/fgt/ - Film General Thread

File: ass.jpg (526KB, 1000x658px) Image search: [Google]

526KB, 1000x658px

first for HIE is ASS

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	LS-5000
Camera Software	VueScan 9 x64 (9.5.60)
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	4000 dpi
Vertical Resolution	4000 dpi
Image Width	1000
Image Height	658

btw does anyone know what causes the dark spots visible in >>3096464

>>3096228
>So when you want those extremely dramatic shadows in street photography does it have to do more with what film you use or what shadows are in play?
lightning is everything. but yeah, slow asa film (like acros or pan-f) can give pretty solid shadows and rich blacks. street done with slide film and strong shadows looks pretty intense too.

ive been developing hp5 and i get too much grain and also ugly grain, way too coarse. ive got the same film developed by third parties (2 dif ones) and they both look good and way better than mine, same developer (d76), same dilution, not sure if same fixer. happened the same with rollei 400s, my devs look grainier than the ones done by other people. would the fixer matter?

To the guy who said that real sensitivity value is a useless criteria:
You said something really stupid. Nominal ASA value is used to standardize development, real value is used to get better local contrast, definition and less grain.

Just started learning more about and shooting film a couple months ago, and now i'm looking at buying a scanner for my negatives. I'm just doing this for some fun on the side so not tryna drop too much.
Less than $300 would be ideal, and I only shoot b/w 35mm if that makes any difference. New or used, not a huge deal as long as it's functional and gives me decent results.
Whatcha guys got for me?

>>3096481
No, man. That's called pulling. Manufacturer's box speed is authoritative because it comes from the manufacturer. It doesn't need to conform to the ideal of the zone system, nor do the criteria of standardization matter here.

That being said, I have also found Delta 3200 to look better overdeveloped by one stop.

File: badge.jpg (198KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1366x768px

>when you see it

>>3096557
It ain't easy being vegan

>>3096557
It's Sugar at home!

>>3096547
>No, man. That's called pulling. Manufacturer's box speed is authoritative because it comes from the manufacturer.
don't post stupid shit like that unless you actually know what you're talking about

box speed is never precise. any manufacturer will tell you this, and they usually provide the actual iso if you look around

>>3096622
Praise the Lord!

>>3096459
What are good high quality 35mm films? So far all I know is Agfa Photo CT Precisa-100 and Kodak ektar 100 being good. I haven't tried either yet I'm waiting for my camera in the mail.

>>3096557
That video is so painful to watch

>>3096557
who is she

>>3096660
small youtube "vlogger" who made a very cringe worthy video on developing 35mm film

>>3096658
Color negative 400 ASA: Kodak Portra 400 and Fuji Pro400H
B&W: Ilford XP2
Slide: velvia and provia, you have no choice.

>>3096658
Those are color films and very good. If you like black and white, Pan f plus, tmax 100, and fp4 plus are good "high quality" films. You can get good results with almost anything though.

>>3096459
>fortia in 120
[[[he cummms]]]

File: hasselblad_500cm.jpg (3MB, 4046x2680px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4046x2680px

Recently got my greasy hands on my father's old Hasselblad 500c/m from 1987. A12 back, Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8, waist-level finder (cleverly folding one); the lot. As far as cosmetics go it's practically perfect - no dirt, no visible scuffs. Thing is, the mechanism has jammed and the last repairman to have his hands on it (he used to work for Hasselblad) pushed the auxiliary curtain open with his fingers so it looks absolutely fucking shot. Moreover, the camera only worked for about a single exposure after that then got stuck again (keep in mind this was some 5 years ago). Service and repair would most likely reach some 400€, but I'm lucky enough to live in the same city as the Hasselblad factory.

I guess my big questions are these: Is the 400€ service worth it, and do any of you have any general tips for the 500c/m pertaining anything from technique to extra gear?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D300
Camera Software	Ver.1.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	42 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2010:02:17 20:31:47
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Exposure Bias	0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Flash
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4046
Image Height	2680
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3096698
That's just a picture I pulled off google by the way; completely missed how large it was.

>>3093436
I have lots of experience with it, what do you specifically want to know?

>>3096698
400€ is completely a theft, as I can see you're from Europe, where?
I know a repairman who's a real pro and doesn't charge that much for the job. He repaired my Distagon 50 C T* and it's now as good as new. By the way he's in Italy.

>>3096704
>400€ is completely a theft, as I can see you're from Europe, where?
He says he's from the same city as the Hasselblad factory, so presumably Göteborg in Sweden. But year 400€ for a camera service is ridiculous.

>>3096704
>>3096707
It's not a given that it'll reach 400€, but that's the general pointer they offered on their website regarding the V system. I really have to stress that the camera is in absolutely excellent cosmetic condition otherwise.

File: Screenshot_20170617-004130.png (1MB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x2560px

Is this the time to invest in film cameras? I mean, holy fuck they get expensive really fast!

>>3096707
Didn't read carefully, yes.
He should consider to go elsewhere.

>>3096709
Sure, buy my camera.

>>3096709
The time to invest in analog cameras has gone. That's a good camera though

Is it true the Fujicolor 200 is Superia 200 and Superia 1600 is Natura 1600?

>>3096470
Is it possible that chemicals and rinse water had different temperatures?

>>3096658
Portra

>>3096676
If c41, then XP2 is ok, but real bw offers better alternatives.

>>3096709
Fof some reason I think compacts are not worthwile to pay that much. Paid 20eur for my Leica Mini and to be honest, it's not worth much more. For the same price of that camera you can get 20 mju or a Leica III incl. lens if you're lucky. If that contax breaks, you're fucked. If an mju breaks, fuck it. If a leica (or other mech. camera) breaks, get it repaired, or repair it yourself.

>>3096719
XP2 is a great film, especially in medium format. As good as other classic films

>>3096717
https://dexter.pcode.nl/?dx=806253

Check the 6 digit film code on the cartridge. That website says that Agfa Precisa is Fuji Provia.

>>3096722
Sure, it's a good film, but sometimes 400 is just too much and real bw offers alternatives capable of better results depending on the situation.

