Film General Thread

File: Nishika1.gif (881KB, 384x500px) Image search: [Google]

881KB, 384x500px

Finally shot and developed a Nishika roll.

>>3047516
this is real nice, post more

File: img13.jpg (364KB, 1111x741px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 1111x741px

Do you use Yellow filter for B&W ? Is it really usefull ?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EPSON
Camera Model	Perfection V700/V750
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.8 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	120 dpi
Vertical Resolution	120 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:28 15:02:01
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: 2016_FPP_C41_2_liter_kit.jpg (48KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x500px

Has anyone tried using the Unicolor C-41 Film Development Kit? Can it really be stretched to 30 rolls? Is it really as toxic as the label says? Any recommended alternatives?

>>3047518
I do when I shoot foliage sometimes
>>3047520
I use tetenal or whatever it is called. Pretty sure they're all toxic, just don't drink it

>>3047522
Yeah. I looked at Tetenal on B&H. I can't seem to get it shipped. It's only available for in store pickup. Also it seems to have a prop 65 warning on it.

File: DSC05183.jpg (204KB, 593x800px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 593x800px

>>3047518
If I'm shooting pan film in daylight.
With HP5 it gives you one more stop to play with, and a little more contrast without ruining skin tones.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:29 01:19:44
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	593
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3047523
thats because freestyle ships it

File: A004890-36.jpg (260KB, 1000x675px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 1000x675px

>>>3041211
I'll try again, c&c please?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.9 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:17 22:46:03
Color Space Information	sRGB

Jesus christ get over it. Its dead.

Hello what is good replacement battery for SP 675 mercury cell?

>>3047520
I bet if you did all your rolls in a week you could stretch it, but casually deving over a longer period of time deteriorates the blix (I heard somewhere the developer can last longer but cause the blix is mixed it doesn't last as long) reheating the chemicals deteriorates them. I usually get my deving done in a day or two (10-12 rolls) then chuck it and mix a new one for my next set of rolls. Depends how much colour you shoot and honestly I haven't looked into it cause it's way fucking cheaper then going to a lab even only doing 12 rolls a box of Chem. supposedly the results you get back won't plummet as the chem deteriorates so if you have 30 rolls to dev, mix up your chem and keep deving till you get declining results. Like I said still cheaper then a lab if you have a dev tank, a thermometer and a sink.

File: 8714E6F1-AA39-4562-9E76-28BBAEB160D7-7903-000005A2A2E29C1C.jpg (150KB, 768x1096px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 768x1096px

>>3047596
For what camera, I'd just google it desu, I got this.

What's the best light meter app for Android? They all seem like they have retarded clunky UIs and are plastered with ads, are there any decent ones that I'm missing?

>>3047604
Its old cosina and i did some googling and seems like i need a cell that provides 1.35 V.
One site recommends wein cell batterys https://www.amazon.co.uk/Wein-MRB675-Non-mercury-Replacement-PX675/dp/B0002GVSWQ/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8 but i was wondering if it would be possible to use some cheaper brands. Im totally noob in this situation

>>3047638
Tbh it might be easier to get a different camera, I've used zinc air batteries on a Konica C35 and it worked fine, I think the meter read a little over so I just compensated with the iso setting. That was a while ago though. sorry not much help.

>>3047631
I usually use a sekonic meter but in a pinch LUMU app worked fine, assuming it's for android.

>>3047516
What settings did you use for the gif? I can never quite get it right for mine.

File: R1-1A.jpg (2MB, 1818x1228px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1818x1228px

Nikon F3
Kodak Gold 200

File: R1-32A.jpg (1MB, 1818x1228px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1818x1228px

>>3047688

>>3047688
huh, i expected more from a Nikon F

>>3047694
just a snapshit and crappy lab scan

>>3047421

About the slow film, I was thinking of bringing a tripod and doing a long exposure.

Should I stick with velvia then, or do you have other slide suggestions?

I'll shoot the negative stuff first while i'm getting the hang of it since its so cheap, and make sure to use the flash if i'm going to any depth at all

File: FH000036.jpg (3MB, 3637x2433px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3637x2433px

Here's one from my point and shoot Yaschica with Carl Zeiss lens.

>>3047746
goddamn, that is some beautiful color, what film?

You know, I got a question for you /p/:

Is it true still that you shouldn't travel and put your film rolls through the x-ray scanner? I apologize for my ignorance but I heard somewhere that it either messes up the film or something (urban myth or legend probably)

I ask because I've been thinking of bringing just film gear on a vacation for comfy feels. Thanks in advance.


... Oh! Also, any Canon lenses you would suggest for an FD lens user / "must shoot" film in 35mm ? 120 film? (Hasselblad 500C)

>>3047746
How did it feel when you realised u got memed?

File: FH000037.jpg (3MB, 2433x3637px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2433x3637px

>>3047746
Ektar 100. Here's another.

>>3047765
I'm not sure I know what you mean.

>tfw its fucking HARD to find c-41 and e-6 chemicals in australia
FUCK

File: CNV00031.jpg (2MB, 1228x1818px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1228x1818px

>>3047766
>Ektar 100

mah boi.

This is from my first roll, and the scans were shit so was the dev, but my fuck, are the colours there.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM Corporation
Camera Model	Frontier SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJIFILM Corporation FEII software
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:12 11:57:54
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1228
Image Height	1818

>>3047694
A camera is a light tight box, you mongoloid.
Film and lense determine potential image quality, scan technique determines final image quality.
Classic /p/-style is to spend the most money on the least important link in the imaging chain, >>3047688 and >>3047691 demonstrate this perfectly.
>i just spent $300 on and olympus mjeme, whats the best scanner I can get for $100, anyone tried fomapan?

