Film General Thread

Old thread

>>3014067

File: XGMKG16 31.jpg (969KB, 855x1280px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 855x1280px

kek

File: Velvia100F_004.jpg (240KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1000x667px

Last month I picked up a Contax G1 body for $50. Today I grabbed a 45mm f2 for it for $250. Stoked!

Pic unrelated

[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	2017:02:07 18:43:30
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-6.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cool White Fluorescent
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

Budget friendly light meter for landscape photography?

File: SLABCITY1.jpg (1014KB, 1250x1275px) Image search: [Google]

1014KB, 1250x1275px

>>3018200
Are you the shooter in Japan who did all the square stuff with those towers? Do you have a site or email if I had questions about travel and locations in Japan?

My email is [email protected] if you didn't want to share here.

Pic from 2012, Slab City in Southern California. One of my favorite places to shoot.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Robert "Grant" Flanagan
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2942
Image Height	3000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:02:08 09:01:39
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1250
Image Height	1275

>>3018211
sverdlovsk4

does anyone here have experience with IR film ?

Having read about the focusing issues I came up with the idea of focusing at infinity and taking pictures of faraway objects only. Will it work?

>>3018469
You didn't read much about it, did you?
Focus slightly closer than normal. Many lenses have a little red indicator on the focusing scale to indicate IR.

File: 17092854689_db08086dd2_b.jpg (230KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 800x533px

>>3018214
Yep, thats me. Ill shoot ya an email today. Cool shot.

>>3018469
Focusing at infinity won't work (in my experience). Use the IR indicator on your lens.

File: CNV000039.jpg (297KB, 1000x675px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1000x675px

r8 my I have no idea what I am doing zoo snapshit

File: 16658826103_0599c6fdfc_b.jpg (156KB, 800x506px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 800x506px

>>3018530
2/10 for focusing and developing the film correctly. Overall, not worth looking at tbqh. Tons of better penguin pictures out there that aren't shit through a fence.

>>3018547
Well he kind of looks like a prisoner there, even more so with that wing brace.

>>3018547
is that from a nikonos ?

File: 17277250232_396a7ab821_b.jpg (227KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 800x533px

>>3018555
True. Could still be composed better, maybe to utilize the fence in a more purposeful, graphic sort of way.

>>3018560
Yep.

>>3018530
>>3018555
>not titling it "Mondo Spheniscus "

>>3018594
awesome man what model is it? really digging the photos.

File: 17091276288_61fd62f5d7_b.jpg (195KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 800x500px

>>3018616
Thanks dude. Nikonos V with the 35mm. The 35mm lens works both above and below water. The wider lenses are restricted to underwater use only. $80 off KEH for the body and lens.

>>3018622
congrats on the deal and thank you!

File: _DSF9774.jpg (455KB, 908x1000px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 908x1000px

Test snapshot from first self developed roll of slide film. Digital photo of the slide on a light table. This is expired velvia 100f

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:08 21:43:26
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-1.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	908
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: peak.jpg (148KB, 999x999px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 999x999px

Utrafine Xtreme 400 pushed to 3200. Used a Kiev 60 with an 80mm lens.

>>3018669
beatiful

>>3018660
I'd like to do the same. How was it? What chemicals did you use

>>3018660
fuji really, really needs to make some low contrast slide film.

or kodak, since they are in a film revival craze.

>>3018688

If you have done B/W developing I would say go for it. The chemicals I used was the 3 bath Arista Rapid E-6 kit. I guess its not as good as a 6 bath kit but I figured this would be a solid place to start.

The hardest part is getting a rig to keep the temperature consistent. I basically just used a plastic storage bin filled with water and kept all the chemicals and patterson tank in it while agitating (I chose 105 degrees F). Luckily the development temperature range is pretty high so you can pick a few different temperatures and it seems to have a bit more give than I was expecting.

Also the kit cost me like 35 usd which is good for 8 rolls of film though you need to use the chemistry quick as I hear it goes bad within a couple weeks.

>>3018690

I agree, I wonder what kind of modifications they would have to make to broaden the dynamic range. Slide film has a pretty shallow exposure latitude but I think thats really what makes it stand out because its so naturally punchy with contrast and saturation, I wonder if it would lose its distinct character with a less contrasty alternative.

Regardless its good to hear Ektachrome is coming back and its definitely a step in the right direction for the (regrowing) fans of film.

File: 16649582053_0c21f05847_b.jpg (274KB, 800x686px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 800x686px

>>3018698
It worked fine for Astia and Kodachrome.

I have a problem with my Olympus MJU I. When I go to load a roll I close the back and the camera let's out a long, high pitched beep and then displays E. I don't hear any attempt for the motor to try to wind the film. Everything else seems fine. The lens protrudes out when it turns on, the display works, etc. Any clues as to what it could be? I'm definitely loading the film correctly, even giving the camera more leader than it surely needs to catch the film.

>>3018696
yes iv'e heard that the chemical goes bad very quickly. is that the 1quart kit?

File: 22080030.jpg (522KB, 1080x716px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 1080x716px

Tested out a roll of cinestill 800. Grainy af, sticking to portra and Fuji natura in the future

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 01:56:12
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 22080021.jpg (481KB, 1080x716px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 1080x716px

>>3018744

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 01:49:22
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 22080039.jpg (486KB, 716x1080px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 716x1080px

>>3018745

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 01:49:24
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 22080014.jpg (380KB, 1080x608px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1080x608px

>>3018746

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 01:49:23
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 22080024.jpg (609KB, 1080x716px) Image search: [Google]

609KB, 1080x716px

>>3018747
All on a canonet ql17

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 01:49:23
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3018727

I just bought the 1 pint kit to start however for a standard patterson tank it only gives you 475ml when mixed correctly so if you want to do 120 film you need to add a little more water to meet the 500ml required. Haven't tried it yet so I am not sure if that extra water will cause any issues, it says on the instructions however that you can fudge the number a bit without any shifts.

What film will be best in my Smena Symbol? Shutter speed goes only to 1/250 so I should get really slow film if I want to shoot outdoors in winter? What about low-light is it even possible when highest ASA is 250?

t. noob retard

>>3018745
yeah but look at what it does to red lights. It has its uses

>>3018719
>giving the camera more leader than it surely needs to catch the film
you don't need to. only thing you need to do is align the film perforations on the protruding gear rails. E means empty as in no film so you probably fucked up

http://www.olympusamerica.com/files/oima_cckb/O_Stylus.pdf

>>3018744
What iso did you shoot it at?

