/fgt/ - Film General Thread

File: photobotch.jpg (520KB, 1400x911px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 1400x911px

/film/, amrite guise?

File: filename_goes_here.jpg (165KB, 900x613px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 900x613px

like, photos and shit, right?

File: tolerance.jpg (410KB, 1200x792px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 1200x792px

Seriously though, why bother?

File: 24.jpg (3MB, 3434x2251px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3434x2251px

heavy peepee and gimmicks

>>3099466
"why is this longhaired autist pointing his vintage soviet toycam at me? Couldn't he at least get a real camera like us other girls?"

File: ten outta ten discord cancer faggot lad.jpg (258KB, 584x1000px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 584x1000px

>>3099484
10/10 it's like you were there

>>3099464
why do you keep reposting this? do you think its good?

>>3099493
don't you talk shit about slavman in the /fgt/

File: a completely abstract kind of cancer.jpg (278KB, 1000x609px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1000x609px

>>3099493
Because you're not the only single sole special snowflake on /p/ I post this for, kid.
>"I already saw this so why do you repost it, ever, at all, huh?"

>>3099500
you're unbanned in discord now btw
Im sorry I ever doubted you
-Ken

>>3099448
Fellas do you think that 50mm f1.8 plastic fantastic, with a 25mm auto extension would be good for film scanning with a Canon 10d?

File: smol sized kitchen guardian.jpg (655KB, 803x1200px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 803x1200px

Whats up friends!

Ordered a bunch of bw developing chemicals and gonna go shoot some hp5 tomorrow.
Have some agfa vista 200 juicy goodness on a little p&s af1 twin. c:

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:21 23:19:46
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	803
Image Height	1200

>>3099537
Have a look on your local gumtree/craiglist/whatever equivalent and see if you can get an older scanner, I managed to get a canoscan 8800F not too long ago for £50. It's not the most modern for sure, but it's a decent scanner for a decent price. (and there's alot less hassle with a flatbed rather than DSLR scanning)

>>3099466
Damn thots asking to kill their own kids and shirk the consequences of having sex
>>3099468
"Inside every white European is a nigger"
Objectively incorrect government spawned genocide posting.

Are you a liberal, commie anti white faggot?

>>3099538
you have to be 18 to use this site
go post on tumblr or something instead

>>3099559
r-rude!

>>3099511
Am I unbanned now now too Kurwa?

>>3099511
Is that still running? I had it before I went away, came back and it was kill.

Hello, since I hate that fake grain that my flatshit scanner puts in my pictures from color negs (only B/W film has silver grain) and fucks up colors with automatic balance I'm trying to build a reproduction system using my abandoned DSLR. I'll use my LCD screen as a diffused white light but I'm not sure how much white it can be, any advices on other white light sources?

>>3099494
He's a drama-starting autist. What's not to like?

>>3099538
>c:

>>3099493
Can't you see it's a clever visual rendition of the allegory of Plato's cave???? plebs man

Why don't we get a only film photography board here on 4chan?

I'm switching to digital soon boys cause cost reasons (going to school fulltime instead of working fulltime), i hate to do it, is it an easy transition?

>>3099623
too niche

>>3099628
I've been through hard times some time ago, I used to expose less rolls and consequently asking myself everytime "do I really want to pay for this picture?". Also used to buy shitty film like kodacolor and Foma, I also delayed the processing until I had some bucks to do that. You know, it depends on what you want from photography. Maybe you could just use your phone and take good pictures as well but in my opinion nope, it won't be an easy transition.
>>3099631
I don't think so, recently I'm seeing many threads about film photography around and sometimes analog posts get confused with digital. It worth a shot.

>>3099634
This is the only thread that's actually film related. Those other threads are compact film camera wankery. Film cameras are extremely easy to procure, once people get them they don't do anything with them. Hence, only one thread about actual film on this board. The infrastructure required to shoot film is very expensive and keeps most people away.

File: Velvia50_025.jpg (89KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 667x1000px

>>3099628
No need to switch 100%. Keep a film camera loaded with nice film for special photos or when you look outside and the light is insanely nice. It may take you a month or two to finish the roll, but if you shot selectively it will be full of bangers.

You'll probably find digital liberating as fuck.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4000
Image Height	6000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:21 17:58:01
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Brightness	-6.8 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	667
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Unique Image ID	ca582538f7b24dd10000000000000000

>>3099636
I know it well, film photography is expensive but for the same price of a shitty Sony a7 you'll get more than a basic Hasselblad kit or a good SLR with an almost complete set of high quality lenses. This thread is compact but for the same reason it can be confusing.

>>3099638
The way I see it digital and film are expensive in different ways. With film it's the upkeep, with digital it's the initial barrier that's quite high. Like you said; you get high end film gear for the price of a budget digital camera.

