Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
365 Nog Hogger
Jan 19, 2008

by Shine
Woot, first test roll done, just scanned, from my Yashica!

My Dog:


My Sister:


My Parents:


The lines from drying will not happen again. :P

I can hardly wait to make some real photos with it.


e: forgot SA hates imageshack, rehosting.
e: fixed?

365 Nog Hogger fucked around with this message at 01:54 on Jun 29, 2008

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007

Reichstag posted:

You might be pretty hosed, though it matters more if they were in direct sunlight than the temperature.

What are some tips for keeping film as fresh as possible on the road? I've got 19 rolls of Velvia (120) that expired in Feb 07 that've been on ice, and I'm gearing up to be traveling in the tropics for the next 2 months. The plan right now is for a motorcycle trip, so the film would likely be in a bag on the back most of the time. Any type of container to use/avoid, etc? It's not the end of the world if I get less than professional-looking results, but I'd like to minimize spoilage as much as possible.

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

I use a mini igloo cooler for just that. I just got back from the Sequioas and used it with my film and one of those cooler gel packs inside- I never froze the gel pack, just got it cold in the hotel fridge.

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007

hybr1d posted:

I use a mini igloo cooler for just that. I just got back from the Sequioas and used it with my film and one of those cooler gel packs inside- I never froze the gel pack, just got it cold in the hotel fridge.

Cool... is refrigerating/unrefrigerating like that okay for the film? It'd be over two months, so I'm not sure if it'd create wear and tear on the chemicals or not (if that's even possible).


Another question about storage: is it okay to store 35mm film without a cannister if it's in an opaque container? I was loading the cannisters into a cylindrical tupperware I had around the apartment, seems the space savings would add up.

Molten Llama
Sep 20, 2006

Pompous Rhombus posted:

Cool... is refrigerating/unrefrigerating like that okay for the film? It'd be over two months, so I'm not sure if it'd create wear and tear on the chemicals or not (if that's even possible).

I've never seen a problem from doing this.

Rolls that were in and out of refrigeration have printed the same way as rolls that went straight from fridge to camera to processing, but I also haven't done it on a near-constant basis for two months straight.

If you're shooting Kodak film, call 1-800-242-2424, extension 19 during business hours and ask 'em. They love answering crazy technical questions. Fuji's at, uh, 800-800-FUJI, and I'd assume they're equally eager to assist.

quote:

Another question about storage: is it okay to store 35mm film without a cannister if it's in an opaque container? I was loading the cannisters into a cylindrical tupperware I had around the apartment, seems the space savings would add up.

You don't need the can, really, as long as you're not getting too wild and crazy with it: 35mm's coated to not act as a light pipe, and the cartridge has that handy felt-lined light trap. Doesn't mean I'd want to leave it laying around in the sun, but under normal (and clean—crud will either get in through the light trap or get stuck in the felt and cause scratches) conditions you're not going to hurt anything.

Debbie Metallica
Jun 7, 2001

hybr1d posted:


EDIT: Looks like the image attachment barfed. Any resident mods that can remove the attached image?

Under normal circumstances I would, but the system doesn't seem to realize it DID upload for you so I don't have the option to strip it out. :( Sorry!

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007

Molten Llama posted:

I've never seen a problem from doing this.

Rolls that were in and out of refrigeration have printed the same way as rolls that went straight from fridge to camera to processing, but I also haven't done it on a near-constant basis for two months straight.

If you're shooting Kodak film, call 1-800-242-2424, extension 19 during business hours and ask 'em. They love answering crazy technical questions. Fuji's at, uh, 800-800-FUJI, and I'd assume they're equally eager to assist.


You don't need the can, really, as long as you're not getting too wild and crazy with it: 35mm's coated to not act as a light pipe, and the cartridge has that handy felt-lined light trap. Doesn't mean I'd want to leave it laying around in the sun, but under normal (and clean—crud will either get in through the light trap or get stuck in the felt and cause scratches) conditions you're not going to hurt anything.

Great, thanks! (it's Velvia, Superia 1600, and Kodak BW 400).

I'm cleaning out my film stocks before I go... my last question is about these two rolls of infrared film that came as part of an eBay grab bag. I've read somewhere that some IR films are so sensitive that taking them out of the cannister in a lit environment can expose the film to the IR. Is there any truth to this? (Because I've already done it) It's Kodak Hi Speed Infrared and Konica Infrared 750nm.

