|
pootiebigwang posted:I have been shooting with some ilford delta 3200 pulled back to 1600. This is my first time shooting black and white and I am concerned about getting it developed. I am going to have to get it developed in a lab, as I do not have a single room in my house that doesn't have a window in it. When dropping the film off do I need to let them know that I pulled the film to 1600? I also have 3 or 4 shots that were taken at 3200, will those be effected? You'll probably have to pay extra to have traditional B/W film developed at a lab. When you drop it off, make sure you make it clear that it's traditional B/W film and not C-41 or E-6, otherwise they can easily ruin the film with chemicals for colour. Do tell them about the 1 stop pull, though they might change extra for it. Your EI 3200 shots will come out underexposed if the film is developed for EI 1600, but one stop is not a huge deal and is easily handled during printing or scanning, the film should have enough dynamic range for that. Alternatively, don't bother telling them to pull, the negatives should still be just as usable. But you don't need a darkroom to develop your own film, only to make wet prints. To develop film, you just need a dark place for moving the film from the canister/roll into the light-tight developing tank. You can get changing bags for that, a light-tight bag that lets you do the work in an otherwise fully lit room.
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 04:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
You can't change ISO in the middle of a roll - you just underexposed by a stop (after pulling). You also don't need a windowless room to do development, most tanks these days are light tight and film is loaded in a light tight changing bag. edit: way way beaten
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 05:29
|
|
|
If you can't get in the mood to murder someone (it's understandable), simply try and spool film onto a developing reel in a bag for the first time. Unending, indiscriminate rage or your money back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 08:34
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:If you can't get in the mood to murder someone (it's understandable), simply try and spool film onto a developing reel in a bag for the first time. Unending, indiscriminate rage or your money back. And that's just for 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 09:07
|
|
|
pssh. That's only if you use that paterson rubbish (or its clones). I gave an AP wide flange reel to a friend who is learning how to shoot film and she loaded it in a bag first time in about 20 sec with 120 film.
Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 10:27 on Oct 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 10:25
|
|
|
Was the recent Princess Bride reunion photoshoot done by Annie Leibovitz? http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/10/12/the-princess-bride-cast-reunion-photo/ I can't find any confirm/deny aside from the fact that it's very much her style.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 10:33
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:pssh. That's only if you use that paterson rubbish (or its clones). I gave an AP wide flange reel to a friend who is learning how to shoot film and she loaded it in a bag first time in about 20 sec with 120 film. Wow, you have a film loading savant for a friend. I don't think there is a person in this whole subforum who loaded 35mm film onto a reel nearly that successfully the first time, much less 120. Congratulate your friend, she truly has a gift.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 14:48
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:Was the recent Princess Bride reunion photoshoot done by Annie Leibovitz? It has the photographer's name under the photo  http://www.bigpicture.in/celebrities-portraits-and-ensembles-by-art-streiber/
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 15:16
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:pssh. That's only if you use that paterson rubbish (or its clones). I gave an AP wide flange reel to a friend who is learning how to shoot film and she loaded it in a bag first time in about 20 sec with 120 film. you've never used the steel reels with the little sprocket tabs
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:you've never used the steel reels with the little sprocket tabs My fingertips hurt just reading this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:you've never used the steel reels with the little sprocket tabs pffft. Real film doesn't have sprockets 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2011 00:22
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:Is there a particular reason why the the temperature for white balance in Lightroom is backwards?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2011 00:44
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:pffft. Real film doesn't have sprockets Get with the times, man! 135 is the future! Rollfilm's on its way out already!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2011 01:41
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:pffft. Real film doesn't have sprockets 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2011 04:52
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:Real film doesn't come on rolls real film is glass 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2011 05:57
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:Real film doesn't come on rolls Reel film does though. edit: and if you're taking photos on anything other than bitumen you're loving soft. Sevn posted:Wow, you have a film loading savant for a friend. I don't think there is a person in this whole subforum who loaded 35mm film onto a reel nearly that successfully the first time, much less 120. Not really. I mean yeah, I am a great teacher and all, but it's more to do with the fact that paterson reels are just a terrible design compared to the AP compact reels. They have a design that makes sense and doesn't make it harder than it needs to be, where paterson reels are needlessly harder to use. After she got it with the AP reel I gave her a paterson one and she took about 5 min. Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Oct 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2011 07:17
|
|
|
Is there an easy way to find photos taken with a specific lens on flickr, besides just browsing for the few pictures where people have tagged it with the lens?