On a similar note; is film even more expensive than it used to be? Accounting for inflation, I'm not sure it's too far off from what it cost in the 80s and 90s. Some aspects might actually be cheaper.

File: Velvia50_024.jpg (244KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1000x667px

>>3099640
>is film even more expensive than it used to be?

It's much cheaper today if we're talking US prices. Lots of information you can find by googling. To summarize, film costs have remained relatively stable. So once you factor in inflation, you'll find film is cheaper today.

[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	2017:06:21 17:54:09
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
Unique Image ID	3bda20bcc493c0230000000000000000

>>3099640
>>3099646
The time and money consumption part of film is the processing of it, developing, printing, digitizing.

I'd be curious to see how a film board would work out, though. Someone should email japanese moot about it.

File: sheddoor2.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

Here's a negative preview of a shot I printed. I neglected to scan the print because retarded. Take my word for it: it came out pretty okay.

>>3099656
That's a pretty interesting room to say the least. Where'd you take the photo?

>>3099657
The farm.

File: 68798765.jpg (13KB, 200x255px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 200x255px

>>3099659
What.

File: chickencoop1.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>3099659
I went to the farm and took that photo in the garage that connects to the chicken barn.

Here's the chicken barn, obviously a shittier shot.

>>3099646
>>3099640
It depends, color photography used to cost more than nowadays, black and white instead less.
Example:
I have a photography catalog where are listed all available films with prices related to the formats. I calculated the inflation and that's what I got:

Kodacolor II 135 format 36 exp.:
1979 - 8,50€
2017 - 2,50€

Kodak Tri-X 120 format:
1979 - 3,25€
2017 - 7€

Ilford HP5 and FP4 135 format
1979 - 4,80€
2017 - 6€

File: IMG_1851.jpg (3MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2448x3264px

>>3099666

>>3099668
Also a high quality E6 Kodak slide film (120 format) used to cost from 19€ to 24€, now you'll get a Provia or a Velvia for less than half of the price. I generally pay 9 euros for a 120 roll of these films.

>>3099677
For the amerifags:
Keep in mind that
P$≈11/10 * P€

>>3099680
>P$≈11/10 * P€
now in english, einstein.

>>3099686
Price in dollars approximately equals to the price in euros multiplied by 1.1
You're welcome retard

>>3099595
:C

>>3099666
>>3099656
Soup your prints longer or put a drop or two of film developer in, you're not getting good blacks

File: minolta_x300[1].jpg (237KB, 617x425px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 617x425px

lads im bored of digital and i want to get into film. Is minolta x300 a good start for someone who shot film with auto compacts like 20 years ago?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot G7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	617
Image Height	425
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	2012:01:12 22:55:31
Exposure Time	1/25 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.89 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	617
Image Height	425
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3099448
Link the fucking new thread in the old thread you dumb fgt

File: 460122026_9db5686be9.jpg (56KB, 500x361px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x361px

Is the Kiev 6C a good choice for babbies first medium format camera?

>>3099845
yes sir pretty much any slr is a good choice

>>3099869
The Kiev 6S is basically a pentacon six copy. Those cameras are generally unreliable, the curtain shutter is big and this will cause lots of problems in the years to come. If you're lucky enough you'll take one for a fair price and it won't need CLA.

File: Untitled.png (1MB, 1366x738px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1366x738px

Welp, it's been almost shit, 3 months?
Time for a ferrania shitpost!

So far, only 2 "dispatches" have been released, lemmie sum them up here.

SCALING UP Pt 1 & 2
> Since day one we've been thinking of scaling up production.
> However, we still haven't.
> We know you want our garbage film, so we can only make limited amounts.
> So far, we shipped some film. But we see some scratches as a result from our shit machinery so we decide not to release those rolls. Which is probably 90% of our production.
>/ me smells a cover-up of lies going on.
> We've "resumed" making film. But we still won't ship anymore yet.

So basically, you folks still can't produce film properly? What about you're "scaling up" proclamation? Shouldn't you have scaled up yet?

QUIET MEANS BUSY
> We've gotten emails from concerned customers.
> They've JUST NOW FUCKING REALIZED they still haven't gotten film after ~3 months.
> We aren't making much film, if any at all, to ensure quality and serve you better. No film is for the better.
> Go on lengthy explanation for people who can't figure out the brief sentences, and probably won't get the explanation either.
> We're shipping film as we make it, so maybe one or two rolls per week. Our production rate also is increasing by about .01 roll per week, but we assure you it is increasing.
> We are disappointed we aren't growing any faster, and we probably aren't doing much about it either.
> YA'LL FAGGOTS PRE-ORDERED, AND NOT TRULY ORDERED, SO YOU GET FILM WHEN WE SAY YOU CAN!
> Kickstarters, we still care about you. Not a lot, probably little at all, but we still do.

Glad I wasn't a pre-oderer or a kickstarter.
I could get a better deal with some expired ilford.