>>3047770
it's gotta be a hard life to have to go tell people they are mentally challenged to prove a point. =)

>>3047767
>>3047766
>>3047746
You may as well have shot through the bottom of a coke bottle m8. The outer third of the frame is fucked.

>>3047757
have them hand screen it.

File: petebiking2.jpg (205KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 800x533px

>>3047631
LightMeter with the old school meter icon works great on my phone.

>>3047685
200 milliseconds. And image order of 1 2 3 4 3 2 so it creates a back and forth loop. I used some online gif creator.

>>3047688
>>3047691
Good exposures and focus, but super boring images.

>>3047701
Velvia would be OK.

>>3047757
Don't put it in your checked bag and you'll be fine.

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

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

>>3047757
>Canon lenses you would suggest for an FD lens user
The 35/2.8 and the 50/3.5 are real gems. Small, light, razor sharp. If you have a grand burning a hole in your pocket, the 85L is penomenal also.

>>3047757
>"must shoot" film in 35mm
Agfa Precisa, Fuji Velvia, Provia, Superia (all speeds), Tri-X/HP5, Rollei Retro 80S. These films are all available new, and can give really stunning results. In 120, grain and sharpness don't really matter so much, so just shoot whatever gives you the colours or contrast you like.

>>3047802
Hey! Thanks a lot! I'll look into those lenses and look around for those films. I''m Chicagoland based so I got options, and I believe if I look around LA and San Diego I'll find shops that carry that or some rare films as well!

Cheers!

>>3047787

>>3047778
So have them hand screened... Cool Thanks a lot!

>>3047757
I've put film through the x-ray scanner and it's fine.

FD lenses-wise, the 28mm f2.8, absolutely tack sharp and superb. Are you in the UK? I'm selling one... *rubs hands*.

>>3047809

No, sorry I'm in the states: Illinois

>>3047520
Your pic related is a 2 liter kit. It is good for a decent bit more than 30 rolls. I've easily run 50 rolls through the same kit, though it carried the Unicolor label. And that is over a year and a half time span. Chems stored in plastic soda bottles, air squeezed out after each use. This shit is indestructible, no lie.

As to the toxicity, there are no c41 chems that are going to be less toxic. That said, treat these chems as you should treat any photo chems: use common sense and you will come to no harm. Incidental contact with the working solutions won't hurt you. I've been using the same microwave that I eat out of to heat the chems for the last 5 years and I feel better than ever. Do some research on how to dispose of the blix.

Come to think of it, I still have a 2 liter kit I mixed up around June 2015 sitting poorly stored in my closet. It has about 40 rolls through it. I will blow off a roll of Ultramax this week and see if it still works. All for you /p/ :)

>>3047809
>>3047802

I have a 50mm 1.8 and a 35-70mm 3.5 and they, you know...take photos, but I will look into this glass to get optimal sharpness.

File: 17269376701_b98c1a378d_b.jpg (105KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x533px

>>3047813
I have a 28mm 2.8 in great condition. $50 shipped and it's yours.

Pic related and >>3047787 was shot using it.

File: fgh.jpg (649KB, 1818x1228px) Image search: [Google]

649KB, 1818x1228px

Questions from a film beginner:

Pic related - kodak colorplus 200 35mm, cheap lab scan

Would a better scan improve the image sharpness e.g. the door or is it inherently like this due to the cheap film used?

Also I notice that when shooting plants hey have a sort of "wet" look like in the bush of pic related. Is there an explanation for it?

>>3047812
For someone who doesn't have their hands on a kit, can you answer a few more detailed questions?

What's the basic rundown of the process? There's heating involved, as I can see from your post.

Is it easy to fuck up? I'd love to grab the E-6 kit but E-6 film is so expensive and most of my shit is no-longer-produced expired stuff. Don't want to ruin it making retard mistakes or messing up shit that requires fine tolerances and meticulous attention to detail.

>>3047825
Oh, and last question:

When you reuse it, are you just pouring the liquids right back into the bottles, like re-bottling used stop/fix?

>>3047518
It's really handy for turning cheap orthochromatic films into almost normal looking film if you're willing to lose a few stops' light.

>>3047822
$50 huh?

PayPal work? How do I contact you with the info and such?

>>3047822
Sent you a message on Flickr, hombre

>>3047768
I know your pain, my dude.
I just ordered 2 1-litre Unicolor kits from burgerland. 21 shekels each, 25 for postage.
It'll take like a month to get here, but it's still cheaper than eBay.

File: NT_UN54-500x420.jpg (107KB, 500x420px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 500x420px

>"This films is far too good for it’s intended use in cinematic photography!"

>"Quite simply this is one of the loveliest black & whites available, right up there with FP4 and Plus-X in fact some say it’s superior…..it holds great detail, sharpness and superb tonal detail."

>"For some reason it’s very popular with OLYMPUS TRIP USERS…the two go together like strawberries & cream!"

Top kek! I've lost it!

Are they trying to scam dumb hipsters or what?

>>3047768
>>3047835

https://www.thefilmbloke.com.au/

thank me later brodies

>>3047823
This is just an extremely garbage scan. All 35mm film has way more resolution than what you posted.

