|
Thoogsby posted:the one true film is delta 3200 pushed to 12800 True.  Untitled by Drew Davis, on Flickr (e: for embedding) Hokkaido Anxiety fucked around with this message at 01:56 on May 14, 2016 |
#
?
May 13, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Focus is off by ||   AK by spike mccue, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Shellman posted:I really want to try provia's stellar reciprocity out, but the lack of dynamic range stops me from trying shooting it at night. Portra is just so forgiving with metering! I will hear none of your blasphemy!!!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I will hear none of your blasphemy!!! The work in question. Doesn't really jive with any of my other stuff, but it WAS fun being able to create on demand instead of driving around until the light was right and I liked a building. I sold a couple prints of the forty to people who couldn't leave the college student mentality behind at least!  Untitled by Drew Davis, on Flickr  Untitled by Drew Davis, on Flickr  Untitled by Drew Davis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
I thought the colours shouldn't have much of an issue, since you're shooting in controlled lighting. I normally don't have to do much correction when I shoot slide in the studio.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I thought the colours shouldn't have much of an issue, since you're shooting in controlled lighting. I normally don't have to do much correction when I shoot slide in the studio. I was using a friend's flatbed and thought I had all my settings right, but the colors just did not look like the slides themselves, and the prints were exhibited alongside the transparencies. I've never had trouble with mf on my scanner.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
Provia! Al Duca di Venezia by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
11x14 tintype flickr sharpening 
Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 06:10 on May 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
 11x14
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Just found a Kiev 88 for $40 in a Moscow market. Got some Ektar 100 and the photo shop guy ran through the camera showing me how to work it. In perfect condition, looking forward to developing this first roll from Moscow and seeing how it turns out! Also if anyone has a place in St. Petersburg that can develop a roll/prints in a few days I'd really appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
 jerzy by alex gard, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
Sludge Tank posted:
NICE!
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
Now this is just a video grab of me shooting away, but I'm excited because after trying for almost 3 years to capture *photogenic* tornadoes on medium and large format film, I blew through 3 rolls on the Mamiya 7 today. Switching rolls with three tornadoes on the ground at the same time is extremely stressful but rewarding.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
A lovely scan of a lovely picture, but I got the frankencamera working It's a Calumet C2 120 film holder for 4x5, the rail, front stand and bellows from an old 2x3 ICA camera, lens and shutter from ebay (15USD) and the rangefinder of a lovely polaroid, plus some hardware parts I had at home. It's a coupled 120 6x7 rangefinder with a 135mm f4.5 lens (with dental floss linking the rangefinder and the front stand, but it works!) 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Lol I guess you need to do something with those land cameras now.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
 Campo San Zan Degola, Venezia by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
It is normal to have to adjust a rangefinder when switching from a short to long lens? I recently got the 150mm lens for my Mamiya 6 but when I put it on the rangefinders close focus is about 3 to 4 feet instead of the 6 feet it should be for the lens and the giant antenna about 5 miles away is still out of focus at infinity.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
aricoarena posted:It is normal to have to adjust a rangefinder when switching from a short to long lens? I recently got the 150mm lens for my Mamiya 6 but when I put it on the rangefinders close focus is about 3 to 4 feet instead of the 6 feet it should be for the lens and the giant antenna about 5 miles away is still out of focus at infinity. You're not using an adaptor with the lens right?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:You're not using an adaptor with the lens right? No. And when I said "out of focus at infinity" I meant the lens is focused to infinity but the objects in the distance have not yet aligned in the range finder. The range finder seems to be accurate for the 50mm. Having to adjust the patch for each lens doesn't seem right.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
You definitely can and should have the body and lenses calibrated together. It sounds like the lens is probably the issue here, though.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Kinda wish you got rid of some of the bottom or the top, feels a little unfocused to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
That's fair
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Album: https://www.flickr.com/photos/30580418@N04/albums/72157669287073995   
luchadornado fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Jun 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Enjoying cropping down the 6x9 frames 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
 Salizada del Fontego dei Turchi, Venezia by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Kinda wish you got rid of some of the bottom or the top, feels a little unfocused to me. Disagree. The unsettling ripples and shadows form a pretty unreal looking backdrop with the sky that makes depth hard to read, and the lights of the bridge are like pearls in a velvet case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
How bad is this Balsam separation? If I avoided shooting into lighting would it be noticeable?  Its like 1/3 less than the going rate. I remember hearing that its much more of a problem when its on the rear lenses
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
aricoarena posted:How bad is this Balsam separation? If I avoided shooting into lighting would it be noticeable? It's probably not balsam separation, because these modern lenses don't use the tree sap of the Canada Balsam fir tree, but some synthetic, usually UV hardening, agent. This glue can usually not be removed safely or only at great danger/cost. Zeiss experimented with another synthetic glue, which had the issue that it turns into a solid crystal over time, wedging the glued elements apart - but it doesn't appear to be that either. So it's possibly fungus, oil, haze, coating issues, a previous fudged repair or god knows what else. The fact that it shows up without a flashlight being shone through the glass should be highly disconcerting to you. I wouldn't touch that thing with a ten foot pole. My take on buying gear with issues is this: - Can it be repaired cheaply? - If no to the previous question, is the discount steep enough to warrant hedging the bet? As someone who repairs both lenses and cameras on a hobby basis, I can tell you that repair isn't magic. Worn parts will remain worn unless I have the replacements which are also harvested from used cameras. Better condition items are usually in better condition inside as well and thus "repair better". You also can't mix and match glass elements, even between identical lenses. Thus, concluding my long rant: glass issues in a lens that even with 2/3rds of the price discounted still is expensive should be a "no".
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Koni Omegas make good pinhole cameras Portra4338 by Brett Schlough, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
This is what happens when you actually shoot Ilford 3200 at 3200:  Alex by spike mccue, on Flickr (4.5f 1/15s handheld cause I'm never properly prepared)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:This is what happens when you actually shoot Ilford 3200 at 3200: Looks about right for film pushed almost two stops in dim light. Delta 3200 actually a 1000 speed film in most developers. It would be interesting to see what it does in diafine. ilford tech pub posted:3200 Professional has an ISO speed rating of ISO 1000/31º (1000ASA, 31DIN) to daylight. Straight from the horse's mouth: http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/201071394723115.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:Looks about right for film pushed almost two stops in dim light. Yeah I knew it was actually a 1000-1200 speed film but had heard (maybe from this thread?) that you can push it to 3200 with no problems. It's fairly grainy, but it seems to handle it pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Delta 3200 is only about EI 1250 in diafine. That stuff doesn't boost some film nearly as far as others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:Yeah I knew it was actually a 1000-1200 speed film but had heard (maybe from this thread?) that you can push it to 3200 with no problems. It's fairly grainy, but it seems to handle it pretty well. Yeah it seems to heavily depend on the nature of the light and the type of light-source. The max aperture matters, too. I found, from my night photos, that if you hit around 1/15 shutter speeds that an extra stop of aperture seems to go a longer way than slowing to 1/8th. I assume this is because reciprocal failure isn't linear. This is in no ways a laboratory level test and just an observation I had during shooting. Might be totally wrong. 8th-snype posted:Delta 3200 is only about EI 1250 in diafine. That stuff doesn't boost some film nearly as far as others. Interesting. Thanks! I found that -Max also develops rather poorly in diafine. I guess it's not the best choice for tabular grain films.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 07:12
|
|