If you're one of the lucky ones who actually got some ferrania film, please do reply.

>>3099901
Italian here, I'm really suspicious about Ferrania.
A guy I know run some tests on that film, they say it's a 80 ASA panchromatic film, but it's really a 12-20 ASA orthochromatic film.
Exposed at 50 ASA will give the best results.
Oh, they even recycled old film cartridges putting a Ferrania sticker on them.
I don't know how far they'll go, they're not trustworthy and their film is damn expensive.
Quality is good if properly exposed btw

>>3099906

Damn, first time I've had an admitted Italian respond.
Either way, I can see them reusing cartridges. The have no sheet metal working tools, nor have they said anything about.

Now those specs. Mmmmhh yeeeessss.
Sounds more like it.

Thanks for the reply.

>>3099917
It's the more expensive black and white film, even more than Fuji Acros 100. They should at least buy new cartridges, come on, a single one costs less than 20 cents.

Someone else asked this question in the old thread and I was also curious about an answer, but looks like it was overlooked.

>on your traditional 35mm camera, changing the iso will only fuck with your light meter, right? It doesnt change anything about how the camera actually operates unless it has auto shutter speed or apeture or whatever, right?

File: Provia100Fexpired_004.jpg (217KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1000x667px

>>3099931
Correct.

[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	2017:03:23 20:54:00
Exposure Time	2 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-6.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Cool White Fluorescent
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3099974
>So someone just deleted the post with the /p/ discord server invite link

And nothing of value was lost.

Where do you Britfags buy film online? I would just get what I want off Amazon but I'm scared it will be expired or something

What are some good film photography youtubers?

File: 01.jpg (774KB, 633x950px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 633x950px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM Corporation
Camera Model	FUJIFILM Corporation FEII software
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2624
Image Height	3936
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	2017:06:22 18:17:48
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	633
Image Height	950

>>3099999
Nice pants, picture is insignificant.

>>3099994
Eduardo Pavez is my favorite at the moment

Has any one else tried shooting Fuji instax wide through their 4x5 camera. I made a little insert/holder for a standard film holder and it ends up working great, insanely more detailed photos than using it through a instax camera. Definitely going to shoot a lot of this, really wish there was still proper 4x5 instant film. I'll post some scans.

>>3099975
Well I was in there at one point so it wasn't entirely valueless.

>>3099845
get x570 instead, more features and easier to operate
or look into pentax in particular the k1000, spotmatic, km

>>3100027
>k1000
Mine broke and costs 70 quid to repair. Seriously considering it because of how fucking hot that camera is

>>3099920
Double X is still more expensive, if I'm not entirely mistaken. Not worth it either, and jacks your fixer up. StreetPan falls somewhere in between.

For weird small-company film, might I recommend Bergger's Pancro 400 instead? It's supposedly fair quality, though I had some problems with their very last run of BRF400+ (repackaged Orwo N74+) getting some light leaks in frames 0, 1, and 2 due to leader retrieval.

But like, JCH of all people has his boutique film these days. Ferrania the Second is trying to operate a factory on clapped-out old machinery; I'm honestly surprised they've got this far.

Who makes these weird films, anyway? I don't think Maco have a factory; rather theirs is coated at Agfa Gevaert, and Bergger's stuff comes from either Belgium or Germany.

File: PICT0048 RSZ.jpg (982KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

982KB, 667x1000px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Rollei
Camera Model	DFS 300
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.6
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5760
Image Height	3840
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:20 18:03:53
Exposure Time	1481089/16777216 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	0
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000
Exposure Index	1

File: PICT0049 RSZ.jpg (943KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

943KB, 667x1000px

>>3100071

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Rollei
Camera Model	DFS 300
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.6
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5760
Image Height	3840
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:20 18:06:19
Exposure Time	1481089/16777216 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	0
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000
Exposure Index	1

File: PICT0045 RSZ.jpg (978KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

978KB, 1000x667px

>>3100075

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Rollei
Camera Model	DFS 300
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.6
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5760
Image Height	3840
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 13:24:32
Exposure Time	1481089/16777216 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	0
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	667
Exposure Index	1

>>3100062

Maco is indeed Agfa Gavaert. Bergger comes from Belgium.

Love Bergger, btw. Expensive but somehow different, to my limited experience.

I got two rolls of JCH's Streetpan last week and I'm holding onto them for a while. Any special recommendation on how to shoot them?

New to this part of 4chan, nice to see the discussions!

>>3100104
b-but Agfa Vista 200 film is repackaged Fuji c200

File: 20170617-55220002.jpg (990KB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

990KB, 960x1200px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 16:00:15

File: 20170617-55230006.jpg (863KB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

863KB, 960x1200px

>>3100112

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 15:44:13

File: 20170617-55230008.jpg (876KB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

876KB, 960x1200px

>>3100113

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 16:02:19

File: 20170617-55230002.jpg (958KB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 960x1200px

>>3100114

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 15:53:00

File: 20170617-55230013.jpg (1MB, 960x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 960x1200px

>>3100115
last and comfiest doggo.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 16:03:26

File: 20170617-55220022.jpg (773KB, 1200x796px) Image search: [Google]

773KB, 1200x796px

What's the best way to fix a light leak?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.4 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 18:05:20

>>3100124
By sealing your camera film door with light sealing foam.

