[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: proxy-image.jpg (70 KB, 609x457)
70 KB
70 KB JPG
>Large Friend Edition

This is the Film General Thread.
It's ok to post film gear questions in this thread.
It is better to post your film photos in this thread

Film Community Links:
35mmc.com
Casualphotophile.com
Emulsive.org
istillshootfilm.org/beginners-guide-film-photography
hwww.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php
industrieplus.net/dxdatabase

If you have scans of your LF shots now is the time to post them.

Old Thread
>>3786712
>>
>>3792216
>plywood
>>
What the hell is this?
>>
>>3792406
looks like bait for oblivious boomers who grab it thinking it's kodak
>>
Maybe it's the time of year, but fuck me, there's barely any film to buy at my usual joints. Everything's sold out.
>>
>>3792406
Did you give it a shot? Could be alright.
>>
>>3792524
I think its also due to corona. Lots of production got halted.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2160
Image Height1464
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>3792216
"okay everyone... watch the birdie- FUCK! God damn fucking fuck!" me from under the dark cloth as I try to cock the shutter and get a sliver in my finger from the hipster plywood view camera
>>
>>3792579
Wouldn't be surprised. Luckily I have more film than food in the fridge.
>>
File: 8235001083_04f06a4c9a_o.jpg (1.01 MB, 1400x2100)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB JPG
I'll post some crap here

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: 8202269151_6ba94c45b7_o.jpg (1.57 MB, 2100x1400)
1.57 MB
1.57 MB JPG
>>3792614
1/125, ISO 250, Fujifilm Superia 200
Zenit 12 xp
>>
>>3792615
>>
File: 1609843668385.jpg (45 KB, 502x401)
45 KB
45 KB JPG
i think i understand how a rangefinder camera works. the focusing lever moves the taking lens along with a mirror in the second window, which is calibrated with the lens. fine. so how the fuck does it work with interchangeable lenses? what is moving the rangefinder now? i can't find anything online because either im too fat or every search result is about how to focus a fucking camera. pks
>>
>>3792524
just make your own how hard can it be
>>
File: Analoog_002.jpg (1.52 MB, 2160x1443)
1.52 MB
1.52 MB JPG
>>3792614
>>3792615
>>3792616
Where you from fellow Dutchfag?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 21.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3511
Image Height2350
Number of Bits Per Component16, 16, 16
Compression SchemeUnknown
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Data ArrangementChunky Format
Image Created2020:12:21 22:02:39
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2160
Image Height1443
>>
>>3792629
I mean it's just some silver halide.
>>
>>3792627
wedge in lens pushes on lever in camera as you focus
amount of push = amount of focus patch movement
the interchangeable lenses all have the same wedge mechanism calibrated to their focus throw

is that clear enough?
>>
>>3792640
Lived in Utrecht/Rotterdam for 6 months
Cool places to take photos, have to go back for more! You?
>>
>>3792652
Eindhoven. Weather sucks really bad now. Grey and boring. Going to Utrecht to visit a friend soon. Any good tips?
>>
File: 1609847344737.jpg (144 KB, 1024x768)
144 KB
144 KB JPG
>>3792650
>wedge
interesting. i don't have an l39 lens in front of me to look at, but in photos I haven't been able to spot anything like this
>>
File: 00000033.jpg (905 KB, 1197x798)
905 KB
905 KB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareDigital Photo Professional
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution100 dpi
Vertical Resolution100 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1197
Image Height798
>>
>>3792656
Take a decent photo of the Ganzenmarkt tunnel, i fucked my settings. Enjoy walking there and visit Olivier if it's open
>>
File: meme-II.exe.bat.txt.jpg (1.41 MB, 2666x4000)
1.41 MB
1.41 MB JPG
>meanwhile in shutterbox

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeBoipucci Colonizer
Camera ModelX-Treme 66 Mark VI
Camera SoftwareJasc Paint Shop Pro 3 for Windows 3.11
PhotographerYA4FF (Yet Another 4chang Film Fagget)
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3792406
That is some old film that used to be sold in Brooks Pharmacies, a New England chain of pharmacy stores that was acquired by Rite Aid in 2007.
I have a few old rolls that I've shot but I haven't developed them.
But yeah that film is at least 14 years old.
>>
File: image.jpg (2.33 MB, 4032x3024)
2.33 MB
2.33 MB JPG
>>3792657
With some lenses (like that one), it’s just a ridge around the whole rear of the lens. If the movement of the rear element exactly tracks with how much the focus should move, they can do it that way. Otherwise it has to be a little ramp type thing.

This one’s an M instead of an L39 but they both use the exact same method for compatibility. The brass-colored chunk of metal is the focus part.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width4032
Image Height3024
>>
>>3792406
Check the box for place of manufacture.
Made in Japan: Fuji Superia 400
Made in US: Kodak Ultramax 400

Same for the ISO 200 versions, it’s either C200 or Colourplus depending on where it’s made.
>>
File: Analoog_003.jpg (1.54 MB, 2160x1436)
1.54 MB
1.54 MB JPG
>>3792664
Hmmm, looks a bit boring. I'm more into deserted/industrial areas. The other cliche, I know.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 21.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3518
Image Height2339
Number of Bits Per Component16, 16, 16
Compression SchemeUnknown
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Data ArrangementChunky Format
Image Created2020:12:21 22:02:57
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2160
Image Height1436
>>
File: Unbenannt-13.jpg (455 KB, 1050x706)
455 KB
455 KB JPG
Gonna dump pictures from my first try shooting with my Voigtländer Vito BL. The light metre isn't working properly so I had to use a shitty lightmeter app - the focusing is something I have to get used to aswell.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer
Camera ModelVITO BL
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:07:21
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Unbenannt-14.jpg (433 KB, 1050x700)
433 KB
433 KB JPG
>>3793011

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer
Camera ModelVITO BL
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:08:11
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Unbenannt-15.jpg (426 KB, 1050x704)
426 KB
426 KB JPG
>>3793014

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer
Camera ModelVITO BL
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:08:35
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Unbenannt-16.jpg (452 KB, 1050x705)
452 KB
452 KB JPG
>>3793017

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer
Camera ModelVITO BL
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:09:34
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Unbenannt-17.jpg (465 KB, 699x1050)
465 KB
465 KB JPG
>>3793019

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer
Camera ModelVITO BL
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:09:47
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Unbenannt-20.jpg (414 KB, 1050x708)
414 KB
414 KB JPG
>>3793022

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer
Camera ModelVITO BL
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:10:16
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Unbenannt-12.jpg (296 KB, 1050x696)
296 KB
296 KB JPG
>>3793026
Done

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeVoigtländer VITO BL
Camera ModelOpticFilm 7300
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 4.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:05 23:32:03
ISO Speed Rating200
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3792218
Cheap and very light weight. Their 8x10 version weighs only 2.3kg
>>
>>3793033
This kind of thinking drives you towards suicide.
>>
>>3793038
Just deep melancholy and maybe isolation if I'm lucky.
>>
Do you guys do your own developing?
Is is overly difficult, technique-wise, or is it just follow the directions?
Also, what kind if price point would I be looking at for a decent scanner?
>>
>>3793158
b+w is so easy a trained monkey could do it, just follow the instructions.
Colour and slides are more finicky, mainly because you need to keep the chemistry at a consistent warm temperature throughout, but fundamentally it's pretty much the same as b+w
>>
>>3793158
>>3793170
and yeah seems like most flatbeds are a meme, I've used a few and while I don't mind them, you'd be better off looking for a macro lens for whatever system you're in and some kind of film holder (heard good things about nikon es-2)
>>
>>3793170
>>3793172
Sweet.
It's not something I could afford to do exclusively, but there's a few things I'd like to do with film and I'd like to do the whole process start to finish. It'll be all black and white anyhow for the most part.
>>
>>3793170
>Consistent warm temp
My b/w guide told me to keep my water at 20°c... Isn't it all that important for b/w after all?
>>
>>3793183
No, I processed most at 24 degrees, some at 27 degrees, some at 29 degrees and higher. Depending on the film, in xtol replenished to keep my times short.
>>
>>3793183
Like he said, b+w chemistry is much less sensitive to temp, and is usually just done at room temp. It is also much easier to adjust for over/underdeveloped film with post processing.
Color developing processes like C41 need to be done at a controlled elevated temp (over 100F usually). A variation of even a few degrees will effect your development.
>>
Bought an IR filter to dick around with not thinking that I wouldn't be able to see shit through it. Guessing I have to focus everything prior to using the filter.
>>
>>3792579
Reminder that these people are the ones who shit on digital cameras.
>>
File: 1585972413414.jpg (60 KB, 1200x797)
60 KB
60 KB JPG
>Konica IIA
>>
Just dropping by to say thanks to the anon who recommended me to get Negative Lab Pro. It's great.

Here's the cracked version if you want one:
https://www76.zippyshare.com/v/2KY5aspB/file.html

just enter XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXX

as serial
>>
>>3792579
wtf is this shit photo. what a waste of a frame
>>
File: IMG_1719.jpg (82 KB, 400x267)
82 KB
82 KB JPG
>>3793230
Vintage lenses often have extra mark for IR focus which is different from visible light focus.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 100D
Camera SoftwareDigital Photo Professional
Lens Size18.00 - 55.00 mm
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 1.0.1
Lens NameEF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 III
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution350 dpi
Vertical Resolution350 dpi
Image Created2021:01:06 10:22:03
Exposure Time1/80 sec
F-Numberf/8.0
Exposure ProgramAperture Priority
Lens Aperturef/8.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length55.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width400
Image Height267
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ModeAv-Priority
Focus TypeAuto
Metering ModeEvaluative
ISO Speed RatingAuto
SharpnessUnknown
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Shooting ModeManual
Image SizeUnknown
Focus ModeOne-Shot
Drive ModeSingle
Flash ModeOff
Compression SettingFine
Macro ModeNormal
White BalanceCloudy
Exposure Compensation3
Sensor ISO Speed308
Color Matrix133
>>
>>3793269
Its was a dull and dreary day, how would you frame it?
>>
File: images.jpeg-33.jpg (40 KB, 640x480)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
Anyone here has any experience with the Nikon ES-2 adapter? Ir has a film holder but what if negatives havent been cut yet? Can it still fit?
>>
>>3793278
Yeah, got the focus shift on the om2. Will give it a shot tomorrow, no pun intended.
>>
File: nybro.jpg (1.51 MB, 2580x3498)
1.51 MB
1.51 MB JPG
>>3793158
>>3793170
>>3793177
I've done my fair share of developing and scanning. C41 is pretty simple, if you have a bathtub it really helps, a shower works too I guess. Black and white is super simple, look into the D96 monobath, I've switched to exclusively using it because of its simplicity, I don't really see a difference in results between more traditional developers and the monobath, and it takes like 10 minutes from start to finish.