>>3096526
bump

>>3096526
You'll have to buy a flatbed. I use a V600 Epson film scanner and I can say it's good for medium format, for 35mm it's not enough as most of other mid tier flatbeds. Not an expert of scanners tough so I recommend to wait for an advice from someone who knows more.

>>3096526
for 35mm you're better off getting a professional photo lab to scan them for medium format and larger get a flatbed like the other anon suggested

File: 1495110314778.jpg (54KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 667x1000px

>>3096723
Yep, Precisa is Provia.

Posting an obscure slide film. Fuji Trebi 100C, apparently some kind of repackaged Provia.

Can someone give me a quick explanation of how exposure compensation affects film?

I keep hearing I should overexpose certain films by a certain amount to minimize grain.

Would shooting a 400 iso film at 100 iso give me a less griany image? Or will I get a solid white frame?

File: FH000008.jpg (1MB, 1840x1232px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1840x1232px

>>3096752

Not hik, but...
>professional photo lab
>costs $6 and an extra day to scan versus just an hour for negatives
>get back 1200 wide shots
>that are rotated, heavily cropped, and come back with weird colors

Pic related.

Not really an option. My terrible dslr scans even look better.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-2000
Camera Software	FDi V4.5 / FRONTIER350/370-7.7-0J-060
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:18 13:47:55
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1840
Image Height	1232

>>3096815
>Resize your shit
>??????????
>Profit!!!

>>3096829

fuck off retard.

>>3096809

overexposing print film by a stop or two will yield more information in the shadows without really losing any in the highlights. it's almost impossible to overexpose print film, but not totally impossible.

black and white similarly benefits from some overexposure, though not as much as print film. the old adage goes: "expose for shadows, develop for highlights". If you aren't in control of development, you might end up with some overexposed negatives.

Slide film is very sensitive to overexposure and requires precise metering.

File: 1387418818086.jpg (174KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 600x450px

>>3096843
How 'bout you learn to at least resize your shit senpai before you go adding full stops to a sentence that didn't start with a capital letter.

>>3096853

capitalizing is for fags.

it's also not my photo, i just know that 300kb over the board's suggested posting size shouldn't be enough to trigger your autism.

>>3096853
>complaining about a 1840x1232 image
>grammar nazi in the year 2017
off yourself

Soooooo the Konica AA35 is on ebay on average at $250, sometimes even faulty units. All i can say is ALRIGHTY THEN. brb kys'ing myself.

>>3096853
Good call, bro.

>>3096853
>>3096865
>>3096893
lowercase posters are kino.

what the actual fuck. currently half of ebay cameras are broken shit, sold at prices of mint cameras, specially the usual compacts and cheap rangefinders. whats going ooooooon.

>>3096916

Film is cool again.

Look forward to prices at least doubling on everything for the next few years.

Even old slrs are spiking in price, not just the gimmicky stuff.

>>3096622
>any manufacturer will tell you this,
Mind quoting the manufacturer's reply to your e-mail asking that very question of Kodak, Ilford, or Fuji? Pastebin it or something.

kill this thread already

>>3096925
its just starting slower than usual, mkay?

>>3096719
>conta
i bought a minilux and it was broken. took it to a leica store and they referred me to a guy who said he wouldn't fix it

took it to another store and the guy said "just put it on ebay for parts and let someone buy it who's gonna do the exact same thing you did"

yet to run into another for the right price and I'm thinking I'll just save for a contax t2 or maybe just settle for a g1

>>3096916

I know what you mean, I got tired of japs trying to fuck me

File: MF Japan 2017 05 juin-20 (Copier).jpg (382KB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 960x1200px

Pentax 645
45mm
Ektar 100
Retouched
1/4

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:15 21:15:32
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: MF Japan 2017 05 juin-19 (Copier).jpg (318KB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 960x1200px

Pentax 645
45mm
Ektar 100
Retouched
2/4

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:15 21:15:25
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: MF Japan 2017 05 juin-18 (Copier).jpg (365KB, 879x1200px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 879x1200px

Pentax 645
45mm
Ektar 100
Retouched
3/4

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:15 21:15:18
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: MF Japan 2017 05 juin-15 (Copier).jpg (130KB, 879x1200px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 879x1200px

Pentax 645
45mm
Ektar 100
Retouched
4/4

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:15 21:15:10
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3096956
>>3096958
>>3096959
>>3096960

are you japanese?

>>3096956
>>3096958
>>3096959
>>3096960
holy shit these look so neat. what are the settings for the night ones? i mean, its asa 100 film, how could you get such well lit shots without going all 1/8? tripod?

>>3096965
No, i was on working holiday in Japan. This is from Ikebukuro
>>3096966
Thanks ! No tripod, i put aperture on auto and the speed was enough. It wasn't night yet tho.

File: e1e177.jpg (84KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 800x533px

These chink Minolta clones look pretty neat with the Kanji nameplates.

I hear they are unreliable as fuck and the meters are prone to failure though.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	SLT-A77V
Camera Software	SLT-A77V v1.06
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2012:11:26 23:48:20
Exposure Time	8 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	800
Brightness	0.1 EV
Exposure Bias	2 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Tungsten
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3096956
This is really cool, you should have excluded the guy on the right IMO
>>3096958
No depth of field and signs of underexposure. If you had the chance to reduce a little bit more the aperture even if underexposed it would have been a wonderful picture
>>3096959
Same as above for the woman on the right. Out of focus and too close to the edge.
>>3096960
Meh

You have a great eye, just avoid those things

>>3096992
Thanks for the review, often i don't wait long enough for people to get out of the frame because it's hard enough to shoot under the rain and with people looking at you but i should, furthermore with medium format. For the 4th one, it's just a snapshot.

>>3096709
I got a Contax T2 for free and the only good thing I got from it was the money when I sold it. Defective lens (awful corner sharpness at every aperture), big and heavy for a compact, not pocketable at all and too valuable, made me hesitate to ever take it to the kind of situations where you'd want to use a compact. These shiny metal compacts were intended as holiday snapshitters for rich assholes. There's no reason to pay yourself sick for one of them, I guarantee you will be disappointed with what you can actually do with it versus compacts fifth of its price.