>>3100124
find out what's leaking, and fix it? usually replacing foam seals everywhere.

Small inside news, Kodak wants to revive Kodachrome and it will be available again in Nov 2018.

>>3099668
I buy tri-x for $4, but when I buy it in bulk it usually averages around 3.

so I guess lucky me! same price as it was in europe in the 80s.

File: 022_25.jpg (295KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1000x667px

Got my first two rolls of film i ever shot back. two rolls of triX, one shot at box speed and the other pushed two stops. i liked the normal roll better.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Noritsu
Camera Model	SI-1080 Film Scanner Model DLS1640
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.10.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 18:27:13
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: en.jpg (129KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 600x800px

picked up this big boy, just need to find some time to get printing

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SAMSUNG
Camera Model	SCH-I545
Camera Software	GIMP 2.8.20
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 21:38:31
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	-2.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	4.20 mm
Comment	METADATA-START
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	600
Image Height	800
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	S13F0SAGI01

>>3100165
nutbutton.jpg

>>3100166
where do you buy from in bulk? everywhere I look at seems that it's not worth getting tri-x in bulk but maybe im bad at math.

>>3100166

27 count Superior premium is the way to go.

>>3100165
I heard the same, but that it would be on the market in late 2017.

>>3100165
>>3100224

It is ektachrome they want to revive, and that will be late 2017.

Kodachrome is never coming back.

>>3100216
Kodak's films aren't worth getting in bulk, unless you must for some reason load a 200 exposure reel in a dark room. Ilford's films are barely worth it. It's only films like the RPX triplet and Fomapan stuff that get below 3€/roll. And then you'd probably like to pay off your bulk loader first, those things can cost like a hundred on their own -- basically everything that saves money costs a lot...

>>3099974
>>3099975
oh so the report option works after all, cool.

>>3100165
No idiot, they are reviving Ektachrome. And everyone but you has known this for nearly 6 months now. It will be available the last quarter of 2017.

You didn't get one piece of information right, kys.

>>3100248
they should revive not """ektachrome""" but e100g, thats the only kodak slide worth reviving.

>>3100112
>>3100113
>>3100114
>>3100115
>>3100117
Love these keep up the good work

>>3099869
Get a Bronica SQ, ETRS, S2, or a Mamiya 645 for your first medium format camera.

Is it even worth getting my canon repaired if theres oil leaked in it or whatever? I had a guy briefly tell me it might stop working in a year or 2 cause it was left in the heat for too long (was a hand me down).

File: R1-01461-0033.jpg (2MB, 1981x1379px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1981x1379px

i take my film to a shop to develop it. should I get the stuff to home develop bnw, a scanner, or both?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Fujifilm eSystems, Inc.
Camera Model	Digital Link
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:14 14:46:05
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3100304
Black and white it's very effective yo do both.

Scanners are ass but at least you can do multiple passes to compensate for dense negatives. DSLR scanning mustard race

File: vlcsnap-2017-04-05-16h49m15s201.png (138KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 512x384px

I touched the emulsion of some 4x5 I was loading into film holders, should I commit honourable suicide?

File: LS 1500PX.jpg (1MB, 1500x1187px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x1187px

[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	9526
Image Height	7130
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	2017:06:23 03:51:48
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1500
Image Height	1187

File: 19397118_1564968493574871_12248890346091737_n.jpg?oh=3e893a0c108ce18f10afbe71dbc29b8e&oe=59E09418.jpg (37KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 480x480px

>yfw double the meme

>>3100363
that street cuck film is literally killing film.

>>3100359
Oh shit

Cookie cutter houses aren't just an American thing anymore?

>>3100355
>Scanners are ass
lmao fuck off

How much is a fully serviced k1000 worth

>>3100366
how

>>3100363
I don't mind JCH as a person, but who would buy that shit?

File: Minolta_Supreme_Freedom_Zoom.jpg (147KB, 627x425px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 627x425px

Been looking for a compact and came across the Minolta Supreme Freedom Zoom, anyone have any experience with It?

Reviews are great(though quite old), and it is dirt cheap.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	Optio E70L
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.9
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	96 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1536
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	2015:05:31 18:07:08
Exposure Time	24349/500000 sec
F-Number	f/5.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.2
Exposure Bias	1.3 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Cloudy Weather
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	17.10 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	627
Image Height	425
Exposure Index	100
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Digital Zoom Ratio	1.7
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Macro

Want to get into exclusively b+w film photography with my AE-1. What are some essential film I should check out?