Anyway, for scanners I'd recommend you go with a dedicated 35mm scanner, or 120 if that's what you're shooting. I bought myself a used Minolta Dimage scanner from like 2001, gives me approx. 12mp scans, I'm pretty satisfied with them to be honest, I used to do the DSLR scanning, but it's harder and takes a lot more time imo. Skip the flatbed altogether, they're decent for 120 but suck balls for 35mm.

Pic related, Canon A35F, Ilford HP5+, developed with the monobath and scanned with my Minolta Dimage scanner.
>>
File: bsEYV1f.jpg (4 MB, 2560x3801)
4 MB
4 MB JPG
>>3793394
I'll throw in another. Same film, same developer, same scanner, different camera. Olympus XA2 this time around.
>>
>>3793394
>kebab
https://youtu.be/ac7BTlGrSpU
>>
>>3793394
Unfortunately I can confirm that flatbed scanners kinda suck for 35mm. I bought a epson v600 a while back for scanning 35mm and medium format,, and I've never been totally satisfied with the results. It just can't get the focus right so all my scans lose detail and look pretty lame. There are methods to improve the focus but I haven't tried them.
>>
>>3793327
No, you need to cut them into strips of 6 or smaller.
>>
>>3793394
After checking the prices on 35mm scanners, they're really not all that bad.
I don't know why, but I was expecting worse.
>>
File: 1587356514669.jpg (48 KB, 640x516)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
just got a mamiya m645 and it had a battery in it but most of the time the mirror stays up and the shutter wont open after pressing the shutter release. i already set it on multi-exposure mode. do you think a new battery will solve this?
>>
Remember six months ago when everyone was trying to argue that flatbeds were good kek that aged well.
>>
>>3793526
Thanks. How's the quality and ease of it compared to using a tripod setup?
>>
>>3793675
Yes
>>
>>3793686
>Remember six months ago when everyone was trying to argue that flatbeds were good kek that aged well.

well good luck scanning your tax documents with an es-2 lel
>>
File: portra013.jpg (512 KB, 1577x1000)
512 KB
512 KB JPG
How do I get this dust off my scans?

I tried isopropyl on a microfiber cloth but it kind of rubbed them in even more... They're not on the emulsion side of the negatives, thankfully.

How to clean negatives in general? I tried soaking them in distilled water and that removed a lot of garbage from them, but they collect insane amounts of dust while drying...

Also, how do I achieve sharper scans? I have an Epson Perfection V300, and I realise this is a very entry level scanner, so is this as sharp as it gets?

Thank you!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwaredarktable 3.4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2021:01:06 22:11:47
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1577
Image Height1000
>>
>>3793787
is the dust always at the same spots as in on the scanner or is it on the negatives for sure? i heard something about getting your bath really warm by turning on hot water for a few mins or so and letting the negatives dry in there afterwards would help them not getting as dusty. also after they are dry i would use an air blower to get off the dust before scanning. if its not on the negatives maybe try wiping your scanner with a microfibre cloth.
regarding the sharper scans, there are a few things you can try. you could try and scan the film with emulsion side up/down, you could try other software to scan, maybe there are some settings in your software to higher the resolution.
>>
File: image.jpg (2.96 MB, 4032x3024)
2.96 MB
2.96 MB JPG
>>3793675
Nice, my 645 super just came in the mail the other day. No lens yet but was thinking of getting the 80mm 2.8 to start with. Anyone know of a good all round lens for medium format? Never shot this before.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width4032
Image Height3024
>>
>>3793828
Barring that single lens, they're almost all slow, like f/4 slow. Which is good because there is no dof below that. The 80mm is probably the most usable all around, even baby medium format starts to have a pretty large distinction between wide and telephoto. Portrait lenses are one trick ponies, but it's a hell of a trick. Wides, even slight wides are very different due to the aspect ratio. Not quite what you'd get from square format but small differences in focal length can have dramatic results.

It's hard to describe how pronounced the differences are. I'd stick to the 80mm for a while, the portrait lenses are unwieldy and the wides a very deliberate choice.
>>
>Leica got here
>Portra 400 on delivery today
>Fucking UK seller can't ship my lens due to covid (???)

t-thanks chinavirus
>>
>>3794017
I'm a fujislug but I know that feel, USPS lost my CF card and Adorama is taking forever to reship. No store carries CF cards where I live, truly driving me insane.
>>
>>3794019
>I'm a fujislug
why degrade yourself with monikers?

(my digital body is also a fuji)
>>
>>3793820
the dust is on the negatives, i'm 100% sure, the chunks are big and I can see them with my eye. airblower doesn't work.

I'll try vuescan today instead of the epson software.
>>
so I read that on digital ISO numbers are pretty much arbitrary between different brands, like 200 iso on sony or fuji or canon will not be the same

so my question is, if i'm using a (app) lightmeter, and I put 400 iso, how is that reliable both for film and digital?
There must be a catch
>>
>>3794062
Film only, and even then it's only worthwhile on iPhone as the camera on them is well-known, versus the myriad of varying sensors and calibrations on android phones.
Digital metering is great these days anyway, and you have live preview, histograms and zebras and so on.
>>
>>3794072
>it's only worthwhile on iPhone as the camera on them is well-known, versus the myriad of varying sensors and calibrations on android phones.
the android app I was recomended here actually use the light sensor (for screen brightness) on the front, not the camera, actually
>>
>>3794072
>Digital metering is great these days anyway, and you have live preview, histograms and zebras and so on.
yes my question, as per the thread we are in, was related to film
>>
>>3794021
if the dust is on the negative than maybe try using a new microfibre cloth to get the dust off
>>
>>3794108
I did!
>>
>>3794112
hmm sorry but then i dont know how to help you, are you sure the dust is ON the negative and not might be on the photo itself?
>>
>>3793675
>>3793767
update, got a new battery. the first few times it did the same shit as before. now after the mirror was stuck for half a minute or so even tho i was pressing the battery check button it came down and now it seems to be working. even the shutter. i dont know what happened but is there any clues on what mightve cause this? the battery contacts looked clean to me but im sure it has to do something with the electricity since it wasnt just the mirror. i just hope it wont happen again while actually shooting a roll
>>
>>3794115
absolutely positive, i can see the hairs with my naked eye!
>>
>>3794116
I think I have the same issue, but on my Olympus XA2. Cleaned it up a couple of days ago after my shutter would randomly stop firing. Suddenly it started working again but now it has the same issue. It could either be:|
batteries aren't of the right variety or the shutter has too much dirt and becomes stuck. The latter means opening up everything and manually cleaning and degreasing the shutter blades.
>>
File: Ariana100 at 200 005.jpg (892 KB, 1200x800)
892 KB
892 KB JPG
>>3793743
I use an ES-1 with modified slide mount that lets me slide film strips through.

Using a Nikon ES-1/2 is a MUST if you want to scan 35mm. Quality is top notch and there is zero setup time. No fiddling around trying to align your sensor plane to the film plane. I do use it on a tripod though, that just makes things super easy.

Honestly, if people are DSLR scanning 35mm and not using one of these Nikons they are doing themselves an incredible disservice.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeBessa R4A + Voigtlander 40mm 1.4
Camera ModelArista EDU 100 @ 200 in HC110 dil B
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2020:04:11 19:25:08
Exposure Time1/10 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating100
Brightness-1.9 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceOther
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length0.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1200
Image Height800
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastSoft
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
File: kaneyay.gif (935 KB, 500x247)
935 KB
935 KB GIF
>want to shoot around a local military base while I'm home (father's in the army so I've got an ID)
>put in my last fresh roll and drive there
>take literally two shots of statues and one landscape in a completely open area
>police car fucking whips into my next frame before I can take it
I had to take out this almost entirely fresh roll of medium format film and destroy it in front of the guy. I'm a fucking fool, I should've known they'd require photo licenses on-post. I'm hurting pretty bad, bros
>>
can or should i shoot slide film with a point-and-shoot camera (olympus af-1 twin)
>>
>>3794219
You shouldn't shoot slide film. It's properties are greatly exaggerated, as nice as velvia can look. 400h has similar qualities ever since they changed the velvia formula.
>>
File: IMG_1741.jpg (717 KB, 1600x1200)
717 KB
717 KB JPG
I have a ton of film photos and negatives that I basically just keep in a box, maybe 50 or so rolls of film.

Question is, what is the best way to digitize this stuff? Scanning the negatives? Or printing and scanning the prints? Are there services that do this, and if so, what can I expect to pay for 50 rolls? Thanks to all who reply!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon PowerShot S95
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Lens Size6.00 - 22.50 mm
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 1.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution180 dpi
Vertical Resolution180 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 03:10:58
Exposure Time1/60 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
ISO Speed Rating200
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias1/3 EV
FlashFlash, Compulsory, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length8.56 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1600
Image Height1200
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure ModeProgram
Focus TypeAuto
Metering ModeEvaluative
SharpnessNormal
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Shooting ModeManual
Image SizeUnknown
Focus ModeSingle
Drive ModeSingle
Flash ModeRed-Eye Reduction (On)
Compression SettingFine
Macro ModeNormal
Subject Distance0.630 m
White BalanceAuto
Exposure Compensation4
Sensor ISO Speed192
Image Number147-1741
>>
>>3794254
Scanning from the original matrix is always best, so in this case the negatives.