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-09 at 16.27.20.png (113KB, 436x507px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 436x507px

hey, might be a really stupid question, but here goes:
what is these zebra like streaks?. film is ilford fp4+ @ 2:30m f11 on medium format, developed for 11 min in d-76. none of the other shots where like this? the shot differs from the others in that
>only shot thats a long exposure,
>only shot thats shot through a window.
anyone have any suggestions as to what has happened? sorry for crap quality screenshot.

>>3018887
Ignore that "asa" sunny16 bullshit on the lens barrel, you have shutter speeds and aperture control, download a lightmeter app if you don't already have a meter and expose yor photos properly, using f-stops to achieve desired fov/bokeh/picture sharpness/needed shutter speeds.

You can put any film in and winter is decieving, the white snow throws you off the fact everything else that's in the snow is still illuminated by diffused winter grayness. A 200 or 400 speed film will give you the biggest versatility to handle darker conditions and have a crisp sharp f8-f11 aperture for normal daylight shooting, the extra depth of field giving your zone focusing distance guesstimates a nice safety net. Remember the finder only vaguely indicates what's in frame and have parallax errors in mind for closer photos. I hope you'll have fun shooting it, report back with your photos once you run a roll through it if you can!

>>3018908
Dzięki, I'll shoot Fomapan for extra Slavic flavour.

>>3018923
Do yourself a favour and don't. You'll hate the camera for the results that were the film's fault. Get some nice 3rd world Ilford Pan 400 or agfa rpx if you're going for bw. And find someone with a swierdłowsk 4 on olx or allegro, 50zł is a fair price and it'll outlive you, great widely available lightmeter.

>>3018954
I ordered some Ilford alongside fomapan so I'll also try it. And for the light meter it will be tough for me because I had the usual combo of Zenit 12 with Mir-1b and helios 44-4 and of course Smiena just lying around. So light meter will be the first piece of gear that I will have to pay for, but I probably will. Thanks for help and suggestions.

File: rsz_2017-02-09_200122.jpg (648KB, 1326x812px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 1326x812px

>>3018979
classic family&friends starter pack bruh ;]]]]

Don't be stingy about the sverdlovsk4, it's a one time investment that'll allow you very precise metering on all future film cameras of any format shape or form. It's small, has a single moving part and takes cheap easily available 1.5v pill batteries.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-P605
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:02:09 19:59:55
Focal Length	3.40 mm
Exposure Time	1/41 sec
ISO Speed Rating	40
Flash	Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
F-Number	f/2.4
White Balance	Auto

>>3018998
The film roll didnt fit so tightly in the Cмeнa and I had a small panic attack, but it seems to work fine. Already took obligatory кoт picture.

Hey mates, I got some 120 Negs I'm gonna scan cause I don't got paper at the moment to print. I have a 6x9 glass carrier and a 4"x5" light board and a k3+35mm macro, do you guys think I should be taking multiple shots and stitching or what's your general guide for scanning 120 film? I'll post some here, there's one of me without a shirt on =D

>>3018898
Yeah, doesn't work. Taking it apart tonight to diagnose.

>>3019097
No point in stitching if you won't be printing from the digital files.

>>3018998
>sverdlovsk4
I thought you were just memeing and spewing some garbled slavic sounding nonsense to mockingly imply that a light meter is mostly unnecessary in an age of practically every camera and phone around us beiing able to perform this function.
But no, it really is a joke of a soviet light meter, covered in unintelligible gypsie symbols, designed for communist-only hand-assembled potato batteries, with fit and finish to rival the dashboard of a right-hand drive Lada Samara.
>never change you gypsie cur

File: scanning 6x4.5.webm (46KB, 492x636px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 492x636px

>>3019097
>or what's your general guide for scanning 120 film?
i mainly do 35mm and i use a 50mm and a (20mm?) extension
tube to get full coverage of 35mm negs on my k50.

you need like 30% minimum overlap to properly stitch them. it took me a few attempts to get it right. webm is example of six 24x36mm frames on a 6x4.5 neg.

i do 6 shots for 6x4.5, 9 shots for 6x6. havent done 6x9, but i'd say it'll probably take 12 shots.

lightroom takes like 30-90 seconds to stitch them.

>>3019097
Is the carrier anti-newton glass?
Unfortunately I think with a 35mm lense you'll run into the issue of not being able to get your light box far enough away from the neg to keep it out of the DOF, but you'll want to maximise that distance if possible.
Like old mate said, no point stitching if you're not printing, 24mp is stacks.
If your K3 pixel-shifts, use that.

File: scanning 6x6 and 6x9.webm (142KB, 1616x636px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1616x636px

>>3019165
>i meant 8 shots for 6x6.

>>3019140
>>3019171
fuck these guys. whats the point of shooting MF if you're going to scan it with one shot on aps-c? lol.

File: IMG_1361.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>3018214
Hey, Grant! I finally got down to my PO box and shot some of that edupe you sent. I was skeptical of 37 years expired E-6, but that shit is pristine(pic related)! I still owe you postage. Never heard how much it was, because my inbox was full. I'm very grateful to ye and I'd like to hit you back.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 4S
Camera Software	7.1.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	35 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 19:49:09
Exposure Time	1/20 sec
F-Number	f/2.4
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Brightness	0.9 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.28 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: provia100f.jpg (2MB, 1676x1322px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1676x1322px

Here's my first 4x5 colour shot. 58mm SAXL, daylight, 1/8s @ f/22

I'm finally starting to work the camera properly. No amateurish omissions, fewer vignetted images with movements, and in general a faster workflow. Now I can actually focus on composure with confidence that I won't spoil it.

Took some other shots that weekend, though they are all ruined because I decided I wanted to play with movements.

>>3019231
Naicu.
Gonna be shooting some colour this summer when I feel it's worth it for me. In the meantime gonna be experimenting a bit more with faster apertures in LF, my biggest worry so far is focusing and the DOF for 150/240mm lenses.