>>3100434
JHC Streetpan 400, washi film, Foma Retropan 320, Ferrania P30, these are the absolute classics

>>3100440

Not him, but...

Washi film looks neat as fuck.

I guess that is something I'd have to develop myself?

>>3100428
>using a 10$ camera to waste $8 film

Why do people do this to themselves

>>3100452

It is like $3-5.

And waste $8 of film? I seriously hope it wouldn't take me three rolls of film to realize it is shit.

The reason I asked is because it's optics seemed to have been praised in its reviews. Wanted to know if they still held up.

>>3100434
>TRI-X
>TRI-X
>TRI-X

File: TRIX1600_001.jpg (585KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 1000x1000px

>>3100434
All you'll ever need is Tri-X for 400+ iso and Acros for slow speed.

Anyone who says otherwise is a fucking dummy.

[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	2017:03:06 21:43:28
Exposure Time	2.5 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	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3100461
>>3100455
>>3100440
Thanks guys.

>>3100461
Tri-X and Acros is a weird combination. I'd rather go FP4+ or Fomapan 100, given that APX 100 and Plus-X are dead.

>>3100461
but muhh fp4+

File: img022.jpg (1MB, 2203x1349px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2203x1349px

>>3100476
> given that APX 100 ... are dead

I disagree. APX 100 pushed to 400.
A little cloudy, but I just need to clean my scanner.

File: Clipboard02.jpg (326KB, 1200x789px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1200x789px

>>3100447
Ye you have to hand-develop it but the results are worth it

>>3100512

Haven't gotten to hand development yet, maybe someday soon.

File: s-ls1600.jpg (67KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1000x1000px

Shanghai GP3 is back in 4x5"

>>3100536
>$27.75 for 25 sheets
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Shanghai-4x5-Black-White-B-W-ISO-100-Sheet-Film-25-Sheets-EXP-2018-12-Freshest-/282508917616?hash=item41c6d7fb70:g:OvsAAOSwX9FZM9E6

Flickr examples looks ok:
https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=shanghai%20gp3%204x5

>>3100401
the only brand you shouldbe supporting is the one that actually manufactures film, not resellers or repackagers.

>>3100402
fb followers.

Found nice looking Leica M3 + rigid Summicron + Elmar 135/4 kit at a local store. €750 a fair price, anons?

Never used anything Leica before but really want to try an M3 to see what the fuss is all about. And if I don't overpay I probably won't lose any money should I decide to resell.

>>3100659
Hell of a deal. Make sure everything is in working order (accurate shutter speeds, clean, properly aligned rangefinder) and that the lenses are clear, and if they are, buy it.

>>3100461
I thought tri x was meant to be grainy what is this magic

>>3100671
Medium Format, fine grain developer.
Even Ilford Delta 3200 looks smooth in 6x7

>>3100673
How is film so fucking hd

Sheit

File: grain.jpg (79KB, 720x479px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 720x479px

>>3100675

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	720
Image Height	479

>>3100382
Like, $25-$50.

>>3100694
I dunno. I wouldn't ever pay more than that but prices are pretty inflated right now because the K1000 is a popular film camera right now (mostly because so many recommend it as a "starter" camera). With a bit of luck I bet you could get even twice that.

>>3100673
What developer?

>>3100713

pyrocat

File: Tmax_008.jpg (397KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 1000x750px

>>3100671
Tri-x is a pushing king. That was deved in d76 1:1.

First roll back from a GA645W. Somehow, I think this lens is sharper than the GA645's 60mm. Tmax, red filter, d76 1:1

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

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

File: DSC02806-Edit.jpg (2MB, 5166x3444px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5166x3444px

Sup /fgt/'s?

There has been a lot of talk about scanning film, so I decided to do some comparisons.

What follows is two FULL SIZED scans of a single negative. Nothing special, just a snapshit at the station to test out a new film camera I had cleaned. One is a full sized fullframe camera scan, and the second is a scanned using the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i at full size (which outputs a MASSIVE 200 mb .tiff file).

First up is the mirrorless. It is scanned with an a7ii w/ SEL90M28 that was manually focused. The negatives were held with the Lomography 135 film holder.

Dust and scratches were removed manually (there were quite a few actually, this was the first roll through a dirty old camera that wasn't cleaned quite as well as I had thought), and color correction was done using this:
>https://www.iamthejeff.com/post/32/the-best-way-to-color-correct-c-41-negative-film-scans
Exposure was dropped by around -1 after applying because it tends to output an overexposed image.

I am sure some of you anons could do better, but my monitors aren't calibrated, and my eye for color is kinda shit (maybe I should shoot b&w?).

[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

File: Test1.jpg (3MB, 6000x4000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6000x4000px

>>3100917

This is the 8200 scan.

I actually had to downscale it a bit, even after exporting as a jpeg through lightroom it was 9 mb.