At my work we charge $1.00/strip and we're pretty small and community oriented, so you're looking at a hefty sum to get them all scanned. Either find the rolls you like most, or just buy a scanner (or, if /fgt/ is to be believed, a holder and a macro lens) and do it yourself
>>
>>3794254
Depends on what you want to ise the end result for. You can use a flatbed/plustek for the speed and then do a selection of the ones you want in HR and either shoot those with a borrowed macro lens or buy it yourself.
>>
File: 000038610017-01.jpg (1.33 MB, 2808x2048)
1.33 MB
1.33 MB JPG
wut we need more of in this world :^)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera SoftwareSnapseed 2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Image Width3089
Image Height2048
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2021:01:07 13:39:37
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3089
Image Height2048
Light SourceUnknown
>>
>>3794062
I'd like to add to this question by asking:
How the hell does that EV setting work on digital cameras?
I mean, I get that you turn it up it gets brighter, you turn it down it gets darker, but what is it actually doing?
>>
File: 1luBrN4.jpg (340 KB, 1200x800)
340 KB
340 KB JPG
>>3794219
Yes, of course. I love slide in point and shits. Pic related.
>>
>>3794266
What kind of scanner do you guys use?
What's the professional standard or whatever?
t. in the market for a scanner
>>
>>3794214
>military base
oof.
Yea, you're going to get hassled.
>>
File: realize.jpg (77 KB, 396x394)
77 KB
77 KB JPG
>>3794328
I was there so frequently when I was younger, I didn't even think about it possibly being a problem. I feel like a fucking idiot, he got my info too so now I'm probably on a list.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width396
Image Height394
>>
>>3794062
It’s not because film exposes logarithmically. But 400 on a sekonic meter will for sure be accurate for 400 speed film.
>>
>>3794194
That's good but as you have said I need to cut my megatives into strips of 6 which I don't like. I just roll them up.
>>
File: images.jpeg-34.jpg (29 KB, 554x554)
29 KB
29 KB JPG
Thoughts?
>>
>>3794382
You know you're not up to anything nefarious, but the milintel guys don't know that.
>>
>>3794428
kewt.
Where do I get one? I didn't even know this was a thing.
>>
File: Ilford-Sprite-35-II.jpg (46 KB, 590x442)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
>>3794219
Absolutely. Slide film has less latitude but it doesn't become unusable in an automatic camera. I shot my first roll of provia in a Pentax MV.

>>3794428
Not as cool as pic related. But still very fun.
>>
>>3794266
The only problem with the macro thing is that if you're using a digital camera that's a crop sensor, and doing 1:1, you're going to cut off a lot of the film.
A dedicated scanner might be the best overall option.
I've sent film by post for development, but I was kinda surprised at how expensive higher res scanning was. Though I get that it's because of how long it can take (based on my experience with my flatbed scanner), but I'm not sure if there's an overall better option other than buying a film scanner (which seems a bit excessive if I just shoot film every so often).
I just wish there were decent options to get scans.

Btw, do you prefer getting prints directly from negatives, or get prints from digitised files?
>>
>>3794480
>Btw, do you prefer getting prints directly from negatives, or get prints from digitised files?

That hasn't been a thing for a very long time. Even in the 90s the prints you got when getting your film developed were digital c-prints.
>>
>>3794266
>At my work we charge $1.00/strip
Strip is slang for roll, right?
>>
>>3794326
Plustek 8200 is good. Don't get a flatbed
>t. Epson v600 owner
>>3794544
Sounds like 6 neggies a strip.
>>
>tfw just bought a bulk loader and opened the inside exposing ~25 feet of tmax 100
I HAD NO IDEA, THE EBAY LISTING ONLY HAD ONE PICTURE AND NOTHING ELSE.
>>
>>3794326
god, industry standard is what we *don't* use.

my boss is a packrat and somewhat of a nut, so our setup is the scanner from a konica minolta rs-2 minilab and a noritsu qss green as our printer. The scanner bit is pretty good, but clearly meant to be used with the rest of the minilab and not an inkjet.

at school we had a flextight, which was dope until I didn't check the right box and broke it for like two weeks before the tech could fish the negative out
>>
>>3794480
>>3794505

Loath as I am to admit it, you really can't beat the flexibility of digital printing (whether c-type or otherwise); being able to see and most importantly undo in real time before you print is such a luxury compared to "Oh shit, I forgot to dodge this bit, I guess that's another $2 piece of paper down the drain"
>>
>>3794556
>>3794544

Strip is yeah just a strip, whether it's 4, 5, or 6 frames it's more or less the same set up time which is the main cost
>>
>>3794630
I just want a thing that looks at 35mm negatives and produces a 20 megapickle JPEG.
>>
File: IMG_20210107_214153.jpg (4.87 MB, 4000x3000)
4.87 MB
4.87 MB JPG
Let's fucking goooo

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeXiaomi
Camera ModelMi 9T
Camera SoftwareHDR+ 1.0.291816818zdy
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:07 21:41:53
Exposure Time3/100 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating6906
Lens Aperturef/1.7
Brightness-4.4 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.19 m
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length4.77 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeMacro
>>
File: IMG_20210108_103146.jpg (3.31 MB, 4000x3000)
3.31 MB
3.31 MB JPG
Also I accidentally a Leica
Am I a talented photographer now?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeXiaomi
Camera ModelMi 9T
Camera SoftwareHDR+ 1.0.291816818zdy
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 10:31:46
Exposure Time1/20 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating807
Lens Aperturef/1.7
Brightness-2.1 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.15 m
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length4.77 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeMacro
>>
>>3794672
Does it still work?
The stamp can say D.R.P. but if it's busted, what good is it?
I legit don't know if mine runs anymore or not.
>>
>>3794673
>>The stamp can say D.R.P.
This camera is from 1965 judging by the serial number, so way after nazism.
Yes, it works.

>tfw your 1965 camera feels mechanically better than your 2017 japanese digital
weird feel
>>
>>3794671
>>3794672
You're doomed to never get good because every time someone tries to provide legitimate criticism you take offense to it instead of learning from it.
The only thing you accept are pats on the back from your fellow hacks like the tranny.
>>
>>3794674
Like why does it offend you that a person maybe owns a literal nazi camera?
>>
>>3794676
>why does it offend you
???
I'm not offended schizo, don't know where you read it.

DRP was a bureau under nazism that ended in 1945, and the M series started in the 50s, I was just stating there is no connection.
>>
>>3794675
>because every time someone tries to provide legitimate criticism you take offense to it
I assume you're the schizo who did the 5% more gaussian blur in one of my recent photos
I was not offended, I just commented that I didn't see enough difference to bother doing it myself, expecially as that was not a keeper after all.
I make threads on /p/ like contact sheets, to see what bounces and what not.
It works for me, and I gained new insight from my last thread wheter you care/believe it or not.

I'll stop polluting this nice general with drama now.
>>
File: hal-hortler.jpg (439 KB, 1152x864)
439 KB
439 KB JPG
>>3794677
>>
>>3794677
*cough* deutsche reich patent *cough*
>>
>>3794691
>Early Leica cameras bear the initials D.R.P., which stands for Deutsches Reichspatent, the name for German patents before May 1945. This is probably a reference to German patent No. 384071 "Rollfilmkamera" granted to Ernst Leitz, Optische Werke in Wetzlar, on November 3, 1923.

>Post-war models bear the initials DBP, standing for Deutsches Bundespatent (Federal German Patent), instead of the DRP (Deutsches Reich patent) found on pre-war models.
>>
>>3794693
>>
>load 3200 iso
>shoot 5 frames
>next day go out in bright sunlight
>can't shoot photos
>>
>>3794712
So take your sunglasses off and stick 'em in front of the lens
>>
File: dddd-1.jpg (1.74 MB, 1200x1200)
1.74 MB
1.74 MB JPG
>>3794557
Uh, you couldn't feel the film shaking around inside?

>>3794634
You just described camera scanning.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
Hey guys, I have an Epson v800 for my big sheets, and I also use it for MF. I have tried scanning a bunch of 35mm negatives and they are okay for feels but not really that detailed.

What's the best solution, in your opinion, for 35mm film (and maybe MF up to 6x7), excluding drum?

Like I read very mixed reviews about Plustek 8xxx series. So many doubts like compatibility with modern OSs, speed, real quality over flatbeds and such. Alternatives?

T-thanks!
>>
>send film to lab
>pay for high rez scans
>35mm comes back 7500 px on long side
>120 comes back 5500 px long side

So I bought medium format for no reason then
>>
>>3794729
>Like I read very mixed reviews about Plustek 8xxx series. So many doubts like compatibility with modern OSs, speed, real quality over flatbeds and such.

I have a Plustek 7200i, so even older than 8xxx series, and it's still miles better than a flatbed.
Of course it's limited to 35mm only, and yes you need to manually advance your film for every frame so you can't just go and have a cup of tea meanwhile you wait for a full roll.

Compatibility with modern OS is trivial if you're not retarded, you can run Plusteks under win10 with compatibility settings and the right drivers.

see this video for quality, this guy blew $$$$ on a nikon coolscan 9000 and he was seeething at the comparable quality (he's a good photographer nonetheless)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shNdiq2kKr8
>>
File: Ariana100_003.jpg (741 KB, 1200x800)
741 KB
741 KB JPG
>>3794729
Super Coolscan 9000ED

>>3794731
Pretty much.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>3794729
There aren't any "solutions" for medium format if you're not willing to pay thousands.

If you are willing to pay thousands, first thing to check is the new PlusTek 120 Pro. It will come with warranty and have zero compatibility issues. After that check the Coolscans (compatibility issues but can be resolved with third party software), and the Minolta Dimage Multi Pro, same story as the Coolscans.
Then you can check Noritsus (HS-1800) or Frontiers. The Noritsus and Frontiers will give you the best quality, at the fastest speed bar none. Then check Flextights and professional flatbeds (Lanovias, Linoscans, etc.). All the older professional flatbeds will give you compatibility issues, say some will need SCSI, some will work on older macs only, etc etc. . Better (=cheaper) to get them bundled with the Powermac that used to run them.

Drumscanners are a wholly different league altogether, and people bundling them with other scanners as if they were just another choice or upgrade, tells me they haven't drum scanned s single frame.
They're not "plug and play" where you insert a frame and press a "scan" button. They require lots of space and time to operate, just look up some videos about the wet mounting process, how to operate a mounting station, etc. to get an idea of the workflow and the size of such a machine.

For 35mm the only upgrades over the Plusteks in terms of resolution, or speed, or both, are the Reflecta RPS 10T (~€600) and 10M (~€900, can scan a whole uncut roll), and then similarly the Coolscans and Noritsus and whatnot.