Also, would I get okay results shooting without an IR filter, or should I not bother?

Molten Llama
Sep 20, 2006
Yes, IR film is damaged unless it's loaded and removed in perfect darkness—infrared light isn't nearly as picky as visible light, and the requirements of the film mean it (for Kodak, anyway) doesn't have the same fogging prevention properties as standard 35mm film.

The HIE will probably be fogged at least partway through. The Konica might be better off if they did things differently than Kodak.

As far as filters, use one. Red 25 will work if you want to be able to see something through the viewfinder, more opaque will get you more characteristically "infrared" exposures. Infrared films are sensitive enough to the visible wavelengths that the results are often pretty boring without a filter.

If you're using the Elan, it has an infrared frame counter, so you're going to get fogging through part of the frame anyway. (Not much of it, but you'll lose some of the image.)

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007

Molten Llama posted:

Yes

It sounded like such an old wives tale, drat. I do have an Olympus XA that would presumably be okay, (those stupid slow ASA settings would actually be useful for once) but I think more likely I'll just pitch it. My goal is to run through all this film by the end of the trip, I can use all the help I can get, heh.

35mm:
Fuji Superia 1600 (x10) (for the Elan)
Kodak BW 400 (x9) (for the XA)

Kodak Elite Chrome 400 (x2)
Fuji Pro 160S (x1)
Fortepan 100 (x1)
Kodak Tmax 100 (x1)
Ilford Delta 3200 (x1)
Kodachrome 25 (x1)
Kodak Tungsten 50 (x1, expired 1992!)

120:
Fuji Velvia (x19)
Lucky 100 B&W (x18)
Fuji Provia (x1)

8th-snype
Aug 28, 2005

My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012


Young Orc
I used to shoot a bunch of Kodak HIE. The film can act as a light pipe and fog inside the cannister, I heard it was due to a lack of antihalation layer. However unless you expose the cannister to really bright light on the side the film comes out the most you will ever see is a bit of fog on the end of your leader.

I have never had an image fogged and I have changed film at noon using my body to shade the camera. However I have no idea what long term exposure of medium light levels will do to it, I just wanted to let everyone know that its not as bad as made out to be when light gets to your IR film.

killabyte
Feb 11, 2004
Blue Horeshoe Loves Anacot Steel
I need some ideas or anyone with experience on develping ancient film.

I was cleaning out my closet in my bedroom at my parent's house and found an undeveloped roll of Tri-X from the mid 90s. I want to try and develop it and see what exactly is on there because I took a lot of really hosed up pictures when I was a kid so I bet it will be fairly amusing.

I have Diafine and D76 at my disposal. Which one should I try? I am thinking I will go for the Diafine. Would the D76 be a better option? At least the Diafine takes the guessing game out.

8th-snype
Aug 28, 2005

My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012


Young Orc

killabyte posted:

I need some ideas or anyone with experience on develping ancient film.

I was cleaning out my closet in my bedroom at my parent's house and found an undeveloped roll of Tri-X from the mid 90s. I want to try and develop it and see what exactly is on there because I took a lot of really hosed up pictures when I was a kid so I bet it will be fairly amusing.

I have Diafine and D76 at my disposal. Which one should I try? I am thinking I will go for the Diafine. Would the D76 be a better option? At least the Diafine takes the guessing game out.


Diafine. It will reduce the fog on the film, I have seen 70 year old negs come out printable with that stuff.

Clayton Bigsby
Apr 17, 2005

8th-samurai posted:

Diafine. It will reduce the fog on the film, I have seen 70 year old negs come out printable with that stuff.

Diafine will also solve world hunger, give you a back rub, make coffee and walk your dog. Or drat near. :)

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

My 4x5 came to me with a dirty lens- it took me nearly a half hour to figure out how to open it :psyduck:. I have two questions about it: Is the flash assembly worth salvaging or collecting? It's referred to as the "star wars" handle and uses GE flash bulbs. Second question- it turns out the camera was from an estate sale and the film holders all still have film in them. I accidentally exposed one pair, but considering the camera box hadn't been used in 20+ years, do you think there's anything still on the negatives, and are they still good?