>>3096956
Is that in Ikebukuro?

>>3097016
Yeah 90% sure

>>3097002

So what is a good, easy to use for non-photographers(i.e.-wife who has only ever used iphone), sub $100 compact?

>>3097058
Iphone

>>3097062

iPhone is a little over $100.

Plus it isn't film.

>>3097058
Olympus XA

File: DSC02836-Edit.jpg (98KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1000x667px

>>3096459

The bottom edges are green due to underexposure, right?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3097090

That thing is hideous.

No manual controls either?

>>3097094
It is hideous and a hunk of cheap 80s type of plastic. It has manual controls but don't expect nice smooth electronic use or noise. It's sort of loud and just generally obnoxious.

>>3096980
Are these still being made today?

>>3097101

I don't believe so.

File: 480x318x2.jpg (18KB, 480x318px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x318px

>>3097105
>>3097101

Though it does look like they are still producing TLRs.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	25 dpi
Vertical Resolution	25 dpi
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	480
Image Height	318

>>3097096

You've never used one.

File: wuff.jpg (3MB, 3245x2238px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3245x2238px

>>3097109
If you'll choose to spend your time debunking every stupid, misinformative or opinionated post you see you won't have much time for anything else, anon. For every one you correct or point out there'll be a dozen more. Idk why someone would hate on the XA but equally I've no clue why someone would have interest in defending it. Shame to waste your precious time you could be spending out taking photos or something.

>>3097114

The irony is palpable, spreadable, even.

>>3097114
Well, here in this thread a disclaimer is needed, then.
"Don't come here to ask, you'll receive answers saying everything and its opposite"
I've seen some real shit here, often people who have never tried something and they still tell what they think about it.
To all the anons here: if you know shit then shut the fuck up

>>3096658
>>3096676

Color
>Kodak Portra 400
>Fuji Pro400H
>Agfa Photo CT Precisa 100
>Kodak ektar 100

Black & White
>Kodak TMax 100
>Ilford Pan F Plus
> Ilford fp4 plus

Slides
>Velvia
>Provia

My next question has to do with developing. I don't have any materials or scanners but I want to digitize all my photos. What's the method to getting this done, what are things to look out for, and what are the problems or concerns to be aware of? I'm in the NYC area if that helps, I'd rather go to a place, drop off my film and have the digitized but I don't want to lose image quality by doing that.

>>3097128
Also give a chance to Ilford XP2, you'll be able to get it developed in half an hour and its quality is incredible.

It's better if you buy yourself a scanner. Scanning services are often shitty and you'll pay much for a high quality scan of your film.

>>3097132
How much is a good scanner though? I'm pretty sure I don't want to drop a grand on getting a scanner for 35mm film.

>>3097134
A flatbed generally is a complete shit for 35mm but it's more than enough for MF and LF. Obviously you'd better take pictures with an iPhone than scanning your 35mm with a $100 scanner. Also the software is important, if you use Epson Scan you won't get the same results as if you use Vuescan.

Basically with 35mm you can only use an enlarger and print your shit or get it scanned with a drum scanner paying some extra cash.

>>3097137
>MF and LF
Don't know what that is.

So how do I get good images from using 35 mm? I guess I'm asking a) what's the best most economical setup for non-shit-tier photos and b) what the alternative is to this? I'm supposing the alternative is getting them digitized when I get them developed.... But what's the point if it's badly done to a point I can get the same results with a cheapo setup?

So I guess c) if I get prints do I just pick which ones I like and get them enlarged? I see 35mm film pics online all the time, what's the method to do this or is everyone paying out the ass for home digitalzing setups?

There has to be a simple way?

File: IMG_20170412_020920.jpg (1MB, 2036x3148px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2036x3148px

>>3097162
MF is Medium format
LF is Large format
You know, it depends on what you're looking for.
This is what I get from a 35mm negative under the scanner, that's not what I obtain with my enlarger.
Maybe I'm a perfectionist but I don't like it.
By the way, that scan is from a V600 Epson scanner from a Kodak BW400CN frame.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:04:12 02:09:20
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	2036
Image Height	3148
Image Height	3148
Image Width	2036

>>3097165
That looks like a decent option. What about scanners like the wolverine mighty?

>>3097170
>wolverine mighty
Like what?

>>3097172
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1272226-REG/wolverine_data_f2d20mighty_or_f2d_mighty_7_in_1_film.html

File: DSC02820-Edit.jpg (2MB, 5231x3487px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5231x3487px

>>3097162

DSLR scanning works okay.

Some people get better results than others. Mine have been quite meh, but the lenses and film I use aren't the greatest to begin with.

This is a fullsized scan of something I took today. A random snapshit of a street.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3097174
Never used it but it looks like it will not do a good job. Spend some more cash and at least get something better.

>>3097175
>>3097178
I have a 5d mark ii with a 70-210 f/4 all the way through lens. What's this dslr scanning you speak of? Sounds like I need some kind of rig.

File: 17.jpg (3MB, 2627x4031px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2627x4031px

>>3097179
Basically you illuminate the negative using diffused light, you take a picture of it with your digital camera, then with Photoshop you eliminate color dominants and invert color. I used this method with glass plates like the one I attached. I don't know how it could be with 36x24mm negatives

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2012:03:29 19:50:35
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2627
Image Height	4031

>>3097174

Don't bother with those and their derivatives, it's essentially a low res point and shoot in a different body, and it only spits out compressed jpgs

>>3097219
How do most people post 35mm photos online then? The dslr rig seems like it would be very time consuming and you have to set up the rig.

>>3097220

lab scans desu

You can always get a dedicated film scanner

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/883631-REG/Plustek_783064365338_OpticFilm_8200i_Ai_Film.html

>>3097220
dslr scanning is faster bro

>>3097227
The 8200i se is just under $300 on amazon, and the only difference is the software right? I'm thinking about just getting the se since the software isn't a deal breaker for me and I shoot in bw

>>3096526
Get a coolscan or 7200i

>>3097239
what's the difference between the 7200 and the 8200

>>3097243
One has ICE, the other doesn't. Not worth paying extra for it in my opinion, it doubles the scan time which is glacial enough to start with, and cannot be used with B&W film (except XP2)

>>3097257
Ilford XP2 once developed hasn't any integral orange mask, it's like any other B/W film's. You get confused with BW400CN made by Kodak.
ICE is a complete shit IMHO.