What exactly were the controversial reviews of the Plusteks? Imo there's no controversy, they're the best in their price range by a huge shot.
>>
File: 0005 (5).jpg (688 KB, 1000x667)
688 KB
688 KB JPG
Fuji Pro 400h

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 9.4 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 23:45:56
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: 000332480001_###.jpg (522 KB, 1000x670)
522 KB
522 KB JPG
Lomo 800

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 9.4 (Windows)
PhotographerRewind Photo Lab
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 23:45:56
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3794745
nice
>>
File: A109200-R1-19-11A.jpg (830 KB, 1000x676)
830 KB
830 KB JPG
Superia Venus 800

>>3794747
thanks

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 9.4 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 23:45:55
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: 000387390010_10.jpg (700 KB, 1000x816)
700 KB
700 KB JPG
Velvia 50

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 9.4 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 23:45:55
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: 0005 (4).jpg (715 KB, 1000x667)
715 KB
715 KB JPG
Pro 400h

Ive got a roll of xp2 in my camera at the moment, and Ive ordered panf and delta3200. Itll be my first time shooting b&w in about 10 years

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 9.4 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 23:45:56
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3794752
Make sure to dev Pan F relatively quickly after shooting. Has terrible latent image stability.
>>
>>3794756
thanks, I didnt know that
>>
NYC fags where do you get your stuff developed?
>>
File: 24.jpg (3.26 MB, 1709x1122)
3.26 MB
3.26 MB JPG
Hello everyone. I was wondering if there was a free alternative to ''negative lab pro''? I am scanning my films myself and I dont want to process them manually because the result ain't that good.

>inb4 be good

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeEPSON
Camera ModelPerfection V800/V850
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r16 (May 9 2019) 6e6d7cc 09.05.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution1200 dpi
Vertical Resolution1200 dpi
Image Created2019:09:30 14:18:21
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1709
Image Height1122
>>
>>3794763
>if there was a free alternative to ''negative lab pro''?
it's called pirating it
>>
>>3794764
Where?
>>
File: hinzedamport400.jpg (539 KB, 800x1180)
539 KB
539 KB JPG
>>3794750
whoa. another gold coast anon on /p/
>>
File: 000068970004_4.jpg (494 KB, 1000x616)
494 KB
494 KB JPG
>>3794770
The Gold Coast is nice, I like to go to Brisbane too, but I guess thats off the table for this weekend

E100

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 9.4 (Windows)
PhotographerRewind Photo Lab
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 23:45:56
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3794766
There is a link itt
>>
>>3794775
yea, some nice places to shoot in brisbane cbd
>>
>>3794777
Thanks for helping a retarded anon.

>>3793262
Anyone tried it? No virus, trojan?
>>
>only cracked versions are for Lightroom
will someone think of Capture One users?
>>
Holy shit. I was talking about how I ordered a t50 and a t70 that came with a 35-105 3.5-3.5 for 10€ in total, because I wanted to have a zoom lens for my A1. Turns out that both the t50 AND the t70 are in absolute mint condition and work perfectly??? (The lens works fine as expected)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makemotorola
Camera Modelmoto x4
Camera SoftwareSnapseed 2.0
Sensing MethodUnknown
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:08 16:59:08
Exposure Time1/33 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
ISO Speed Rating148
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Brightness-0.3 EV
Exposure Bias-1.7 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length3.99 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1366
Image Height925
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
File: Velvia 50 011.jpg (1.35 MB, 1200x800)
1.35 MB
1.35 MB JPG
>>3794839
nice! t50 is pretty lame though isn't it? t70 is dope. love that snapshit cam

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon T70 + 50mm 1.8
Camera ModelFuji Velvia 50
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width6000
Image Height4000
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2019:08:07 13:34:42
Exposure Time2 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramShutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating200
Brightness-7.3 EV
Exposure Bias-0.7 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceOther
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length0.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1200
Image Height800
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceManual
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
>>
>>3794843
Yeah the t50 is pretty boring and just doesn't feel great to use. The motor drive us also insanely loud and it's sound is really high as well.
>>
>>3794726
Redpill me on camera scanning.
It's like, an adapter that screws onto a camera that holds a negative?
>>
>>3794932 look here:
>>3793327
>>
>>3794945
Neat.
So you just stick a negative in there and ... point it at a light source?
>>
>>3786712
Maybe someone here can help
>>
Help with a goofy ass problem on this Pentax?
>>3794950
>>
>>3794948
I think so, yeah.
>>
>>3794762
If you need something quick and very good Luster Photo in ukrainian village. If you need something a little better and can wait a couple days Bleeker Digital Solutions in SOHO.
>>
>>3794301
It's exposure compensation. It's saying to the camera "whatever your meter reads as the optimal exposure, add / subtract 1 EV from that" etc. So if the camera wants to do ISO 100, f/8, 1/125 sec and you select +1 EV, it will either switch to f/5.6, 1/60 sec, or ISO 200.
>>
Hey, ive been interested in star trail photography and thought about trying it. Right now there sadly is no option for me to go out far from any ambient light from the city so i wanted to try it on the balcony. Since the view from the balcony is pretty much high above the city you can see many city ambient lights. My question is in what ways these lights could interefere.
>>
Any 8x10 chads here?
>>
>>3792764
Any ideas for deserted around Amsterdam-Rotterdam?
>>
>>3795042
Oh, that makes sense.
>>
>>3794675
are you the guy that thinks your criticism is actually useful to anyone
>>
File: 1610178749446.jpg (1.4 MB, 3745x2497)
1.4 MB
1.4 MB JPG
tfw spent a week shooting 47 shots on a roll of portra 400 before realizing that the film never advanced to the take up spool
>>
>>3794729
Plustek Opticfilm 120 Pro
>>
>>3794712
Why not? Negative film hsndles overexposure pretty well.
>>
File: 000409150036.jpg (635 KB, 663x1000)
635 KB
635 KB JPG
holy based wow slide film is cool.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera Softwaredarktable 3.2.1
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2021:01:09 09:16:25
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width663
Image Height1000
>>
>>3795198
I did that once. Just make sure the rewind knob turns when you advance the film.
>>
>>3795056
Look up didymium filters.
There are “better”, narrow band filters for specific parts of the spectrum of specific nebulae and whatnot, but didymium is the easiest found and cheapest, and very effective for the orange glow of the most usual type of light pollution.

If you just need star trails though, just go out and try without a filter and open the shutter for long enough (10-15mins) and see what comes out.
First of all, do you want to shoot colour or B&W? Just star trails with a normal/wide lens or something like nebulae/Milky Way?
>>
>>3795270
thanks bb
>>
Why are AF lenses for F-Mount so expensive?
It kinda just killed off my interest in the Nikon F5/100/6 as those are some really cool film cameras. It just seems to suck that the platform seems to be expensive af for glass.
>>
Can I get some 35mm Black and White film recs?

I really like distorted grainy shots like this. I love the contrast of the black blacks, little to no grayscale, just black and white.
Im not sure how much of this type of look is due to whats done in the development process or shooting style so Im kind of assuming its all up to the film.

tldr I want grain and distortion with high contrast.
>>
>>3795286
>Im not sure how much of this type of look is due to whats done in the development process or shooting style so Im kind of assuming its all up to the film.
It's mostly the developing process - excluding very high contrast, technical films that are nigh unusable for pictorial use without special developers.

Just push your film. Get some TriX or HP5+ or whatever and push 2 stops or more.
Or go full in and get Delta 3200 and shoot+dev at 6400-12800.
>>
>>3795280
probably because you're competing with dslr users moreso than you would be with other platforms, with the advantage of being able to use modern lenses for film as well. Having VR on a film cameras is pretty cool. But there are still great deals, like the 50mm you can get for $80 or less. Nikon has made a lot of other great lenses, and some get overlooked.

You can of course get new 3rd party lenses too. My buddy's brand new sigma 150-600 works perfectly on my N80
>>
>>3795316
>It's mostly the developing process
Thats what I figured. Im not developing myself so its out of my hands until I start.

Thank you though, Ill try the other two. My SLR and point and shoots only goes up to 1600 though. And If I wanna use something like TriX in my point and shoot, would I change to change the DX codes so it registers at a higher iso?
>>
File: img015_01.jpg (3.82 MB, 4447x2869)
3.82 MB
3.82 MB JPG
Cheap ass 135 Fomapan film and cityscape devoid of people photographer has logged on.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwaredarktable 3.2.1
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2020:12:23 17:07:19
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4447
Image Height2869
>>
>>3795323
>And If I wanna use something like TriX in my point and shoot, would I change to change the DX codes so it registers at a higher iso?
Yeah, if it has automatic DX reading.
I'd argue shoot normally and pump the contrast in post though.
Alternatively, you could use an ISO 100 film and push 3 stops, say to ISO800.
Some film are exceptionally grainy, for instance Rollei Retropan 320 Soft. While low contrast at box speed, it'll pick up contrast when pushed and you'll also have the exaggerated grain you're after.
>>
>>3795337
>Alternatively, you could use an ISO 100 film and push 3 stops, say to ISO800.
Oh shit good idea! That makes so much sense. I never thought about just pushing a lower ISO film instead of starting with a high one lol.
Thanks for the info.
>>
File: pic-16-min.jpg (2.02 MB, 3221x3210)
2.02 MB
2.02 MB JPG
what's a good second lens for 6x6 bros? I've got a Bronica SQA with an 80mm but I'm pretty new to square format and don't really know what works well, should I go longer or shorter? I'm a poorfag so don't say both
>>
>>3795351
that pic compressed horribly I'm doing it in photoshop next time
>>
File: gs7TKne.jpg (64 KB, 465x593)
64 KB
64 KB JPG
>>3795198
Always worth wasting a potential frame and making sure the film catches before closing the back than doing what you wound up doing...for future reference.

>>3795267
YEP

>>3795351
I'm in the 'learn your gear really well' camp. I went a few years with just my Bronica and 80mm before buying another lens. Square format is a weird beast and if you're still new to it, I'd stick with the 80mm for another 6-12 months to get a real feel for the format and gear you already have.

After some more time, it should be pretty obvious which focal length you should go for next. There aren't that many focal lengths in the system. If I were you, I'd decide between a 50mm or 150mm. You could also just get both, as neither lens should cost you more than $150ish.

In terms of what I find useful, I'd say 80mm > 50mm > 150mm. However, I find the 150mm most enjoyable to use when the right situations call for it.
>>
>>3795376
thanks. are the bronicas weather resistant? is that yours in the pic? I am afraid to take mine out in the rain as the electronic bits seem quite exposed
>>
File: X82Pfbc.jpg (103 KB, 1000x1000)
103 KB
103 KB JPG
>>3795378
Ya, that's mine. They aren't weather proofed. Maybe I'm just lucky...but mine has been soaked by rain/snow probably over a hundred times in the 16 years I've owned it. Never had an issue. When I come back inside I take all the components apart and let them dry.