>>3019140
>>3019165
>>3019171
>>3019211
Thanks mates I have extension tubes and the carrier is anti Newtonian, so I guess keep the carrier further away from the light source and try a single frame if I don't have the quality I want then stitch as required.

pixel shift with 24mp yields over 36mp worth of resolution from traditional bayer cameras. according to this test
https://petapixel.com/2014/12/18/comparing-image-quality-film-digital/
the d810's 36mp is equivalent to color negative's resolution. only slow slide film will outperform it, and at that point you're more than pixel peeping.
not to mention that 36mp can already print big. what size prints are you planning on making here?

>>3019234
Oh dude this is some elementary shit, we're talking album art size prints mainly and nothing larger then 11x14. I normally would print all these myself but they gotta be done by Saturday and I got no paper.

File: IMG_3116.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>dark room general dies every time with like 3 replies

Well I'll have to shill my stack of prints and contacts in here then

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6
Camera Software	10.0.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:03 09:49:41
Exposure Time	1/17 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	250
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	0.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3019243
Sorry forgot to add:

Post your contacts, who else prints and what's your favorite paper?

>>3018905
i would love some help w this

File: IMG_0267.jpg (216KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 720x1280px

>>3019243
>>3019245
Oh shit my man I'd keep a printing thread alive I'm in the darkroom as much as possible. I just got a beseler 67 dichro and condenser upgrade from my vivitar e34, I've only used ilford rc papers. Also picked up a mounting press and want to use fb papers.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Instagram
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	720
Image Height	1280
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3018905
Only shot that's through a window? I bet it has something to do with light reflecting of the layers of the window concentrating differently, only noticeable at long exposures?

>>3019243
I didn't even know a dark room general existed

>>3019252
You haven't printed till you've made some true matte fiber prints. It's like starting into the eyes of god. I use RC for everyday printing and make fiber when it's for something important.

I use a Beseler 23cii, print 35mm, 6x6, and 6x7.

>>3019243
Man I wish I had time in my life to do more darkroom stuff. I'm so shit at making prints, and I have so little spare time that I can't quite fit that shit in. If I had a dark room at home it would be easier, but that wouldn't fit in my apartment and my bathroom would be impossible to light seal.

Right now I'm just making contact prints with my 4x5's to figure out which ones I might want to scan whenever I find a scanner.

>>3019211
What's the point of having big files if all you're going to do is downsize for web? That's why I specified if printing isn't the goal there's no point in wasting time shooting multiple frames and stitching them together.

File: IMG_3112.jpg (1MB, 2448x2447px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x2447px

>>3019306
It's easier than you think. This my whole set up, fits in relatively small bathroom. I have black out curtains on either side of the door and I shove a towel in the crack at the bottom.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6
Camera Software	10.0.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:02 16:15:39
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	2.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2448
Image Height	2447
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3019309
>What's the point of having big files if all you're going to do is downsize for web?
so you dont have to scan them again later when you decide to print it.

>>3019231
>mfw your cuntingly expensive lense doesn't give you sharp corners @ f/22

File: Can.jpg (153KB, 1000x659px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1000x659px

>>3018748
>>ql17
I love mine. Just wanted to say it.

>>3019165
>>3019211
So are you using some type of sliding rail for stitching?

>>3019316
So scanning and stitching a bunch of files in the off chance you'll want to print 1 is supposed to save you time?

File: wittnerchrome.jpg (55KB, 650x479px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 650x479px

>>3019245
I'm a big fan of foma fiber paper. my favorite is fomabrom 123 but it got discontinued last year so it's getting hard to find. It has an amazing texture and great tones. I've tried fomatone 542 and is has a great surface too but I'm not a fan of the greenish color of warmtone papers in general and anyway, it's also discontinued. Might have to move to graded fomabrom instead for dat pearl fiber texture.

I also tried adox's semi-matte fiber paper but was disappointed by contrast range and light blacks.

I'm thinking of also trying glossy rc paper to try stuff with a high contrast, hyper shiny look.

also, excited to shoot slide for the first time. I like dark, dense shadows and saturated highlights so I was thinking of underexposing by one stop and developing normally. thoughts?

>>3019341
no. i have my dslr on a tripod pointed down at a light panel.

i just position the neg by hand. start on bottom corner, move across. start on top corner, move across.

>>3019369
as i said, i mainly shoot 35mm and my primary reasoning is that i dont want to dick around changing my setup for one or two rolls of mf. the time it takes to take multiple shots per frame is negligible in comparison.

File: Velvia100F_005.jpg (210KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 667x1000px

Couple more Velveeta snaps.

[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	2017:02:10 21:22:41
Exposure Time	2.5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-7.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cool White Fluorescent
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: Velvia100F_006.jpg (414KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 1000x667px

[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	2017:02:10 22:06:30
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-6.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cool White Fluorescent
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: Velvia100F_007.jpg (391KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 667x1000px

[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	4000
Image Height	6000
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	2017:02:10 23:22:54
Exposure Time	1 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-5.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cool White Fluorescent
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3019377
>I like dark, dense shadows and saturated highlights so I was thinking of underexposing by one stop and developing normally.

underexpose by half a stop if you want to experiment with that, slide is super finicky. youll get dense shadows anyways.

File: CONEY1.jpg (2MB, 1250x1262px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1250x1262px

>>3019226
YOOOO WHAT THE FUCK. Thats epic dude hahah. Did you adjust exposure much? Thats actually like totally nuts. The color looks great. The slower the ISO the better it holds over the years, but still, those were the nastiest boxes ever. Postage was like $12. I'll send my paypal linked email on LFPF. Epic dude.

On a different note, has anyone ever shot 70mm film in a Hasselblad before? I have some questions.

Pic is from 2015, Coney Island after a snowstorm.
Portra 400 or maybe something expired, tons of grain.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:10 11:26:21
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1250
Image Height	1262

>>3019530
god velvia is fucking great

>>3019563
How do you digitize you're negs?

>>3019590
>you're
;(

File: DRUMPF.jpg (1MB, 1250x1283px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1250x1283px

>>3019590
I am a neg.

I use an Epson V700 with Epson Scan. Alex Burke has a great blog post about super flat scans and it's really changed my post processing. I use a FUCKTON of compressed air, a can for every 20 rolls of 120 approximately. It helps.

My exact process is load the holder, wipe down both pieces of glass in the scanner with an Ilford anti-static cloth (the orange one), then spray the glass with the compressed air, put the neg holder down, spray the negs from an angle that doesn't allow air underneath, so the film doesn't pop out, and quickly scan it. Usually only need 5 minutes to clean the images in PS.