Find somewhere else to develop and scan your film

File: JPEG_20170325_123732.jpg (1MB, 3024x4032px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3024x4032px

Picked up the Nikon s2 with the 2.8cm, the 5cm f1.4, and the 13.5 cm all in mint condition and a roll of tmax. Does anybody have any tips and tricks shooting a s2? Or should I sell it all and buy a m3?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Huawei
Camera Model	Nexus 6P
Camera Software	angler-user 7.1.2 NPG47I 3795619 release-keys
Sensing Method	Unknown
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:25 12:37:32
Exposure Time	1/24 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	524
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Brightness	0 EV
Metering Mode	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.67 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3024
Image Height	4032
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3047875
Sell it, get a Bessa R2, or a Contax G2

>>3047596
Hearing aid batteries (675) are very close. They do deteriorate over time, even when not used. Let them 'breathe' for a while (15min) after peeling off the airtight tab before inserting

>>3047882
Why? Also my rz67 mk ii seems to be malfunctioning. It constantly flashes a red light even though I ran through the check list from the manual and everything seems to be in working order

>>3047890
Because.

Actually, fuck if I know. Do whatever the hell you want, it affects me in exactly zero ways. Smash it and post it up on youtube.

>>3047573
Thanks, but 54 bucks for 12 reels? I think I'll just stick to Unicolor.

File: 17060051997_398803ddf7_b.jpg (121KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 700x700px

>>3047827
>>3047833
Messaged ya back on Flickr.

>>3047870

>67 dollarydoos for a litre of Unicolor C41
>plus postage

Ya galah.
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/10123-Unicolor-Powder-C-41-Film-Negative-Processing-Kit-1-Liter

HEY FAGGOTS GUESS WHAT I SHOOT FUCKING FILM HAHAHA NO ONES GONNA STOP ME

I wish I could shoot with film, but I don't want to wait for development and I do not have access to a dark room.

File: DSC04300.jpg (406KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 1200x800px

>>3047825
My comments above concern only the c41 kit. I have also used the liquid e6 kit from Freestyle, but I can't comment on yield or longevity because I don't shoot enough e6.

As to a process rundown for c41: plastic tank (better insulator), I do not use a water bath, heat chems in the microwave, 107F Blix, 103F Dev, prerinse tank with steady running water at ~104 for about a minute, when Dev drops to 102F pour into tank, 3:30 for fresh chems, agitate first 30secs then 2 inversions every 15 secs, pour out, dev will have lost 2 degrees in the process which is totally fine, no rinse, pour in blix, agitate first 30 seconds and routinely thereafter to a total of 8-10 mins. Pour out blix, rinse in running ~100F tap water for 3 minutes, then rinse in a bath of either photoflo or Flexicolor final rinse (FUCK that stabilizer that comes with the kit. Leaves crusty white shit all over the film.)

I've yet to ruin a roll of film with this method. I have underdeveloped, overdeveloped, undertemped, overtemped, it all comes out in the scan (within reason). And since there ain't nobody still doing c-prints with an enlarger, minor variances in development does. not. matter. It will all come out in the scan.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Capture One Pro (for Sony) 10.0 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/4 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-2.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Image Width	1200
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard

>>3047914
Guess film isn't for you then.

You don't need a darkroom btw.

Forgive me if I fuck up the names of some of the below items, but I'm super new to photography. To the point, though. I came into a lot of gear recently from my aunt who used to shoot professionally. A pair of Nikon F100 bodies (plus another lower-end camera that escapes me), a Sigma 28-90mm D AF Aspherical lens, a Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di, and another telephoto which I can't recall the name of right now as it's upstairs someplace, as well as a nice tripod with pistol grip and some lighting gear. Meters, flashes, spotlights, that sort of thing. I bought some (7 rolls) drugstore Kodak Ultramax and Fuji Superia Xtra 400 to sort of get into the learning process. Problem is, I have no idea where to start with any of this stuff. I have a bare-minimum understanding of technical terms, so be gentle. What do I need to know and what should I keep in mind when I'm starting out?

>>3047940
Do you know how exposure works?

>>3047949

To an extent, but not anywhere near 100%. If I'm not way off, I grasp that film speed is the sensitivity of the film itself to light, shutter speed determines how long your aperture stays open and that the F Stop determines how wide it opens. As I understand it, you balance those two to get a good amount of light for a clear shot (I think the F100 assists in balancing as well) but I'm lost beyond that. Also, I should note that I haven't finished reading my user manual - figured I might need some more basic info before the depth of customization really makes sense to me. A few rereads are probably going to be in order.

>>3047940
Grab one F100, put the 28-90mm on it, set the lens at 50mm and leave it there, put camera on P mode, work on focusing and composition and holding the camera still.

Did your aunt give you any darkroom gear, development tanks, chemicals, changing bags, etc? I mean, professionals used to shoot mostly slide back before digital came along, but there's an off chance. Mainly studying photography with film should happen with black and white, and maybe a scanner -- if you don't want to spend on a halfway nice digital compact or some such just to study the basics without the lab turnaround.

>>3047875
I know who this is!

>>3047961

Can do! I'll actually be going out tomorrow or over the weekend to shoot with a few friends. One of them has experience with film photography so I think he will be able to give a few pointers.

She didn't - if I recall, she had a friend who worked in a local lab (now closed) who would do special processing jobs for her. If I want to avoid drugstore mail-order labs, I think I'm stuck going to a lab that's about a half hour away - totally doable - or investing in development gear and learning to do it myself. I do have a Canon Rebel T4i with two of the bundled lenses on loan from family (indefinitely) that I can use to pick up on focusing and composition in general if that would be helpful, but I'm not on any time crunch as far as learning, so the lab turnaround doesn't really bother me.

>>3047970
Immediate feedback ("chimping") is very helpful in the process of trying stupid shit, and you won't have to pay like half a dollar per frame. I'd suggest learning the major technical concepts on the rabble, since they'll be mostly the same on film as well.

On the other hand, the F100 is a lot better body than any rabal. So therein lies the rub. Anyway, if you do end up practicing with film, start taking notes on how you shot once you deviate at all from the "P mode, EC at 0, ISO set correctly" scheme.