IMO they're robust enough and also cheap if worst case ontario happens and some rain eventually breaks it.
>>
>>3795317
I was specifically looking at Sigma.
If I were to get invested into a Nikon F mount, I'd be mostly interested in getting a standard zoom and maybe a prime lens for low light conditions.
I wouldn't really be overly interested in getting too invested into F-Mount, particularly since I don't intend to get a DSLR, and not while Nikon shifts their focus to Z mount.
Or I guess the alternative is to be a space tourist and borrow the lenses they have on the space station.

I'm already pretty invested into a MILC camera for digital, and the "alternative" would be to get fresh M-Mount glass for a rangefinder, though I do find the focussing on those to be a bit more... uncertain.
I guess I'll just stick to using a 90s P&S with AF for the time being - good lens on it though.
>>
File: Scan (12)-facebook.jpg (1.51 MB, 2048x1365)
1.51 MB
1.51 MB JPG
>35mm full frame
>can fit in sportsbike storage compartment
>in-finder metering
>mechanical shutter
>no selenium
>either fully manual or manual modes available
>will stand up to careless handling
What camera do I want?
So far I'm considering:
>Olympus 35SP
>Rollei 35 TE/SE

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareNegative Lab Pro v2.1.2
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:10 13:10:09
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: 23-2020 (16).jpg (1.3 MB, 1724x1200)
1.3 MB
1.3 MB JPG
>>3795286
FP4+ @500

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakePlustek
Camera ModelOpticFilm 8200i
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r16 (May 9 2019) 6e6d7cc 09.05.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width1724
Image Height1200
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2020.10.25 21:06:28
Image Width1724
Image Height1200
>>
>>3795418
Dude yes! This is exactly the type of thing Im looking for, Thank you, thats a really cool picture!
>>
>>3795418
dank
>>3795286
im currently playing with underexposing by N stops and then pushing in devopment by N stops
>>
>>3795286
It's mostly the light. Fomapan, which is grainy and high contrast with short tails on both ends is surprisingly pleasant in rodinal on day shots. In medium format.

Shoot anything in 35mm at night pushed 3+ stops, develop in rodinal for maximum grain, and do the rest in post. Contrast filters go a long way so getting happy with the slider should too.
>>
>>3795418
ohhhh what was the dev and dev time? just bought 200' of fp4.
>>
>>3795449
>do the rest in post. Contrast filters go a long way so getting happy with the slider should too.
I usually throw all my digitized film shots into Lightroom and mess around, but it makes me feel disingenuous since Im treating it like a digital photo... Is it irrational to care about this?
>>
>>3793258
I've got a II I'm fixing up rn. what about it?
>>
File: 000249730034_01.jpg (264 KB, 663x1000)
264 KB
264 KB JPG
>>3795398
hmmm... you could get something like the nikkor 28-80mm for $20, and a 50mm 1.8 for $80. The 28-80 isn't anything to write home about but pic related is a recent example from it. It's really not so bad.

Also you mention f5/f100/f6, consider looking a rung or two down the ladder. There's significant money to be saved, sacrificing mostly weather sealing and ruggedness while keeping autofocus, metering, and a lot of other features

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera Softwaredarktable 3.2.1
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2021:01:09 23:49:05
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width663
Image Height1000
>>
File: IMG_20210109_204850235.jpg (1.16 MB, 1056x1017)
1.16 MB
1.16 MB JPG
Rate my new scanning setup

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:09 20:48:50
Exposure Time1/30 sec
F-Numberf/1.7
Lens Aperturef/1.7
BrightnessUnknown
Exposure Bias0 EV
Focal Length4.28 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4032
Image Height2268
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Geodetic Survey DataWGS-84
>>
File: Honeyview_DSC00770.jpg (930 KB, 1333x2000)
930 KB
930 KB JPG
>>3795487
A sample scan. I'm still learning to use Negative Lab Pro properly. About as good or better than lab scan imo.
>>
File: 10.jpg (3.41 MB, 1709x1140)
3.41 MB
3.41 MB JPG
>>3795487
>>3795494
Very nice. More detailled pic of the setup?
How do you hold film so it's not bending?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeEPSON
Camera ModelPerfection V800/V850
Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r16 (May 9 2019) 6e6d7cc 09.05.
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution1200 dpi
Vertical Resolution1200 dpi
Image Created2019:09:30 14:18:19
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1709
Image Height1140
>>
>>3795487
neat. is it actually cheaper than buying a film scanner? what lens are you using?
>>
>>3795613
>>3795637
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbVVkWyTlGU&feature=emb_title
I 3d printed the mk2 version here's the link
https://www.kamerakraft.com/pro-35mm

Here's the free version if you want to print it yourself
https://www.kamerakraft.com/film-scanning-carrier

Lens is Micro Nikkor 60mm f2.8D $200 used
Porta Trace light box $20 used
Film carrier set $80
Negative Lab Pro for Lightroom $99

In hindsight the mk1 probably would have worked better as well as costing less. I went for the mk2 as it's more customizable and let me capture the film border. I was looking at used Plustek scanners but after more research they're apparently really slow and the software costs $200 for full functionality. This setup can scan a whole roll for less than 10 min compares to 10+min/frame at comparable resolution for the plustek. The gear advance is cranky and some of the parts don't fit really well being 3d printed so it's not perfect but I'm happy not having to rely on shitty 3mp lab scan anymore.
>>
Im in the process of 3D printing this 6x12 panoramic medium format camera. It comes with the files for a huge range of lens cones to print and I'm going with one for a 90mm lens. Im pretty hype.
>>
>>3795681
MY MAN!
>>
>>3795682
Im 7 hours into a ~25hr print for the camera body.
My plan is to use the Rodenstock 90mm 6.8 Grandagon-N.

Also printing it out of PETG instead of the PLA that the creator used.
>>
>>3795486
I live in Europe.
It seems like the second hand market for the F5 and F100 seem pretty reasonable. F6 less so. I can get an F100 for a quarter of the price of the P&S I have (I inherited that, though).
As such, the F-Mount market for new lenses just seems kinda insane.
Idk where you're getting prices for those cheap af lenses.

Is the Canon EOS-1/3 any good? I can find EF lenses for really low prices everywhere, even if an EOS-1 would be twice the price of an F100.
>>
>>3795685
Link to STL? Also, kind of annoys med that most creators don't share STEP/SAT files as well. So much easier to edit or remix.
>>
Dumping my latest roll here: >>3795720
>>
>>3795719
I would but this guy sells the .stl's for $30 on his etsy and it looks like he put a shitload of work into the design. Its the Kraken 6x12 on etsy shop FrozenPhotonCameraCo
>>
>>3795472
>Is it irrational to care about this?
Very. Doing it in a physical darkroom is merely expensive and time consuming. One time I tried to draw the line, but as I found sitting in the dark, there is no "pure" or unadulterated process. All images are edited and manipulated from the moment you point the camera, the division between the pictorialists and f/64 was over outright photoshopping.

It's the mindset of boomers who have never set foot in a darkoom. Watch them fumble over whatever a straight print is supposed to be to break the spell. As long as it's done well and achieves the intended results it's fair game. Between the negative and the frame is a lens, a filter box, two feet of nothing, your hands, paper, multiple chemical baths, and a spotting brush. All must be chosen and manipulated. See what I'm saying?
>>
>>3795494
Nice sharpness. I'm convinced DSLR scanning is the best solution for digitizing negs
>>
Thinking about developing my own B&W film, if I sent it to the lab it takes a least two weeks... Looked up and saw you can do monobaths. Anybody got any experience with it?
>>
>>3795790
I don't see the point when tf-5 and your developer of choice is cheaper and lasts longer. It's about 60 dollars to get set up, but that doesn't account for scanning.
>>
>>3795790
You dont need a monobath. Just measure temp from tap, mix your developer in it, prewash in the same temp water (dont have to), develop, pour out chems, rinse with same temp water, fixer in, fix, pour fixer back in bottle, wash with running water for 20 minutes, hang them dry. Its amazingly easy even without a monobath, and proper developer will both get you cheaper devs, also better results.
>>
>>3795793
>>3795791
The problem for me is the room available. Hanging film to dry isn't an option here sadly...
>>
>>3795797
I stringed a shoelace from my shower head to my shower curtain rail, but you could probably do something like a coat hanger too.
>>
>>3795791
>>3795793
>>3795799
Is this a good tut?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPQ7OPy8T2w
>>
>>3795801
It's okay. It doesn't show how ghetto you can get using dollar store measuring cups, a water stop, and a liter bottle of arizona tea to hold the fixer, but that's the general process. Throw in a dark bag for ease of use and emergencies.
>>
File: 1594744685198.jpg (4.41 MB, 3120x4160)
4.41 MB
4.41 MB JPG
I recently picked up a roll of this kodak recording film 2475 for next to nothing. No idea on when this roll expired but has anyone here had any experience shooting this? The documentation that I found for it says it has a range of like 1000-4000 ISO but no idea what to do with it. Any idea?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: 1610296600663.jpg (27 KB, 400x400)
27 KB
27 KB JPG
How do you focus the Super Fujica Six? Is the focusing mechanism on the lens? Is it the knob at the top? I seriously can't figure this out using the internet.
>>
>>3795813
Looks like a coupled rangefinder, there should be a patch inside the viewfinder that moves when you turn the focus collar. All you have to do is overlap the patch with your subject, or set it to f8 and zone focus. What other knob on the top are you talking about?
>>
>>3795834
I mean the physical focus control. Where is it? Is it on the lens? I remember seeing similar cameras that had focusing wheels around back, or on top...
>>
>>3795772
>As long as it's done well and achieves the intended results it's fair game.
Well said, thanks for breaking that down for me.
>>
>>3795277
i shoot on color and with a 80mm lens on 6x4.5, probably gonna try and see what comes out after like 15 mins as soon as i get a clear sky
>>
>>3795835
Yeah it looks like the knob on the lens is what you use to focus. By moving the lens out it will focus closer. https://youtu.be/LHhToE5zHMA at ~1:00 his looks like an older one but should be the same
>>
>>3795681
that's so fucking based!
>>
>>3795681
reminds me of
>https://www.doragoodman.com/goodlab
kinda stuff. Since no new film bodies are really being made anymore, is 3D printing the future of the medium?>>3795681
>>
File: IMG_20210110_194411_7.jpg (3.16 MB, 3968x2976)
3.16 MB
3.16 MB JPG
I've been wanting to shoot film for a while and someone gifted me a canon rebel k2. When I load it with film, it go through all the film, and then says the battery is dead, I just bought new batteries so this is not true, then when I turn it off and on again and try to take a picture it does the rolling through the film thing again, and the film roll is all used up. I'm really new to film so I don't know if I'm describing this correctly, but does anybody know what I might be able to do to fix it? I'm not sure what's wrong with it. I'm using the kit lens for the camera, I'm putting the film in correctly and doing everything I'm supposed to, it just keeps flashing that the battery is dead when I try to take pictures, and it just wasted three rolls of film by going through them

