Film General Thread

Anyone here use a MOD54? Thinking of getting one for C41/E6. I have temperature control just need a holder for 4x5

any must know tips and tricks related to bulk roll film?

>>3022322
Don't open it in daylight, only roll what you need, attach film leader in a changing bag/keep junk tips for maximum savings.

There's really not much to know.

>>3022320
>I have temperature control
>just need a holder for 4x5
I use the rubber band/hairband taco method in a paterson tank, The mod54 seems a little overpriced for what it is and I've seen some complaints over film getting loose while processing. Have you considered the SP445?

>>3022328
I just bought a sp 445 and I'm happy with it. Complete film noon and never shot 4x5 before but it was still fairly easy to use.

File: Industrial_013.jpg (422KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1000x667px

Contax G1 test roll came back great. Holy fuck is the 45mm f2 a nice lens. Loading it up with Provia now.

[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	2017:02:15 20:39:19
Exposure Time	6 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.7 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	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: Industrial_014.jpg (721KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 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	2017:02:15 20:47:30
Exposure Time	6 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.4 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	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: IMG-20170214-WA0008.jpg (1MB, 4160x2336px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4160x2336px

phaggots, I bought a Pentax ME Super yesterday, just to get the lens actually, but playing with it, I thought it would be a good idea to buy film for it and shoot a couple of shots

What kind of film would be the best to buy? Thinking of going black and white.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	HUAWEI
Camera Model	HUAWEI VNS-L31
Camera Software	VNS-L31C02B125
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4160
Image Height	2336
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:14 12:21:40
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	537
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	-2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	3.79 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4160
Image Height	2336
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3022311
I bought a Pentax ME Super yesterday, just to get the lens actually, but I think now that I have it, I may as well get some film to shoot with the camera

I want to shoot black and white, what would you phags recommend to get first

after one year of shooting film I can say that while it's fun there's no

>>3022561
What's that, the 50mm f/1.4 tak? Nice.

As for film, get yourself some Fujifilm C200 or Agfa Vista, and have it developed at a shitty lab that doesn't give you your negatives back but charges as though they did; then come to the /fgt/ a couple of threads down to ask if there's something wrong with your camera. It's unlikely that any lab near you will develop actual black and white for you, so skip that unless your school or some such has a darkroom with development tanks and what-not.

>>3022561
Delta 100 or 400

Anyone have some advice on shooting delta 3200? I've been told to shoot at 1250 and develop (I'll be hand developing these) for 3200 for best results.

>>3022569
there's no what??

>>3022581
>>3022569
Seriously, I'm on the edge of my seat.

>>3022577
Only buy Delta 3200 if you develop film yourself. Labs will always fuck it up. And don't develop it in Rodinal. Set metering to the speed you want, and develop accordingly; tricks with overexposure (which is what lower ISO means) are only tricks.

In general, metering at 3200 ISO becomes nontrivial. You won't be able to shoot at night time and have the film record what you saw yourself. It's best to just set the camera to f/2, 1/30s (or something like that, around EV7 which is EV2 at 3200), and shoot dimly street-lit scenes, than it is to use an automatic camera's fucktard mode. The film itself can handle a couple of stops of overexposure, so go with static settings and you'll be fine.

The only time you'd want to shoot at 3200 on autoexposure is if there's actual light in the scene, but not enough to stop motion quite well enough. Or you need to make the most of a dinky little flash unit.

Finally got a copy stand for scanning negs. I'll post some examples when I scan some up, they're 6x6 + 35mm. Im the k3 guy with the macro 35mm f/2.8.

Greetings friends. I've just found a roll of unopened Kodak ISO 200 film in my attic. The thing is the roll expired in 2007. Seems to be in good condition, do you think it would be worth using? Or would it just come out looking awful? I don't want to spend money to get it developed for it to come out shit.

>>3022619
that's so inartistic of you

File: r001-020.jpg (4MB, 2048x3072px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2048x3072px

Thoughts guys? These haven't been edited

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:02:11 17:20:20

File: r001-018.jpg (4MB, 2048x3072px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2048x3072px

>>3022634

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Microsoft Windows Photo Viewer 6.1.7600.16385
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2017:02:11 17:20:04

>>3022619
you could probably look it up but most people use the general rule of thumb that as colour film ages a decade you rate it one stop slower. So 200 kodak thats 10 years old should be shot and pulled to 100iso. Tbh its not that damn old i bet shot and dev'd at 200 would be fine too.

Noticing either specks/scratches on the bottom mirror of my camera. Is it safe to gently rub a q-tip or something against it to clean it if it is just a speck of dust or something? Or will I fuck it up?

File: .jpg (33KB, 500x479px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 500x479px

how do you guys shoot sports on MF? I've opted for a method of keeping the shutter depressed while i quickly spin the film crank. works fine for 220 film, but the film reloading process is a bit slow. should i just get additional film backs for quick change?

File: largeformatolympics_mini.jpg (36KB, 550x383px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 550x383px

>>3022743

>Not shooting sports with a large format field camera

Plebs, when will they learn

>>3022740
It's just a mirror. Just try not to break it.

>>3022746
Holy shit haha. Is that David Burnett?

>>3022747
I thought there was something to do with the coating of it that can fuck up if you touch it

>>3022573
on a scale from 1 to 10 how much do your parents love you?

>>3022750
mirrors are just there for previewing, it wont affect image quality so i dont see any reason it would be coated with anything

>>3022749

yup lmao

>>3022752
>>3022750
Some (most?) mirrors are just metal with a reflective coating straight on it, that can be damaged easily.
Unless it's making looking through the viewfinder annoying or difficult I'd leave it, and if you really want to clean it, do it with a very soft q-tip dunked in mildly soapy water.

>>3022743
What kins of sports are you shooting and why do you need to shoot that quickly?

I shot skateboarding on mf. Used off camera flashes to freeze the motion.

Recently bought a Nikkormat EL but the internal light meter seems off, but still semi-working (as in it reacts to light, but significantly underexposes photos). An example is a dimly lit room where my DSLR suggests 1/4th at f/1.8 and 1600 ISO, but the EL suggests 1/15th at f/16 and 25 ISO. Is there a way to recalibrate it to the Sunny 16 rule (which currently gives a shutter speed higher than the max, 1/1000th sec, at ISO 100 and f/16) or someplace that fixes that sort of thing in Australia?

I've shot a test roll using both DSLR, phone app, and the seemingly-defunct internal meter to see which works the best, but I have yet to develop it

Cheers,

>>3022783
>recommending a q-tip for cleaning a mirror
kys tripfag.
>>3022740
If you can get a pack of the sensor cleaning swabs, they work well and won't damage any glass/mirrors/focusing screns.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/0/B00TF9AIF4/ They're widely available
>>3022743
Use a motor drive if speed really matters, buy additional backs if you think you'll miss some shots or subscribe to the "there are no photos while I change film" mantra.
>>3022561
Delta, HP5/Tri-X or Acros are good choices. Acros is a bit slower but is a solid performer.
>>3022613
>>3022577
>In general, metering at 3200 ISO becomes nontrivial. You won't be able to shoot at night time and have the film record what you saw yourself. It's best to just set the camera to f/2, 1/30s (or something like that, around EV7 which is EV2 at 3200), and shoot dimly street-lit scenes, than it is to use an automatic camera's fucktard mode. The film itself can handle a couple of stops of overexposure, so go with static settings and you'll be fine.
This tbqh, lightmeters have trouble working with low light, it's much safer to shoot at something you're comfortable with.
Try it at 3200 before you even attempt to pull it. Pls, no autistic replies about the true speed of Delta 3200.

