any /jp/ oldfriends around here happen to be familiar with what

post more for reference reasons

I'll almost guarantee it was slide, simply because positive film was easier to turn into print in those days.

>>3082625

lol wut

I am extremely interested in this. May have been 35mm since gravure is a volume business

>>3082600
why not ask the photogs themselves? send them an email.

>>3082600

Probably Bronica 645 or an RB/RZ67 + Provia

Shoot Fujichrome for Asian skin tones, Ektachome for westerners.

>>3082600
I know Pentax 645n series was very popular. It was a suitably big format, had film cartridges instead of dealing with the rolls on set and the motor drive was quick. Modern metering and excellent flash sync.
Compared to the 6x7 and other big boy MF kits the 645n had an actual workflow, without pauses, the whole shooting was done in less than 30 minutes so the customers could go on their merry way without devoting their whole day for the shooting.

>>3082792
>>3082758
You retards seriously think cheap-ass softcore porn shooters were shooting mf?

lolno.

>>3082797
Some quick googling I did yesterday also told me that the Pentax 645N was popular for the purpose.

The photobooks popular around then seemed to have more emphasis on image quality than production speed, so I can imagine 645 being used for that. For weekly magazine shoots, who knows.

>>3082797
I know they had to work fast so the one with the best workflow was used. In 645 format the Pentax was king.

Araki used the Pentax 6x7 a lot with with what looks mostly like slide film. Different genre but kind of similar look. I'd bet a lot of it is MF slide.

>>3082797
Yes we do.
I used to shoot with the Pentax 645 back in the day. It was like shooting with an over sized SLR.

>>3082963
>we

>>3082658
Who's this faggot trip and why haven't they been run out of /p/ yet?

>>3082990

its me son ur dad

>>3082990
lol this little shit thinks /p/ is an angsty teenager board like the rest of 4chan

Could we have a gravure photography thread, or is that too /s/?

>>3083038
Sounds good to me, especially if we approach it from the perspective of showing good photography or talking about why it's bad. Why not do it in this thread?

>>3083019
Where do you think we are? Stupid summerfag

>>3083046
Hate to break it to you, but most of /p/ is over 30, even 40.

>>3083038
It's photography, as much as any other portrait.

>>3083049
Yes many of us are angsty old farts. We got that way dealing with young we know it all safe spacers.

File: araki.jpg (385KB, 1280x1597px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1280x1597px

>>3082600
A lot of Araki either resembles gravure or is obviously so. There's usually a lot more thought put into the color themes, and the mood is darker, less cutesy. This looks like 6x7... and he placed focus on the dinosaur, I think?

I'm unclear on terminology - is it gravure if it's nude, or is it just nude photography then? I think it's more of a stylistic genre than just nude/not nude, anyway.

>>3083071
Looks more like 645 ratio, but could be crop. Also 645 film was portrait oriented while 6x7 is landscape.

File: 25d122bbc57bfe5d725182ec3ed113de.jpg (46KB, 736x415px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 736x415px

>>3083080
6x7 can be either... rotate the back on an RB/RZ, or mount your Pentax 6x7 sideways.

Some 645 cameras are portrait and some are landscape.

>>3083082
Judging by the look on his face, he likes what he sees.
Also mad hairdoo.

>>3083086
I'm pretty sure he's one of the most energetic, enthusiastic people on the planet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIsrL5H3NDA

>>3083090
hes incredible. i have the big araki book and lots of the big shots look soft, bordering blurry, he didnt give a fuck about sharpness.. you can see the camera wiggles all the time whe he does the rapid cocking/shots. it was all about the mood and the lewd.

>>3083043


Sure.

Got a link to a huge torrent of 80s-90s gravure scans?

>>3083105
Nope, try Google or >>>/jp/

>>3083082
master roshi is pleased.

>>3083105
or newsgroups, if you've got an account. Still lots of 90s scans hanging around there, but the scanners tended to retouch them in bad ways.

>>3083108

lol, someone made a /jp/ thread and it got deleted.

>>3083136

Oh and btw:
>>>>/jp/17003805

>>3082658
Commercial printing, not darkroom prints.

Almost everything you see in magazines, books, and newspapers from the 40s-90s was shot on slide film. I'm not quite sure why that was the case, I've heard a number of explanations (some as simple as that it meant the editors could view the film on a lightbox instead of printing proofs, which saved time) but I'm not sure what's true, just that slide was the preferred medium.

>>3083249
When you scan you are also converting to CMYK and outputting four pieces of film. These pieces of film were then used to make a printers proof which was then checked against the slide for colour accuracy.

It was, of course, possible to scan from prints and negs but it was a pain in the arse workflow wise and harder to colour correct.

Source: I'm an old fag who has worked in publishing all my life

>>3083249
Can confirm, when I first started getting stuff run in magazines (early 2000s) many of them ONLY accepted mounted slides. No negatives, no unmounted slides.

>>3083301
What kind of stuff were you getting published, out of curiosity? And how did you get into it (being published)?

>>3083366
Skateboarding and BMX. My friends got better than me so I stopped trying to keep up and started shooting photos. Some of them got sponsored, they needed photos for ads / interviews, and things went from there.