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeDroi
Camera ModelUMIDIGI X
Camera SoftwareMediaTek Camera Application
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)0 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Created2021:01:10 19:44:11
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
ISO Speed Rating3200
Exposure ProgramNot Defined
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure Time60001/1000000 sec
Focal Length3.80 mm
FlashNo Flash
Light SourceOther
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Exposure Bias0 EV
Image Height2976
White BalanceAuto
Image Width3968
Exposure ModeAuto
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: Honeyview_DSC02327.jpg (629 KB, 1066x1600)
629 KB
629 KB JPG
>>
i can see a couple dust specs through my slr viewfinder. i tried cleaning the focusing screen and the mirror using a very soft brush and a blower but there is still one dust spec stuck somewhere. i can only assume it's gotten behind the focusing screen.
is there anything easy that i can try? should i bother taking it to be cleaned?
>>
>>3796073
just live w it
>>
>>3796073
If it doesn't affect your microprism/split image/AF point, then it'll be fine. It's pretty benign compared to sensor dust.
>>
yo /fgt/ I haven't been on here for a while, I remember last time everyone was getting hyped for the new ektachrome's release
now that it's been out for a while, and they even made a 4x5 version, what's the general verdict of this film?
yeah? nah? better to just use provia?

thinking of shooting some slides for portraits soon, but these days slide+processing is so expensive so I'd like to stick it to a safe choice
>>
>>3796115
only cucks shoot slide film in 2020+1
>>
>>3796119
only /p/ says retarded shit like this
>>
>>3796136
Im sure that was posted seriously
>>
I use a plustek 7200 for my scanning needs. I'm gonna start shooting 645 soon. Would the results from an epson v550 satisfy me?

(I already have VueScan)
>>
brahs
Xtol or D76 for HP5 at box speed?
>>
File: bwalk-2020.jpg (386 KB, 1080x1350)
386 KB
386 KB JPG
So I have a k1000 and a Vivitar 2800.
I have the iso set to the sync speed, I have the flash on the hotshoe, the flash says its ready to fire, and yet it does not fire when I shoot.

The flash is working, as I can test fire. I've cleaned the hotshoe with an alcohol wipe. What gives?

Here's an old picture, to contribute.
>>
>>3795813
My moneys on the grease being so dried up that you cant focus it anyway.
>>


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 10.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 18:12:39
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3796232
Must of bumped the tripod

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 10.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 18:12:38
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
>>3796234
>Must of
how can you not realize of is not a verb
how can anyone not be able to speak his own language baffles me
>>
>>3796232
Fujifg back at it
>>
>>3795453
HC-110 dil. B, 10 inversions at the beginning and 5 inversions every minute for 19min.
>>
File: 6x7 6400x5200 crop.jpg (480 KB, 2703x1968)
480 KB
480 KB JPG
>>3796198
This is roughly a 100% crop of the average quality I've been able to get straight from the flatbed.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.2.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution2400 dpi
>>
>>3796318
And this is max dpi.
>>
>>3796217
I've had nothing but hell trying to get a flash to work with my mx. Sometimes it fires if you get it in the pc sync port just right, sometimes it doesn't. My first thought is a loose contact or oxidized spark generator. That's next on my list after fixing the shutter curtain.

The first thing to do would be check for a consistent spark using a bit of wire or whatever in a dim room.
>>
>>3796318

Cool. This is good enough for my purposes. Thanks for the help!
>>
>>3796206
pour metol and sodium sulfite powders straight into the camera and shake it up
>>
File: Image5363_2.jpg (2.02 MB, 2250x1500)
2.02 MB
2.02 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4500
Image Height3000
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 18:31:23
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2250
Image Height1500
>>
>>3796232
>>3796234
I didn't know white balance changed between each shots on film....
>>
File: Image5410_2.jpg (1.68 MB, 1500x2250)
1.68 MB
1.68 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3000
Image Height4500
Pixel CompositionUnknown
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 18:37:24
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width1500
Image Height2250
>>
File: Image5429_2.jpg (1.42 MB, 2250x1500)
1.42 MB
1.42 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4500
Image Height3000
Pixel CompositionUnknown
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 18:42:36
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width2250
Image Height1500
>>
File: Image4878_2.jpg (1.89 MB, 2250x1500)
1.89 MB
1.89 MB JPG


[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4500
Image Height3000
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 18:46:50
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2250
Image Height1500
>>
File: rollei crop.jpg (392 KB, 1710x3182)
392 KB
392 KB JPG
>>3796386
Final quality is heavily film and camera dependent. It's roughly hitting 400 iso dpi, I haven't tested and pixel peeped enough with 100 iso. Resolving power, focus and aperture between cameras and lenses outside of a controlled environment also makes it hard to tell. Here's an example with everything wrong happening at once. Gotta love the rolleinar.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.2.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution2400 dpi
>>
>>3796397
>>3796240
>>
>>3796068
These old EOS camera wind the entire roll into the spool when you first load it and each time you take a photo it rewinds back into the cartridge. Check the manual.
>>
Anyone have a good recommendation for a decent macro lens for the Canon to do DSLR scans with? Not too expensive, at around 200-250 euros. Saw a Sigma but the reviews/comments weren't quite good.
>>
>>3796444
Rings suffice,
>>
File: main[1].jpg (35 KB, 490x490)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>>3796449
Any good recs? Is this decent enough?
>>
>>3796450
s'long as it's cheap and does what you want (maybe autofocus if you don't have an evf that can grain peak) it'll do. The vignetting was already there and is easy to correct in post.
>>
>>3796232
>>3796234
You’re now 0/4 trying this in fgt bro just let it go
>>
>>3796453
Thanks man, I'm scanning in some stuff at the moment and really bothered by the shitty digitization. Using an old borrowed Epson scanner now. Gonna do a quick test using my Canon 5D and an old Panagor maco lens I have.
>>
File: foma400-1600rodinal 1.jpg (1.03 MB, 1643x2000)
1.03 MB
1.03 MB JPG
>>3796455
I didn't like what it takes to do good dslr scanning on MF. It would probably be better than a flatbed for 35mm but y'r limited by total megapixel multiplied by asspain in MF composites.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution1152 dpi
Vertical Resolution1152 dpi
Image Width1643
Image Height2000
>>
File: 7340_0.jpg (156 KB, 480x477)
156 KB
156 KB JPG
>>3796457
Currently just shooting 35mm so I think for me DSLR will be easy/fast to do. Thanks for the advice fren
>>
File: shit.jpg (387 KB, 1000x1000)
387 KB
387 KB JPG
>>3796458
It's a pain in the ass but if the quality is there because you have the camera for it, it wouldn't be a nightmare. Can't remember if this modern art museum folder is 16mp oly scans or flatbed.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution1152 dpi
Vertical Resolution1152 dpi
Image Width1000
Image Height1000
>>
File: shit 3.jpg (434 KB, 1000x1000)
434 KB
434 KB JPG
>>3796459
What a shit day, one of the best photos I took.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution1152 dpi
Vertical Resolution1152 dpi
Image Width1000
Image Height1000
>>
File: rke 18.jpg (261 KB, 1600x1600)
261 KB
261 KB JPG
>>3796460
Modren art in a nutshell.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Width1600
Image Height1600
>>
File: Shot_IlfordHp5.jpg (1.19 MB, 1652x2400)
1.19 MB
1.19 MB JPG
>>3796460
Nice foto with the lighting adding lots of contrast and good linework.

I just got handed back two rolls of BW films and 60% of the shots were all failed due to the camera becoming broken. Still not quite sure whats wrong with it. Opened it up and the shutter lever gets stuck I think. No clue/idea how to fix it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 22.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width2363
Image Height3417
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution2400 dpi
Image Created2021:01:11 22:25:42
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1652
Image Height2400
>>
File: rke 15.jpg (288 KB, 1600x1600)
288 KB
288 KB JPG
>>3796463
Self portrait in the whole reason I went.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Width1600
Image Height1600
>>
File: rke 12.jpg (332 KB, 1600x1600)
332 KB
332 KB JPG
>>3796464
I took that one too. Both half a roll of broken camera and the other. It's probably something fucked up that's cheaper to get a whole new camera for. I'll be scrounging new MXes soon as cheap ebay season starts next month.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Width1600
Image Height1600
>>
File: shit 12.jpg (2.34 MB, 2000x2000)
2.34 MB
2.34 MB JPG
>>3796466
I prefer rocks at dawn.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareCapture One 10.2.1 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution1152 dpi
Vertical Resolution1152 dpi
Image Width2000
Image Height2000
>>
>>3796466
Everything is closed here due to lockdown or else I would scour every thriftshop here in a 15 mile radius.
>>
File: noooooo.jpg (141 KB, 974x1000)
141 KB
141 KB JPG
>>3796467
and self aggrandizing self portraits i shouldn't post.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Softwarepaint.net 4.2.14
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution1152 dpi
Vertical Resolution1152 dpi
Image Width974
Image Height1000
>>
File: 1595093573401.jpg (167 KB, 1280x894)
167 KB
167 KB JPG
are there any hidden gems on the point and shoot market? i love the super sharp t2 lens but the price really aint it so im lookin for something with atleat a reasonably good lens which is not hyped up
>>
>>3796454
Like honestly does he think we shoot film for the convenience? Of course you cant simulate it.
>>
>>3796478
>why do better things cost more?
>>
>>3796457
A friend set up a rig and rented a H6D-100D with a lens and went through his catalogue of 645. The sensor is big enough that you can get fast almost 1:1 100mpx captures.