Also, don't look at the sun through a SLR finder.

File: f79.png (401KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 600x450px

>>3047875

>>3047872

If my negatives were developed in a cheap lab, can a good quality scan still make a difference?

>>3047974
that has to be the most awkward way to hold a camera ever.

File: 10616885_452081788310834_999956331_n.jpg (105KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1080x1080px

what camera is this?

>>3048039
see >>3047770

After exposing colour neg film can you store it back in the fridge for a while before developing? If so how long before you would start to notice loss of quality etc

File: 旭日旗_2[1].png (16KB, 320x214px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x214px

Im going to yodobashi in a week. What am I in for?

File: 17945410742_cc57c280bf_b.jpg (205KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 800x800px

>>3048064
A fuck ton of digital cameras and a tiny film section.

where can i get microfiber cloths for cheap?

Bronica users, specifically SQ-A, have you ever used a flash with it? I want to try some flash portraits, what would you recommend? I've read that I'll need manual flash and PC sync or using the grip. I was also looking for a trigger to go with the flash.

>>3048134
I just use the speed grip and put a flash on it (ETRS)

>>3048135
And you have any problems synching? Would a cheap auto speedlite, like those from yongnuo, work? Or does it have to be manual?

File: 20170329_163209.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>3048139
No, I just use a slow shutter speed, 60 or slower. The one I use for the ETRS is an ancient AGFA flash, it always works. For some reason, my more modern flashes won't fit the hot shoe.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	SM-G901F
Camera Software	G901FXXS1CQA7
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3264
Image Height	1836
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:29 16:32:09
Exposure Time	1/124 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	50
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	5.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash
Focal Length	4.80 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	1836
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	F16USHD01SA

Whats a good ISO film to start?

>>3048185
400

>>3048056
bump

>>3048051
An old roll film Polaroid converted to 4x5.

>>3048185
ISO 37,1. Don't go for the ISO 171 stuff people recommend because it reticulates so badly. You just need to watch out for bromide drag so tell the lab to stand develop it and cross process it and then scan it with a Noritsu Frontier and you should be good.

>>3048185
6400 then work your way down to 0.05

>>3048185
400 is the best place to start. Anything above 1600 is for shit light/being lazy.

File: nsVNghv.jpg (152KB, 841x863px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 841x863px

>>3048195

>>3048195
kek

File: img20170329_10423651_3.jpg (909KB, 2970x2082px) Image search: [Google]

909KB, 2970x2082px

Anon who bought the shitty neg "scanner" from Lidl. I wisened up and scanned the prints I got from my local lab. I used the scanners I can use for free at my uni. (They have Epson DS-6500 which go up to 9600 dpi, lol)

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Paint.NET v3.5.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:29 10:45:01

>>3048220
Looks decent, what film is this?

File: img20170328_15022889_3_50.jpg (361KB, 1712x1162px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1712x1162px

>>3048236
Portra 160. 15 second exposure at f/3.5 (I think), First roll of film I've ever shot, so there was a lot of trash on that roll; out of focus, over-exposed and all that.

This one is from my second roll, Tmax 400.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.16
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:29 00:13:23
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

>>3047514
What are some decent compat cameras that shouldn't cost more than 20 €?

>>3048185
Somewhere around 0.000001. It was good enough for Nièpce to start with, so it should be good enough for you

File: 76766.jpg (2MB, 2970x2082px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2970x2082px

>>3048220

I got bored.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:29 22:19:27
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2970
Image Height	2082

>>3047920
So do I need a Jobo monster for this shit or can it be done by hand?

File: Yashica mat EM.jpg (265KB, 1011x1024px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1011x1024px

I'm about to get my first MF camera (pic related). I got it for 81 eurobucks, and the seller assured me that everything should work properly.

Anything should I know before loading my first 120 roll into this Yashica ?

>>3048220

Looks like some shitty place in France.
C'est ça ?

>>3048064
Unfortunately not alot these days. Fuji some Kodak about whats available anywhere else but i guess natura is nice.

>>3048133
>where can i get microfiber cloths for cheap

If you are in the states, Advance Auto and Auto Zone sell packs of like ten 14"x12" microfiber cloths for about 5 bucks. Look for them near the car wax section.

>>3048282
You absolutely do not need a Jobo unless you plan to process more than 5 rolls a day. A patterson-style tank sized for how many rolls you plan to do at once is all you need. As I said, I do not use any water bath whatsoever with c41. I do, however, fill the sink with hot water when I do e6.

>>3047514
Not really a poorfag here but just bought my first house so have other priorities to take care of first.

I want to get into medium format for less than $50 dollars if that is even possible. I would be willing to go up to $100 but I don't want to go much more. I would prefer something where I can control it fully manual. Any recommendations?

>>3048333
i'm in canada
but i'll check out some auto shops here
why the hell do they have microfiber cloths?

File: DSC02858.jpg (265KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1500x1000px

>>3048351
m8 your first two rolls of velvia will cost you more than that once you get them developed.
Ante up or choose a cheaper hobby.
That said, pic related is your best bet.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:20 14:18:36
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	1.1 EV
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Flash
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3048359
I plan on self-developing anyway. I currently shoot a shit ton of 35mm b&w and film cost isn't that big of an issue. How are the brownie cameras? I've actually considered them just to be able to shoot medium format.

>>3048240
I like it. The chain link fence actually improves it.

I just missed out on a 700$ CAD jobo lift kit. Mega fucking sad.

File: BrownieOrtho01-4mini.jpg (96KB, 547x800px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 547x800px

>>3048360
The lense is fine, you just need to hold the camera still and get your exposure right.
I usually budget around f/19 and it's in the ballpark for neg film.