I've switched from using expired shitty films to shooting exclusively fresh Portra 400. It's the best film for me, allows me to be at 1/500 @ f/16 in full sun, 1/250 @ f/11 or f/8.5 in shade. With the DOF of the Hasselblad, hyperfocal struggles at street level with f/8. I usually don't do much with tonality once its scanned, usually just try to it near to color correct. Overcast images I go a bit blue. I can do a whole step by step of my post production if you want.

Sorry if this is a repost. NYC march against the Muslim immigration ban.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:05 22:43:44
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1250
Image Height	1283

>>3019623
>I've switched from using expired shitty films to shooting exclusively fresh Portra
reeeeeeeeee im like that, all i shoot is expired film. somehow i like 160nc better than fresh 160. also there is literally no equivalent for ektachrome 64 today.

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-10 at 2.08.13 PM.png (4MB, 1368x1384px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1368x1384px

>>3019627
One of my favorite films is Agfa Portrait 160. The color tones are cool pastels. Beautiful. And I still have some loaded, but for most of my work, I can't risk this sort of thing. Pic attached is a screen grab of a flat scan. The grain pattern is visible in the flat scan in the borders, which doesn't happen with fresh film. I'm guessing its a combination of the loss in speed resulting in me underexposing when shooting at box rating and also just film degradation in general. Theres a guy on instagram, 400nc, who only shoots it. His stuff is great. I might have some ekta or other slide stuff in a shoebox, if you want me to send you it. My email is [email protected]
Another beautiful film I will shoot until its gone is Kodak Ektar 25. ISO 25, slightly red. Amazing film. Just great. I shot some stuff in the Grand Canyon and the Petrified Forest with it.

File: PARADE.jpg (2MB, 1250x1260px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1250x1260px

>>3019636
Here is that image mastered. There is also a weird red tint at the bottom of the frame in the middle, which is a quirk with some expired films.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:10 14:23:07
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1250
Image Height	1260

>>3019636
>>3019640

sent you an email, man.

ive seen some rad stuff shot with ektar 25, specially some grand canyon shots, might sound heretical, but those oranges and reds looks even better than the best slide film.

your pic related looks super grungy for 160 film. i have some early 2000s 400NC that looks virtually grainless. i think agfa tends to age not so well in general (slides turn into piss yellow).

File: SAN PEDRO 1500PX srgb.jpg (967KB, 1500x1180px) Image search: [Google]

967KB, 1500x1180px

ekta 64 + desert = best friends forever.

[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	4590
Image Height	3565
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	2017:02:09 02:56:12
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1180

Long shot, but I just got hold of my Zorki and the rangefinder is out vertically - anybody know if it's possible to fix it without opening up the entire camera?

>>3019669
smack it.

>>3019671
don't, you will probably break whatever you smack it against

>>3019671
Did occur to me, the prism is usually displaced by a whack, maybe another whack could move it back the right way.

>>3019686
This is also an issue.

>>3019563
I read online that people were exposing it at 6-12 ISO. Figured I'd knock that down to half. ISO 3 worked like a charm. I have three, from 12-3, and ISO 3 was pretty solid. Will take a few more pics and see what comes out.

Haha, yeah, that shit was straight-up moldy. I'm quite shocked myself. When I called ahead, to ask the lab if it was worth picking up, they said, "Well... you lost some of your blacks, but they look okay." I was so downtrodden until I picked the shots up and my eyebrows practically jumped off my head.

File: 02.jpg (1MB, 1326x1662px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1326x1662px

I'm actually going to post my shitty provia 4x5 portraits.

Now, I want someone to tell me, besides that they are each underexposed by at least 1 stop, what I did right and what I did wrong; where and how the shots might have been saved. Although if they're 100% shit, I'm totally cool with that too. I'm pretty disappointed in my performance that night.

File: 03.jpg (1MB, 1326x1662px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1326x1662px

>>3019732

File: 04.jpg (1MB, 1326x1662px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1326x1662px

>>3019733
More than anything, I think I got carried away with the movements. It's fun playing with them, but you waste shots. I've got some B&W stuff I'm going to print tonight, we'll see how it comes out.

File: 0007-e.jpg (452KB, 1024x835px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 1024x835px

tfw 10% photos of the darkslide

tfw rangefinder is incorrect

tfw your photos are shit anyway

File: 17265464532_acb017bfe3_b.jpg (385KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1000x1000px

>>3019636
>Agfa Portrait 160

Are you talking about Agfa XPS 160, or is that a different film? I had over 80 rolls of that shit in 220 (bought for $160). Pic related.

>>3019627
I used to do that too. Took a couple of rolls that were unknowingly completely fucked for me to decide to shoot fresh stuff. That said, the new portra licks ass compares to NC and VC.

>>3019732
>>3019733
>>3019736
Normally I don't believe in the phrase "wasting film", but these are a fucking waste of film.
What the hell is wrong with you?

>>3019623
>>3019627
I've been processing a lot of portra for others lately and I've got to say I really don't like it.
The red just dominates the scans too much. I'd say they're great for sky on fire sunsets, but for basically everything else, I'd prefer anything else.

>>3019810
I'm not a huge fan of Portra either. It's good, but I don't see the huge hype around it. I get very similar results with Gold 200 (albeit grainer) at a far cheaper cost.

In the right light it's incredible for skin tones though.

File: _DSF9831.jpg (500KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 1000x1000px

Follow up from >>3018660

digital photo of slide on light table of 120 Velvia 50 self developed.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-Pro1
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:10 22:15:48
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/9.0
Brightness	5.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3019825
It's not like Kodak make Gold 200 in sheet or roll form m80

File: T70Superia20.jpg (210KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 800x800px

>>3019844
Fuck me I wish you could get Superia 200 in 120.
>or reala ;_;

[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

>>3019846
Superia used to be made in 120 format I think, so you might be able to find some floating around ebay

>>3019825
I bought two pro-packs of the new stuff thinking it'd be similar to the old stuff. Shot one roll and haven't shot another since. What boring, sterile film.

File: BLOQUE CEMENTO 1000PX.jpg (625KB, 1000x998px) Image search: [Google]

625KB, 1000x998px

>>3019848
this is superia 100 120. p nice film. got two rolls, now i have one remaining which ill use when i get into the woods, becuase them greens.