>>3096959
Over processed

>>3097257
And the difference between the 7200 and the 7200i to my understanding is that the 7200 does not come with software or the hardware to support the infrared correction (which doesn't work on black and white if I'm not mistaken), while the 7200i will come with both. Pls correct me if I'm wrong.

I can't seem to find the 7200i anywhere, but the 7200 looks like it's available on amazon.

File: img087s.jpg (3MB, 4430x2975px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4430x2975px

Dropping some shit

Canon FTb, Helios 77m-4, polarizing filter and Kodak Ektar 100 film.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:28 02:28:28
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4430
Image Height	2975

Guys as a film photographer I'm asking you this: why you use film?

>>3097332
its fun.

>>3097332
Basically it fits my work flow and I like that the archival value of film is good and in a physical format.

>>3097332
I used digital for a long time and after I started using film I realized how many useless digital photos I took. MF and LF film makes me care more about the photos I take, less is more, etc. Documentary portraiture is also easier, in terms of approaching people, with a Rolleiflex than a Rabal or fuckhueg d810

>>3097332

Because it makes digislugs mad

>>3097260
It's not the mask you dumbass, it's the metallic silver crystals left in the emulsion that confuse the ICE, hence it cannot be used with normal B&W films. ICE uses longwave infrared light which passes through the film but is blocked by dust particles to figure out their precise location to then apply automatic dust removal PP. Metallic silver particles reflect IR light in the same manner as dust particles, thus fucking up the system. XP2 does not have them because it's a C-41 emulsion, so ICE does work on it. Applies to BW400CN too of course, the reason I didn't mention it is because it's discontinued and ded.

File: DSC02774.jpg (1MB, 5357x3571px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5357x3571px

>>3097182

Yep same thing with 35mm really.

You just need a pretty solid macro lens, some diffused lightsource, and some way to hold the negatives flat.

Hardest part is getting colors right after inverting them.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3097332
Pure, cold and simple: the colors are better.

>>3097332
I like the chemical process of developing and printing, it feels like I'm more actively involved in the process. I could deviate and type a whole prose about how black and white is more moving etc etc but basically, >>30973342 it's fun. I'm not an artist, I'm a hobbyist and while I own a dslr and like to use it now and then, I like film more. There are loads of professional photographers, people who know more about photography than I, so I won't engage in a X is better than Y debate. I just like it and have fun with it, that's basically it.

>>3097332
I fetishize film gear because unlike digital cameras they're not a bloody computer on the inside. The directness of an oldschool user interface delights me, and the inaccuracies of approximate framing and the requirement of previsualization suit my style better than chimping and exact EVF preview.

Hate scanning though

>>3097396
Where do you think that those black parts in the developed emulsion come from? Yes, right, not even XP2 can be used with ICE.

>>3097498
Not the guy you're replying to, but XP2 is chromogenic just like any other C-41 film. That's to say: developed silver is bleached and then fixed away with undeveloped silver, as part of the process. XP2 leaves behind dye just like colour print film.

As for whether it'll work with ICE, I've not tried -- I don't shoot XP2 myself, nor use ICE.

File: film-and-darkroom-film-color-single-roll-fuji-superia-800-24.png (272KB, 512x426px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 512x426px

Is Superia 800 any good? I've shot 200 and 400 before with great results

File: s-l1600.jpg (120KB, 1000x630px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1000x630px

Which FED models/production years are known to be the most dependable? I hear for Soviet rangefinders the older production batch the better the quality control. I know Zorkis and Zenits are abysmal as far as reliability goes, but how about FEDs?

>>3097096
literally it's silent when shooting. it's strong plastic with a large amount of metal. the focus is a little tricky but smooth as butter.

>>3097534
They all work equally fine (so as bad as the day they were produced) - almost all modes of failure in the entire hotizontal cloth shutter camera family come from aging - the shutter is made from rubberised cloth that becomes less flexible/prine to cracking with age and use, leading to light-leaking pinholes. It's held in place with old soviet synthetic glue which loses its adhesive properties with age and bad storage conditions, like dampness, detaching from the rollers and killing the camera - this is the most popular mode of failure. Add moidture-related rusting, grease drying out/becoming sticky with dust, fucking up shutter speeds, esp. slower ones. Extreme shock can misalign the rangefinder.

As you see all of the above are age and storage-related, not a fault of the cameras themselves. Older FED/Zorki models will have had more time and opportunities to get fucked up, as cool(er) as they may look, design-wise. I've seen pristine 50ies feds and gummy 80ies zorkis, it's solely down to the individual camera and its history.

File: IMG_0012.jpg (616KB, 1904x1263px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 1904x1263px

From my first roll (about 3 months ago)
Fuji C200, Revueflex SC2, Auto Revuneon 50/1.9

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 40D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1263
Image Height	1904
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	2017:06:18 14:29:53
Exposure Time	0.3 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	80.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1904
Image Height	1263
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3097584
It seems underexposed, common thing when there is the sun in the frame.

>>3097332
Tonality is better, particularly in black and while. And there's a certain look you get from medium format film that's very hard to approach in digital. Unless you shoot MF digital, of course, but who here can afford that?

I would agree that 35mm film is kinda redundant at this point, though.

Found a T50 today. Do I need to worry about replacing light seals?

>>3097653
Open up the back, take a photo and post it

>>3097653
Unlikely.

>>3097622
So as someone just getting into film and has only been shooting 35mm for a couple months, should I just switch and start learning mf? I hardly see anyone here who just shoots 35mm.

File: IMG_3661.jpg (40KB, 627x532px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 627x532px

Is there a work around for loading a different kind of film besides fp-100c into a med format instant film back? Perhaps impossable project?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	96 dpi
Vertical Resolution	96 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	627
Image Height	532
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3097664
Keep plugging away at 35mm till you get pretty decent, then get some MF gear.