>>3048056
bump

>>3048056
You can, but I wouldn't advise that you do it for more than a year. I usually shoot 15 rolls and then develop them all at once since the chemicals for C41 dev go off pretty quickly, and I just leave the rolls just in room temperature. No problems yet

Modern emulsions are really stable, I wouldn't worry too much about colour shifts unless you plan on leaving the roll a few years

File: IMG_3295.jpg (178KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1600x1067px

>>3048351
Agfa Clack is your best bet. You can choose between two apertures and it doesn't have anything but 1/30s shutter time. So you'll get nothing extra out of MF, but it sure is <100usd

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1067

>>3048351
Pick up a TLR or something like that.

You can pick up a Yashica Mat pretty cheaply, might cost you a little more than $100 but it's worth it. It's a fully featured camera, and pretty much just as good as the Rolleiflex that it's a knockoff of.

I wouldn't bother with any of these toy cameras you're being recommended, you're gonna be dissapointed after shooting manual 35mm cameras

>>3048464
Alright thanks mate

>but I wouldn't advise that you do it for more than a year
Nah it wouldn't be that long, probably less than a month

>>3048366
Ehh what do you need that for??

File: IMG_0370.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

My first film rangefinder. How did I do?

>>3048507
I have one of those, but the shutter sticks, so the results are... very artistic.

>>3048281
Thanks, that looks a lot better this way. I just posted those the way they came out of the scanner. The only thing I did was lower the saturation a bit in the scanner settings.

>>3048286
Germany actually. Bielefeld to be precise.

>>3048361
Thanks! Might have been even better if I had hit the focus properly on that icy pipe, but I'm happy with how it turned out.

File: Ektar_002.jpg (351KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 750x1000px

GA645+EKTAR
A
6
4
5
+
E
K
T
A
R

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

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

>>3048576
the silhouette of ur qt's tt is the best thing about this
>tfw no longer have halfbreed white asian gf ;_;

>>3048582
I'm more interested in what she's cooking, but I'm also pretty gay, so there's that. :^)

>>3048601
it's scrambled eggs and bacon isn't it pal

your powers of deduction aren't so good hey

>>3048603
If he thinks dicks are for sucking and boy butts are for fucking, he's clearly undergoing some cognitive impairment.

>>3048603
Thought so at first, too, but a saucepan full of eggs isn't how I scramble mine.

>>3048605
>>>/b/

Thoughts on the FED 5?

>>3048608
Russian piece of shit. You honestly won't find one that's not broken in some way or another.

If you want a cheap rangefinder, buy a Canon P (or if you want a lightmeter, Canon 7). Infinitely better build quality, and you can still use all the leica thread mount lenses you wanted to use on the FED

How does the Epson V600 shatbed hold up nowadays for 120 film? How big a difference in quality between it and the V700/750?

I would prefer the V700/750 but no one on ebay sells them new, and the couple selling used overseas are so overpriced due to shipping cost that I'd be better off spending a bit more and buying a new V800 (I don't want to spend $850 on a scanner atm).

>>3048617
I use a V600 for 120 and I'm quite satisfied with the results (for 35mm too). Don't think there's really that much of a difference between those 3 models desu

File: Ektar_001.jpg (576KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 750x1000px

>>3048582
T-thanks.

>>3048606
Omelette yo

>>3048617
DSLR scan is better if you already own a good digi. Otherwise yeah, just get a v600.

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

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

>>3048625

this. I got laughed at early on in the days of DSLR scanning for some slides I posted but look, now everyone is doing it even camera shops are.

The jig isn't hard to fab up I have a picture somewhere. You'll need an external flash and a sync cord to illuminate the slide from behind. I made the whole thing from a small cardboard box. You will want to use a decent telephoto macro or 55mm macro if you have one.

>>3048608

It's shit, that's coming from one of the biggest proponents of Soviet RFs on this board. FED2 is better and was built when the Soviet Union was competing with the United States to prove they could achieve German build quality on Communism without the need for capitalist pigs, and we all know how that ended. After 1970 Soviet QC fell off and went south like the Wehrmacht after getting their asses handed to them on a Mosin-Nagant in Stalingrad.

>>3048621
Realistically what's the biggest you could print with good results?

>>3048625
>DSLR scan
Yeah that's what I'm doing currently, but it's a real pain in the ass taking 6 images per photo then having to stitch them in lightroom, it's fiddly, real time consuming, and depending on what's in the photo it will sometimes refuse to stitch properly.

Since now I only using my dslr for scanning and metering, the idea was to sell it and buy a dedicated scanner along with a small, light and portable camera for metering (and in the off chance I want to shoot digi I can still use that)

>>3048630
I don't really print 120, but I can get a usable A3 sized print from a good 35mm scan

File: Provia400x_004.jpg (309KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1000x667px

>>3048630
>taking 6 images per photo then having to stitch them in lightroom

Why in the hell are you doing that? I take a sine photo and then crop. If I ever need to print big I'll go back and rescan with the stock method.

Stitching every shot you scan is madness.

[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	2017:03:10 17:38:44
Exposure Time	2.5 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.3 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3048635
I like having a nice big scan to work with. When I did my first scan attempt I tried a single image per photo but the results I got were shit, and if something every happens to the original negatives then it's nice knowing I've still got a good scan. I don't know man, I'm an autistic fgt

>>3048632
Alright that's good to know, cheers

>>3048632
>I can get a usable A3 sized print from a good 35mm scan
Really? I felt I was pushing the scanners limits printing 12"x12" from 120. I used properly adjusted BetterScanning holders too.