[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	3678
Image Height	1766
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	800 dpi
Vertical Resolution	800 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2015:08:27 22:40:29
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	998

>>3019851
Looks very similar to Fuji Pro 160NS. Look into it, probably one of the most affordable medium format c41 films and absolutely beautiful.

>>3019855
i think its special and cool, but its not "my look". reala is my look and i have some of those.

>>3019850
>What boring, sterile film.
thats my main gripe with it. its engineered to be as safe, and as foolproof, and as scan friendly as ever, leaving a dumbed down no personality film.

thats what has me a bit cautious about kodak "reviving" their old stock. theyll obviously tinker them to modern standards aka grainless, etc. but i like grain wtf.

File: 28183069441_3253c0f73d_b.jpg (512KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

512KB, 1000x1000px

>>3019859
Well, considering there's no warm toned e6 film currently on the market I have my fingers crossed. I'll completly abandon fuji e6 in a heartbeat if the new e100 is like the old stuff.

Pic is Portra 400.

File: IMG_20170211_163045_434.jpg (351KB, 1080x1350px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1080x1350px

Mail's here!

>>3019900
Cunt

I remember a while back seeing some anon post his ghetto dslr scan rig with a full list of parts and instructions, I'm sure some of you have it saved and if so can you post it please

>>3019873
Shoot Rollei CR200, that stuff is really warm, almost yellow.

File: 0008_23.jpg (224KB, 502x756px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 502x756px

Shot with a Canon AV-1. I've been really interested in getting into medium format. What's a decently priced camera you anons would suggest?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:24 16:14:59
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2005
Image Height	3024

>>3019905
Don't know if this helps, but here are a few DSLR scanning pics I had saved.
imgur.com/a/nUvO5

>>3019903
:(

>>3019946
If I can find it for a good price I'll definitely go for it. Looks nice!!!

I don't know how many /p/tards live in Japan, but is anyone interested in buying my 120 Kodak film off me? I have so much slide to get through I'll probably never touch the stuff. Since Kodak is expensive as sin here maybe someone would want to save $$$ and buy from me? I have (all fresh):

>2 pro-packs of Portra 400
>2 pro-packs of Ektar
>1 pro-pack of Tmax 400

Looking for 16000yen shipped. Guess if there are any aus bros who are interested I could ship there too.

File: 16mmpurp.jpg (130KB, 1440x812px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1440x812px

I intend to load the 16 mm. film into the spent 110 cassettes once I have shot them. It'll be fun.

>>3019231

You must share your scanning process.

File: IMG_8375.jpg (4MB, 2000x1600px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2000x1600px

>>3019790
Nah it's actually called Portrait 160. Wild film. Bought 40 rolls on a craigslist deal in Vegas never seen it again. >>3019810
I actually find it to be much more blue than Fuji 400H, which seems to be why all those Contax bros shoot 400H and overexposed to get "the thing" like Jose Villa.

I'm just not a fan of 400H, I've tried to like it but Portra has some great tonalities every time I use it. Pic related. >>3019730
Yeah I shoot Fuji Interneg film in 810 and rate at ISO 1.5, lovely. Those boxes were nastyyy dude, came to me like. Post a pic of them so we can all share the horror.

Just doubling back, no one has experience with a 70mm back for Hasselblad?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	200 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:04 22:29:20
Color Space Information	Unknown
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1600
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3020001
cool shite.

how do they do that? do they expose the film to heat or something?

Any recommendations for a mail in film developer or a shop in the north Houston area? I've always developed myself but recently moved and don't have the time or space to mess with C-41 or E-6 any more. Plus I'm kind of over scanning with a flatbed.
I'm in a rut because I don't have a digital camera and I don't have time to develop my film.

>>3020090
>8days left

fuck off, you dramatic cunt. this is your first bid on ebay, right?

>my heart when silverfast shows the option "scan Kodachrome" in the dialog panel

>>3019900
what a winner. congrats, anon.

>>3018547
>>3018594
Trash photos

>>3019949
RB67 or RZ67. You'll get swole.

I'm looking to buy a cheap compact film camera, any recommendations?

>>3020153
I do love my Lomography Konstruktor F, but keep in mind that it uses 120mm film.

https://shop.lomography.com/en/cameras/konstruktor-family/konstruktor-f

>>3020153
Yea the Olympus zooms, mjuiii specifically is nice. Ricoh xf-30. There's tons depends what you want?

Small dark specks when I look through my viewfinder.
When I put an object in front of the lens, the object fills the focus circle in the middle and the specks are still there.

Will I have specks on my pictures or is the viewfinder just fucked?

>>3020178
I'm just looking for something that I can carry around in my pocket everywhere. Ideally should have some manual control.

File: IMG_0300.jpg (1MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4032x3024px

>>3020190
Shite man, check out some of the smaller fix lens rangefinders. Ricoh 500g, rollei 35, etc. I was thinking you ment auto compacts.

Printing today what everyone else doing?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6s Plus
Camera Software	10.1.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:10 16:36:07
Exposure Time	1/29 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	25
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	4.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: SALAR 8 1000PX.jpg (1MB, 1448x850px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1448x850px

>>3020196
>Printing today what everyone else doing?

pp.

[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	28682
Image Height	3210
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:02:10 22:43:18
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1448
Image Height	850

File: F1000049.jpg (1MB, 1203x1797px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1203x1797px

My grandpa gave me a case with some of his old camera gear in it, including an unopened roll of Kodakchrome ISO 64 slide film. However, on the bottom it says "to be processed before September 1985". Seeing as it hasn't been refrigerated or frozen, bur rather kept in a wardrobe for the last 30 years, is it worth shooting some pictures and spending the money to get it developed, or am I wasting my time? Colour shift is fine, but if I won't get anything useable out of it then I'll just keep it in the freezer for now.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi

>>3020272
>is it worth shooting some pictures and spending the money to get it developed
anon...

>>3020275
I know I sound dumb but I mean will film that expired 32 years ago give a picture worth anything at all or will it be completely black or something? I'm very inexperienced

>>3020280
i think it could still deliver some sort of image.

but the kodachrome developing process was discontinued in 2010. you can still shoot it and develop in b&w process and youll get a grainy b&w image.

now, my advice: be patient and keep it, the crazies at kodak *may* resurrect the process, theres a 1% chance, but still.