>>3022821
A decent q-tip doesn't leave any residue, and they're easy to get to places with. I've used them to clean several mirrors without incident.

File: 17269895195_2f210f8cd0_b.jpg (123KB, 999x999px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 999x999px

>>3022619
Attics get hot as fuck. I wouldn't bother shooting it.

>>3022634
Cool scene, but its missing something.

>>3022635
Boring shot with no point of interest.

>>3022740
Its just a mirror. Has nothing to do with the image on film.

>>3022814
Are the batteries fresh?

>>3022814
Old Nikon meters tend to fail in a way that makes them lose sensitivity altogether, starting from the low end. This is due to irreversible aging of the photosensitive CdS cell. So no, there's no way to recalibrate it; the only way it'd ever be usable again is if the CdS cell were changed out. This'll cost you far more than a working Nikkormat (or indeed a decent film Nikon, like a FM2 or F3).

So what's happening is that your meter has NO FUCKING CLUE what to do, so it indicates a wacky reading.

On the upside, now you won't have to carry spare batteries for your Nikkormat. Learn eye-metering like a boss, have no fear, bracket like there was a bomb around your neck.

I recently developed a roll of HP5 (120 size) and when I pulled the negatives out they were completely clear with a slight pink tint. No frame numbers or anything. I used Ilfosol, Kodak stop, and Ilford Rapid Developer. Any clues?

>>3022932
Did you mess up the chemical order (fixer before developer)?

Making a home darkroom

I have a bunch of Ilford Pan f and some Tri-x

I'm buying some TF5 and was wondering if anyone could recommend a developer. I was going to go with D76 but should I get an Ilford developer for the Pan F?

>>3022953
Rodinal. It lasts forever, works with fine grain and they're never going to stop making it no matter how many companies go out of business because the recipe is so simple.

In fact, you can even make it yourself out of distilled water, Tylenol, Lye and Sodium Sulfite (A food preservative).

>>3022573
no, 50mm f1.7, really a sharp fast lens. I went out to get film,but the only film I could find was Fuji superia iso 200, but I'm in a small south African town, so will get something better once I'm in a city again

>>3022932
Welcome to the club. I just recently fucked up 2x 135-36 tri-x with (presumably) poorly-preserved R09 oneshot. Same symptoms as yours: pink negative (pink wash as well) and not even manufacturer markings. Far leader wasn't chock thick as it usually is.

They say Rodinal keeps well, but only if you've got a proper cap on it. Same for Ilfosol 3, it being close to Rodinal by some estimates.

>>3022953
The truth is, it all depends on your personal preference and personality/approach to this stuff. Normal well-off hobbyists just keep a bunch of D-76 packets or a bottle of hc-110 around. The "fuss" of mixing up a working solution and keeping it around is only an issue if you develop rarely and with infrequent, unplanned pauses between rolls. That's what rodinal is good for - keeping forever, not being overly worried with precise temperature and time control, grainy film look. Rodinal is most beginner-friendly: hard to spoil, fuck up the dev (stand development ahoy), but the results for most purposes are worst of all the developers put there.

Choosing a developer in general is a weird mix of personal subjective preference and utility. I'd say experiment with small batches of each kind. Get some d76 packets. Tiny one-shot rodinal bottle. If you're a brit suck Ilford's cock till it's raw, they have all their chems and films synergised and streamlined. If you have an amazing high-dpi scanner splurge out on some fine grain dev for the pan F and enjoy your infinite resolution™, if not, even rodinal will work fine. Worst thing you can do is listen to a single opinionated jaded fuck on an anonymous messageboard and commit to that. Rodinal 1:25+ tri-x will look supergrainy. rodinal 1:100 1hr stand dev tri-x will look entirely different. Shit's subjective as fuck. This is the bit where you experiment and form your own tastes/preferences. Have fun and remember to post your result snapps here in /film/!

>>3023118
That's where you're absolutely wrong.

Combine Ilford DD-X and Delta 100

Win

????

Keep winning

File: IMG_0411.jpg (191KB, 1543x1094px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1543x1094px

got this today for ¥5600 today cause the shop owners didn't know that the lens needed a battery lol
it's fucking perfect other than that it's missing the battery cap, i've just been using some balled up tinfoil and tape

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Greg Czajko
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2496
Image Height	1664
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	2017:02:17 00:54:37
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/9.9
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1543
Image Height	1094
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3023196
lol i just noticed that the previous owner of my 5d's name is still in the exif data
who the fuck is greg

>>3023200
Lol. Damn homie

File: 21456585636870.png (78KB, 202x201px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 202x201px

>>3023196
>forgets to scrub exif
>acts as though he's not greg and outs himself before anon does
>who is greg tho r-right guys??
hi greg

>>3023203
that bastard greg sold me a camera with a fucked up display
had to jury rig that shit to make it work
fuck you greg

>>3022619
A Japanese photographer won a World Press Photo award using rolls of film from Pripyat that expired in 1992. The pictures are edgy as fuck and not normal but it might be worth a shot for the sake of art.

https://www.worldpressphoto.org/collection/photo/2016/people/kazuma-obara

File: SMART PUP.jpg (1MB, 1250x1262px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1250x1262px

>>3022743
>>3022746
>>3022749
David Burnett is so great for this shit. Campaign trail with the Holga. I read somewhere he shot one roll in it, of an entire cabinet, I think Bush's cabinet. He just waited until he could get all of them alone for single portraits. Thats dedication.

Good article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/essays/vanRiper/010706.htm

[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	2017:02:16 11:58:04
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1250
Image Height	1262

>>3022635
That's awful anon. Boring content but with some interesting elements (patterns and textures) to showcase but your composition is really lacking, this is more of a snapshot from you standing straight.

>>3022311
Yo what do you guys think about moving to a plastic EF mount camera and investing what I have in digital gear into EF glass? I don't mind my digital but I want a solid slr set up, using vintage 35mm is fun but it is becoming a fucking pain in the ass. I was thinking any 35mm eos body and then a 28mm, 50mm and 85/100mm lens? It's either that or a G1/2 system, I just have more faith in the availability of cheap ef bodies and ef glass retaining value.

Im cutting some 4x5 Lith sheets into medium format 6x7 size... How the fuck do i do this without fucking shit up?

File: Vsl40.jpg (87KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1280x720px

I just fixed several days ago this one, the mirror was displaced a bit because the glue that holds it to his base melted because heat, so i just took a hair dryer and re-heated the mirror box and pushed it into place again, now it seems to work beautifully.
Teh cam is basically a rebranded Cosina, and i got some Kodak Gold 400 very very cheap(it's the only film i could find on my place)
last time i used this camera was like ten years ago and i basically forgot about it, at that time i used fuji superia mostly.