File: 20160916_104559_Richtone(HDR).jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>3048608
it's a rangefinder with a failure-prone cloth shutter, an acceptable set of shutter speeds and an abysmal viewfinder with zero framing/parallax indication. it's great as an entry level $10 RF to get an idea of rf workflow but that's about it. worth if for that price, completely not worth the bother for more. Everything beyond the shit viewfinder is subjective illogical hatred. you'll need a lightmeter to use it to its full extent, too.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SM-P605
Camera Software	P605XXUCNF2
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	32 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3264
Image Height	1836
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:16 10:45:59
F-Number	f/2.4
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Focal Length	3.40 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	1836
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Unknown

Thoughts on the CanoScan FS4000US? Most online reviews seem a bit old, anybody still use this scanner and have some sample images?

>>3048666
where to cop that light meter?

>>3048666
>nokia E2
god damn i loved that phone when i owned it, until the keyboard failed.. too bad it still costs around 100$ for one in good condition

Loaded some freezer stored Sensia 400 that expired in 2009. Going to use it at box speed because my camera only does full stops for ISO. What kind of tones should I expect from this film?

File: img20170328_14552309_3_50.jpg (398KB, 1716x1159px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 1716x1159px

I just noticed something about the prints I got.
So, my local lab only develops colour film and they send in b/w film to a larger company. Normally, they'd just have the film developed there and do the prints themselves if customers (like me) ask for them. But the new guy/intern/whatever fucked up and forgot to write "develop only" on the bag and so the large, factory-style lab added their shitty prints.

I mean, look at this shit. The black bar on the righthand side isn't a wall or something, its the fucking transition to the next image.
I was 100% sure that I stood right in the middle of the hall when I took the shot...

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.16
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	600 dpi
Vertical Resolution	600 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:30 20:48:22
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

File: neg.jpg (338KB, 2048x1605px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 2048x1605px

>>3048742
...and I did

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-28 at 22.31.08.png (2MB, 1100x1458px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1100x1458px

>>3047746
>>3047766
>>3047769
Okay guys, I must be doing something terribly wrong because this is what I'm getting out of DSLR scanning Ektar.

Tips?

My method is basically backlighing the film through a piece of semi transparent plastic with a flash and then I shoot the film using a telephoto lens with an extension tube at around f/11, exposing "to the right".

I surely must be doing something terribly wrong because my scans look like garbage.

Sorry for PNG.

File: _MG_6801.jpg (307KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 2000x1333px

>>3048747
this is what the scan looks like before processing it raw

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Macintosh)
Photographer	PETER_WILKINS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:30 20:36:58
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1333
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: 14909013269325.jpg (309KB, 1234x967px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1234x967px

>>3048744

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1605
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	2017:03:30 22:03:26
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1234
Image Height	967

File: 14909026253402.jpg (349KB, 821x1234px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 821x1234px

>>3048749
From your "raw".
>Curves alt+auto - > per channel contrast

Your neg is also underexposed.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Photographer	PETER_WILKINS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1333
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	2017:03:30 22:07:13
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	821
Image Height	1234
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3048701
eastern Poland antiques streetmarkets, ex eastern bloc auction sites, local museums and skips.
>>3048715
designated clock and mp3 player, infinite battery life

>>3048757
>>Curves alt+auto - > per channel contrast
I knew about that, but I thought it looked pretty bad when I did that, or at least not as good as the many examples of ektar that i've seen in this thread.

Could it be this?:
>Your neg is also underexposed.
What do you mean by this? The picture in the film is underexposed or the picture I took of the film is underexposed?

thanks

>>3048755
Thanks, anon. I think I'll pay my lab a visit tomorrow and see what they can do about it. Maybe a discounted set of prints or something.

>>3048764
>underexposed
The film is almost transparent in the shadows >>3048749

No detail. Try exposing ektar at ISO 50 instead. It will be denser, and slightly less contrasty, but you'll get good shadows.

>>3048532
I think your original looked better desu

>>3048626
Oh yeah, why don't you post some of those "early slides" so we can all have a laugh again, Sugar?

>>3048666
What is the ground made of in this photo, slavshit?

>>3048737
>What kind of tones
>K Y S
>Y
>S

What is all the hype about the Makina 67 about? Is it actually worth $1500?

File: 1000px--18.jpg (342KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 667x1000px

>>3048774
Thank you. After fucking around with it I got to this point which seems okay (not amazing still) to me.

I will expose Ektar at ISO 50 next time. Is this a thing with Ektar (or new Ektar)?

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

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

I was running my finger around the rim of my lens as I hiked because I have autism and I like the feeling of the grooves. But then it unscrewed a bit and thats how I discovered that my camera has had a Skylight Filter on it this whole time and I never knew.

>>3048790
Color negatives in general does not like being underexposed. Ektar even more so, for some reason.

File: 1000px--19.jpg (410KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 667x1000px

>>3048790
this one looks better

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

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

File: 1490902625340.jpg (230KB, 545x800px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 545x800px

>>3048790
DSLR cuck scanner here.
I concur that your neg is parlously underexposed.
Your scan is underexposed too, however.
It's fine to let the sprocket holes blow out, you want to get the neg itself as close to clipping as possible.
Also, working on your raw file, you want to normalise the colour there as much as possible, by adjusting your white balance (if the range of adjustments in your raw converter make this possible) or curves(if necessary). When you need to massively increase the contrast, like in your scan, this will give you less blocking, banding, whatever.