>>3097672
I'm working on a Instax square instant film back for my Hasselblad, I don't think there is something new to use, unfortunately.

File: img098x.jpg (2MB, 2835x4252px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2835x4252px

Dropping some shit
Nikon N4004 (a.k.a. f-401), Af-D Nikkor 18-55, Kodak BW400CN film.
Amatrice, Italy, 2012
At that time I used to experiment a lot using lenses meant for APS-C digital cameras on analog bodies and expired film.
Now that place is completely gone after an earthquake.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:06 02:44:17
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2835
Image Height	4252

File: Foto022.jpg (989KB, 1984x3229px) Image search: [Google]

989KB, 1984x3229px

>>3097736
Same place, same time, same film, same camera but I used the Af Nikkor 35-70. This tower is the only artifact in Amatrice that resisted the earthquakes sequence (24th of August, 30th of October and a whole sequence in January).
I was lucky enough to survive the 24th of August so I'm currently documenting the decay of those Italian gems.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2400 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:26 21:45:54
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1984
Image Height	3229

File: img073.jpg (2MB, 4506x2981px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4506x2981px

>>3097739
This is the last moment of lightheartedness I caught there, it was the 21st of August, just less than three days before the disaster. In the background on the top-right corner you can see a portion of the tower I posted here.
Canon FTb, Helios 77M-4 and Kodak Ektar 100 film.

[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	2017:04:27 21:11:44

Does anyone have any experience with the Leica CL? Recently got my hands on one in excellent cosmetic condition (practically unused) with 40 and 90mm lenses to boot. Issue is that it's been sitting still for a long time and needs some service.

>>3097736
>>3097739
>>3097743
I came here for film, not for feels, anon. That said; great documentary work. My dad always pushed the idea that even mundane pictures will have worth in the future; you never know what might have happened 30 years from now.

>>3097744

It seems to be a love it or hate it camera. I have been trying to find one myself, but haven't seen one for a decent price yet.

The meter is on top of the shutter, and can actually get fucked up by certain lenses so be careful.

The meter also uses mercury batteries, you need a special adapter for modern batteries to be usable. Otherwise the meter will be way off.

The two lenses you have are supposed to be great though.

File: img124.jpg (3MB, 4476x2967px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4476x2967px

>>3097747
Photography is also about feels, man.
By the way, humanity didn't leave those places, humans kept being humans and everything at first was well organized.
Here you can see the Red Cross first aid camp during breakfast time, Municipality of Accumoli, Roccasalli Village.
Nikon N4004, Af Nikkor 35-70 and Kodak Color Plus 200 Film. Breakfast time.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	317 dpi
Vertical Resolution	317 dpi
Image Created	2017:05:28 20:15:07
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4476
Image Height	2967

File: IMG_20170427_220304.jpg (1MB, 2252x1475px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2252x1475px

>>3097750
Now everything is a wasteland, only few farmers keep living there, other people left the mountains and went to the seaside, people who used to pass their vacation there keep going in those places to check on their ancestors' houses and to meet each other.

[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 Created	2017:04:27 22:03:04
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Width	2252
Image Height	1475
Image Height	1475
Image Width	2252

>>3097754
Forgot that:
Canon FTb, Helios 77M-4 and Kodak Ektar 100 film, firefighter watching the ruins.

>>3097290
oh I love my FTb!

>>3097332
I was too poor to afford a DSLR or Mirroless at first. And eventually I just stuck to it. Also lenses, bodies, filters and everything are MUCH more cheaper on the FD side, even higher end glass.

>>3097784
It's a good camera, affordable, completely mechanical, a great set of lenses and really tough. Also love its shutter sound.

>>3097731
Are you working on modifying an existing one or making one from scratch ?

>>3097838
Building one from scratch, old ones were meant for peel apart instant film, instax and impossible release the chemicals that are stored in the bottom part of the frame. I managed to get a broken instax camera and a broken magazine, now I have to build a plywood chassis and try it.

File: img153s.jpg (3MB, 2200x1650px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2200x1650px

>>3097754
After all nature keeps shining as always. I'll never abandon that place and I won't stop documenting.
Hasselblad 500C/M, Planar 80, Fujifilm Pro400H and Carl Zeiss Jena polarizing filter.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (20060914.r.77) Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	2892 dpi
Vertical Resolution	2892 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:19 03:34:07
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2200
Image Height	1650

>>3097332
1. Using high-end a film camera is extremely satisfying
2. Exposure latitude on C-41 process film makes using film very comfy

File: Noodle.jpg (995KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

995KB, 1000x1000px

Had fun with my TLR last week.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3097793
oh yeah, my FTb has endured quite a lot. How much did you pay for yours?
I paid $40, came with a 50mm F/1.8 lens, UV filter, and a carrying bag.

>>3096663
what's her youtube channel? lel

>>3096557

>this is the average film shooter

That is why I shoot digital.

>>3096557

someone link this video

>>3097907
Which one anon ?

>>3097909
It was a gift, only body with a ton of FD accessories like macro rings, a microscope joint, some macro tools and flashes. At that time I was short on money so I had to find a cheap solution to use it so I bought a FD-M42 adapter.

File: VIEJO TELE B 1000PX.jpg (619KB, 1161x967px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1161x967px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	EPSON
Camera Model	GT-X770
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	28732
Image Height	3245
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	3200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	3200 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:06:19 05:11:51
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1161
Image Height	967

File: Velvia50_018.jpg (419KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1000x667px

>>3098035
This is weird. I like it!

>>3097907
Is that some old Portra NC?

[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	2017:06:19 18:57:19
Exposure Time	1.6 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-6.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight Fluorescent
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

File: 2017-06-19 20.48.03.jpg (795KB, 1073x1070px) Image search: [Google]

795KB, 1073x1070px

Looks like fuji is releasing another special edition disposal camera. Looks like a rubber cover to place over their cameras. Last year they had a cardboard sleeve for them to mark 30 years.