Any tips for using Gold 400? it's nothing fancy, i just want to test the camera again and i'm gonna get it developed at the lab where i bought the film.

i found this online:
>As part of the design team for the first Kodacolor Gold 400 film, I suggest that you meter at 320 rather than 400. This gives a bit less grain and a bit better color. The film is a true 400, but this little trick will improve results, as it will for all consumer color negative films. Rate Portra films at their box speeds.

Gold has a contrast of about 0.63 to 0.65, a bit higher than the norm of 0.60 for the Portra films. This gives higher contrast in professional cameras, but "normal" contrast in the cheaper single use and consumer cameras due to lens flare

>>3023408
>Any tips for using Gold 400?
oeverexpose and shoot away.

kodak can handle overexposure very well. even their consumer film overexposes very gently, unlike cheap fuji which is SHIT.

File: Nikon-F6-Review-2-of-13.jpg (142KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1200x675px

Is the Nikon F6 the most technologically advanced film camera?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSLR-A350
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	42 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:12 20:21:50
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3023196
Nice find! How thoroughly did you check for mold? Shit is prevalent as hell in photo gear here.

>>3023427
Also does the F6 benefit from vibration reduction lenses like DSLRs?

>>3023450
Yeah. The F5 and F100 do, too. The only thing the F6 has over those is that it's still repaired by Nikon, and it can use Nikon's i-TTL flash system where F5 and F100 are stuck with the SB-600 and earlier.

>>3023418
how much should i overexpose? 1/3, 2/3, a complete stop?
can i put the ISO setting on the camera to 200ISO to shot and just send it to develop like normal?`
any other tips should be welcome

>>3023489
>how much should i overexpose? 1/3, 2/3, a complete stop?
1/3 is cool.

>can i put the ISO setting on the camera to 200ISO to shot and just send it to develop like normal?`
totally.

>any other tips should be welcome
have fun. really, no more tips here, film is a very simple thing.

>>3023547
well that is, i bought 3 rolls initially. gonna shoot one at the rated 400ISO and for the other one i'll put the camera at 200ISO and send them to the same lab to compare.
Btw what i like is that the camera is completely manual (only use two lr44s for the light meter) and that it uses a Pentax K mount, so if i get good again with fil i could invest on some optics as i've heard Pentax ones aren't expensive.

>>3023404
If you're going for single shot:
Cut yourself a guide and cut in the dark, remember which side is the emulsion and which one is not.
For cutting the guide, it should depend on your camera but you want the frame to be bigger than the captured image so that the pressure plate keeps the film flat. The easiest way to find out is to measure your camera or just cut it to 120 width.

For fun, also cut some photo paper and have some fun with papernegs.

>>3023427
>Is the Nikon F6 the most technologically advanced film camera?
In what way do you consider it to be the most technologically advanced camera?

>>3023563
>Cut yourself a guide
yeah, ill do that. sounds easier now. the pentax 67 has lots of room so till be very easy todo this. that film is double sided, so its pretty neat.

was just looking out for expired photo paper too. a friend told me you develop them just like normal negs but with the added bonus of using the red light and d72, everything else should be the same.

>>3023555
pentax optics are pretty good, cant go wrong there.

beware that if you overexpose the negs you should post process them yourself. if you let the lab do the scan or prints, maybe theyll come out just very contrasty and blown, because the machine will auto average levels and not mind your experiments.

File: IMG_1389.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>3023220
ayo Grant, y'gotta' send me your email address on LFPF one more time. You happened to send me a message right as my inbox filled up again (the night I sold a bunch of stuff). Should be all good now, there oughta' be space.

Here's a detail shot of the Edupe

[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	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:16 17:47:43
Exposure Time	1/150 sec
F-Number	f/2.4
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Brightness	6.8 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: print1.jpg (322KB, 1193x1505px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1193x1505px

Tried using an old Nikon speedlight with the 4x5 for the first time. Results are meh.

This shot was on the 90mm @ f/11. Is X-ray film, hence the high contrast and the plethora of freckles.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2550
Image Height	3507
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	RGB
Horizontal Resolution	299 dpi
Vertical Resolution	299 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format

File: print3.jpg (334KB, 1489x1209px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1489x1209px

>>3023586
These are both prints scanned in an office scanner. I'm still shit at printing.

Lighting is scavenged club lights that my friend scored from a place that was closing.

Fomapan 100, 210mm @ f/11

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2550
Image Height	3507
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Left-Hand, Bottom
Horizontal Resolution	299 dpi
Vertical Resolution	299 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format

>>3023586
>>3023590
both pretty underexposed my man

File: Hoya Filter.png (119KB, 385x263px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 385x263px

If I want higher contrast out of my B&W film I should use a filter right? Something like this Hoya red filter?

However it says it has a filter factor of
>3 (+2 stops)
So that means I would need to compensate for the amount of light its preventing through? How does one do that? Is it just a matter of bumping the aperture up or through slower shutter speed?

>>3023592
Compensate by two stops either by shutter speed or aperture.

Which you choose is up to you but once you start to hit reciprocity failure you may want to choose aperture > shutter speed.

>>3023591
>>3023590
>>3023586
>both pretty underexposed
Wondering if you've got the hang of reciprocity failure for Fomapan yet, it can be pretty brutal especially on LF indoors. You may want to switch to bulb and triggering the flash manually.
Noticing how these are focused, are you also applying compensation for bellows factor?

>>3023596
I don't have the hang of it, to be honest. With the second, it's my own bad. It was taken at like 1/8s. I'm pretty sure the issue is that I'm fucking terrible at using my spot meter for the zone system. That being said, I think I fucked that print a bit, too. I may have overexposed the print by a full second (of 3).

The flash, though, it's pretty hard. I think that the speedlight is so old that it's faded. I've tried following the directions on the side of the light, and they always end up underexposed.

>>3023604
I should maybe use the 35mm or something to familiarize myself with the zone system. Using the spot meter and fucking up all these 4x5 shots is punishing. I'm still learning the ropes on the 4x5 itself.

any protips on getting good 35mm scans with the v700
is the ANR glass from better scanning worth it?

>>3023586
>>3023590
apply yourself, buddy. this shit is so lazy, your friens are so lazy, its like you dont give a fuck about photography, at all.

>>3023611
damn homie chill out ay.
he and his 'friens' just having fun

>>3023611
Am I supposed to give a fuck? All my work is garbage. I've got no pretension of quality. My equipment is shit, too. What else can I do with a forty year old speedlight and dim-as-fuck club lights, shooting on x-ray film. If my posts bother you so much, come and kill me pal. Do me and everyone I know a favour.

I don't see how anything about my pictures reflects negatively upon my friends.

>>3022613
What if im shooting with a manual camera? Stupid question I know. But I am developing myself (hc110 solution B). Last time i shot a roll with it metered at 3200 most of my shots came out pretty damn flat. I am shooting at night and for the most part its the dim lights from store fronts and occasionally street lights that I want in detail. I'll post some of what I mean in a bit.

>>3023207
This is trash, without the "Mariya" sob story these photos would go no where

>>3023427
Yeah I'd say so, vr lenses should work fine with it too

Maybe this belongs more in a stupid questions thread but on my camera to adjust the ISO setting you lift up the ISO dial and turn it to the right amount. My question is what happens when I do that? What changes with the camera internals?

>>3023635
It changes the light meter reading, nothing else. You set the ISO dial to the ISO of the film, so if you're using Gold 200 you set the dial 200, and the lightmeter will give you the correct exposures for 200 speed film.

