpg (687KB, 1013x1024px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 1013x1024px

got this baby a few days ago.
was shooting street with a nikkor af-d 35-105 f3.5-4.5 entirely at 35 until now, the lens was fine and sharp but kinda prone to distortions and the minimum focusing distance of 0.85m was really bothering me, so yeah the 35 f2 AI feels like a nice update!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:08 23:36:31

>>2858880
>35mm meme

120mm is the meme
>cost a lot of money
>thinking it has better quality over full frame
>holga and diana uses them
>lomography

>>2858896
>portra 160 120 for 5$ a roll

Where to cop? Local shop sells them for $10 per roll.

>>2858918
amazon

>>2858916
lowqualitybait.bmp

>>2857451
I use an ancient Coolscan 4000 for 35mm.

For 4x5 and 120, I put the negs on a light table and then use a DSLR with macro lens and stitch the results. a bit of a PITA because of the stitching, but works ok.

Gonna try using the Sigma DP2 as an alternative to the DSLR once I get the close-focus lens in the mail and see how it compares. Bayer arrays suck for film detail/grain =(

>>2857557
Sending 1 roll is expensive. Scan your own and send 5 rolls at once and you pay £5.70 each.

If you shoot 35mm film putting £80-100 into a plustek pays for itself in 16-20 rolls.

>>2858925
>Gonna try using the Sigma DP2 as an alternative to the DSLR once I get the close-focus lens in the mail and see how it compares. Bayer arrays suck for film detail/grain =(
post results for this, I've been thinking of using that setup as well

>>2858405
Thanks. It's been a while since I shot film, and while I was pretty confident I loaded it correctly the rewind lever not turning threw me off a little.

What are you guys using in terms of film scanners? I've been wanting to give film and home developing a shot, but the cost of a film scanner seems high for something that I may not care much for. I don't feel like spending $100+cost of developer et al just to get digital copies of my photos when I have a dslr that does all of that all ready.

>>2859159
a canoscan 8400f that I got at goodwill for six dollars

I havent attempted dslr scanning yet even though I have a decent macro lens because I dont have a flash

>>2859159
V500 that I dislike.

>>2859159

v500 that i love vehemently.

>>2859172
>>2859179
ROUND 1: FIGHT!

How much should I be paying a friend for an om-1 or om-1 n body with a random lens? He wants $150.

>>2859247
there's one on ebay for 70

>>2859251
My friend's is in top condition and the lenses are decent, better than what I see the bodies are paired with on ebay. This one for 70 is the lowest I see online.

>>2859247
Depends on the condition, but 150 sounds like too much. Whats a random lens? 50mm f1.4 would be worth more than a Soligor 28mm f2.8 or something.

Anyone care to recommend some links for a reasonably objective film comparison? I haven't really done much since the early 90s, shooting Kodachrome slides and some Ektachrome 64T. There are lots of google results, but most of them seem biased or simply inconsistent.

Currently getting set back up with a Pentax K1000, a Kodak Pony 135. May also have a Vivitar V3800N coming, waiting to hear back from someone. Grabbed some TMax 400, Ektar 100 and ACROS 100 to play with, but wondering what else is out there.

>>2859263

flickr/flickriver.

File: hum.jpg (400KB, 1152x766px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1152x766px

Did my first home dev of C-41 yesterday, everything went better than expected.
Used the Digibase pre-diluted kit, and this roll of Fuji Press 800 that came half shot in an old EOS camera I was given.
Finished off the roll at 400 using the EF 40mm.

[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	1152
Image Height	766

>>2856951
oh shiiiiiiiiit

I want to do night photography with film.
Does anyone have any experience using a digital camera as a light meter?
If I take a photo with digital then transfer the settings over will I get the same exposure or will the difference in lenses fuck the eposure?

>>2858071
>>2858047
I came up with a bleach method that looks reliable and doesn't have the toxic and enviromental issues.

