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
dakana
Aug 28, 2006
So I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two blindfolded dental hygienists trying to make a circle on an Etch-a-Sketch and headed for California.

Ineptitude posted:

How is your LR catalog so small with that many photos? I have about 10k photos and my catalog is 12gb

Are you including your previews in that size? I'm just including the .lrcat file, not the previews folder.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

huhu
Feb 24, 2006
Any advise for a decent tutorial for using VirtualDub to make time lapse videos? The first 5 articles I've browsed on Google are all crap and gloss over most of the stuff I actually care about. "just pick the compression settings you usually use" :rolleyes: Absolutely useless articles.

TheLastManStanding
Jan 14, 2008
Mash Buttons!
So what do you care about? If you just want to know compression settings the typical answer is pretty much always H.264 codec using 2-pass VBR at 5Mbps, 30 (or 60) fps with either 720p or 1080p resolution, audio set to AAC using at least 192 kbps. What rate you actually take the photos at is completely up to what you're doing: Estimate how long you will be filming for, divide by how long you want the final video to be, then divide by the framerate: This gives you the time between shots, which you should then divide by 2 or 3, because you can always get rid of frames later.

huhu
Feb 24, 2006

TheLastManStanding posted:

H.264 codec using 2-pass VBR at 5Mbps

What/How do I do these things?

Ineptitude
Mar 2, 2010

Heed my words and become a master of the Heart (of Thorns).

dakana posted:

Are you including your previews in that size? I'm just including the .lrcat file, not the previews folder.

Oh, that single file is 335mb :v:

Shrieking Muppet
Jul 16, 2006
More sigma 50-150 questions, the nom-OS version has a I and II revision. aside from being 8 mm shorter and $200 more is the version II a huge improvement?

KinkyJohn
Sep 19, 2002

HookShot posted:

Yeah, they're all focused on that wall in the background. I agree, it was probably in manual focus.

Luckily they didn't chimp to check the outcome, otherwise they would have looked like an amateur who chimps like a real chimp!

Comrade Red
Jul 9, 2013
Couldn't tell which thread I should ask this in, but I've been looking into getting into 35mm photography. A friend recommended to start with a Minolta SRT-101, is this a good starting out camera, only experience I have with with your regular cheaper point and click type stuff. Eventually I would like to get a Contax II, anyone know if the two of these have a similar feel to them?

learnincurve
May 15, 2014

Smoosh
Not really no. Are you dead set on a fully manual old school camera or is it film in general you are interested in?

If it's just film then the Minolta 7000i with a Minolta 35-70 f/4 Mini-Beercan (all metal with 1:4 macro switch)is a fantastic combination if you want all the modern cons like AF , and if you decide to go digital then the minolta AF lenses will work on Sony DSLRs.

Comrade Red
Jul 9, 2013
Leaning more towards a full manual old school (analogue?) camera. Not looking for anything high end professional but just as another side hobby, if that helps.

Helen Highwater
Feb 19, 2014

And furthermore
Grimey Drawer

Comrade Red posted:

Leaning more towards a full manual old school (analogue?) camera. Not looking for anything high end professional but just as another side hobby, if that helps.

Everything that isn't digital is analogue. Some analogue cameras have more automation and electrical stuff to make your life easier, some are purely mechanical and require you to do everything yourself.

If you really want a Contax II, then buy one and practice with it. Shoot lots of rolls and learn from how you gently caress each one up. If you're a bit nervous about dropping the money on a Contax just to discover that you hate it, then buy a cheap Soviet rangefinder on eBay and play with that until you figure out if you want to go on with it. The Kiev cameras are based on the Contax so shooting with a Kiev 4 or something will be very similar to the Contax experience, but a Zorki or FED rangefinder will also give you the feel of what shooting with a pre-war rangefinder camera is like. If you are interested, I might even be able to hook you up with a suitable camera.

burzum karaoke
May 30, 2003

Comrade Red posted:

Couldn't tell which thread I should ask this in, but I've been looking into getting into 35mm photography. A friend recommended to start with a Minolta SRT-101, is this a good starting out camera, only experience I have with with your regular cheaper point and click type stuff. Eventually I would like to get a Contax II, anyone know if the two of these have a similar feel to them?