A bit pricey but the files he got out of it were something else. Easy as 35mm on FF.
>>
>>3796488
I have a condenser enlarger, I'm just giving suggestions in my downtime.
>>
>>3796487
you know it didnt spike in price suddenly because its gotten better somehow, do you? it spiked because celebrities started to use it and people jumped on it. it may be one of the best point and shoot cameras but still is terribly overpriced.
>>
>>3796478
Pentax PC35
>>
>>3796423
Didn't think to do that, I'll look it up, the problem is that it's rewinding the entire roll back into the cartridge before I even can take a picture. and it keeps saying that the battery is dead when I try to take a picture. Thanks for the info!
>>
File: 2020_0617_15053300.jpg (664 KB, 1776x1184)
664 KB
664 KB JPG
Hi filmanons, another fujifag here
Is it worth getting into film or am I better off getting an instax printer and printing files from my main camera to get the organic feel™, whatever film sim I use + instax colors on top and the added cost per exposure to limit my snapshits? I'm in a bigger city atm and should be able to get a decent deal on a camera, but I'm afraid that film acquisition + developing costs might lead me to not use it as much as I'd like to - compared to my fuji xe2. Why do you guys shoot film and what are your thoughts on my connundrum?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeFUJIFILM
Camera ModelX-E2
Camera SoftwareDigital Camera X-E2 Ver4.11
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mm
Maker Note Version0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationLeft-Hand, Bottom
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2020:06:17 15:05:33
Exposure Time1/250 sec
F-Numberf/0.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating250
Lens Aperturef/1.0
Brightness1.4 EV
Exposure Bias-0.7 EV
Metering ModePattern
Light SourceUnknown
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length50.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1776
Image Height1184
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
SharpnessHard
Subject Distance RangeUnknown
SharpnessHard
White BalanceAuto
Chroma SaturationHigh
Flash ModeOff
Focus ModeManual
Slow Synchro ModeOff
Picture ModeManual Exposure
Continuous/Bracketing ModeOff
Blur StatusOK
Focus StatusOK
Auto Exposure StatusOK
>>
File: DSC_0461.jpg (1.01 MB, 1339x2000)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB JPG
what's the best film for "mood" or is it simply shoot in low light
a lot of people who shoot this style tend to use portra 800
this was shot on 400 but I shot it in a poorly lit area so it has a bit of that look I'm after

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: 000268840007.jpg (1.73 MB, 1545x1024)
1.73 MB
1.73 MB JPG
>>3796564
>worth getting into film
if you like how film looks
>better off getting an instax printer and printing files from my main camera to get the organic feel™
it won't look the same as film. It might be an approximation, even a very close one, but it will only ever be that.
>cost
you could always get a fuji x lens mount adaptor, so you could use your x mount lenses on whatever body you choose to use. A lot of film bodies are very cheap, I think I got my nikon 8008 I mostly use for like $20 from keh. Film is usually $5 or lower a roll, or ~13¢ a shot, with the local lab I use charging $9 to develop and scan a roll, bringing it to ~38¢. I am willing to pay that because I like how film looks.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera SoftwareEZ Controller 6.11.003 (140225)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1545
Image Height1024
>>
>>3796478
Get the Agfa Optima Sensor Flash.
Great lens, well built, cheap, aaa batteries, not a meme
>>
>>3796469
At a passing glance, that leaf between your legs looked like a shit smear.
>>
File: onestep.jpg (53 KB, 690x690)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
Thrift store jesus blessed me today. For 10 dollars I've finally got my own lol80s Polaroid and lol90s Olympus point and shoot, both in mint condition. I'm excited to take some meme camera pictures, a little less excited for even more film expenses...
>>
>>3794839
I picked up two T70's for 10aud a few years ago, one of them had an excellent condition Canon 28mm f2.8 and the other one with the zoom I suspect was dropped into the ocean at some point so really, just the one camera and a hipsters desk ornament. The cameras themselves are pretty shit in my opinion, having only program modes and shutter priority. Shutter priority on a camera that as far as I'm aware only has manual aperture lenses doesn't make any sense to me and I've never actually wanted to shoot in shutter priority mode before anyway.
They're also one of the uglier cameras I've seen but to each, their own I guess.
>>
File: 2020-04-11-0051-01.jpg (611 KB, 1343x2000)
611 KB
611 KB JPG
>>3796564
>Why do you guys shoot film and what are your thoughts on my connundrum?

If you'll excuse the self-indulgent navel gazing, i shoot film for a more conceptual reason: when you take a photo on film, it leaves an actual impression of a moment in time and space on a physical matrix -- like a footprint in snow, or a bird striking a window. A digital photo isn't impressed in the same way, it's more of a reconstitution of a moment by way of a computer. In that way, a digital photograph is another step divorced from reality.
If what you're after is contained wholly within the image and the process is more or less secondary, then digital makes sense. If the actual act of being in the moment is important to your practice, then I would argue film is the better choice. It ultimately depends on your own views on what it is that's happening when you place yourself behind the lens.

Oh and the look, I like the look

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera Model8800F
Camera SoftwareSnapseed 2.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2021:01:11 22:11:24
Image Width1343
Image Height2000
>>
>>3796581
the apertures are auto on fd... it's a full manual camera dumb ass
>>
>>3796571
>if you like how film looks
what does the film look depend on? Film stock chosen? Lab that processes it? How it's scanned? that potentially comes back to the cost thing. I don't care as much about the hardware itself, it's only the cost of film + developing.
It's 100 danish kroner per roll, and then another 100 or 150 to get it developed or scanned. That brings us to somewhere around 6-7 DKK per exposure. Could be more if I don't go for cheapest everything. I wouldn't feel comfortable developing myself because I'll be shooting my first roll if I get into it, although I understand that diy dev and scanning would make it cheaper.
Then it's back to Instax; Instax wide costs roughly 6-7 DKK per exposure too. I am not deluding myself, I know it's not the same look as film - it's got its own look. But there is no external processing involved, and I walk away with a print.

>>3796597
Bro are you just fetishing soft images? Sorry if I sound rude, lol. I shoot with a M42 lens too; adapted. I can achieve a similar aesthetic (not same) if I put in a lot of effort, especially with colors and lighting in post. But I get you, it's a different process altogether.
>A digital photo isn't impressed in the same way, it's more of a reconstitution of a moment by way of a computer.
I'd argue that film is no different because it has to be scanned to be shared, so it's self-defeating in that regard. Fuck, I might sound like an instant film shill now.

I just really want to try film, like I want to try vinyl LPs because it's a different media. I just don't want to get a camera and have it sit on the shelf, like my tiny vinyl collection does (I don't have a record player, I just collected deluxe editions of albums I really fancy). It has to be a tool that can inspire, what inspires you to shoot film besides all the quirks of its process? I seriously do not want it to be a novelty, where I'm taking 10 shots with an XE2 and then 1 on film coz it's special :|
>>
>>3796627
You sound beta and cheap
>>
>>3796629
I have other hobbies besides photography, it piles up and gets expensive. I'd be glad to buy an XPro 3 or a Bessa or whatever if it was making me money, but I'm not skilled enough or looking into photography as a sidegig. If your gear pays for itself, more power to you.
>>
>>3796627
You could start with cheap and easy processes you can DIY like B&W film with rodinal and use it to gain confidence to eventually move to C41 and E6. Hell, you could even use caffenol to start.
>>
>>3796635
I looked it up. What else do I need? Mixing tank? Fixer? Your recommendations on the cheaper side?
I can 3d print a jig to scan the developed film with the XE2 so scanning is covered.
>>
>>3796626
Heh, yeah they do have auto aperture.
>it's a full manual camera dumb ass
No it isn't, it still only has shutter priority or program, if you don't like the aperture it chooses then you are required to go and fuck yourself.
>>
>>3796627
>Bro are you just fetishing soft images?

Get a load of ansel adams over here
>>
How are delivery times going for anyone ordering vintage bits and bobs out of the former USSR? I ordered a Zorki film reel and pressure plate from okvintage early-mid last November and it hasn't come through yet.

I'm in Australia, so that might be why, alongside the delivery delays across the world in general, but how have your experiences gone with buying from Russia?
>>
>>3796654
>but how have your experiences gone with buying from Russia?
got a wife from there, can't complain
>>
>>3796654
>he didn't stockpile soviet surplus ncb suits and gas masks before the coof
ngmi
>>
>>3796651
>Focuslet comparing me to a hillside shooter yank
Yuck. Use a measuring tape next time if it's too hard for you.
>>
>>3796658
Isn't there an issue with possibly carcinogenic particles in old gas masks and/or their filters?
>>
>>3796661
living is carcinogenic itself man

if you're in USA you're eating GMO's daily whose effect won't be known before the next 50 years thanks to congress lobbying
if you live in a city bigger than 10'000 people you breathe car exhaust daily
if you smoke enough said

plus vintage lenses are more often than not radioactive, expecially from CCCP
>>
>>3796664
Asbestos exposure is a bit more noticeable and inconvenient that the buildup of microplastics from the food we eat, so I think I'll just skip on that for now.

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/consumers-warned-against-using-vintage-gas-masks

I haven't bought any glass from the former USSR for a while now because of the shipping delays, but I'm considering it after the pandemic clears up.

What kind of sites would you recommend for picking them up through? I've seen a decent number of lenses turn up on etsy.
>>
>>3796661
Asbestos filters yeah. But I'm pretty sure the asbestos was there for a reason.
>>
>>3796668
And a bit of asbestos is probably the least of your worries if you actually need to breathe through a gas mask.
>>
>>3796668
Probably since it was cheap and the health dangers of asbestos particles weren't well-known at the time. When undisturbed it's not too big of a hazard, but you never know how it could have degraded when it comes to buying vintage filters.

I dunno if they used to use asbestos in the rest of the mask components. The general consensus is that there's asbestos used in old filters.
>>
>>3796572
Seconded, super neat little camera.
>>
>>3796467
I'd fuck that rock
>>
>>3796708
That's one way to get your rocks off
>>
>>3795811
found these blogs about it
https://raymondparkerphoto.com/remembering-recording-film-2475/
https://www.flickr.com/groups/kodak2475/
https://www.baja.org/sensuousline/sline0797/ra2475.htm (nsfw)
https://emulsive.org/reviews/high-speed-journey-kodak-t-max-3200-and-kodak-recording-film-2475-by-erik-gould
>>
>>3796654
I ordered a Jupiter lens in march and got it around the end of june.
>>
File: 38700004.jpg (1.11 MB, 1545x1024)
1.11 MB
1.11 MB JPG
>>3796564
>Why do you guys shoot film and what are your thoughts on my connundrum?

Simple answer is that, as a hobbyist, photography should be fun. I should enjoy taking pictures, and then enjoy looking at them and sharing them. I simply find that I have more fun shooting film than digital, although I do shoot both. A big part of the appeal of film is forcing me to slow down and be more deliberate, which is hard with digital because I'm a retard with a squirrel brain.