Cameras without a lightmeter don't have an ISO dial

>>3022821
Are there any light meters that work well in low light?

>>3023611
>Too lazy to hit the shift key at the start of the sentence.
>Too lazy to spell friends properly.
>Too lazy to not abuse punctuation.
Opinion: Discarded. Apply yourself when you shitpost.

>>3023604
>>3023605
As long as your exposures aren't going over a second, you should be mostly okay in regards to reciprocity but any zone which requires more than a second of exposure requires compensation somewhat, especially if your bellows are racked way out to focus close. If you're going to be shooting in dark rooms and people with dark clothes you're going to want to keep this in mind when shooting Fomapan which is pretty much the worst emulsion on the planet. I can't really help you out with advice on x-ray emulsions since it's harder to find and more expensive for me.
>I should maybe use the 35mm or something to familiarize myself with the zone system
While 35mm Foma is certainly cheaper and will give you a good idea for how to handle reciprocity, it will still be more expensive than testing your exposure with a digital camera (if you own one). Since you're generally shooting at "slow" apertures for small format, you can meter and test your flash to find a good balance between background exposure and shadow detail, going a little over should be okay as digital will clip the highlights. Even cheap 2nd hand point and shoots that have a manual mode will work with this.

I've rambled far too much. TLDR: err on the side of overexposure in dimly lit places, even if you're working with a flash. Shooting slow film indoors with anything that isn't Acros takes a bit of experience and applied learning.

>>3023635
the specifics will depend on the camera model, but it just adjusts the metering

>>3023637
>Cameras without a lightmeter don't have an ISO dial
even cameras without a meter can have an iso dial as a reminder

>>3023638
Expensive ones. If you're looking to meter long exposures you can just use a digital camera if you have one, and then calculate how much more time you'll need based on the reciprocity failure of the film you're using

>>3023643
Ah true, the Leica M2/3/4 all have an ISO dial but no meter. And some cameras have a meter but no ISO dial thanks to DX coding

>>3023635
>>3023637
>Cameras without a lightmeter don't have an ISO dial
but they fucking do. as a memory aid. some also have memory aid markers for whether the camera is loaded with color, b&w or tungsten shit.

>>3023640
>err on the side of overexposure in dimly lit places

I was thinking this myself after looking at my negatives and my exposure journal for the last set of mostly indoor shots. I can distinctly remember a few times where I was a bit concerned that they wouldn't be able to stand still enough and erred on the fast side instead of slow.

This is actually my first experience with foma. I got a 50 sheet box to compare against the EB/RA x-ray shit I've been shooting.

Do you know if speedlights lose their brightness over time? Part of what's fucking me up is those recommendations on the speedlight's body don't seem to produce the intended results.

>>3023638
Not really, even if you get a dedicated lightmeter the best they'll usually measure is -2 maybe -3 EV. At that point you're better off consulting a chart anyway. It's completely pointless to buy a lightmeter for low light photography. A digital camera and calculating reciprocity/compensation manually is the best way to go.

>>3023644
Ah shit.

I've been holding out for 2 years now, waiting 'til the point where I can afford a 5D MK III, and now, MK IV. Is that stupid? I want to make the jump into digital. Should I just get a micro 4/3rds and use that until I can afford a decent DSLR? I want to get more serious about my photography.

File: digishit-cell.jpg (158KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 640x427px

>>3023650
>Do you know if speedlights lose their brightness over time? Part of what's fucking me up is those recommendations on the speedlight's body don't seem to produce the intended results.
I've rarely worked with speedlights and only started using them for a more portable solution, you can replace the flash head but someone in the gear thread is more likely to know about that.
>I was thinking this myself after looking at my negatives and my exposure journal for the last set of mostly indoor shots. I can distinctly remember a few times where I was a bit concerned that they wouldn't be able to stand still enough and erred on the fast side instead of slow.
Sometimes it's necessary, if you're using additional lighting and not natural light this won't be a problem as the intense light will freeze them in frame. Just tell them not to move and be very still, most non-parkinsons patients can hold surprisingly still for a full second. Don't crucify me for this, but the attached image was shot on digital, ISO400, 1 second, lit by the torch from my phone. While a shot like this is much harder to do with film because of reciprocity it is possible with another lighting source.
>>3023652
You don't need to gearfag over a digital camera for a lightmeter. You can use anything that gives you manual control. A point and shoot, a first gen mirrorless with an adapted lens.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS M3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017-02-17T03:24:39
Exposure Time	1 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Image Width	640
Image Height	427
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3023655
I'm pretty impressed! I always figured that people would struggle to stay still for anything more than 1/15s. I recently shelled out for some Arista EDU 400 sheets, so maybe I'll try using that more often. I think I can only use the x-ray during the day, now. It's just a mess using it in anything less than midday light.

It's not that I want to gearfag about getting a digital. I just figure that a decent tier digital is something I've wanted for a long time, and if I'm going to get one to use for test shots, I might as well grab something I'll use generally. However I'm starting to realize that it's hard to sustain film photography and get a good digital if you don't have a well-paying job. I've got no rich parents to bail me out.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/853326569/under-florida

>>3022942
I don't think I messed up the order, maybe it's the age of my chemicals, about a year old (concentrates not working solutions)

>>3023104

Yeah I've got some Microphen around that's a lot fresher than my ilfosol, I might use that if my fixer isn't totally fucked.

>>3023688
>underwater 4x5
neat

Short of shooting a test roll, what can I do to test if my developer is still good? Can I just clip test with a leader or something?

File: Delta 3200.jpg (488KB, 714x1080px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 714x1080px

>>3023626
Quoted the wrong person before.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 20:57:30
Color Space Information	sRGB

Is there some sort of list of old film cameras that are worth buying?

>>3023885
That's up to you. If you're just staring out I would go with a pentax k1000. Or just hop into a thrift shop and see what you can find. If you've got some nikon lenses with you already (non G) then find whatever nikon body with an f mount you can and you're set.

>>3023188

Delta 100 and DDX is my fave combo, smooth as silk

>>3023625

Its cool to experiment but what were you expecting? What do you think you will do differently in the future to get a result that is more in line with what you were hoping for?

Saying your work is garbage is a cop out, keep at it and make notes.

Reciprocity failure times for delta 100 120?

>>3023899
I do actually keep notes. Since I started doing LF I've been keeping an exposure journal, and then transferring it to a spreadsheet on my PC. I mark the negative sleeves and then cross-compare. It's helped a bit, although lately I've been too busy to do proper analysis. It sucks that I live far north enough that we have such limited time daylight, and on days where I don't work, I essentially have to make choices between "go outside and photograph" or "stay inside and do archival/analysis work or study".

File: Untitled (75).jpg (2MB, 5124x3504px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5124x3504px

couple of questions:
what are some pros still shooting film today?
also anyone here scan their own negatives and post process in lightroom? what are the most useful tips and tools? don't know anything about photoshop/lightroom. this is one i've done so far.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:01 16:27:21
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3024034
Lots of fashion photographers, look at Tim Walker.

Mitchell Feinberg still shoots 8x10 for commercial work. He had 2 custom 8x10 digital backs manufactured to offset the cost of 8x10 Polaroids, each of which cost about the same as a decent house.