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

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

File: CT_fujifilm_provia1600.jpg (19KB, 250x171px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 250x171px

>>3098064

>a shitty disposable sleeve
>not a natura s ii w/ a new high speed natura-like slide film

What the fuck, Fuji?

I don't care if you keep ignoring/killing off film, I am not gonna buy your shitty mirrorless cameras with no lenses and a joke of a film simulation mode.

File: DSC_0010.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

The glass looking into my viewfinder fell in.

Will this fuck up anything? Everything seems to be working fine.

And yes, I know it is dirty as shit. Bought used and was cleaning it when this happened.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	402SO
Camera Software	32.1.D.0.430_0_f900
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:19 23:48:38
Exposure Time	1/32 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	640
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash Function
Focal Length	4.60 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3840
Image Height	2160
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

/DIYfilm/ question:

is it possible to make the shutter time slower in a fixed shutter speed camera? i have a camera that im really liking lately, but it has its shutter fixed on 1/100 or 1/150, which is too fucking short for doing night or indoors stuff (pushing film wont do it)

>>3098053
thankyou.

File: kodak brownie mod.jpg (261KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1600x1067px

>>3098251
>is it possible to make the shutter time slower in a fixed shutter speed camera? i have a camera that im really liking lately, but it has its shutter fixed on 1/100 or 1/150, which is too fucking short for doing night or indoors stuff (pushing film wont do it)
No bulb setting? It really depends on how the shutter works I guess. With brownies you can tweak the shutter speed, although usually for faster speeds. (Brownies have a B setting though)

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

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

>>3098258
no, no bulb.

>>3098251
Are we talking about the almighty VUWS? It's too small to usefully mod a bulb setting into without destroying a couple of 'em first. Stick with sunlit days, that camera ain't made anymore.

>>3098291
>VUWS
?

I sent in 7 rolls to be developed and 3 apparently are blank? I didn't expose any to sunlight, what's the deal with this.

>>3098301
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwAG-DnWhiY

>>3098301
The lab may or may not have fucked up.

>>3098301
1)You sent bw film to a c41 lab with idiot employees
2)your camera didnt work properly
3)you didn't put the film in properly and it never left the canister
4)you shot a rf with the lenscap on
5)you shot manual mode handheld nighttime with retard settings
6)you mistook unshot rolls for used ones
7)you (you) you etc. Noticing a pattern?

The pattern is - you're the sole person with the information as to why something failed, having done it personally.

File: 83910008.jpg (390KB, 1919x1287px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 1919x1287px

Was handed down my dads old camera- Olympus Trip 35.. been taking some photos with it a while- didnt really think to develop a reel and see how it went..

Take 8 canisters to a place in soho- get them all developed, scanned and printed..

Get sent an email with about 105 pictures- i assume i fucked the rest of them up although there are some badly exposed, sunflare ones...

Looking at photo's like these, could anyone tell me if this is just me being retarded with settings/lighting? or do the red streaks come from the sensor/scanning process..

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	QSS-31
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.8 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:19 20:06:39
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3098312
light leak

>>3098312
Those are lightleaks - your camera back lets light through some slit, probably lightproofing foam disintegrating from old age. Either that or you did something with your film, like opening the back before rewinding.

File: IMG_3667.jpg (66KB, 980x600px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 980x600px

Modifying a polaroid colorburst into a Kiev 88 (Hasselblad knockoff) polaroid back? What does anyone think the likely hood of this working? Has anyone taken apart a colorburst or has any kind of images of the inside makeup?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	980
Image Height	600
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3098388
You know that Kodak instant film hasn't been made since like the 70s, right.

File: apx400 200 juni001-Edit.jpg (703KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 800x1200px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: apx400 200 juni035-Edit.jpg (575KB, 1200x755px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 1200x755px

>>3098421
these are shot at 200 with a pentax 50mm 1.7, on apx400

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3098420
Yeah but I can load impossible project in it right?

File: apx400 200 juni021-Edit.jpg (565KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 1200x800px

>>3098423

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: apx400 200 juni019-Edit.jpg (516KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

516KB, 800x1200px

>>3098425

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3098424
Nope, different formats, different pressure during the expulsion of the film, different chemicals. It won't work. The only way to properly do it is to take a broken Instax camera and use Instax film.

>>3098428
Damn... are there people who have done that with instax?

>>3098310
Put your trip back on, fuckcuck the newfag

>>3098429
You could try, but the flange distances still might be too different to work.

>>3098310

Ya i appreciate it it's not like i'll get mad, I'm just genuinely curious.

The funny thing is all the 3 blank rolls occurred after a fishing trip I went on with my camera and I got a new lens which I was using on the last 3 rolls and switching between my 55mm and 85mm.

Now that I can even it down I'd say it's something with my camera or them, don't know what could make 3 rolls in a row not work though.

>>3098449
Assuming you get your negatives back like a civilised human, if the blank rolls have edge markings/frame numeration that means the fuckup was on your side, if it's totally blank, on theirs. Unless, again, you sent them b/w film and they processed it as colour.

>>3098448
It's not about flange distance, it's about mechanics. To create an instant back is needed a magazine plate, filmpack holder, the expulsion trigger and all the mechanism that let the chemical reaction occur by pressing the liquid filled pocket and distributing the liquids homogeneously through two properly spaced rollers. Obviously it's necessary to build a box that contain all of those things.

>>3098470
So if I disassemble an instax camera, make it so the film is exposed to the film plane of the kiev and make sure that it still goes into the necessary rollers it should work? Is it impossible ?

File: IMG_2590.jpg (5MB, 4953x3302px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 4953x3302px

Hey /p/ it's dick contact prints guy again
Went for a skinny dip it the pool cause it's winter here and so the school doesn't clean the pool.
Thought the mud would be to opaque to show my dick, turns out it's not.

FP4+ xtol 1:1 13mins
Mju ii

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4953
Image Height	3302
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3098528
lolll

>>3098528

You are just going to keep posting dick pics, aren't you?