Just a straight scan at max resolution available, with iSRD (automatic scratch removal) and some light noise removal. I did not apply the negafix film profiles, they really fucked the colors.

Took a good few minutes to actually scan. Didn't actually time it though.

Oh, and the film used was Fuji Superia Premium 400, 27 count.

[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

File: Negative0000.jpg (118KB, 802x524px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 802x524px

>>3100918
>>3100917

Oh and here is a "Quickscan" using the 8200.

Took seconds.

File: chairmanmeow.jpg (61KB, 960x760px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 960x760px

>>3100024

Not quite 4x5 but I've moded a Polaroid Pathfinder (Rodenstock Ysarex 127mm F4.7 tessar lens) to shoot Instax wide. Its pretty fun

File: wheatfieldinstax.jpg (84KB, 960x760px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 960x760px

>>3100937

File: 1456373752676.png (6KB, 390x470px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 390x470px

>>3100917
>>3100918
>>3100921
Can't wait for the dslrcuck cunts to try and defend this after being BTFO this hard

>>3100968
>i-it can rival drum scanning!
L M A O
M
A
O

has anybody used both the contax g2 and the leica m6 and can tell me some of the pros and cons of both systems? I'm looking for a more compact system that I can carry with me all the time because it's pretty cumbersome carrying around my hasselblad everywhere.

>>3100917
>>3100918
>>3100921
Sorry but I can't tell what you are trying to demonstrate here

>>3101007
>tell me what to think please!

>>3101013
>>3100972
Who are you quoting?

File: 100%.jpg (495KB, 1103x682px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1103x682px

>>3101013
Well it shows the second of the two scans in the sharpest but the reason for including the third one remains a mystery.

I guess I was thrown by >>3100968 faggot because I can't see what DSLRs have got to do with it

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh
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	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:24 15:35:48
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1103
Image Height	682

>>3101007

Nothing.

Just giving a comparison between the two. Draw your own conclusions.

>>3101018

Yea, third was included because somewhere in a previous thread someone was asking of they needed to disk with silverlight or if they could just use the quickscan button. I should have explained it in the post.

>>3101018
>Well it shows the second of the two scans in the sharpest but the reason for including the third one remains a mystery.
The second scan is not only far sharper, but also has much better shadow detail than the dslrcuck scan.

The reason for including the third scan was probably to show that you can still get good enough results for online posting with a quick and dirty scan, considering these dslrcucks are always crying about how long it takes to scan with a dedicated scanner, and how muh dslr method is so much faster.

File: F1190016 copy.jpg (192KB, 1008x672px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1008x672px

Just got my first roll developed, can I get some feedback on it? Also I fucked up and got a bunch of light leak onto it.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:03:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1008
Image Height	672

File: F1190006 copy.jpg (169KB, 672x1008px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 672x1008px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:03:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	672
Image Height	1008

File: F1190021 copy.jpg (231KB, 672x1008px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 672x1008px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:04:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	672
Image Height	1008

File: F1190003 copy.jpg (200KB, 672x1008px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 672x1008px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:03:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	672
Image Height	1008

File: F1190019 copy.jpg (169KB, 672x1008px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 672x1008px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:03:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	672
Image Height	1008

File: F1190017 copy.jpg (206KB, 1008x672px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1008x672px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:03:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1008
Image Height	672

File: F1190020 copy.jpg (193KB, 672x1008px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 672x1008px

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD.
Camera Model	SP-3000
Camera Software	FUJI PHOTO FILM CO., LTD. FE FDi Service Software / FRONTIER355/375-3.0-0E-511
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:06:22 22:04:00
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	672
Image Height	1008

>>3101030
The rest are pretty average snapshits, but this one stands out.

File: _MG_6471.jpg (2MB, 5066x3376px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5066x3376px

>>3101027
>dslrcuck scan
>a7ii

I think you mean mirrorlesscuck

This is a DSLR scan.

For the unashamed anorak wearers it was shot more than 20 years ago with a Canon F1, an FD 35-70mm f/4 and a Metz potato masher on Fujichrome Provia 100. For most of the intervening years it languished in a dusty old cardboard box in a humid environment with no climate control.

For scanning I used I used a 5Dmk2 with a 50mm macro, extension tubes and a Nikon ES-1 slide copying adapter and a speedlight

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5066
Image Height	3376
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	2017:06:24 16:11:00
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/7.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	5066
Image Height	3376
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3101044

Cool.

Now show us the same negative scanned on an 8200 so we can compare.

>>3101047
>negative
Slide

I don't have and 8200 you'll have to use your imagination

>>3101049

>use your imagination

So sharper and with even better shadows?

Man, you should get an 8200.

>>3100476
Not to sound like I'm shilling, but my substitute for old APX 100 (aka the stash someone's gonna inherit probably, at this rate) in Rodinal is RPX 100 in HC-110. Sadly it's only like a 85-90% equivalent, but works nicely for photos of nothing in particular.