Posted here http://www.apug.org/forum/index.php?threads/copper-sulphate-b-w-reversal-bleach.137943/

>>2859392

for normal night shooting? i have found you have to give lots more light to film. at least a full stop.

for long exposures, if i get that ill need 30 sec in my digital camera, i give 45 secs to the film exposure. have never needed super precise readings, the more light you can give film, the better.

>>2859392
Apertures, shutter speeds and ISO's all mean the same thing on all cameras, so yes, you can do this.
The only issue is that film doesn't necessarily respond to light in a linear fashion at lower light levels, whereas digital does.
So once your digital exposures get out past a few seconds in length, you might need to make a longer exposure on film to match it.
It's called reciprocity failure.
Google that and and the film you want to use, and apply compensation as necessary.

>>2859397
>>2859396
thanks a ton guys

>>2856951
>>2857073
>>2857286
>>2859391
Samefag.

I am going to buy a film camera but it is kinda tie between Nikon F3 and Nikon FM2
Please anons give your opinions which camera to buy?

>>2859580
The FM2 is smaller and lighter and cheaper and has a better shutter and a hotshoe and doesn't need batteries.
The F3 is "pro" and can autoexpose.

File: DSC07097.jpg (507KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 800x800px

Haven't developed anything I've shot on 6x6 since last summer. Got a bunch of rolls back but no legit way to scan. Pretty stoked on some of the shots though!

[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	278 dpi
Vertical Resolution	278 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:09 20:14:45
Exposure Time	1/2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-5.1 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	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2859590
Thanks for the reply.
But which camera is the best one between these two is the real question?

>>2859597
Yeah, if only there was some way people faced with any kind of choice, who had all the relevant information spoonfed to them, could rank their priorities based on their particular needs and make decisions of their own, hey...
>taking bets on this being the same cunt who wanted to know if he should buy an F3 or an FM10

>>2859597
They are different. The f3 is more modular and more sophisticated. I wanted a simple and sturdy camera that is not battery dependent, so I got the FM2. Black version. The brass starts to shine through. Looks so hot. Omg
Also, fully mechanical 1/4000th of a second shutter.

>>2859625
>fully mechanical 1/4000th of a second shutter.
does this actually hold up on a 60 year old camera? or is it just a gamble every time you buy one?

>>2858903
Nice, how is the glass state? It seems a little beat up outside, but as long as the first one is good it's all good.
I'm considering getting a 35mm f1.8 g for work myself

>>2859326
what did you use for scan? i would kill for that f1.2 for portraits and muh bokeh

File: EMPortra40021.jpg (367KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 1200x800px

>>2859652
Funnilly enough the other roll I souped on that first go was a pretty dead Portra 400 NC I shot in that Nikon.
I think I just shot this at 400.
The lense isn't kill-worthy imho.
Nice, but nowhere near as nice as the FD 50L.

[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	1200
Image Height	800

>>2859637
The Fm2 was released in 1982 and in production till 2001 so 30 to 15 years is more likely. I don't know how accurate the highest shutter speeds are on these cameras. Anyway, they have proven to be extremely reliable. There are plenty of workshops that still service them of there is something wrong.

>. The camera's precision-tapered, high-strength vertical metal shutter blades were fabricated originally of lightweight titanium (later production FM2 shutter blades were made of aluminum), while the mirror/shutter mechanism rides on self-lubricating bearings. The mirror linkage uses the same mechanism found on Nikon's professional F2, with some modern improvements designed to further reduce effects of vibration and mirror bounce. The FM2 also features Nikon's famous close tolerance assembly and minimal space lubrication, meaning that it will reliably operate in temperature extremes of −40 °C to +50 °C.
-wikipedia

File: tmx0012.jpg (344KB, 772x1200px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 772x1200px

>>2859662
oh, wow I was looking up the wrong camera
thanks anon

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

>>2857718
nah it's great
color scheme remembers me of tdkr beginning though

>>2859652
>i would kill for that f1.2 for portraits and muh bokeh
Someday, you'll get a super fast prime and come to the same realization that many talented portrait photographers come to: that f/1.2 isn't actually very good for most portraits. Nothing is in focus. Once you hit that point, you start to bounce back and find yourself shooting most of your shots at around f/4 or f/5.6, and simply working to compose your shot differently so that you get your subject in focus, and the scene looks nice. That's when you start chasing nice directional light and become an actually talented photographer.