8th-snype
Aug 28, 2005

My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012


Young Orc

Clayton Bigsby posted:

Diafine will also solve world hunger, give you a back rub, make coffee and walk your dog. Or drat near. :)

And all the cool kids are using it.

killabyte
Feb 11, 2004
Blue Horeshoe Loves Anacot Steel

8th-samurai posted:

Diafine. It will reduce the fog on the film, I have seen 70 year old negs come out printable with that stuff.

An update:

I just finished developing the film. It is hanging dry right now. I used standard 3+3 diafine and fixed it in Kodafix (I really need to get a non hardening fixer). They look somewhat overexposed. There's about 15 usable images from the roll of 24. The film looks to be circa 1994-1996.

The images consist of some bizarre looking self portraits, a few pictures of my television set, a couple pictures of my computer, a picture of my dog, my brother, and my backyard.

8th-snype
Aug 28, 2005

My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012


Young Orc

killabyte posted:

An update:

I just finished developing the film. It is hanging dry right now. I used standard 3+3 diafine and fixed it in Kodafix (I really need to get a non hardening fixer). They look somewhat overexposed. There's about 15 usable images from the roll of 24. The film looks to be circa 1994-1996.

The images consist of some bizarre looking self portraits, a few pictures of my television set, a couple pictures of my computer, a picture of my dog, my brother, and my backyard.

They look overexposed? Or are they really light? Hardening fixers just make washing the film take longer there shouldn't be any other difference in modern films.

365 Nog Hogger
Jan 19, 2008

by Shine

hybr1d posted:

My 4x5 came to me with a dirty lens- it took me nearly a half hour to figure out how to open it :psyduck:. I have two questions about it: Is the flash assembly worth salvaging or collecting? It's referred to as the "star wars" handle and uses GE flash bulbs.

You should just send the flash handle to me is what you should do. :angel:

There really isn't any way to tell if they're exposed or worth saving, short of developing those sheets.

And yes, Diafine will bring peace to the middle east.

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

Reichstag posted:

You should just send the flash handle to me is what you should do. :angel:

Star Wars junkie! Graflex.org mentioned the handles were often bought off ebay so they can be modified and resold as light saber replicas. It came with the camera, so I feel like I need to keep it safe from people like you :) I was delighted to find a Sekonic 86 in the bottom of the box as well. Now all I need to do is apply some kind of chemical to the camera body so it doesn't smell like eau-de-old-man's-garage.

I shot 4 rolls of Fujichrome 120 in the Sequoias this last week, along with two rolls of Ilford B&W- I am really excited to see what I got- there should be a keeper or two since I looked for keepers with my digital camera and then bracketed the poo poo out of everything. My previous rolls came back from the shop very under-exposed which tells me I need to learn the light meter in it better or just use a modern one.

porcellus
Oct 28, 2004
oh wait, wrong chat window
I'm going to purchase what's on the list from the list from http://chromogenic.net/develop + a small changing bag to get started on developing film instead of that amazon list. Is there anything else I should know about?

Dad Hominem
Dec 4, 2005

Standing room only on the Disco Bus
Fun Shoe

Pompous Rhombus posted:

It sounded like such an old wives tale, drat. I do have an Olympus XA that would presumably be okay, (those stupid slow ASA settings would actually be useful for once) but I think more likely I'll just pitch it. My goal is to run through all this film by the end of the trip, I can use all the help I can get, heh.

HIE is worth an absurd amount on eBay so if you don't shoot it, sell it.

killabyte
Feb 11, 2004
Blue Horeshoe Loves Anacot Steel

8th-samurai posted:

They look overexposed? Or are they really light? Hardening fixers just make washing the film take longer there shouldn't be any other difference in modern films.

Yeah, I made the hardening fixer comment because it sucks washing film for 25 minutes.

The pictures are overexposed but not too bad. They are extremely grainy.

It's funny, I have been looking through the pictures (they are very mundane pictures) and I narrowed the date down to Memorial day weekend of 1995. There was a calendar on the wall in the picture of my bedroom. All the days were X'd out up to May 27th. There was also a nice stack of Pogs sitting in my windowsill. I would have been in the 6th grade.

killabyte fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Jun 30, 2008

MrMeowMeow
Aug 11, 2006
Seriously, what the hell is a Dim Mak?
A couple of weeks ago I finished shooting my first roll of B&W film and I was really stoked and wanted to get prints, so I took it to London Drugs and was pretty bummed when they told me it would take 2 weeks. So I grabbed the roll and decided that I'd go and buy the stuff so I can develop at home (that's still on my to-do list)

Anyhow, when I got some color prints before, I got some weird striping effect happening on some of the photos:


Any idea on what could have caused that and what I could do to prevent/fix it?