>>3099906
Most of these are standard gripes about any film. Many people like to overexpose 2/3rds of a stop, and there's even good reasons for it even on a zone system perfect process; your shadow detail area under the curve will be greater. I've also had dicky cartridges from other small-time brands. (curse some of them for being so delicious regardless. pic related.)

The orthocromaticity point I've heard before in a thorough technical review, but can't find the link for the life of me. Said it's best for shooting brick walls in old industrial districts & so forth.

However, from a professional italian, point taken.

>>3099901
I see people on twitter mention shooting it like all the time. Maybe it's single rolls on occasion? I've not ordered any, Maco lists it as stocked, but aside from that...

>>3101050
Nope, I never shoot film these days and the only stuff I have left to scan are old family snapshits. Even the slides weren't worth spending money on a scanner. They are all old and some of them are in dodgy condition.

>>3101050
kek

>>3101027

The dslr/mirrorless/what-ever-you-want-to-call-it scan really isn't all that terrible.

It is certainly a valid option. And considering many people already have a digital body and a decent lens, it is a very economical choice too.

>>3101057
I'm not at all against dslr/mirrorcuck scanning and agree it's a valid option, but there's two faggots in particular (one being moopco who doesn't even take photos, and the other being another sony cunt lmao how typical) who like to argue that dslr/mirrorless scanning is the ONLY option and that dedicated scanners and shatbeds are far inferior.

Even after being shown valid proof and comparisons, they are too much of a manchild to admit there's other options. Just you wait, they'll show up soon enough.

>>3101057

It's not terrible at all, I'm very happy with >>3101044.

But I have to say if I was shooting film I would be putting it in an enlarger and making prints. Scanning wouldn't enter the equation.

But that is not my cup of tea anyway so it wont happen

>>3101061

>But I have to say if I was shooting film I would be putting it in an enlarger and making prints. Scanning wouldn't enter the equation.

I don't print anything larger than L (and the very, very rare A4), so even the DSLR scan is more than enough.

Digitizing it means I can shitpost in threads like this too.

>>3101041
Yeah I feel the same way, got pretty lucky with that shot.

File: image.jpg (916KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

916KB, 3264x2448px

can anyone identify how old this is? And how much overexposure that would need

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Right-Hand, Top
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3264
Image Height	2448

>>3101267
Color negatives tolerate high overexposure, so expose it like a 50 ASA and you'll be ok, you could have a maximum of a stop of overexposure.

>>3101267
It's gold, your probably don't even need to adjust the exposure.

>>3101007
>>3101014
>>3101018
>>3101024
>>3101027
>>3101044
>>3101049
final redpill on DSLRcuckscanning:
it fucking sucks. i has been demostrated. and it was demostrated that it sucked with b&w too in another thread.

now, between different cuck devices, DSLRs perform better than mirrorless (surprise surprise), even an old crop reflex like the 550D rapes the A7ii weeb professor cuck in the ass in terms of IQ.

>>3100939
>>3100937

How does it compare to a regular instax lens

>>3101280
The reason I ask is because a different font is used for Gold nowadays and I've never come across a 12 exposure film, so I'm assuming its older

>>3101302
it wont be earlier than 2002 or something, youll be fine.

>>3101304
t.hanks

File: img001(1)Instagram.jpg (1MB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2000px

>>3100937
>>3100939
Pretty neato but doesn't look particularly nicer than the instax cam

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	800 dpi
Vertical Resolution	800 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:24 16:04:11
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2000
Image Height	2000

File: untitled.jpg (844KB, 3096x2319px) Image search: [Google]

844KB, 3096x2319px

>>3100917
>>3100918
>>3100921
>>3101289
It's not that bad. This is with the kit lens and china extension tubes

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

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

File: untitled-4.jpg (655KB, 835x1112px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 835x1112px

>>3101327
Thought the EXIF was included.

Canon 550D

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

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

Got my hands on a Minolta srt 200, looking for some good lenses. Came with the 50mm 1:2

Also anyone have experience with this model camera?

>>3101044
is this a joke post? what does having a mirror have to do with film scanning?? you even go into "mirrorless" live view mode to focus the image

>>3101355
He's being pedantic because it's not DSLR scanning if you are using a mirrorless camera.

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

>>3101387
show the full photo so we know how cropped this is

File: digislugs btfo 2.jpg.jpg (220KB, 606x695px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 606x695px

>>3101401

Well here's the thread, mostly about how many photo sites shill hard for digital, I remember an article where they were saying that 4x5 was equivalent to 5mp

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 9000 ED
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS4 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	8964
Image Height	11016
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	200 dpi
Vertical Resolution	200 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2011:09:23 10:39:32
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	606
Image Height	695

I'm probably responding to trolls/idiots here, but I see no reason why dslrscanning would be inherently worse than using a scanner.
You just need to make sure both the negative and the camera are absolutely level, and you need a decent macro lens with good field flatness (and focus it correctly).
If you even take the time to stitch shots of different parts of the negative you'll probably hit the maximum possible resolution pretty fast.