File: 14152211_1252311878125933_74087936_o (1).jpg (369KB, 2012x2048px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 2012x2048px

I picked up some expired Ektachrome from the mid to late 90s. Previous owner was a professional photographer and kept the film frozen the entire time he owned it. I shot a couple rolls of test rolls, bracketed to like 4 steps, and got them developed at a local lab. Each roll came out incredibly blue. I've been looking at things online and can't determine if my lab fucked up, or if it's the film. Any of you know what could be the issue?

>>3020335
Is it Ektachrome T film? The T stands for tungsten which means it's balanced for tungsten light. Shooting it in the day without a filter will give quite blue images.

>>3020337
I bought both regular and tungsten from him, so I know for sure that this was regular ektachrome

File: qt.jpg (851KB, 997x967px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 997x967px

>>3020335

this is a classic case of what the fuck. just look at the histogram.

now, tungsten film doesnt go like that. i dont know much about e6 dev process, but its like one of the color layers didnt get removed or something.

at first i thought it was impossible to do anything, because if you remove the blue, the image left is black and white. tried some tricks and this was the best i could do in a couple minutes of pp.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:12 01:09:09
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	997
Image Height	967

>>3020344
wow that's really great; I guess I'll have to mess around with the other pics some more

I wonder if I should bring some more of the film back to the same lab, try somewhere else, or try to develop it myself (I have no experience with home developing)

>>3020022
resize your snapshits

is there any way to spool 120 film into 35mm cartridges? how do i make the sprocket holes?

>>3020496
>how do i make the sprocket holes
You don't.
You shoot an eos 10, which doesn't use the sprocket holes.
>>3020496
>is there any way
Is there any reason, is the question you should be asking. Ancient folders and brownies are a way more interesting way to use old 120 film.

>>3020498
>Is there any reason,
yeah several.

too bad the lab will still need the holes to do the developing, oh well.

>>3020441
Resize your ego. This isn't babbies first 35mm scanned by a lab on a noritsu or frontier.

>>3019808
I may have been more drunk than I should have for taking pictures.

>>3020518
That it was scanned on an Epson doesn't make it any faster to load.

>>3020496
Nope. You'll have to slit it down in perfect pitch black darkness.

Anybody do reversal process on black and white film? Any tips?

Probably a stupid question but I'm new to this camera.

Got a Canon A1. I want to use Aperture Priority mode, so I switch it to Av, turn the lens to the A lock, but "E E E E E" keeps flashing in the viewfinder and doesn't let me take the image. It only lets me take an image if I take it off the A lock on the lens.
(I'm under the impression you have to have the lens in the A lock to use the AP mode and select the aperture you want on the wheel)

>>3020566
>You'll have to slit it down in perfect pitch black darkness.
i pass film from roll to roll, canister to roll by hand all the time. only problem i see here is the fucking sprockets.

Any point and shoot with zoom capabilities and near zero vignetting? does that exist?

>>3020595
http://www.ars-imago.ch/productinfos/osbahr_reversal_films.pdf
there's simpler methods out there but this one seems to give the best results. there's also premade kits made by foma or bellini if you're in europe
if you just want b&w slides without processing yourself, I'd recommend dr5 in the us

>>3020613
Side note: I've looked up elsewhere and the common thing seems to be to push the multiple exposure lever, and advance the frame. But that doesn't work for me. I still get the EEEE EE showing.

When I have the camera on the Av setting and the lens not on A, I can take shots. It seems to automatically choose the shutter speed for me, which is what the aperture priority mode should be doing anyway, but I'm not sure if doing that's actually solved the issue.

>>3020504
>using a lab
>using a cuck lab
You don't deserve happiness.

File: IMG_20160901_212948.jpg (506KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 1000x1000px

>>3020690
Check the lens contacts.

>>3020690
>>3020613
You're a total fucking moron, your camera is working perfectly.
Aperture priority is selecting the aperture on the lense.
It's a thousand year old camera, you don't choose the aperture with a scrolling dial.

>>3020613
I misread. To shoot aperture priority you set the shutter speed dial to A and then selected apertures on the lens. If you set both the shutter speed dial AND lens to A you're trying to get the camera to shoot in full auto mode, which it can't do (this is what the AE-1 Program can do, hence the Program in its name).

>>3020721
man where you learn to compose like that, just practice?

>>3020761
In what world is this 'good' composition? Like it's certainly not awful, but it's in no way incredible either

>>3020765
please show me what good composition looks like. not disputing, only interested in learning

File: 10josefkoudelka-fotografia-oldskull-07.jpg (451KB, 1267x835px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 1267x835px

>>3020766
Koudelka would have to be one of my absolute favorites for composition, would recommend his books for sure

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 (12.0x20100115 [20100115.m.998 2010/01/15:02:00:00 cutoff; m branch]) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2011:05:18 05:09:23
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1267
Image Height	835

File: evitekoudelka.jpg (354KB, 2324x1502px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 2324x1502px

>>3020767

>>3020767
>>3020768
are there specific codified rules that define the composition here? i keep getting told it's all about lines and bullshit like that, but you'd think one would run out of innovative and eye-catching orientations along line schemes eventually.

File: IMG_20161129_183053.jpg (512KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

512KB, 1000x667px

>>3020761
I dont think it's composed too well. I almost didn't take the shot because I couldn't work out a nice composition, but took it anyway because the light was nice.

Best way to get better is to emulate photographs you like. Also, simpler is usually better. I spend my time trying to reduce elements in the frame rather than trying to include elements. Eventually it becomes intuitive. Ive been shooting with that camera for 10 years now, which certainly helps.

>>3020816
the problem i'm having is that now that i'm 25 and work full time, i don't feel like i have the time to make mistakes. i look at every dud i produce and can only think of the cost of the film, the time i spent developing ,etc. it really bogs me down.

File: IMG_20160713_220235.jpg (307KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1000x1000px

>>3020819
I honed my composition shooting on digital, so that definitely helped.

Also, I'm 27 and have been working full time since 22. What's the rush man? Your making shooting a chore.

>>3020826
a digital is key. i got hit by a car a few months back and it wiped my savings. i was saved from bankruptcy by our healthcare systems, then bled dry by being unable to work. before that i was looking at a digital. it's a bit of a way's off now, because i work minimum wage (which amounts to about 8 USD) and our sales taxes are much higher.