Jahoodie
Jun 27, 2005
Wooo.... college!

MrMeowMeow posted:

Any idea on what could have caused that and what I could do to prevent/fix it?

Is it the same bands, in the same spot, on all your pictures? (Looks like it might be from those two). Might be a light leak in your camera.

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007

breathstealer posted:

HIE is worth an absurd amount on eBay so if you don't shoot it, sell it.

I wouldn't feel right selling something that's probably no good, and I threw it out yesterday anyways :-\

Yet another stupid film question: I forgot to take my ISO 1600 (and one roll of Ilford 3200) film out of my bag when it went through the X-rays. Am I screwed?

Dad Hominem
Dec 4, 2005

Standing room only on the Disco Bus
Fun Shoe

Pompous Rhombus posted:

I wouldn't feel right selling something that's probably no good, and I threw it out yesterday anyways :-\

Yet another stupid film question: I forgot to take my ISO 1600 (and one roll of Ilford 3200) film out of my bag when it went through the X-rays. Am I screwed?

Which X-rays? If carry-on, anecdotally you may have a chance. If it was checked, then I guess you can wait it out like me - I let some Velvia go through and shot it anyways, and now I'm waiting on development with my fingers crossed.

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

1600 will experience some loss in the passenger screening X-Ray, as will anything over 1000- but some people report it's not bad enough to be noticeable.

Checked bags get several times higher the dose of radiation each time they are checked, and 1600 in a checked bag means you are more likely hosed. I don't ever check film into bags, and once more I save my 1600 boxes and keep all my film in them. The idiots at the TSA won't "hand-check" them otherwise. How they hand check them without reading the ISO 100's are in 1000 boxes, I have no clue.

MrMeowMeow
Aug 11, 2006
Seriously, what the hell is a Dim Mak?

Jahoodie posted:

Is it the same bands, in the same spot, on all your pictures? (Looks like it might be from those two). Might be a light leak in your camera.

Yeah, it's on the same spot on all the pictures. But the strange thing is that out of the 2 rolls i've gotten developed and printed, the striping only occurred on the 2nd set of prints.
If it is a light leak, how would I fix that?

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

My Pentax K1000 isn't moving the film correctly from the cannister to the right hand reel. I had first assumed I had just not seated the roll correctly and the film was just slipping- then I ran a roll in the daylight and found the spindle with the teeth 'slips' and as such doesn't always pull the film forward all the way to the next frame. I suspect one of the gears has missing or worn teeth, and it only slips when I get to that side of the gear.

Does anyone think this sounds like something different, or have any idea how much people charge to repair a K1000 these days? I bought it mostly as a collectible and have taken good care of it, and after a dozen rolls this is the first sign.

8th-snype
Aug 28, 2005

My office is in the front room of a run-down 12 megapixel sensor but the rent suits me and the landlord doesn't ask many questions.

Dorkroom Short Fiction Champion 2012


Young Orc

hybr1d posted:

My Pentax K1000 isn't moving the film correctly from the cannister to the right hand reel. I had first assumed I had just not seated the roll correctly and the film was just slipping- then I ran a roll in the daylight and found the spindle with the teeth 'slips' and as such doesn't always pull the film forward all the way to the next frame. I suspect one of the gears has missing or worn teeth, and it only slips when I get to that side of the gear.

Does anyone think this sounds like something different, or have any idea how much people charge to repair a K1000 these days? I bought it mostly as a collectible and have taken good care of it, and after a dozen rolls this is the first sign.

Buy another one, K1000s are not collectible. Keh.com has plenty of manual K-mount camera.

Jahoodie
Jun 27, 2005
Wooo.... college!

MrMeowMeow posted:

Yeah, it's on the same spot on all the pictures. But the strange thing is that out of the 2 rolls i've gotten developed and printed, the striping only occurred on the 2nd set of prints.
If it is a light leak, how would I fix that?