I wish you well on your journey anon.

File: heh.jpg (75KB, 1233x206px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1233x206px

>>2859575

hurt summerfag :^)

>>2859659

this processing is crazy. looks more film than film, like a caricature in a good sense. what are you doing here?

>>2859717
huh? it's pretty standard looking portra, looks hella grainy for 400 though

>>2859625
Thanks anon :)

>>2859624
Shut the fuck up.
I am noob and I just wanted some advice and I got it

>>2859714
Nice photoshop.

File: 26 (2)S.jpg (443KB, 1019x680px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1019x680px

latest scans

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:30:11

File: 26 (4)S.jpg (939KB, 997x1491px) Image search: [Google]

939KB, 997x1491px

>>2859886

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:32:29

File: 26 (5)S.jpg (751KB, 1020x1517px) Image search: [Google]

751KB, 1020x1517px

>>2859889

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:33:05

>>2859637
I got mine out of a bargain bin with a corroded battery chamber for $25, and all of the high speeds gave me perfect exposures on Rollei Ortho 25, which is very high contrast and would show a broken shutter clearly.
The 1 sec speed got a bit hung up, but that went away by the time I'd put a roll through it.

File: 26 (10)S.jpg (818KB, 1455x1020px) Image search: [Google]

818KB, 1455x1020px

>>2859892

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:27:46

File: 26 (11)S.jpg (657KB, 990x1424px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 990x1424px

>>2859895

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:28:16

File: 26 (12)S.jpg (683KB, 994x1457px) Image search: [Google]

683KB, 994x1457px

>>2859897

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:29:25

File: 26S.jpg (734KB, 996x1469px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 996x1469px

>>2859899
nikon 35ti
ektar 100

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	78 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	78 dpcm
Image Created	2016:06:09 12:34:41

>>2859889
>>2859892
>>2859901
Nice stuff.

File: EMPortra40002.jpg (524KB, 1199x800px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 1199x800px

>>2859659
>>2859717
>this processing is crazy
Not really breh, it's just fucked old film.

[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	1199
Image Height	800

>>2859895
>>2859897
>>2859899
What apertures were you using for these? They seem pretty smeary away from the centre.

>>2859159
I have a v500 and I'm pretty happy with it

I want to try to get into 120mm film photography. Is a Yashica mat 124g a good camera for $150? What should I be looking for?

>>2860155
The 124g is a good quality camera yes.

Also, 120 film isn't 120mm. It's actually 60mm. The number 120 has nothing to do with units of measurement.

>>2860155
I love the results from my 124G but I really don't enjoy shooting it

>>2858916
>thinking it has better quality over full frame
It does
>holga and diana uses them
And?
>lomography
ples go b8

>>2859263
Only one I know of
https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2010/12/a-colour-film-comparison/
https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2011/02/colour-film-comparison-pt-two/

File: F1Superia25.jpg (192KB, 540x800px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 540x800px

>>2858896
>Not really, you can get portra 160 120 for 5$ a roll
ayyy
The cheapest Australian seller has them for only $14.80 each.
>>2858897
Superia is based. I'd rather shoot Superia 200 to Portra 400 10 times out of 10.

[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	540
Image Height	800

>>2860241

Dunno why but I get my kicks out of Agfa Vista :D most likely some nostalgia "from childhood" kind of thingy

>>2860241
>mfw I'll probabaly never get to shoot a roll of superia in 120

Feels bad man.

File: F1Superia09.jpg (233KB, 571x800px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 571x800px

>>2860269
ikr?
I looked when I was in Japan, no such luck.

[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	571
Image Height	800

>>2858166
Are you me? I did the exact same thing recently.
Felt like an idiot after doing it.
Getting the negatives back today though, so I will see how bad I messed up.

A little frustrating because I was testing the meter against the meter of one of my digital cameras, so those shots might have got messed up.