>>3101401
>>3101403

https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/digtal-vs-8x10-film.451252/

>>3101403
>>3101405
this is pretty damn impressive, I didn't realise 8x10 had THAT much resolution

>>3101404

in the future you'll be able to scan every individual grain in a negative and then stitch them together

>>3101409
thanks for your contribution

>>3101412

You're welcome

File: _DSC5062.jpg (2MB, 7952x5304px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 7952x5304px

>>3101403
Sony A99 II is good enough to bridge this gap :D All those megapixels <3

>>3101355

Nothing. In theory they should perform roughly similar on the same negative. (only variance due to lens and sensor, and of these two, the mirrorless had the better lens and sensor).

The difference between the two examples in this thread could be due to different films/lenses used to take the initial image, fucked up settings by some (i.e.-anti-shake on a tripod can sometimes cause issues), and so on.

Flippy flap mirrors change nothing.

>>3101406
>i didnt realize a format that's 60 times bigger would have more detail

I'm planning to shoot 400 iso all day with flash, taking pictures of people, it's an f4.7 lens, what shutter speed should I set my lens to?

>>3101512
how could anyone possibly tell you that without being there with you

why the fuck are you using a flash in bright daylight? Does your camera have a light meter?

>>3101428
>watermarking pictures of your cat

this better be a troll

>>3101428
>Sony A99
>7952x5304
>watermarked photo of cat
>:D
><3
>all those megapixels
obvious troll is obvious

File: 1471863961594.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

>>3101428

>>3101518
>watermarking pictures of your cat
It's the only pussy he gets, and even that one hates him

>>3100993
Haven't used an m6 but would like to, but I do own a contax g1
The glass is awesome, the camera is pretty nice since it's all titanium and the viewfinder will hmmm shrink, for lack of a better word to show what you're focusing on when you get closer to your subject. Lack of a proper manual focus can be a dealbreaker for some people when it comes to the g1/g2. There's a wheel on both cameras to do scale/zone focusing but it's awkward to use. Otherwise, even on my g1, the autofocus is pretty decent, although the g2 has a much better AF system according to some internet reviews and fares a little better in low light
The g1 is pretty cheap, a body is less than $150 (I got mine for $90 from a local shop) and most g2s start at over $500 for the body only from what i've seen. The tradeoffs are a faster shutter speed (1/4000th iirc, and 1/6000 in aperture priority), better AF performance, more lens compatibility, and a somewhat better viewfinder. Imo the tradeoffs don't justify the ~$400 difference in price. I love the system, but if you're looking for a full manual experience, i'd go the leica route but if automation is your thing, the contax is a good choice.

>>3101516

No lightmeter, but I have one on me, but what about when I go inside the building?

are leicas a meme?

>>3101567

Digital Leica's are a meme, but the film range finders are absolutely exquisite.

File: ST705WSuper20000022.jpg (470KB, 1080x757px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 1080x757px

>>3100917
>>3100918
>>3100968
>>3100972
>>3101018
>>3101027
>>3101044
>>3101047
>>3101060
>>3101289
Actual DSLR-scancuck here.
Very happy to see this shitfight unfold with you morons holding up a total garbage scan as evidence of the whole concept of camera-scanning being a failure.
It's obvious that the only reason you babbys are so against it is that you lack the technical ability to make it work.
And that's really the key; if you want to take the process into your own hands and improve it, you're also going to have to overcome the challenges involved yourself as well, and you folks simply can't or don't want to try.
That A72 scan is massively out of focus and has been "colour corrected" by a retard.
And hot tip guys, a 24mp camera outputs a 4000x6000 pixel file; captain shitforbrains has cropped right in, to about 18mp, because he couldn't fill the frame with the neg for some reason, because he has NFI what he's doing.

[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	2017:06:25 19:32:35
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-8.7 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Other
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	0.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1080
Image Height	757
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3101060
>Just you wait, they'll show up soon enough.

>>3101637
And here's one of the faggots now, right on time.
Thanks once again for providing us with one of your "superior" scans of a literal snapshit lmao. How about actually providing some fullsize scans for comparison, just like everyone else with an unbiased opinion has done.

>>3101637
>That A72 scan is massively out of focus

It isn't though.

I will admit the source was done with a subpar camera, so could be an issue.

>has been "colour corrected" by a retard.

Will totally give you that.

>And hot tip guys, a 24mp camera outputs a 4000x6000 pixel file; captain shitforbrains has cropped right in, to about 18mp, because he couldn't fill the frame with the neg for some reason

Was using text on the negative to aid in focus.

>>3101428
fuck i hate that cunt from captured society