Where are you getting prints? It might just be crappy drugstore developing then.

MrMeowMeow
Aug 11, 2006
Seriously, what the hell is a Dim Mak?

Jahoodie posted:

Where are you getting prints? It might just be crappy drugstore developing then.
London Drugs :pseudo:
Yeah at first I thought maybe it was London Drugs that hosed up my poo poo, but I wasn't positive. I guess we'll see when I get around to developing my own stuff.

I was wondering what I should do with my bulk loader that's full of film? I keep it in my room (in a box, in my closet) but it's starting to really warm up around here and I'm worried that if my room gets too hot it'll gently caress up the film. I don't think I have room in the family fridge to fit the entire bulk loader, so should I just fill up as many cartridges as I can and then toss those in the vegetable crisper? The only problem with that I guess is that there will still be film in my room

Pompous Rhombus
Mar 11, 2007

breathstealer posted:

Which X-rays? If carry-on, anecdotally you may have a chance. If it was checked, then I guess you can wait it out like me - I let some Velvia go through and shot it anyways, and now I'm waiting on development with my fingers crossed.

Checked :smith:

I think the Velvia should be okay. poo poo, I hope it is.

gib
Jul 14, 2004
I am probably Lowtax

8th-samurai posted:

Buy another one, K1000s are not collectible. Keh.com has plenty of manual K-mount camera.

Agreed. A friend's K1000 recently developed some shutter issues.

I told him to get an MX. It's like an OM-1-sized K1000.

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

I want a working K1000, not that I wouldn't mind a working OM1 either :) I'll surely replace the K1000, I'd like to have one that works, even if it only sees light and occasional use. It's the camera I learned on some years back, so the particular one I have means little to me compared to the model in general.

I developed 2 rolls of Tri-X 400 120 today, one was horribly under-exposed with nothing but black squares. The other one has one or two on it, this being one of them:



My Epson 4490 doesn't seem to scan negatives as negatives- when I tell it I'm scanning film, it takes 20 minutes to give me an ugly black strip- not of the negatives. I have to put them in the holder, tell it to preview in photo mode then scan the negatives at 3200. Does anyone out there have any better luck?

Clayton Bigsby
Apr 17, 2005

Give Vuescan a go. I've used it for years and years, it's relatively cheap and makes for great scans.

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

The vuescan software shows the same image for "transparency" images- a gradation of grey/black no matter what negative is loaded. The Epson software does the same thing. Maybe the analog gods are unhappy with my unhappy alliance of film and digital?

Luxmore
Jun 5, 2001

hybr1d posted:

My Epson 4490 doesn't seem to scan negatives as negatives- when I tell it I'm scanning film, it takes 20 minutes to give me an ugly black strip- not of the negatives. I have to put them in the holder, tell it to preview in photo mode then scan the negatives at 3200. Does anyone out there have any better luck?
This is a stupid question probably but you do have the backlight exposed, right?

Otherwise I'm not sure, my 4490 is pretty quick to produce terrible scans.

hybr1d
Sep 24, 2002

Luxmore posted:

This is a stupid question probably but you do have the backlight exposed, right?

Otherwise I'm not sure, my 4490 is pretty quick to produce terrible scans.

Doh! Nothing like making an idiot of myself in the forum :) I said out loud, "Backlight, there's a backlight? I suppose there has to be one here somewhere" and found the handle for the cover about 10 seconds later.

I don't have access to a darkroom and don't have the resources to make one- so a scanner is as close as I will get for a while- is there a better than the 4490 or 4990? I know drum scanners are supposedly the best but insanely expensive.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Luxmore
Jun 5, 2001

hybr1d posted:

Doh! Nothing like making an idiot of myself in the forum :) I said out loud, "Backlight, there's a backlight? I suppose there has to be one here somewhere" and found the handle for the cover about 10 seconds later.

I don't have access to a darkroom and don't have the resources to make one- so a scanner is as close as I will get for a while- is there a better than the 4490 or 4990? I know drum scanners are supposedly the best but insanely expensive.
I use a Nikon Coolscan V, which is a dedicated film scanner, and they run around $600. You can pick up older models for much less, and any of them will do a better job on 35mm film than a flatbed.

Medium format is another story- the 4490 will do pretty okay work as long as your negatives are properly exposed.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply