|
ShotgunWillie posted:I don't have PM's, but I would like to know about the services you offer. i have access to a ridiculously nice scanner through my college. the images that come out of it are nicer than any you will get short of a drum scanner. if you feel like giving me money i will scan your negatives (in any size up to 4x5) and give you the files.
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
alkanphel posted:Velvia 50 Those colours and tones are gorgeous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
Genderfluid posted:i have access to a ridiculously nice scanner through my college. the images that come out of it are nicer than any you will get short of a drum scanner. if you feel like giving me money i will scan your negatives (in any size up to 4x5) and give you the files. How much money, and where?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
ShotgunWillie posted:How much money, and where? I live in ny. $15 for each image up to 5, $10 each up to 20, $7 thereafter. if you want to do a really large batch tell me the details and i'll give you a flat price. here's a pro shop, look at their prices. http://www.photovillage.com/pages.php?pageid=5.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
 2013-674 by Tom Rintjema, on Flickr This was taken with my setup. It works out to a 4" sensor. Edit: Maximum Bokeys!  2013-675 by Tom Rintjema, on Flickr TomR fucked around with this message at 01:26 on May 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
I'm selling these fine cameras over in the Buy/Sell thread.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 06:06
|
|
|
 My ill mother Shot with QPZIL's Speed Graphic on 4x5" Provia 100f. Not really the best use of LF but I love this none the less.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 10:32
|
|
|
I'm so proud :')
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2013 13:25
|
|
|
Portra 160 Sacks, Princep Street, 2012 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
 Untitled by lucas.deshazer, on Flickr I bought the Chinese 6x12 back floating around and it's pretty leaky.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
Back in action with the old 6x7: ---_0039 by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Hasselblad CM 500. Various film. Don't really know how to use it yet and less about editing. I think I have a problem with my film getting exposed. That or the place I get it developed locally sucks.   
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 08:58
|
|
|
It looks like your under exposing the film and the lab (or yourself, did you scan them?) is having to push them up during the scan, resulting in a lot of grain and not so much shadow detail. What film types were these?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 09:05
|
|
|
Mostly Portra and Tmax 400 iirc. I think I've underexposed some of them myself in lightroom to compensate. I'll try to find dig up the originals tomorrow. The place I have them developed has been giving me the negatives along with a CD. Sometimes I just get 1024x resolution though, which is pretty lame.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
Anyone have any experience sending equipment to Ross Yerkes for repair?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 11:00
|
|
|
 2013-680 by Tom Rintjema, on Flickr The original output was over 15,000 pixels wide. The detail is amazing. I stopped the lens down to f/16 for this one. My next step is to make a bag bellows that goes around the camera instead of a shirt. I reoriented the horizontal rail so it takes the load better and works much more smoothly.  2013-679 by Tom Rintjema, on Flickr I made a thread on LFF if you want to have a read. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?102853-I-made-a-4-quot-digital-back-and-you-can-too
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 16:46
|
|
|
That's really cool! How long does it take to take one picture? You do all the moving by hand, right? Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 20:16 on May 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
It's not too bad. I made the above photo from 36 exposures, so something like 1 or 2 minutes. It takes longer to frame and focus the shot. Also there is computer time for the stitching. I messed with it for about half an hour, but it doesn't have to take that long.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
TomR posted:It's not too bad. I made the above photo from 36 exposures, so something like 1 or 2 minutes. It takes longer to frame and focus the shot. Also there is computer time for the stitching. I messed with it for about half an hour, but it doesn't have to take that long. I have a board + LF lens sitting around at my house, I need to pick up a macro rail and make use of it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
I'd be curious to hear how you frankensteined the front standard and the macro rails together actually. I'll have to keep my eye out for a cheap view camera.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
The front standard is on the rail the way it normally is. I removed the rear standard and bellows. The macro rail is held by a 90 angle bracket which is clamped to the rail. I have another 90 bracket holding the other part of the rail to the first part. Everything uses 1/4" bolts, the same as the screw that is on the bottom of most cameras to mount them on tripods. I used a sweatshirt as a bag bellows for now. I will make a proper bag later. I would like to make a better mount for everything. What I have is crude, but it works. The one thing I watched for was to make sure the DSLR was lined up with the lens when the rails are at their mid points and no movements are applied to the front standard. I hope that makes some kind of sense. I've got a bad cold and can't think.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 00:17
|
|
|
Finally got around to scanning my most recent acros roll. Magnolias by Jordan_t_Brown, on Flickr Ziggy Smalls fucked around with this message at 22:49 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 08:58
|
|
|
Nice tones, but aren't they magnolia flowers?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Nice tones, but aren't they magnolia flowers?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
http://www.bjp-online.com/british-j...%20of%20cameras RIP the Hasselblad 6x6.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
It's ok, no one could afford a new one anyway, and the old ones will work forever.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Spedman posted:http://www.bjp-online.com/british-j...%20of%20cameras