>>3020826
is that mexico?

I'm about to go full-sugar and cuck myself into a Memeya system.
RB with prism, many backs, and pretty much every lense besides the 60, 90 and 127.
Should I kys myself?

>>3020868
What are you gonna use it for?

>>3020870
Probably a test roll or two, and then just as an ornament/e-peen augment?

>>3020875
Yeah dope it'll be perfect then.

In all seriousness I hope you're ready to build some serious muscle, the RB is a comically huge camera.

>>3020868
>>3020875
Enjoy your "workhorse" camera. The real e-peens will be over here shooting 6x9 and large format.

looking to purchase film in Australia. Want to keep it cheap as I am a poor cunt. ebay provides bulk international sellers, but postage is excessive.

>>3020915
b&h or eBay is your best bet. Australian Film Photographers on facebook is good sometimes too, people sometimes offload their stock for great prices.

If you're looking for most bang for your buck you should bulk roll and home develop B&W. A 100ft roll of film will make ~ 20 36exp rolls of film, and costs about as much as 10 rolls of film.

File: 20170212-10-02-2017Superia013-Edit.jpg (1MB, 636x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 636x1000px

Acceptable scan?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:12 23:23:51
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3020950
The greens came out in all of their annoying high-frequency glory. I'd say the scan's fine, but the picture is absolutely haram.

>>3020915
Looking for 120? See my post here. >>3019976

File: 01239485-2093485.jpg (2MB, 2506x2988px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2506x2988px

Was hoping to find some insight on this little guy.

I found this earlier today at a Goodwill for 2 dollars. It has a working battery and it seems like everything is working. All I'd have to do is actually test it.

Is this a good find?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SAMSUNG-SM-G920A
Camera Software	G920AUCS5DPK3
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:04 19:02:00
Exposure Time	1/10 sec
F-Number	f/1.9
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/1.9
Brightness	-1.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	4.30 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	5312
Image Height	2988
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	A16LLIC08SM A16LLJG01GM_

>>3020955
not sure why it posted sideways, sorry

>>3020955
that's about what it's worth, so if you want a hipster lomo 110 camera, sure.

>>3020955
Finding film/development for it is gonna be a pain in the ass since 110 film hasn't been produced for a little while.

Pretty sure an anon earlier up was spooling some 16mm movie film into 110 cartridges, so if you're really set on using it you could certainly do that and develop at home.

>>3020960
lomography sells 110 film.

File: 1486973357740.jpg (358KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 800x600px

>>3020729
The manual says that to choose aperture priority you select the lens to A and choose the aperture on the scroll dial.
What I'm saying is that when I put the lens on A at all it won't let me shoot.

The only way I can take a shot is if the lens is off A and I select an aperture on take the scroll dial. The aperture doesn't change in the viewfinder when selecting aperture on the lens, only with the dial.

The shutter speed dial doesn't have an A. It has a P. Still, I tried what you said and put the shutter speed to P and tried to control the aperture with the lens, but the only way I can take a shot is with what I said above.

>>3020962
Maybe just try shooting manually like a normal person?

hey little ones

i just picked up my first film camera, which film is the best to start on? I was going to buy some afga vista+ 200 and 400 until i get into the swing of things, is this the right choice? What's a cheap brand of black and white film i could smash out aswell?

File: Feelini.jpg (75KB, 664x896px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 664x896px

I asked some threads ago about this problem with my medium format negs, that the skies would come up unevenly, with streaks and shadowy lumps. This would happen with my Pentax 67 and Rolleiflex.

BUT, was almost falling asleep when it came to me: WHY THE FUCK would there be uneven skies caused by developing and gone bad chemicals (previous thread hypothesis) in two cameras that position the images differently, one vertically and the other one horizontally? If chemicals fail to run down the neg correctly, then the runs should go always in the same direction, independent of the camera.

My new hypothesis: The Rollei has light leaks on the top of the frame (film door junction). Also, i never thought the "load in subdued light" was so critical, but i think it might be affecting my photos in the Pentax 67, and Rollei.

>>3020975
>afga vista+ 200 and 400
cool choice.

>cheap brand of black and white film
ilford. get hp5, its cheap and pretty good, cant do wrong there, its forgiving as fuck.

Completely new to shooting film, I bought a Pentax 67 (no TTL Prism) and have yet to buy a handheld meter. In the meantime, will the meter on my K-5 iis give accurate readings for MF Film?

>>3020988
Yes assuming both lenses have same light transmission

>>3020988
totally. even your phone will do pretty good. i use a small digital p&s, works excellent, even with velvia (which is known for its narrow "proper" exposure window).

>>3020988
Damn that's a pretty big jump into film, good ass camera tho. Yeah as long as you set your DSLR to the same ISO setting the meter readings will be spot on. If you're using colour negative film it doesn't hurt to overexpose 2/3rd of a stop or so, for more shadow detail. Even the mobile phone lightmeter apps are pretty accurate. Good luck senpai

>>3020981

Found the problem with the Rollei. It has a hit at the base, right at the junction with the film door, its bent against the door, so the door closes, but not totally. Holy shit. I wonder if this might mean the pressure plate isnt doing its job fully.

Thanks for reading my blog!

I will be passing through Germany soon.
Can you still get the €2 film and development at DM?

>>3020989
>>3020990
>>3020992
Okay great, cheers fellas

Hey /p/,

I'm super new to photography and film use and I'm aware there are two film threads so I'm gonna post this in both of them.

I recently got given my dads old canon AE-1 and I've been trying to get to grips with the basics of photography. I have taken about 3 rolls of pictures with it and I'm quite happy with them. The only problem I've run into is the cost. How do you guys keep this hobby up without it breaking the bank?

I've been looking into developing B&W film because its easier to do at home and then scanning the 35mm processed film into a pc with a scanner.

Was wondering what all you guys do? Do you just get them developed at a local lab? Do you have a darkroom in your home and do it all yourself? Or do you develop and scan like I said above?

I really like going out for walks and shooting film when I'm out but its beginning to be costly. I know the answer to this is just to use a digital camera but I want to get better at understanding photography as concept and process.

Thanks in advance for any info!

>>3021032
Home processing and scanning is the best bang for your buck usually and B/W can be processed for pennies. C-41 is easy to do as well but for some people lab processing only will be cheaper or around the same cost.
The process itself is simple and the materials are cheap too.