I wouldn't necessarily encourage you to shoot your Ektar at 50, you will get good results if you meter properly for 100. Consistently underrating your film is more like a "hack" that relies on the overexposure latitude of neg film to stop you from underexposing it no matter what fuckery your meter does, but in a lot of scenes you're just throwing away a stop of shutter speed. What camera were you using? A centre weighted meter should have given more exposure in this scene.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Photographer	PETER_WILKINS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:31 07:31:03
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	545
Image Height	800
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: 1000px--23.jpg (245KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1000x667px

>>3048804
>What camera were you using? A centre weighted meter should have given more exposure in this scene.
Thanks for the detailed answer m8. I'm pretty sure it was an EOS 100/Elan. I was probably using Evaluative (the one that measures the whole viewfinder, not sure what name it's got) which I usually get away with using my dslr but clearly didn't quite work using film...

I've been messing around a bit more and came with a workflow that's giving me some pretty nice (I like them so I'm happy) colors.

Also I see that there is quite a lot of difference in how each of us has scanned my frame. For me obviously the one that looks the best is >>3048790 the one I made since I was there and that's what things were looking like (it was -4C and about to snow like crazy, pic related). Is this usually how it's done, by eye?

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

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

File: 1000px--22.jpg (249KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 1000x563px

>>3048812
more decent colors

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

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

File: 1000px--21.jpg (422KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1000x667px

>>3048813
and this'll do with flooding this thread with my photos

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

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

>>3048771
By the way, is it normal for lab prints to only cover around 90% of the negatives?

I noticed that on the other roll I've had developed as well. To be fair, those prints were only 9x13, so I'm guessing they should naturally have some stuff missing left and right.
But with regular 10x15 prints that shouldn't be the case, right? I noticed that on almost all of the prints; the example in >>3048742 is just the most extreme case.

>>3048812
I would usually avoid using a matrix-type meter, because you really have no idea what it's trying to do. (what it's really trying to do is stop you blowing out slide film)
The Elan lets you select centre weighted metering, and has an exposure lock button on the back shoulder, that's how I shoot it.

And of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. They're your photos, you decide how they look.

>>3048823
good, good.
let the labcucking flow through you...

>>3048824
Thanks again, very helpful.

We'll see how the next roll of Ektar turns out, I'll be travelling to Norway soon.

File: dslrcuck.jpg (874KB, 1094x1622px) Image search: [Google]

874KB, 1094x1622px

>>3048749
>>3048757
I tired too. I'd say the worst part is that you're letting in stray light on the right side of the negative. Also like everyone else said the negative is underexposed quite a bit. Also we only have a jpg so editing is further fucked.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Photographer	PETER_WILKINS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2000
Image Height	1333
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	2017:03:30 17:08:36
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1094
Image Height	1622
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3048836
Also looks like you're getting lens fall off on the wide edges of the negative too, results in a "bokeh" look/ slight vignetting.

Filmfriends, all this time I've been inverting my Paterson universal tank for agitation. But I recently noticed the instructions say "_or_ open tank with lift rod agitation"

Does this mean I can just agitate using the rod? I feel like an idiot, spilling blix all over the place during inversions. What's the best manner to agitate using the rod? Spin in one direction? Forcefully turn left and right?

>>3048847
Well m8 I don't think it matters too much just don't attach a fucking drill to it and spin it 1000rpms. I'd imagine a nice left spin right spin would suffice, that's what i've done in the past.

>>3048635
I'm a fan of your work, what lens do you use with your A7 to scan film?

>>3048518
>Artistic

You mean light leaky and over all shitty?

>>3048742
>>3048744
>>3048755
>getting a lab to process your B&W

you asked for this

>>3048854
Thanks buddy. I use a Canon FD 50mm macro.

>>3048859
Care to elaborate? That was literally my second roll of film I've ever shot.
And it's hardly my fault if the new guy is too dumb to write "develop only" on the bag, even though I even overheard his boss tell him to do exactly that, because he knew the prints would turn out crap.

>>3048847
Blix is good for your skin, don't worry about it.
Also, you can properly seal your paterson with some selastiky schmoo, they leak around the join of the red and black plastic, usually the lid is pretty fine.
I always invert because simply rod twirling doesn't induce any top to bottom convection in the chemicals.

Also, I found in my bulk purchased pile of darkroom gear some old design Patersons, they seem much more skookum. All seams to the atmosphere are thickly gasketed. Rinse water doesn't flow freely out of them though.

File: 61080JBhir224002-R1-033-2.jpg (3MB, 3035x2035px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3035x2035px

I realized I'm a idiot because I've been shooting my rz67 without the proper finder mask. Can someone explain to me how to change it?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:03:13 20:05:04
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Width	3035
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Image Height	2035
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Height	2035
Image Width	3035

>>3048866
>selastiky schmoo
>skookum

What the hell are you saying

>>3048863
I'm just saying that processing B&W film is stupidly easy, and getting it done at a lab is the equivalent of buying bottled water. If you're just getting into film don't worry about it

>>3048847
The problem you are experiencing is pressure build up in the tank due to the blix reacting with the leftover developer. If you did manage to get your tank to perfectly seal, it will blow the lid off. You can either learn to burp the tank, or do what I do: invert normally in the development stage, and just swirl the tank occasionally in the blix stage. Blix is done to completion, so accurate agitation is not necessary.

>>3048870
He's an AvE aficionado. I'm surprised there was no chooching.

File: 1423642630696.jpg (10KB, 247x247px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 247x247px

>>3048870

>he doesn't watch AvE

almost feel bad for you my man.

>>3048195
underrated post

>>3048635
provia has never looked this bad

>>3048792
lmao

>>3048909
its the dslr cuck scan "look".

File: Provia100F_011.jpg (480KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 1000x667px

>>3048909
what did he mean by this

[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	2017:03:31 10:33:19
Exposure Time	4 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-7.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cloudy Weather
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3048666
>>3048628
>>3048611

I was only gonna get one because there's an unopened one still in box at my local camera shop for around $50. I've got a real small budget so I think it's ideal to get me into rangefinders.