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:It's ok, no one could afford a new one anyway, and the old ones will work forever. Yeah I always thought it was dead long ago and all the "new" stock was from warehouses containing stock that no one would buy at those crazy prices.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
In 5 or 10 years someone remind me to buy a few V series parts cameras.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:In 5 or 10 years someone remind me to buy a few V series parts cameras. K, I set a reminder in my phone for 8:50am 5/6/2023
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
Buy one now and store it away. Then sell it to the future people with an impressive markup.* * Provided the chemicals/film exists in 30 years.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
6x7 supremacy.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
Cross posting from macro thread, but I got bellows for my Bronica SQ   52mm Nikon lens cap for scale.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
Portra 160 again BIRDLAND, 2012 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
I am looking at Hasselblad's for my next season at the south pole. I have one that is close by, the 2000FC. The guy said he's willing to hang onto it for me if it doesnt sell. The downside is the repair cost of these apparently is ridiculous, and would result in the butchering of another body for parts. Also I'm reading that the 500cm has problems with shutters staying open in cold weather, which obviously I would want to avoid. Any suggestions? Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 07:55 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 07:45
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:I am looking at Hasselblad's for my next season at the south pole. Yeah the repair cost of a 2000 series Hassy is going to be crazy and that's not including trying to find the parts. With regards to the 500CM, I think if you get a one and give it a good CLA, it should work fine for you even at the South Pole. Take a look at this thread.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 08:01
|
|
|
Link was good and much what I thought anyway. Thanks. The camera will probably only be used down there, and not THAT often (will be a 'special occasion' kind of camera) so it's not like it will be a knockabout. How much assurance could you rest in it being an infrequently used camera that is cared for and kept in a carry case most of the time? How sturdy will it be? For interests sake I'm looking at this: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/300901574336?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 08:11
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:I am looking at Hasselblad's for my next season at the south pole. Hasselblads are expensive for repairs, regardless of model. Unless it's something a technician can fix quickly and easily in the backroom with a screwdriver and an extra spring or something, expect maintenance costs to be up there. In fact, everything Hasselblad-related is expensive. They're great cameras, though, and lots of fun to use. I wouldn't bother with any of the focal plane shutter versions, least of all the 2000 series, especially the 2000 FW which is what the guy on eBay is trying to sell. The 200 series is typically hard to find and always expensive. The 2000 models have had their share of issues over the years. (This article explains more on that. Also, see quote below.) The one nice thing about the 200/2000 series, besides the faster maximum shutter speed, is that it's compatible with the coveted 110 f/2 lens, which cannot be used with the 500 series. It's a fantastic lens and, I believe, the fastest one Zeiss produced for the Hasselblad. Mike Peters used it in a number of his shots with his 203FE. From article mentioned above posted:The 2000FC had the same problem of the 1600F/1000F, namely that ham-handed photographers had the unsettling problem of putting their thumbs through the fragile and expensive titanium-foil rear-shutter. The 2000 FC/M solved this in 1981 by having the shutter retract when the back was removed. There was a minor change in 1984 with the 2000 FCW which added the ability for a motor-winder. The 2000FCW and the 2003 FCW are the most reliable cameras in the 2000 series (and the only ones that Hasselblad will still repair)* and the only models you should seriously consider buying. Otherwise, get a 200 series. *(Emphasis mine. Also, with the recent announcement of the discontinuation of the 503CW it's going to be harder and harder to maintain over the years -- and while the two are different cameras they will inevitably share some parts.) Hasselblads have been used in cold weather for decades. Personally, I've shot in 10 or 20 degrees Fahrenheit on many, many occasions and haven't had mechanical issues. And this guy did quite a lot in the snowy mountains with his 503CW:  If I were to buy one (and I did once!), I'd get the components from KEH. Pick the body, get a lens, get the finder you like and a film back. They (usually) have ready-to-go kits but I never like their pairings and prefer to build my own. What I don't like about Hasselblads is that, with frequent use, they seem to need a good CLA every 1-2 years. Mine recently stopped working, just as I was about to take a picture of Louis Mendes. B&H's "Hasselblad guy" couldn't fix the problem and recommended a repair shop in the city, but I have gone to their US-based HQ in New Jersey before and liked their service. They also offer a first time repair discount that is sort of a quiet secret. (You save a lot of money!) I think it was intentionally intended for students but nowadays I think pretty much anyone can get it. Just ask about it and they will give you some information. Here's their number if you're curious: 914-703-4350. But they also have a number of repair facilities throughout the country: http://www.hasselbladusa.com/about-hasselblad/partner-locator.aspx. My suggestion would be to buy a 500 C/M, get a good CLA on it before you take it to the south pole, and not worry about the cold weather. Moving forward, the cameras are abundant, parts are still around, they are less expensive to fix than modern-day H Series or the older 200/2000 models. They are good cameras and fun to use. Otherwise, there are a lot of other 6x6 options out there if that's your thing... Mannequin fucked around with this message at 08:55 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 08:45
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:6x7 supremacy. It will happen to these too, eventually. Sorry to rain on your parade.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 08:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Cross posting from macro thread, but I got bellows for my Bronica SQ ...and now I need to check the macro thread.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 10:32
|
|