Prathm fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Oct 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
Prathm posted:Is there an easy way to find photos taken with a specific lens on flickr, besides just browsing for few pictures where people have tagged it with the lens? http://www.pixel-peeper.com should help you out. Also look for groups dedicated to that specific lens, there generally are quite a few of those.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 21:52
|
|
|
PREYING MANTITS posted:http://www.pixel-peeper.com should help you out. That's a neat site. I'm shopping for a portrait-lens for my analog hasselblad though. E: found some groups
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 22:18
|
|
|
Anyone have any experience at using an iPad to edit photos? I just ordered one for uni and figure it might be a decent addition to my camera bag. Obviously I'm not expecting to be able to do anything particularly sophisticated with it but it'd be nice if there's a reasonably streamlined app to do a few basics like cropping and level adjustments whilst I'm out in the field.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 12:13
|
|
|
Prathm posted:That's a neat site. I'm shopping for a portrait-lens for my analog hasselblad though. (e: not many options because the 180 is dumb and 3 times what a 150 would cost you) evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Oct 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 13:28
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:So get a 150/4? It's not like there's a million options 8/ What about the 120? Any good?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
I just need a quick suggestion. Can anyone suggest an intervalometer/remote for the Nikon D3000? I want one for a project idea I have for capturing birds and squirrels at a feeder.
Atticus_1354 fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Oct 20, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
Atticus_1354 posted:I just need a quick suggestion. Can anyone suggest an intervalometer/remote for the Nikon D3000? I want one for a project idea I have for capturing birds and squirrels at a feeder. AFAIK the D3000 doesn't support either wired or wireless remotes, but it should still be possible to control it from a PC, if having one hooked to the camera by USB is an option. Try this little program.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2011 00:47
|
|
|
Prathm posted:What about the 120? Any good?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2011 01:18
|
|
|
nielsm posted:AFAIK the D3000 doesn't support either wired or wireless remotes, but it should still be possible to control it from a PC, if having one hooked to the camera by USB is an option. Try this little program. Really? There is an option for it in the menu and I have found wireless remotes. I would just like something that also had timelapse functions also. I am going to go ahead and pick up a regular wireless remote and see if I can do it manually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2011 01:39
|
|
|
Atticus_1354 posted:Really? There is an option for it in the menu and I have found wireless remotes. I would just like something that also had timelapse functions also. I am going to go ahead and pick up a regular wireless remote and see if I can do it manually. Oh, maybe that's only the D3100/D5100 where they scrapped remote triggering then. I just remember looking for it on one of those more recent low-end bodies and not being able to find it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
Holistic Detective posted:Anyone have any experience at using an iPad to edit photos? I just ordered one for uni and figure it might be a decent addition to my camera bag. Obviously I'm not expecting to be able to do anything particularly sophisticated with it but it'd be nice if there's a reasonably streamlined app to do a few basics like cropping and level adjustments whilst I'm out in the field. I don't think it can do RAW (could be wrong on that). I think it should be able to handle what you want on JPGs though. It works great as a portfolio!
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2011 03:04
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Oh, maybe that's only the D3100/D5100 where they scrapped remote triggering then. I just remember looking for it on one of those more recent low-end bodies and not being able to find it. D3100 = No IR Remote D5100 = IR Remote Legdiian fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Oct 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2011 23:48
|
|
|
UK folk: What's the best online store for Camera bodies & lenses?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:UK folk: What's the best online store for Camera bodies & lenses? http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2011 23:16
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ Is there an American equivalent of this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2011 23:21
|
|
|
Abnegatus posted:Is there an American equivalent of this? There should be! But you guys get the 50% "living in America" discount.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2011 23:23
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/ Not to argue, but I just checked the Canon 50mm 1.8 and it quotes Amazon as the cheapest at 85 quid, whereas Amazon itself lists it at 74.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
Ok newbie question I can't seem to find a clear answer for on the internet. I have a white dog, for some reason the top of her head keeps blowing out even in flat light. Should I be exposing to the left or right of the histogram?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2011 17:52
|
|
|
Medusula posted:Ok newbie question I can't seem to find a clear answer for on the internet. I have a white dog, for some reason the top of her head keeps blowing out even in flat light. Should I be exposing to the left or right of the histogram? I'm not positive, but I think a white dog is kind of like white snow (except maybe less extreme) For snow you do 1.5-2 stops of overexposure so that it meters properly, so try 1-1.5 stops overexpose for a really white dog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2011 18:08
|
|
|
Your camera overexposed because the rest of the scene is dark. Use exp comp or just choose the exposure yourself.Shmoogy posted:For snow you do 1.5-2 stops of overexposure so that it meters properly, so try 1-1.5 stops overexpose for a really white dog.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
This is the hound in question, my other dog no problems but for some reason her pictures tends to requires an hour of fiddling in post to get anything usable. May just be easier to get her some sort of hat. Old man dog
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2011 02:02
|
|
|
Medusula posted:May just be easier to get her some sort of hat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2011 02:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
spog posted:Not to argue, but I just checked the Canon 50mm 1.8 and it quotes Amazon as the cheapest at 85 quid, whereas Amazon itself lists it at 74. it's not my site :/ it's good to use as more of a guideline anyway. Amazon's prices fluctuate a lot - at the time of posting it's 80, not 74.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2011 11:41
|
|