(As has almost always been the case) most pro work today is being done in 8x10 or 4x5

>>3024058
that's good to hear as someone that isn't really attracted to digital.

File: untitled-3.jpg (472KB, 1100x723px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1100x723px

>>3024034
Slows me down a lot

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	300 dpcm

>>3024065
what do you mean?

>>3024066
I can't really spray and pray the same way as with digital. Especially not with medium format or large format. I only get so many pictures per roll.

I spend way more time composing and "getting it right". Spend more time looking, less time shooting.

>>3024070
oh i agree completely. you put a lot more thought into each frame knowing that you have a limited capacity. but instant feedback is nice too.

File: rsz_no_1.jpg (644KB, 1000x869px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 1000x869px

>>3024065
It didn't slow you down enough to stop you taking that photo it seems. Can I ask why you took it?

>>3024064
To be fair those two people I mentioned were successful professionals before digital was really an option.

All of my commercial work is digital but I almost exclusively shoot film for my personal work. I'm not sure about becoming a commercial photographer using film nowadays. I think outside of editorial/fashion most clients/agencies will want the reassurance and on-site results of digital.

File: whatslr.png (1MB, 1228x843px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1228x843px

Does anyone know what SLR this is? Looks like a Praktica to me but I guess I'm wrong as I can't find it when I look for Prakticas.

>>3024107
I'm more interested in the qt DESU

>>3024098
A cropped grainy mess of a picture featuring a person walking down a cobbled street with muh shadows and muh lines as it's main feature.
May I ask why you took this foto? Just for the shit aesthetics and maintaining a portfolio full of only trash?

>>3024098
that boring photo is still better than your boring trash photo.

>>3024117
i mean composition wise >>3024098
is a lot more interesting, could use better processing like adjust the contrast and get more defined whites and blacks.

>>3024116
It's a screen from this MV:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf1MfO4V7cA

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-17 at 9.22.44 PM.png (339KB, 530x316px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 530x316px

>>3024034
how can i get rid of scanner glow like this?

>>3024124
>The uploader has not made this video available in your country.
THANKS VEVO, I THOUGHT THIS WAS AMERICA NOT GERMANY

>>3023904
bump

>>3023904
>>3024226
Are easily found using the internet and a search engine, even provided on the data sheet.

>>3024227
I obviously searched that but many people were saying the chart is innacurate. Someone in a forum linked a site saying this guy did thorough testing and found accurate times but of course the site 404'd

File: Screenshot_20170218-151425.png (431KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1440x2560px

>>3024226
This is what datasheets are for. Pic related. Delta sucks when it comes to reciprocity failure. Get Acros for log exposures, don't need to adjust until exposure times exceed 2 minutes.

>>3024231
It really depends entirely on your developer. Read the datasheet, read the posts and you have your answer.
Lucky enough for you, it's the year 2017 and tonnes of autists have been doing this for decades.

>>3024231
reeeeeee i know that feel
i hate it when i lurk old threads from forums to find info and all the pics and links are 404'd

>>3024232
>>3024233
Okay thanks guys, looks like I'll be going with Acros then

File: untitled-6.jpg (786KB, 2200x721px) Image search: [Google]

786KB, 2200x721px

>>3024098
>Can I ask why you took it?

Messy scenes like this catch my eye. I love spending a long time finding balance in chaos.

Moving a millimeter or less, until it all just clicks. You entire body just knows when you're there. Even though the image itself might not be that good, that feeling when it's in balance is the main reason I photograph. It's not the work I produce that matters, but the doing of it.

Also, epson scan cropped out a bit of it, so the balance is a little off. I don't use the scans of my B&W for other than digital contact proofs.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	300 dpcm

File: xxxxxx.jpg (943KB, 1228x1818px) Image search: [Google]

943KB, 1228x1818px

>>3024283
Then solely based off your posts and examples here it looks like you're no more of a "photographer" than a mental institution patient scribbling in a notebook is a "bookwriter". The medium is employed, but the underlying reasoning very far from its mainstream uses.

File: re size.jpg (538KB, 1200x802px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 1200x802px

a few questions if you don't mind:

why did my picture come back with these blue and red 'veins' in it?

a few of them were like this. I don't mind it, but it's a little perplexing.

do you think this shot is just a piece of trash, or should I straighten it up in post and keep it?

I currently shoot 35mm but I'm getting that gearfag itch again. should I buy a Pentax 67? please talk me out of it, oh god please.

also, is Fuji 400h worth the money? I'm on the verge of buying 10 rolls (which'll cost over $100!) if not, what else should I buy instead?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-007
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:16 11:19:45
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3636
Image Height	2433

>>3024285
>kurwa calling other people mental institute patients

Dude, in the last week you've made death threats, cried when someone threw away a note you wrote and extolled the virtues of delicate yellow paper. We've all been begging you to get checked out for months.

File: untitled-7.jpg (499KB, 1100x721px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1100x721px

>>3024285
>a mental institution patient

I've been close to admitting myself several times. Have been dealing with psychosis and borderline schizophrenia the last 5 years. Through mindfulness, proper food and photography, I've handled it pretty well. I don't want to fog my mind and experience of life up, more than it already is, by taking medication.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	300 dpcm

File: Capture3.png (11KB, 727x132px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 727x132px

How do I work this shit out? I need 500ml of working solution at 1+14

>>3024295
500 / 15 = 33ml of developer
500 - 33,333... = 467ml of water

This all makes a working solution of 500ml

>>3024295
Also, next time use XTOL for Acros.

>>3024293
The comparison was purely coincidental (and, I admit, intentionally antagonizing for the sake of my "followers'" theatricals) but I'm glad to learn you found a healthy outlet for your condition in photography. Do you have samples of any other things you photograph besides this forest theme? Now I'm curious what kind of things "click" for you, visually.

File: untitled-8.jpg (654KB, 1100x734px) Image search: [Google]

654KB, 1100x734px

>>3024306
I've tried some color, but it does not give the same satisfaction as finding balance in chaos. When I shoot color, I go for the colors themselves.

For me, B&W is all about the forms, lines, contrasts and composition.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	300 dpcm

File: sVJRAbo[1].png (106KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 320x240px

>>3024306
>and, I admit, intentionally antagonizing for the sake of my "followers'" theatricals

>>3024312
A group of people encouraging you to get checked up at the doctors are not your followers, just strangers that don't want the guilt of never trying to help you before it's too late, like what happened to ricky.

File: n_portrait.jpg (623KB, 664x1000px) Image search: [Google]

623KB, 664x1000px

>>3024286
Looks like a light leak, though I've never seen one so odd and precise like that. Might be an issue with scanning, are the 'veins' present on the negative.

I don't think it's a particularly good shot at all. It's underexposed by at least 2 stops, and there doesn't appear to be any visible subject. Chuck it and learn from it.

Do you need medium format? MF gear is heavier, more expensive, and more specialised. Obviously you get more quality, but do you need more quality? Have you found the limits of 35mm? If you're shooting shit like the photo you posted I'd stick with 35mm until you find an actual reason to upgrade.

Fuji 400h is baller shit but it's overpriced. The results will be awesome, especially with a touch of overexposure. If you're still new to film maybe stick with a cheaper stock like Fuji C200 or Kodak Colorplus / Gold 200, where you can afford to make mistakes and experiment. The attached pic is Colorplus 200, for reference.