>>3048917
he meant provia usually looks good but >>3048635 made it look uggo

File: Minolta_X-700.jpg (67KB, 700x464px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 700x464px

>>3047514

What is the recomended Minolta body for a first time film (well first time since messing with my dads old nikon back in the 90s) user?

Leaning toward X-700.

Cherry blossoms start soon, so I wanna give it a shot.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Camera Model	E-10
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2005:05:21 21:13:14
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	80
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	36.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	700
Image Height	464

>>3048939

Can't go wrong with an x700.

>>3048804
>>3048795
fuck, why isnt this a diptych printed out in a largd format on a gallery wall yet
>>3048784
you're mum

File: 20170331_093051.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>3048939
X-500, XG-M and SRT-series

>>3048973

Looks like X-500 is the same thing as the X-700 but just with some quality of life improvements.

Am I wrong? Does it lack anything the X-700 has?

>>3048939
I'd personally recommend a full manual one like the SRT-101 since I had an XG1 just randomly die on me before. Was decent before that though

>>3048979

I know this is heresy, but I was tempted by the P mode on the X-700. I have a basic understanding of how exposure works, but it takes time for me to figure it out. While full manual would be great when I am out shooting by myself, I wouldn't be able to use it when out with my wife if I couldn't shove it into a P mode and not worry. Manual focusing old lenses on my mirrorless already stretches patience.

>>3049031
You shouldn't give a fuck what mode you're "supposed" to shoot in.

>>3049031
the XG1 has an Av mode

>>3048975
Yes.
The X-500/570 is better because it lets you use the meter in manual mode. The X-700 doesn't have any real benefits. Plus the meme tax

>>3048582
>talking about actual human beings like this

>>3049062

I can't find either at any shops locally (Kyoto, Japan).

But yea, the 500 is half the price of the 700 on ebay.

>>3049076
Well women, at least. "People" is a bit of a stretch for something that doesn't work or vote or think.

>>3048576
Did you make her eat all those eggs?

File: film.jpg (767KB, 2573x1709px) Image search: [Google]

767KB, 2573x1709px

Recently obtained a bunch of expired films.
First roll I'd like to shoot is pic related, Kodak Royal Gold 25.
It's about 18 years expired. Any recommendations? From what I've read, this film sadly doesn't keep well.

>>3048576
how do you like that camera? hows the autofocus?

>http://hugostudio.com/tlr--large-format.html#!/~/

Anyone here ordered some replacement leather from link related? Just wanting to know what the quality is like, especially over an extended period of time.

File: werewrewqr.jpg (234KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 1000x667px

>>3047691
oh hey it's <this shot> again

File: 000013web.jpg (245KB, 1000x674px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1000x674px

posting from my first roll of kentmere 100

1/3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	674

File: 000015web.jpg (256KB, 1000x674px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1000x674px

>>3049156
2/3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	674

File: 000017web.jpg (335KB, 1000x674px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1000x674px

>>3049157
3/3

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	674

test

>>3049132
Rule of thumb says 1 stop overexposure per decade past expiry; in your case you'd expose it at ISO 6 and hope very hard.

I've got a 120 roll of Fujicolor 100, expired in 1989, got the olympic rings and everything. Waiting for the sunny days.

>>3049145
At least you caught a bifurcated one.

>>3049076
You sound like you're ugly and smell bad.

>>3049241
Yes, even faggots can post in this thread.
>>3049250
You haven't lived until you've bifurcated one of these >>3048576

File: BrownieOrtho-08.jpg (151KB, 861x579px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 861x579px

>>3048906
>>3048899
Post your skookum choochers + the cock for dolly
>pic related

File: 1490902625340.jpg (401KB, 1065x1617px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1065x1617px

>>3048747
Inverted
Auto colour/tone
quick curves pulling the green and blue to get rid of excess cyan

its quick and dirty but its a start to the process
also expose the neg a bit more, youll get it eventually

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.14
Photographer	PETER_WILKINS
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:23 16:19:01
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	135.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1065
Image Height	1617
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3048917
still looks like shit and not at all like provia retard
but I guess sonyggers wouldn't know what real colour is

I got one roll of film left, what should I get next?

>>3049279
Not him, but fuck you. Post up your "proper" Provia. Matter of fact, post up any scan of yours that comes close to the quality of that scan. You can't. All I'm going to get from you is more butthurt waaaaaaaaaaaaaa it dont look like provia waaaaaaaaa. KYS

>>3049264
well post away brother
what's that got to do with me though

File: DSC04718.jpg (421KB, 1400x2100px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1400x2100px

>>3049279
So does this look like Kodachrome out of a 110 instamatic shot in 1980???? No??? Well it looks fucking exactly like this on the light table. You disagree??? kys

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Capture One Pro (for Sony) 10.0 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/4 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-3.1 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Image Width	1400
Image Height	2100
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard

>>3049281
Acros 100 is the pinnacle of modern smooth high resolution T-grain and Tri-X is the perfect classic film. Everything else is redundant, and color is for amateurs.

>>3049301
>ILCE-6000
kys my man.

File: IMG_20170401_100058.jpg (118KB, 492x656px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 492x656px

>>3049090
Did you try Camera no Naniwa? I also see those cameras in the bins at Hard Off all the time. Whether they work or not I'm not sure.

>>3049100
She probably makes more $$$ at her government position than you do bud.

>>3049127
We shared <3

>>3049133
It's fan-fucking-tastic. Hasn't missed focus once out of 3 rolls so far. No complaints, going to load it up with slide next and see how well it meters. I've read it should be no problem. The AF is loud as fuck tho.

>>3049279
*Giggles* but it's expired anon, I even got an explanation back from the lab saying so.