>>2860245
Nowadays vista is rebranded superia or c200 though.

File: 008b682d-828e-470b-a400-8aae8ebbfde4.jpg (416KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 1280x1280px

>>2860269
Yeah it's a pretty nice film. Why do you think you can't shoot 120 superia? Search on ebay.

Pic related is superia400 in a yashica mat124g.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:11:03 17:25:12

Superia has never looked looked that nice to me. ::shrugs::

>>2860231
Why don't you enjoy shooting the 124g?

File: BZ9A3888-Edit.jpg (902KB, 1050x717px) Image search: [Google]

902KB, 1050x717px

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:06 21:31:54
Exposure Time	0.8 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	65.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1050
Image Height	717
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2859263
did you even fucking try? you can just google search for literally any film comparison, e.g. "tri-x vs. hp5" and there are tons of results that pop up

>apug.org
>photo.net
>rangefinderforum.com
>thephotoforum.com

these are the big sites and have literally thousands upon thousands of threads of people asking these same questions. there are like 100 threads for comparing tri-x and hp5 alone

>>2859931
not sure. i know i was trying to make out shutter speed (250 on the camera) so they probably were all around 5.6-10 range

>>2859916
thanks mayne

>>2856926
>at the university, waiting for my turn on the exam
>watching the showcase cupboards because bored
>saw a whole cupboard filled with old Exakta SLRs, various rangefinders (Zorki 3, Contax G2 etc...), a damn nikon FM2, all with CZJ oldder and newer lenses (except the Nikon)
>Pancolars, Flektogons everywhere
>In the back, a goddamn FD 50/1.2
>all covered in fine dust but otherwise looked well, no fungus or haze

I've got to ask about them at the end of the exam.
>Oh, nobody uses them anymore, nobody uses film so they are just junk.

I'm still not sure what to think about this. I'm feeling all kinds of emotions.

>>2860570
same thing happened to me anon. just grab a few.

they are either going in the garbage or to be sold ridiculously overpriced to collectors and hipsters who want shelf decorations on ebay... either is a fate worse than hell, just take em

>>2860579
Can't, property of the institute. At least they could dust them off from time to time.
Oh, there was a Super 8 camera too with a few lenses.

>>2860586
>Can't, property of the institute
I think you misunderstand me anon

take them, as in "steal", so much as you can "steal" someone's trash

>>2860592
You misunderstood ME, my dear friend. Unlike you I ain't no dirty stealing nigger, mate.
Hence why I go to the university to study instead of stealing.

>>2860595
>being this much of a pussy
youre literally taking someone's trash

they'll probably be glad to have it off their hands

>>2860596
>not having a steady income to support his hobby's budget.
Spoken like a true nigger.

>>2860597
it was never about being able to afford cameras you mong, its about not letting perfectly usable equipment go to waste

keep backing yourself into that corner, though

>>2860599
You clearly suggested to steal them. I said I ai'nt no stealing nigger. You got all butthurt about it and now you are trying to get a moral ground?
Don't make me laugh, nigger. I bet you stole the computer too.

>>2860318
>those tones
>that sharpness
>the subtle color cast
JUST

Anyone have that dslr scanning infograph

Don't have a flash but I have a macro lens now. Where to get small pieces of glass to press negative on?

>>2860634
You don't need a flash, a mirror a lamp and some diffuser material will do just as well.

>>2860643
but a flash is better, anon. not that you can't do it, but the result is better and faster.

File: 3242-12.jpg (369KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 1500x1500px

Fuck, I love Portra 400.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3552
Image Height	3499
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:11 05:52:28
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1500

>>2860658

feels.

god damn

>>2860674
>imblying

>>2860658
Tower is overexposed.

File: carropont2.jpg (1MB, 5211x1723px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5211x1723px

>>2860658
agree: portra 400 masterrace
snapshit from fuji 617, picrelated 1 of 2

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5429
Image Height	1892
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	800 dpi
Vertical Resolution	800 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:11 01:18:20
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	5211
Image Height	1723