File: IMG_20160906_191758.jpg (276KB, 866x866px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 866x866px

>>3021032
I save a fuckton of money by being selective about when I take a picture. It's for this reason that I really dont suggesting learning about photo basics on film. The cost will surely slow down your progress.

File: Capture.jpg (321KB, 858x1128px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 858x1128px

So is this all I'll need to develop some 120 b/w?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017-02-13T23:52:06+10:00
Flash	No Flash Function
Image Width	858
Image Height	1128

File: 17.jpg (1MB, 1785x1385px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1785x1385px

>>3020816
Is this poorly composed?

>>3021075
Yeah pretty much, as long as you've got somewhere dark to load the film onto the reels.

You don't really need the stop bath, many people just use water instead. I just do 2 x 30 second rinses of water and then move onto the fixer and it works fine for me. It's cheap enough that you might as well get it anyway though.

You'll need somewhere to hang the negatives (your bathroom is a good idea since it's dust free). Wetting agent/photoflo also saves a lot of hassle and avoids you getting water spots. It's like $8 a bottle and will last you quite literally forever so might as well tack it on.

Also some negative sleeves might be handy, to put he developed negatives in after they're dryed and cut into strips.

Could be worth getting the next size up of paterson tank also. The one you've got does 2x 35mm at a time, or 1x 120 at a time since the reels have to be expanded to make room for the larger film. A 3 reel tank will accomodate 2x 120 films at a time, which will save you a lot of trouble for a little bit more money

>>3021032
I bulk roll B&W film from 100ft rolls into 35mm cassettes, and then develop at home. With that setup, film is around $4 a roll and developing is less than a dollar. After that I do a quick scan of all the negatives and have a look at them on the computer. I choose the ones that I think are worth printing and then print them using an enlarger in my darkroom/bathroom.

>>3021075
Jesus christ son get some 120 negative sheets for archive, it's shit having no where to put them after they're dev'd and dry. Also that patterson tank will only allow one roll dev'd at a time with 500ml of dev fluid, it may be more economical to go steel tank and reels if they arn't 1000$ new. I'm assuming you have all your 35mm dev stuff like a change bag and all that shite. but yeah thats the stuff basically.

>>3021096
>>3021094
Woops like this anon said go with the next patterson tank up so you can do 2 rolls. Idk why i was shilling steel tanks on you there (but honest if you can afford steel i think they're nicer, doesnt matter much though)

>>3021042
Thanks for the info. I think I might try it.

>>3021050
Although this is true, I think the fact that if I fuck up, its gonna cost me money and will make me more "aware" of what I'm doing.

>>3021094
Thanks for the info, what equipment do you use? Like your scanner? Also have you ever developed colour film?

>>3021101
>>3021075
I'd recommend hitting up largeformatphotography.info/forum or APUG.org's classified sections. There are plenty of older guys who are getting rid of their dev equipment. Might as well wait a tiny bit and get perfectly fine used steel or patterson tanks than pay full price like a chumperino.

>>3020626
have you tried this yourself? it's much more complex than the ilford method... i'm also looking to make some b&w reversal negs i'd love if you could show some examples of your success. and thanks for the link, it's an extremely informative paper.

>$15 for 36exp roll of 35mm film developed & 5x7 prints

That sound too expensive? Pretty sure this is my only local option

>>3021090
>is this poorly composed?
no
unfortunately, OP you need to ask yourself "is this an interesting photo"?
the answer is also: no
composition is just one aspect of shooting photos.
looks like a 4x5? and it's dusty as fuck.
you're getting there, nice job :-)

File: IMG_1454.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>does /fg/ even film?

enjoy a small sample of what's in my freezer

>>3021162
Nah, it was my second reel on the RB67. I've been on a bit of a hiatus since my life fell apart a few years ago. Lost a lot of skill not taking pictures. My poor hasselblad got dusty as fuck, as did my skills. What makes an "interesting" photo?

>>3021171
3 things, just like real estate
subject, subject, subject

What kind of film would you recommend for indoor sport photography? Going to watch a basketball game

400asa w/ a flash & 100+ mm lens

>>3021214
also, 800 w/ no flash would be ok too

>>3021075
You need a graduated cylinder for measuring and you should have some kind of jars to hold mixed stock solution and to put back mixed solution. Gloves help too.

OK fellas what do I do when the negative is really dark?

Do I "let it burn for longer" in the enlarger or let it burn for less?

Sorry, complete n00b.

Also, I have gotten D-76 and Dektol developer bags FROM THE 80s! Is it still good?

>>3021222
>Do I "let it burn for longer" in the enlarger or let it burn for less?
You do a test strip like a normal person and judge your exposure, contrast filtering and any burning and dodging with those.

>Also, I have gotten D-76 and Dektol developer bags FROM THE 80s! Is it still good?
Almost surely not, but you could try with a throwaway roll. Some developers like HC110 or Rodinal would probably be fine though.

File: 1410967044064.jpg (213KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1280x720px

>>3021272
>>3021222
Those are powder developers. Virtually lasts forever.

File: sfmoma-hcb-07-sumatra-1950.jpg (331KB, 817x550px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 817x550px

>>3020805
>i keep getting told it's all about lines and bullshit like that
>and bullshit like that

That's exactly what it is. Forget the golden rule and all that shit. "Unfocus" with your eyes and look for balance in the scene instead. You will "know" when it's right.

Although, spend some time looking at great artwork and notice where objects and subject matter are placed.

>>3021296
Funny that you post Lines: The Photograph in reply to that post

File: 08010011.jpg (462KB, 1040x1024px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 1040x1024px

>>3021296
How do I compensate for the "I am retarded" effect? I can see other photos I like, and just /feel/ or /know/ that they are good. When I'm looking at my own shit, even stuff other people say they like, or when I'm staring down the viewfinder, I don't get that tingle. It always just feel like I'm a retard and my vision is retarded.

I'll include an example I've posted before. It's an okay photo. Not awesome or anything. Not shit, though? Or at least my friends told me. I can't see why it's okay. It doesn't make sense to me. Besides obvious shitpiles like my faceindoor double exposure, they all look equally meh. It's like I'm supreme autism manifest.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	QSS-31
Camera Software	QSS-31 G002
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1040
Image Height	1024