If you're looking for cost effectiveness I'd encourage you to get into developing your own B&W. It's ludicriously easy, and decreases the price of development hugely. The cost for me to develop 1 roll of B&W film is less than a dollar

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

So I just got given a Canon EOS 5, any tips on what I could do with it? I already have an SLR and a rangefinder but this has autofocus (which I didn't even realise 35mm cameras could do).

File: 000008.jpg (3MB, 2433x3636px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2433x3636px

>>3024316
thanks very much for your thoughtful reply.

you're right about MF, of course. I think we all get these urges to spend money sometimes.

I find b&w is a bit limiting, but maybe it's a good way for me to practice the basics for now (I definitely need it). I guess I could spend the $100 on rodinal and etc instead of the 400h. fuji superia always comes up nice for me anyway.

check out another one of these veiny shots. it was a roll of cinestill 800t. I consider this the best of the lot. not saying much, perhaps

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
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	2017:02:17 09:03:04
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2433
Image Height	3636

>>3024319
Light leaks.
Get a new camera.

File: 000024.jpg (508KB, 1200x802px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 1200x802px

>>3024320
sorry I didn't resize.

if they are light leaks could they be from the lens? I'm using an SLR that I had professionally serviced only a year ago so I don't see how this can be possible.

why do they only show up in certain lighting conditions? (ie, daylight seems unaffected, see: this shot.)

not trying to argue, but I'd like to be sure

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-007
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:16 11:21:12
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3636
Image Height	2433

>>3024300
Thanks mate much appreciated

And why XTOL? Does it give noticeably better results?

>>3024321
Send whoever did the cla these samples.
It looks like it's just from a tiny slit/hole, and may only show if light hits that area at the right angle, or it might only take effect if the camera has been on that frame long enough (it may be an incredibly weak light being transmitted through), this would explain the daylight shots being less affected.

No, they can't be from the lens, if the shutter is closed the neg should be in pitch black. No amount of lens changing should change that. I guess you could have a leak between the lens and mirror that only gets exposed when the shutter is open, but it's still gonna be a body issue.

File: 000012.jpg (622KB, 1200x802px) Image search: [Google]

622KB, 1200x802px

>>3024324
thanks, that explanation really helps. I'm disappointed but at least it can probably be fixed. I'll see what my repairman says.

here's one more from that roll.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER355/375-1.8-0E-007
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:16 11:19:45
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3636
Image Height	2433

Yahoo Auctions here in Japan is too fucking addicting. This past week I've grabbed:

Yashica T4
Nishika N8000
20 rolls of 35mm Fuji PN400N (aka Pro 400)
10 rolls of 120 Provia 100F
10 rolls of 220 Velvia 100
8 rolls of 220 160NS

And I feel like I'm holding back on bidding on so much other stuff. There are so many cool films constantly up for auction.

>>3024326
cinestill huh

>>3024319
>>3024321
>>3024326
Kinda looks like the frame has been double exposed with a weird lightning shot. That's super weird, I've never seen it before. Probs a light leak as suggested earlier tho, or could be a remnant of the remjet removal process Cinestill does.

Also all of these are underexposed by a fuckload. Cinestill 800 is Kodak 500t cinema film without the remjet backing. So you should probably be shooting this at like 400, especially in daylight when you have the avaliable light. Color negative film handles overexposure very gracefully, and underexposure extremely not gracefully as we can see from these photos. It's grainy and faded because you aren't giving it enough light

>>3024322
You're welcome.

XTOL gives finer and sharper grain, full film speed, is non-toxic and is economic at low dilutions (1+2 or 1+3).

Kodak also recommends using XTOL instead of Tmax Dev for their Tmax films. Fuji Acros is also a T-grain film, same with Ilford Delta.

>>3024327
>10 rolls of 220 Velvia 100

Lucky you. Were the date good? Cold stored? Also, how much did you pay for that?

>>3024331
fuck, really? I thought this was how it was supposed to look. I didn't know that about exposure tolerance either. guess this is all learning...

I looked at the negs and the 'lightning' is present but in some cases it even travels to the very edges, way outside the frame of the shot, if that makes sense.

>>3024340
If it goes outside the frame it could be a number of things. Light leak, issue in development, issue in manufacture, issue in storage (as in the film canister had a very small leak).

It's pretty hard to say until you change each variable and it stops happening. I would email Cinestill and provide examples and ask them what they think it might be.

Also don't worry about the underexposure thing, it takes time to learn and film is far less forgiving than digital. Keep at it, keep reading and keep shooting

>>3024335
Cold stored and expires in 2018. Paid $45usd for em. My film stash is getting a little ridiculous at this point. I've bought about 40 rolls of medium format and 40 rolls of 35mm in the past month.

>>3024347
what the fuck

that is such a good deal

>>3024349
This is why I can't stop.

The 20 rolls of 35mm of what is essentially 400H were cold stored and cost me $40. The 10 rolls of 120 Provia were also cold stored and cost me $45.

File: r4IUFPM.gif (473KB, 500x459px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 500x459px

>>3024347
>10 rolls of 220 Velvia 100
>$45

Got myself loads of super cheap film that expired 10-20 years ago.
Should I bother keeping them cooled or does it not matter anymore?

>>3024316
Hey, how'd you light his face? Was that plain sunlight, or did you use a reflector disk?

Is Rodinal terribly unsuited for B&W? I've heard it gets high grain, high contrast.

Any thoughts on Pyrocat HD? Anyone know where I can get in Canada?

>>3024373
B&W? Should be fine. Color, not so much.

>>3024376
>I've heard it gets high grain, high contrast.
True for low dilutions. It's pretty OK at 1+100.

Pyrocat-HD is a very fine grain, high acutance, semi-compensating developer. I like it with together with Acros. Tends to yield very low contrast, so useful in high contrast scenes. Highlights and shadows are saved, but midtones suffer in lack of contrast.

I've bought mine from:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pyrocat-HD-Staining-Film-Developer-to-make-28-litres-of-working-solution/122326563962?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D41376%26meid%3D23322afd08f842dcb0fda3b7d1820ef2%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D122326580775

Lasts forever (5 years or so). Cheap to use.

File: Capture4.png (22KB, 667x491px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 667x491px

>>3024333
Okay nice, will look into that.

Another question, in the OP pic I posted above it says to develop for 9.5 mins, however on this guys site with the same film and developer it says 7.5 mins. Which one should I go by?

>>3024381
>Pyrocat-HD
>but midtones suffer in lack of contrast.

However, because of this, I will be switching back to XTOL 1+3.

>>3024382
>This guys site

Use massive dev chart:
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Fuji+Neopan+100+Acros&Developer=Ilfosol+3&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C

Seems ilfosol 3 does not yield full film speed. XTOL does this.

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/201142795941192.pdf

File: printcontrast.jpg (427KB, 1465x1193px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 1465x1193px

>>3024381
1+100
Yeah, that's what I use it at.

I ask about Pyrocat because folks at LFPF swear by it for developing X-ray film. I'm finding Rodinal's high contrast results enhance the already extreme orthographic contrast of the film. It worsens shit like pic related. Which isn't to say it was a well metered or great shot.