How long until we have a close up of your dick penetrating someone?

okay so I recently purchased a camera lens/accessories lot from a local website, owner threw in his old AE-1/P. There is an issue (or two) with it the Mirror is stuck in the up position, and the film curtain is also raised. Along with that the button on the bottom to rewind the film is also stuck pressed down. Any ideas on fixes?

>>3098528
you're the reason I come to /p/

File: digislugs btfo.jpg (129KB, 606x394px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 606x394px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2011:09:24 17:18:57
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	606
Image Height	394

>>3098528
The composition is nice.
The penis ads an unknown level of artistry here.

>>3098528

Surprise penis makes this art.

And that must have been a disgusting ass pool, I hope you don't get a skin disease.

>>3098528
hahah

>>3096557
link pls

>>3098618
For sure 8x10 sheet film resolution is better, but consider the price, the developing cost and the fact that basically you can only contact print it.
I'm happy with medium format.

>>3098511
Exactly, it will work.

>>3097987
>>3098638
>literally has emojis in the title
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfotW1bo8LA
Have fun listening to a blue haired freak read the instructions off a developing kit for 18 minutes

>>3098639
who'd have thought that you pay more for the best results

File: img.jpg (686KB, 2144x1424px) Image search: [Google]

686KB, 2144x1424px

Umm, I just noticed I'm beginning to amass a collection of film cameras.

Should I be worried?

>>3098652
anon did, and decided it wasn't worth paying that much

File: 8743763371_b6c3dbe0f2_z.jpg (80KB, 640x462px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 640x462px

>>3098658

>a fellow Nikon fag

My dad gave me his old N2020 (F-501) and I have fallen in love.

Any recomended zooms? He had a good collection of primes, but no standard zoom. I want something I can carry everywhere for snapshits and not have to bother with lenses.

>>3098658
We're all the same. About a month ago I sold every film camera I owned apart from my most used 35 and 120 camera, and a couple of keepsake cameras that are unusable and sit on my shelf.

I ended up with my mju ii and Yashicamat, basically the most gentrified film cameras ever hahah.

That or have one nice film camera to compliment your digital workhorse, such as a M6 or T2.

File: DSC03504[1].jpg (39KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 640x640px

so I bought a Super Tak 35mm f2 for cheap to adapt onto my Pentax K-mount film SLR body

but some anon in another thread told me to buy a K-mount wide angle instead, so I've held off on buying an adapter for now

can I get some opinions please? should I bother going down this track or not?

What do you guys think of post-process color pictures into black and white?
Took lots of pictures where I think it would benefit greatly from beeing monochrome, but it kind of feels wrong.

Atleast my autism makes me feel wrong.

>>3098658
I also own an F90X and it's my favourite film camera by far
>>3098660
My favourite is the 28-105 3.5-4.5 AF-D

Prices are rising now but sometimes you can still find a bargain
When I was shopping for one, they were all around 200€, but I found some guy felling an F80 and the lens for 80€

>>3098671

>28-105 AF-D

Looks to be around $100 on ebay.

Might pick one up, thanks anon.

File: image.jpg (699KB, 2442x1592px) Image search: [Google]

699KB, 2442x1592px

>>3098660

My workhorse lens is a Nikon 35-70 2.8D. It's a pull-zoom, default is 70 and pulled to 35.
I've used it for weddings, tours, and back when I was in photography class. It was a little weighty b/c the steel frame, but not bad to carry.
The f501 doesn't have a vertical grip, so if you do get this lens its weight would probably make camera the flip downward on a neck carry. At least this happened to me on my fa, I haven't used an f501.

A lens I'm looking to get is a nikon 28-70 2.8D. A little larger, but the the plastic body would likely offset the potential weight. Also offers a full aperture ring and swm af, so it won't scream during use. (e.g. my f90x)

>>3098671
>I also own an F90X and it's my favourite film camera by far

I agree. I do need to get mine cla'd sometime, at a bare minimum my FA could serve as a backup.

>>3098668
It seems fun and interesting, but often times it can be a waste. Lots of times, it comes out grainier than on color and you'll also have to deal with the orange mask.
Its often better to just develop as color, then either print to black-white or scan or post process as black/white.

At least in my opinion.

>>3098674
Also, do you have any experience with nikon digital bodies?

What would you reccomend to someone coming from the F90x?
I don't want to get rid of my glass by buying into Sony or Fuji so I'll probably stick to Nikon

>>3098679

Not him, but...

I went from a Nikon F-501 to an a7ii.

Heavily customisable interface, great lenses, and it is just all around fun to shoot.

Very happy with it. It works pretty well scanning my F-501 negatives too actually.

As for Nikon bodies, I hear great things about the d7100. It is DX (crop) but it supporrs screw drive lenses.

>>3098679
It depends. If they're all D type, then half your troubles are fixed.

Next off is whether you care for AF or not. Screw-type af, and you'll have to buy some of the more higher-end.
Also, look for nikons with the lcd config on top. More than likely, they can af with screw-type, and the lcd would offer a similar experience to the f90x.

If you want a cheaper starter you'll probably get rid of after a while, the d90 ought to work. If you want to switch from s to c af, you'd need to set in menu, most digitals are this way. Lots can be had cheaper than 200, and still make decent quality to get you into digital.

Otherwise, hop in with the 3(high grade, e.g. d710) or single digit(pro e.g. d5) series, if you can spend the money. I seriously recommend you look for FX cameras no older than 2006. Those are full-frame, and though they are older, still provide decent results these days. They also take full advantage of your film lens, unlike cropped dx. While DX is iffy, it can provide nice results depending on the camera, sometimes comparable to FX. Its really your preference.

The quad digit series(e.g. d5300) are all menu-oriented noob cameras, so unless you like clicking through 4 menus to change iso, stay away.

Do look at different camera reviews by different people. Or, if you can, go to the local store and actually use one in-house. That's why they're on display. You might be able to get away with sticking your own lens on.

Trolol, my first digital was a d2x I bought off my photography teacher.

>>3098698
Just in case, to clarify by stating
>D type

I'm referring to your lens and whether they have cpu capability.