As far as cost goes, c41 and bw aren't too bad per shot. E6 can get pricy but can get some great results. You can spend pretty much as much or as little as you want on gear. I use a point and shoot I bought for $9 (took pic related), and a Nikon N80 I got for $20 (and shares lenses with my dslr). I can get good images from both. Or of course you could pay thousands for a Leica.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera SoftwareEZ Controller 5.80.020 (111031)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1545
Image Height1024
>>
File: HP5-Ilford_j.jpg (602 KB, 1800x1221)
602 KB
602 KB JPG
>>3796655
Doubles and good comedy, good comrade!

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 21.2 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3443
Image Height2342
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution2400 dpi
Vertical Resolution2400 dpi
Image Created2021:01:12 09:56:12
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1800
Image Height1221
>>
File: russian-hackers-2060x1374.jpg (324 KB, 2060x1374)
324 KB
324 KB JPG
>>3796654
i bought some mercury batteries from there Nov13 and still dont have them man i was depending on them to hack the election for trump and they just keep letting me down

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
>>3796627

>>A digital photo isn't impressed in the same way, it's more of a reconstitution of a moment by way of a computer.
>I'd argue that film is no different because it has to be scanned to be shared, so it's self-defeating in that regard.

Well or you can print photos from negatives with a darkroom, which I do. But you're right that in order to share them with a digital audience they need to be digital photos, and trust me I think about this every time I'm sitting in front of my flatbed and trying to get them as true to life as possible.

I do think you're getting more flak than deserved in this thread, but you are being a little stubborn. Just buy a cheap point and shoot from a charity shop, a roll of kentmere or foma, and just see if it clicks for you
>>
>>3796730
Thanks, I'll check them out
>>
File: 000268810016.jpg (1.33 MB, 1545x1024)
1.33 MB
1.33 MB JPG
>>3796627
if you can't afford it then you can't afford it. Film bodies are cheap enough you could get one and shoot a roll to see if you like it, then sell it if you don't. Instax would definitely be the wrong move imo because it looks like poopoo and you don't get the favorable visuals of film like the grain. Getting an actual physical print isn't important to me; if it is to you, then just get prints made

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKI
Camera ModelEZ Controller
Camera SoftwareEZ Controller 6.11.003 (140225)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1545
Image Height1024
>>
Got a nice deal on a Fujica st605. What are the chances that the CdS sensors in it are still gonna be good for something? The 605 uses LR44s instead of mercury so that's a plus.
>>
>>3796756
Where did you find them advertised?

>>3796670
>Probably since it was cheap and the health dangers of asbestos particles weren't well-known at the time.
Probably, I read that asbestos was used to bind something in gas to itself. That's not to say there aren't better alternatives now. I still think I'd take my chances with asbestos over sarin or radioactive dust if it came to it.

>>3796654
It was a few years ago but I had pic related teleconverter delivered to 50km west of buttfuck Qld and it took about a month from memory.
>>
File: 20210113_124944.jpg (1.68 MB, 4032x2268)
1.68 MB
1.68 MB JPG
>>3796232
>>3796234

>>3796240
>>3796454
I don't understand who you guys are talking about.
>>
File: PXL_20210113_020612839.jpg (1.94 MB, 2181x2908)
1.94 MB
1.94 MB JPG
astrum foto 400, like trying to load confetti onto the reel. Probably coulda handled it a bit better though

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeGoogle
Camera ModelPixel 2
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 6.1.0 (Android)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2021:01:12 18:06:12
Exposure Time1/640 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating62
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness6.7 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.07 m
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.44 mm
>>
File: PXL_20210113_020540213.jpg (3.32 MB, 3024x4032)
3.32 MB
3.32 MB JPG
negs are beyond fucked lol

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeGoogle
Camera ModelPixel 2
Camera SoftwareHDR+ 1.0.345618096zd
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width3024
Image Height4032
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:12 18:05:40
Exposure Time187/125000 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating58
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness6.9 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.07 m
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash, Auto
Focal Length4.44 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width3024
Image Height4032
RenderingCustom
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Subject Distance RangeMacro
>>
>>3797163
>>3797165
Bro wtf, how???
>>
>>3797167
I don't know why the bearings created those marks over the sprockets, but the scratching was just me giving up and doing whatever i could to get it all on the reel.
It kept crumpling and coming off the reel mouth as I was loading it, the base is so thin.
If I ever try it again I think I'll do a better job.
I think I'd cut the head a bit smoother, and not pull it all out of the cannister before loading.
Also have a break if my hands start getting too sweaty in the bag

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeGoogle
Camera ModelPixel 2
Camera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 6.1.0 (Android)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created2021:01:12 18:05:40
Exposure Time1/640 sec
F-Numberf/1.8
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating58
Lens Aperturef/1.8
Brightness6.9 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Subject Distance0.07 m
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.44 mm
>>
File: 20210113_142228.jpg (1.89 MB, 4128x2322)
1.89 MB
1.89 MB JPG
>>3796984
Same anon, here. It was just a film spool and pressure plate, and they finally arrived today.

It came with a block of chocolate, too, and I'm not sure about whether it's safe to eat or not.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makesamsung
Camera ModelSM-A105F
Camera SoftwareA105FDDU5BTK1
Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.9
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4128
Image Height2322
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:13 14:22:28
Exposure Time1/20 sec
F-Numberf/1.9
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating500
Lens Aperturef/1.9
Brightness-1.5 EV
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeSpot
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length3.60 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4128
Image Height2322
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
ContrastNormal
SaturationNormal
SharpnessNormal
Unique Image IDD13LLMA00HM
>>
any quick tips on using a modern flash with a film camera as far as nailing exposure?

using a yongnuo yn560iv with a nikon f3 and all the pics came out way too overexposed obviously

it shoots at 1/80 by default when the pc port is connected
>>
>>3797207
That was pretty nice of them.
>Russian chocolate
>two months in a shipping container
I think it's still worth a go
>>
File: 20210113_045633.jpg (3.22 MB, 4000x3000)
3.22 MB
3.22 MB JPG
Got all the parts of the 6x12 panoramic camera printed and assembled. Now im just waiting for my Rodenstock 90mm 6.8 lens and the helical to arrive. so fucking excited.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Makesamsung
Camera ModelSM-A515F
Camera SoftwareA515FXXU4CTJ3
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)25 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
Image OrientationRight-Hand, Top
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2021:01:13 04:56:33
Exposure Time1/40 sec
F-Numberf/2.0
Exposure ProgramNormal Program
ISO Speed Rating320
Lens Aperturef/2.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModeCenter Weighted Average
FlashNo Flash
Focal Length4.60 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width4000
Image Height3000
Exposure ModeAuto
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Unique Image IDB48LSMG00CM
>>
>>3797163
I like it
>>
I want to scan film with my X-T2 and I just realized that all of my lenses have a minimum focusing distance of at least like 3 feet or something. Do I need a macro lens or something?
>>
>>3797539
I'm wondering if I could get away with a cheap vintage M42 lens for this.
>>
>>3797540
>>3797539
Or maybe this can be accomplished with some cheap extension tubes?
>>
>>3797479
Do you have a way to advance the film accurately without wasting it or overlapping frames?
>>
>>3797539
I cheaped out on extension tubes and a crap macro lens, if you're scanning anything half decent it's honestly worth just investing in a decent dedicated macro lens, especially if you'll be shooting 120 too
>>
>>3797542
see >>3796444
>>3796449
>>3796450

I'm going to save for the essential film holder kit along with some extension tubes and a kit to develop BW film
>>
>>3797546
You use the numbers on the paper back of the film.
>>
Newt Head

>>3797855
>>3797855
>>
>>3797727
>I'm going to save for the essential film holder kit along with some extension tubes and a kit to develop BW film
Extension tubes are an attractive option, but I don't understand how or why they would reduce your minimum focusing distance, which needs to be pretty close. Does this depend on the lens you pair them with, or is there a formula involved?
>>
>>3797994
>but I don't understand how or why they would reduce your minimum focusing distance
Because you can focus much closer, with any lens, as long as you can move the lens far enough from the sensor. This quickly becomes impractical because at very close distances, you have to move the lens quite far away from the sensor, and that would need a huge focusing helicoid and barrel, making the lens too big and heavy. So the minimum focusing distance is set by how long a helicoid the manufacturer decided to put on the lens, as a compromise between minimum focus distance vs bulk/practicality.

A macro lens at its most basic is just the same lens with a longer helicoid. Good macro lenses also have an optical design that prioritises performance (in terms of chromatical aberrations etc.) at close range instead of long range. And then, depending on use, you might want a lens which also prioritises flatness of field (say for shooting flat subjects, like film scanning).

>Does this depend on the lens you pair them with, or is there a formula involved?
Sure. Here's the simplest case, for a simple lens:
1/(focal length) = 1/(lens to subject distance) + 1/(lens to sensor distance).
As you can see, the longer the focal length, the more you have to increase the (lens to sensor distance) to achieve the same minimum focusing distance.

Also keep in mind that the above "distances" are measured from the optical centre of the lens. For a symmetrical lens, that's roughly the middle of the lens. For a telephoto, it's some point in front of the lens, and for a retrofocal wide, some point behind the lens.
That means for instance a tele would be able to focus closer with less extension than a symmetrical long focal design. Which was one of the reasons teles were invented and used in the old large format days, imagine the feet of bellows you'd need to focus a symmetrical 300mm or 600mm in 4x5" to a close portrait distance.
>>
File: VinBot_web.jpg (471 KB, 1045x1300)
471 KB
471 KB JPG
>>3792216

Using 4x5 for only about 2 years now, got drawn to the image quality of course, but in terms of utility it offers so much more than my other systems with the front and rear movements.

Got 135mm + 240mm lenses and I haven't found a subject yet that's out of the reach with just these.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeEPSON
Camera ModelPerfection V800/V850
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2019 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width5813
Image Height7232
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution600 dpi
Vertical Resolution600 dpi
Image Created2021:01:14 19:41:11
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1045
Image Height1300
>>
File: 5479964940_3e29ce0f33.jpg (55 KB, 500x500)
55 KB
55 KB JPG
>>3796478
the only P&S cameras left that aren't generally discussed and already expensive are weird rare models from the late 90's from manufacturers that were on the way out. Rollei has a couple of high end models no one knows about but, Agfa has one or two also. There are also good quality Japanese models that are semi-rare but can be found at moderate prices such as the better Pentax Espios and the Fuji Tiaras. Also the Nikon AF600. Everything else is over 200 euro or crap.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.