I've been using a 022 yellow filter and getting slightly more even-toned results, and am wondering if maybe using Pyrocat HD would further help me in my attempt to emulate normal films.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2550
Image Height	3507
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	RGB
Horizontal Resolution	299 dpi
Vertical Resolution	299 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format

>>3024384
Thanks again. At this point I think I'm all set, just gotta wait on everything to get here so I can start shooting and developing

>>3024388
>developing X-ray film
Yeah, sounds like Pyrocat would do very well with that.

>>3024391
Have fun!

Im new to b&w developing. Just bought a D76 bag.

What are some interesting developers or techniques i should try? Saw some examples here of the ultra low contrast with pyrocat, i liked it. Also, whats with stand dev? can it be used to tame the severe grain from pushing HP5 to 3200?

>>3024396
>Also, whats with stand dev? can it be used to tame the severe grain from pushing HP5 to 3200?

Stand dev is a lazy way of getting your negatives developed. It tends to produce "haloing" around contrasty subjects. You basically let your film sit in the tank with dilute developer for 1 hour. Just a little agitation the first minute, then nothing the next 59 mins.

http://www.japancamerahunter.com/2013/10/black-white-film-development-lazy-people/

>tame the severe grain from pushing HP5 to 3200
There is this magical arcane developer called Diafine. It is said it will let you shoot Tri-X / HP5 at ISO 1600 with no increase in grain. So probably your best bet for ISO 3200. It's expensive though.

https://www.amazon.com/Diafine-Black-Developer-Concentrate-Solution/dp/B00009XVDX

>>3023102
Look up Cape Film Supply on Facebook. Good selection and they will ship to you for R100

what are some good books about film photography i could find in PDF?

>>3024326
>>3024319
man i wouldnt even fix that camera, those red and blue sticks are cool

Have any of you guys tried stand developing? What are your tips? I brought some rodiniol to develop some black and white. How have your results been?

>>3024034
Medium format film is crazy cheap compared to medium format digital and resolves like crazy if you treat it properly. It has a certain look that a lot of fashion photographers/magazine types really like. Then you get into proper large format which is a step up again so a lot of landscape types like it.

>>3024295
>on massive dev chart
>isn't using the amazing volume mixer page
smdh s e n p a i
Don't worry too much about the XTOL thing, use what you have as Acros is pretty much black magic. It works real well with DD-X too. There's a lot of rampant Kodak shills that populate this board that are worried about the companies recent performance. There's also a complete nutcase who makes terrible Acros suggestions to people.

If you must buy a developer to use specifically for Acros, import some of Fuji's Microfine.

>>3024316
>>3024286
>Fuji 400h is baller shit but it's overpriced.
Care to tell me what makes it overpriced? Circumstances are different in every country. Here Fujifilm emulsions are cheaper than kodak. A single roll of 400h or 160 is cheaper to buy than Portra/gold. Even their sheet film prices are far more competitive than you would think.
In places that aren't America, Fujifilm is offering the best value for money for hobbyists and pros alike.
>>3024412
muh sticky
muh ansel adams camera and negative series
>>3024424
They can be okay if you're poor or lazy, however the downsides outweigh the positives. If you must process with rodinal, pretty much everything but HP5 will turn out okay with 1+50.

>>3024430
>>3024295
>>3024305

XTOL and DD-X are both very good. Yields very similar results. I started out with DD-X, but it's expensive.

XTOL is a lot cheaper and non-toxic. Based on Vitamin-C

Completely new to film here, as you can tell from my question.

Can someone explain "pushing" film? What is the purpose of using a, say, 400 asa film and telling the camera you're using 1600 or whatever. What effect does it achieve for the film and I'm what on stances would you push film?

>>3024482
>What is the purpose of using a, say, 400 asa film and telling the camera you're using 1600 or whatever.
it causes the camera to underexpose the film. you then develop the film for longer. it affects grain and contrast of the resulting negative.

>>3024482
You basically gain access to faster shutter speeds / smaller apertures, but you get more grain, more contrast (which can paint you in a corner if you print in a darkroom) and you lose a lot of detail in the shadows. Personally when shooting film I do it for the look, not so much the speed gain. Especially since I don't use a "fast" developer like Microphen.

This is for black and white btw. I've only pushed color film once so I can't say much about that, other than that the results I got were not great.

File: Untitled (52).jpg (1MB, 3504x5124px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3504x5124px

>>3024131
bump

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:11:01 16:37:26
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 16752290224_07f52e2419_b.jpg (263KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 800x800px

>>3024416
Rodinal stand is great with Acros. I typically agitate at the 30min mark. Dilution 1:100 for 60min. Pic related.

So my T4 is acting screwy. Think the battery may be the culprit. Can I replace the battery midroll without the camera freaking out and trying to rewind/wind the film?

>>3024657
>Can I replace the battery midroll without the camera freaking out and trying to rewind/wind the film?

it will rewind the roll.

File: img126s.jpg (835KB, 1000x1008px) Image search: [Google]

835KB, 1000x1008px

120 Provia 100F expired 2002

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5892
Image Height	5940
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:18 20:31:37
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1008

File: IMGP4884.jpg (3MB, 9103x8946px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 9103x8946px

>>3022311
What's the best way to edit colour film scans, I.ve been having poor colour casts and can't seem to get consistent colours. I have PS and LR.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Photographer	MLF
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:18 20:36:09
Exposure Time	1/13 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	9103
Image Height	8946
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Macro

>>3024668
http://www.alexburkephoto.com/blog/2013/06/02/scanning-and-editing-color-negative-film

>>3024430
>isn't using the amazing volume mixer page
What the fuck, I searched all over google for this exact type of thing and couldn't find shit, and it was right under my nose the whole time

>>3024663
Fuck that's dumb. Guess I'll manually rewind it in the dark and replace the battery.

File: whoa.gif (640KB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

640KB, 200x150px

>>3024668

>81 megapixel scan

>>3024672
or just let it rewind it. Then use a film extractor or a piece of film you wet a little to make it sticky to get a film lead back out of the canister. Then load it again and shoot x number of black frames. X being the number of frames you have shot already.

In case you don't know what I'm talking about vis a vis film extraction, here is a cute Asian girl showing it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc00ULY7cYU

>>3024677
I've tried doing that and could never get it to work. :(

>>3024680
saliva works better.

>>3024684
Yeah, I think they say the film might be unhealthy for you but I have been licking mine for years.

>>3024674
Lmao little over kill maybe. That Fucking gif tho

File: 20170218-10-02-2017Superia025.jpg (918KB, 631x1000px) Image search: [Google]

918KB, 631x1000px

Getting to grips with scanning a little more, second roll through the Bessa

[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	2017:02:18 20:13:47
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 20170218-10-02-2017Superia023.jpg (987KB, 1000x643px) Image search: [Google]

987KB, 1000x643px

>>3024707

[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	2017:02:18 20:06:30
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3022743
Look for an ELM body, I think you get 1.5 frames per second. Not bad when you figure most of the 1988 Olympics was shot on a Nikon F3 with MD4 which gave you 3 frames per second on 35mm.

fast shooting is the only reason to look at an ELM now and because of that you can practically get them free.

>>3022746
right on, never used the sports finder on my crown graphic. nice to know it's there for a reason

File: IMG_4976.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

Used packfilm for the first time

File: IMG_4983.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>3024720
Fujifilm why would you discontinue this

>>3024722

Because they didn't make enough money off of it.

Why did you just use packfilm for the first time?

>>3024684
That's what I tried. Still didn't work.

>>3024375
Sorry for the late reply, the sun was punching through the clouds facing the subject making for some great lighting. This was just a holiday snap, I don't really carry artificial lighting or reflectors unless I'm specifically shooting a portrait

>>3024727
somethings wrong with you then.

Theres an mju ii on that auction site with a day left without bids yet, should I try and go for it? Or is it gonna get sniped?

(Ausphag here these cameras usually go for more)

>>3024760
these never go unnoticed. either its not THE mju ii, or its broken, or something.

>>3024760
It's a fantastic camera. Go for it. Odds are it will get bids though.

>>3024756
Damn. how many tries does it usually take? I tried for 10 minutes and gave up.

>>3024674
I can scan a 371 megapixel image for you if you want (and I'm only a small format pleb).

>>3024762
>>3024764
The starting price is 99. which is less in usd, so no bids yet.

What is THE mju ii?

Reread the description, says everything is working and comes with film

>>3024722
same reason they gave up on the super CCD
they care about the bottom line not your fucking art

>>3024769
THE Mju II is the fixed 35mm 2.8 lens version. Make sure it's not a MJU II Zoom. Just look at the lens to make sure it says 35mm 2.8 on it. I just sold my best to shit mju ii for $140.

>>3024771
Ah its a zoom, makes sense

>>3024770
They didn't have to retarded about it by not releasing the development process so others could try manufacturing it.

And don't tell me it may be a similar formula to Instax because it's fucking not.

File: 1476601693404.jpg (306KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 667x1000px

>>3024771
That should say *beat to shit*.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:16 15:59:08
Exposure Time	2.5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
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	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3024773
Yeah, fuck paying $99 for that.

>>3024722
>>3024720
>Why would you discontinue this
Well, consumers moved away from instant film as digital came down in price and even more when phones started having cameras. Then the 1h photo places at your supermarkets started accepting SD cards and the internet became a great way to instantly share photos.

The final nail in the instant film coffin? The real big bastard that did it in? Professionals. People stopped using polaroids for test exposures. As dslrs became more and more popular, you could shoot a test shot with a DSLR and have instant feedback. No waiting for the polaroid to develop.
I'd love to shoot some fp-3000b in 4x5 but it's not worth it for me.

>>3024774
The thing is that it's still not really profitable for anyone else to continue production of peel apart film. New55 even failed with their kickstarter and their products are flawed and overpriced.
You'd need a big manufacturer to take over production, which is unlikely to happen unless there is a demand for it. There's not enough of a demand for it. Tiny instant film is here to stay for the forseeable future.

So I added a fresh battery to the T4 and it seems to work fine now. However, the shutter lag still seems quite significant to me...especially for a camera that has this much hype. It's to the point where shooting street or moving subjects would be an issue. I'm used to the nearly instant shutter action of the Mju II. is the T4 actually slower or is there still something potentially wrong with mine?

>>3024795
>t4
seems to be a case of u buying a literal meme, son.

>>3024798
Calling something a meme means nothing when I've seen every camera called a meme at some point. So is the T4 actually shit and the speed I'm experiencing normal, or is mine messed up somehow? I'd say after prefocusing and then fully depressing the shutter there's a ~1 second delay before the picture is taken.

File: Screen Shot 2017-02-19 at 1.12.55 AM.png (18KB, 292x159px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 292x159px

>>3024799
why didn't you read about the memest camera before you bought it?

>>3024825
Yeah, I googled exactly that after making that post. Shutter lag seems to be the norm. The price was too good to pass up so I just grabbed it. Going to be an easy $200 profit.

Fuck the T4 for real. Stylus Epic is infinitely better.

How bad is macro on film?

>>3024830
what did he mean by this?

>>3024830
Macro slides will make you ejaculate.

>>3024827
are you slamming the shutter button?
you just have to half press, get the focus confirm then the shutter is near instantaneous
also the t4 has a much better lens than the stylus

>>3024845
Nah, I'm half pressing and getting confirmation lights before pushing all the way.

File: D3S_9968-left-1200.jpg (295KB, 1200x1083px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1200x1083px

>>3023427
nah, 1v is

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

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3024841
fuck now im tempted to get one of those medical PEN F's with the microscope lens mount.

File: IMG_20170219_163438.jpg (1MB, 2753x2164px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2753x2164px

Hello anons, I just picked pic related up from a flea market for 35 euros+this old case it had. Later found another guy selling a Pentax mg for 50 euros but I didn't have the cash on me. Is it worth getting it for 50 (comes with a 50mm 1.8 iirc)? Will I be able to sell it for a bit more maybe a bit later on?

I noticed it's quite a popular model, but I don't really know much about film

Pic related was apparently made in Dresden in the 70s
It's quite a bit bulkier/heavier than that pentax

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Nexus 5
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:02:19 16:35:06
Image Width	2753
Image Height	2164
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.4
Focal Length	3.97 mm
Lens Aperture	f/2.4
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448
Flash	No Flash
ISO Speed Rating	576
Exposure Time	16664153/500000000 sec

>>3024924
Why did Canon kill it off then?

I do the know anything about film cameras/film but I'm interested in getting into it. Any suggestions on decent cameras/film to get started?

>>3024953
spotmatic with the 50 1.4.

>>3024924
this, in terms of electronic features, the 1v was so complicated it was hard to use

>>3024953
really most film camera bodies will be fine, most people agree that ultimately they are just boxes that capture small bits of light. They'll have smaller features that separate them but really they'll all do you well. I'd recommend something with autofocus because doing manual focus slows you down and makes you more careful for sure, but sometimes shit happens around you and you'll want that speed.

for lenses start with a simple 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 or f/2. They are usually small and light and usually have nice optical quality. Those apertures will let you have more fun with depth of field and will work a bit better in lower light than something like a f/3.5 or f/4

Okay /faget/, help me riddle this out:

I have this dumb p&s that when you put an iso 100 roll, it thinks its handling an iso 1250 roll. I want to use it to do low light shots at about 1/60, so i need to trick it into thinking its handling a higher iso film, so the shutter goes fast enough. I need it to underexpose the shots bassically. But, since it will be iso 100, i will need to push the film too at the end. Lens is f.4.

How much should i push it in dev, and how much should i underexpose by mangling the DX code?

>>3025010
>thinks its handling an iso 1250 roll.
I put that backwards. You need to put the DX on 1250 to compensate and get properly exposed photos. Camera thinks iso 100 rolls are iso 12 or something.

What's the most technically advanced m42 or K-mount SLR? I'm looking for features like multispot metering, automatic aperture, center-weighted TTL metering, and shutter speeds up to 1/2000s. Mostly motivated by the apparent plethora of m42 and K-mount stuff from Japan and the former Soviet Union.

File: IMGP4884 copy.jpg (4MB, 8517x8602px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 8517x8602px

>>3024668
ok i tried

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Photographer	MLF
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	52 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	9103
Image Height	8946
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	2017:02:19 13:01:19
Exposure Time	1/13 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	8517
Image Height	8602
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Macro