>>3098704
Yeah all my lenses are AF-D

Guess I'll look into the 3 digit series, 1 digit is a stretch for now

750 or 810 maybe?

>>3098710
At this point, I'd recommend the d810.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-D-D810-36-3-MP-Digital-SLR-Camera-Black-Body-Only-/222543919022?hash=item33d0a6b7ae:g:K4oAAOSwZ4dZIxhl

>>3098713

If you're willing to deal with a potentially sketchy used offer.

Generally d810s go for 1900 to 2300 body only, d750 about 300-400 less. But a 12mp difference...

File: image.jpg (1MB, 2095x1393px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2095x1393px

And since this is supposed to be a film board, have a grainy fuji 400 snapshit.

File: 1490381049181.jpg (23KB, 480x336px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x336px

>>3098651
That wasn't so bad. Just a bit too much talking and lengthy explanations.

File: received_1869117853413144.jpg (48KB, 640x966px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 640x966px

Anyone else had fortunate results from light leaks? I shot a lot of dark shots after I first got my OM1n and the first time I took it out in the sun pic related happened.

>>3098728
a e s t h e t i c

>>3098728
Fortunate? Oh God.

>>3098555
nevermind found the problem.

>>3098728
Didn't you post this like 6 film general threads ago?

>>3098721
Eh I found it unbearable

Probably a stupid question but here goes, I'm doing a photo shoot soon (my first) and putting a lot of resources into all the materials for it. It'll be like $800 in all which really isn't a big deal for me as long as it comes out good.

The question is, will my canon ae-1 be capable of taking professional photos in an outdoor setting that could be worthy of being put up somewhere?

I know this is dumb since professionals have been using film since photography has been invented but before I go out and do this all I'm wondering if I should upgrade to a different camera.

>>3098855
As long as you know how to use it and the film you'll be using, you'll be fine.

>>3098858

Okay thanks, I've done street photography for a while now and I now it's always been sufficient for that but I wasn't sure how it'd be in a different context.

>>3098658
I noticed I was starting down that path myself. I caught myself on my second film camera, fortunately. I sold my rangefinder and kept my fm3a. I really miss my bessa I sometimes I have bouts of regret, but it was the right thing to do. I hardly shoot film, I shouldn't own more than 1.

File: IMG_2584.png (1MB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x1136px

>>3098545
Unlikely that we would get full penetration,but if I do it would be enter the void style

File: 17620068572_8b7806381a_o.jpg (570KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1000x1000px

>>3098728
Once. Wasn't thinking and popped the back open mid roll. I had owned the camera for 8 years at that point. Not sure what came over me but I caused a sunset to occur midday...so that's neat.

>>3098892
No problem with trying different cameras and having a few at one time. Its dumb to keep something you don't like or use though.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5261
Image Height	5253
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2015:05:13 19:35:04
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000

What's your favourite medium format film camera and why, /p/?

>>3098955
cool shot. post another picture.

no big deal about opening the back, everyone's done that before

>couple months back
>finish a roll
>think to myself 'time to take the film out!'
>promptly open the back without rewinding at all
>close it in sudden panic
>wonder what the fuck is wrong with me

>>3098956
Hasselblad 500C/M

PROS
-It was a high end camera that now you can buy for the same price of a shitty entry level DSLR
-Completely modular, allows you to change films and formats, finders, winding cranks and lenses.
-top quality Zeiss lenses
-Interchangeable and high quality focusing screens (acute matte)
-accessories for every kind of photography, they could be expensive but you'll always have a choice
-flash sync at all speeds
-basically indestructible
-a real pleasure to see
-it's compact compared to other MF reflex cameras
-service is still widely available everywhere

CONS
-The cost is higher but you pay for what you get
-Heavy lenses, especially the C series
-Loud mirror and auxiliary shutter (the lenses' central shutter is quiet instead)
-everytime you use it people will ask you what camera is it.

How bad is it really to start out with a cheap shitbed (v600) for practicing with 35mm? I don't really plan on shooting anything good enough to print off, I just need to be able to see my bw negatives in a scan. Possibly post something on insta if it's muh aesthetics.
Also plan on seeing what the MF hype is about once I get the hang of shooting 35mm

File: Velvia50_019.jpg (267KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 1000x667px

>>3098968
It makes a bit more sense to do at the end of the roll with 35mm. I was on frame 8 or something, wasn't even finished with the roll. Total brainfart.

>>3098956
Bronica SQ-A. Can do anything a Hassy can just as well for a fraction of the price. Any focal length and film back you could want is available. Lenses are a couple hundred dollar investments. The camera is solid and can handle tons of abuse and isn't prone to jamming.

Cons are the name isn't 'elite'.

[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	2017:06:19 19:16:26
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-6.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight Fluorescent
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

>>3098990
>Cons are the name isn't 'elite'.
That's just the start for some of us. I'm swedish, so chosing an analog MF camera that isn't Hassy is practically treason.

(good thing I fucking love Hasselblads' film stuff)

>>3098990
The name isn't elite because that camera isn't elite. Of course it allows you to take really good pictures but you won't get the same results that a Hasselblad can give.
Just consider that bronicas used to cost less than 1/3 of a Hasselblad.

>>3098997
What results are we talking about though? The only thing really is the lens characteristics. Zenzanon lenses are still plenty sharp. I've printed up to 24x24 and the sharpness is fantastic.

>>3098999
Lenses are not just sharpness. Even my Helios 77M-4 on 35mm is sharp if properly focused. It's full of aberrations and distortions in the out of focus parts.
That's what I mean, I used both Zenzanon and Zeiss lenses and I personally understand why the German ones were sold at least at the double of the price of the others.
24x24 what? Centimeters? Inches?

File: IMG_20170127_223532_634.jpg (503KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 1000x1000px

>>3099002
Inches using both the 80mm S and 150mm PS. Film used was Ektachrome and Acros... definitely helps to use sharp film. I'm not trying to say Zenzanon lenses are on par with Zeiss, but they are ~90% there. If someone can afford to build a Hassy kit all the power to them. I bought my Bronica kit while in high school mowing lawns. Haven't seen the need to ever upgrade.