Nikon FM2 is probably the best bang for your buck fully manual SLR. It's small, well built, has a mechanical shutter, an easy to read light meter, meters up to ISO 6400, shutter speeds up to 1/4000s, split-focus prism, plus you get a huge library of lenses to choose from. That said, most 70s/80s SLRs you can get for cheap will treat you just fine.

Rangefinders of note:
Olympus 35RC
Olympus 35SP
Yashica Lynx 14E

Wild EEPROM
Jul 29, 2011


oh, my, god. Becky, look at her bitrate.
As much as I like the FM2 (and FM2n), they're selling for much more than they should be because they are ~all mechanical~. Even more so for the FM3a.

The FE2 use batteries for metering/timing, are just as reliable and compact, and sell for almost half the price.

There's also the F3, which sells for around the price of the FM2n, and is probably the most solid, reliable, and dependable camera I've ever owned. It also has all of the "pro" features like a removable prism, the ability to use non-AI lenses, and all kinds of winders and backs. It's a little bigger and a lot heavier, though.

The FA is a strange one. It's the cheapest, and it's the most technologically advanced. It's also got a case of the 80's unrepairable electronics.


You could also go with a different system; since the Nikon F mount is still used, the system isn't the cheapest. The Olympus OM and the Canon FD mounts are both dead, and so you can find good deals on them. The OM cameras are also a lot smaller than the Nikons, and Canon has the New F1, the only camera I would give up my F3 for.

Xabi
Jan 21, 2006

Inventor of the Marmite pasty
Get the Olympus OM-1 and live happily ever after.

HPL
Aug 28, 2002

Worst case scenario.

Helen Highwater posted:

If you really want a Contax II, then buy one and practice with it. Shoot lots of rolls and learn from how you gently caress each one up. If you're a bit nervous about dropping the money on a Contax just to discover that you hate it, then buy a cheap Soviet rangefinder on eBay and play with that until you figure out if you want to go on with it. The Kiev cameras are based on the Contax so shooting with a Kiev 4 or something will be very similar to the Contax experience, but a Zorki or FED rangefinder will also give you the feel of what shooting with a pre-war rangefinder camera is like. If you are interested, I might even be able to hook you up with a suitable camera.

Being the owner of a couple of Kievs, I would say that you're better off staying away from that sort of thing. Kievs are fidgety, fickle things, not terribly pleasant to use and buying one is always a gamble, as is buying Russian cameras in general. If you're just getting into film photography, your best bet is a Pentax ME Super because they're affordable, plentiful and Pentax K-mount lenses are everywhere. Seriously. Go look under your couch cushions. You'll probably find one. Don't spend a lot of money on film gear right away because shooting film is a colossal pain in the rear end compared to digital and you might find that it's not worth your while in the long run.

If you absolutely, positively want to get a Russian rangefinder, I recommend the Zorki 4k. It is solidly built and it uses a lever to advance the film instead of a knob, and you're less likely to get a lemon with the 4k versus other Russian rangefinders. It also uses Leica M39 mount as opposed to the Kiev which uses the Contax-style mount.

Xabi posted:

Get the Olympus OM-1 and live happily ever after.

Except that I recall that it uses an old battery that isn't easily available any more. The OM-4 and OM-4 Ti, on the other hand, kick all sorts of rear end. Unfortunately, OM glass is getting harder to find since it wasn't as popular as other brands.

HPL fucked around with this message at 22:27 on May 29, 2016

Dr. Despair
Nov 4, 2009


39 perfect posts with each roll.

Pentax me super or bust.

Xabi
Jan 21, 2006

Inventor of the Marmite pasty
The original mercury batteries for the OM-1 aren't made anymore, but you can still use modern 1.5V substitutes. The voltage from these modern batteries apparently drain gradually -unlike the mercury batteries - and some people are therefore afraid that the metering can't be trusted. I've never had a problem and if you're worried you can just replace it regularly.

Dr. Despair
Nov 4, 2009


39 perfect posts with each roll.

pentax mx is also a valid option, but pricier because of the all mechanical stuff


avoid the mg

SMERSH Mouth
Jun 25, 2005

I like the SRT-101. I started out on one, and look where it got me. (I'm a terrible photographer.)

But really, the SRT-101 is a fine camera, if you actually want to go all-manual for everything except the light meter. The SRT's CLC meter is very accurate and reliable, but you have to twist a flush dial on the bottom of the camera body to turn it on, which is a pain. The later Minolta MF cameras are all pretty solid, as well. The XD-11 for example has shutter- and aperture-priority automation and very smooth mechanics. It's design was even licensed to Leica to make the Leica R4. Minolta Rokkor lenses are cheaper than Nikon Nikkors, but generally regarded as better than (non-L) Canon FD lenses.

All that said, I use my FE2 a lot more than my SRT, because it's way faster.

SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 04:58 on May 30, 2016

thetzar
Apr 22, 2001
Fallen Rib
I learned photography from scratch on a Minolta SRT-101. I fully endorse it. Manual, simple, tank-built and understandable. Great lenses that are dirt cheap now. A simple manual focus system, and a decent built-in meter. The only trick is that you need to use a battery adapter to use modern batteries for the meter — easily obtained on ebay. Camera functions perfectly well without the battery/lightmeter, too. That sort of manual camera is the perfect place to learn about the exposure triangle.

That said, if you want to shoot film and get great results, medium might be more your game.

HPL
Aug 28, 2002

Worst case scenario.

thetzar posted:

That said, if you want to shoot film and get great results, medium might be more your game.

Not if you're just starting out. Not a lot of places develop medium format film anymore, but lots of places still do 35mm. Once you've got some experience under your belt and you're sure you want to stick with it, then you can go all out and get all the film developing gear for medium format.

DJExile
Jun 28, 2007


Xabi posted:

The original mercury batteries for the OM-1 aren't made anymore, but you can still use modern 1.5V substitutes. The voltage from these modern batteries apparently drain gradually -unlike the mercury batteries - and some people are therefore afraid that the metering can't be trusted. I've never had a problem and if you're worried you can just replace it regularly.

Yeah I've used modern batteries in my OM1 for years now and they've been great.

Captain Organ
Sep 9, 2004
cooter. snooper.

SMERSH Mouth posted:

The later Minolta MF cameras are all pretty solid, as well.

If you can get your hands on an x-570/700 they are a great deal.

Pham Nuwen
Oct 30, 2010



Mr. Despair posted:

Pentax me super or bust.

This forever and ever. They're cheap as poo poo, small and easy to carry, simple to use, good lens availability.

thetzar
Apr 22, 2001
Fallen Rib
Well, Flickr's upload functionality broke again. It'll probably get fixed tomorrow. If Yahoo dies the great corporate death and takes Flickr with it I'm going to be very, very unhappy.

bellows lugosi
Aug 9, 2003

thetzar posted:

Well, Flickr's upload functionality broke again. It'll probably get fixed tomorrow. If Yahoo dies the great corporate death and takes Flickr with it I'm going to be very, very unhappy.

upload by email is still working

Comrade Red
Jul 9, 2013
Appreciate the help guys, I'll look around for these and compare, looking at ebay they all seemed around the same price range.

Now about film, would it be better to pick some up off ebay to play around with even if it might be expired? Rather than newer stuff that I'll probably screw up on the first couple of tries? Also, how many of you send your film off to get processed or just homebrew it?

Pham Nuwen
Oct 30, 2010



Comrade Red posted:

Appreciate the help guys, I'll look around for these and compare, looking at ebay they all seemed around the same price range.

Now about film, would it be better to pick some up off ebay to play around with even if it might be expired? Rather than newer stuff that I'll probably screw up on the first couple of tries? Also, how many of you send your film off to get processed or just homebrew it?

400ISO Fuji color film from Walmart is ideal for testing your new camera. It's cheap and you know it should be OK. Get it developed somewhere that does it in-house, or mail the film to Citizen's Photo in Portland. Don't use Walmart to dev, they send it out and you only get scans back, they throw out the negatives. Check with any pharmacy to make sure they do it in-house; any place that still advertises "1 hour photo" should be fine.

Once you've verified your camera is in good shape, B&W is the most cost effective thing to shoot provided you develop it yourself. The chems and equipment will set you back... Maybe $60? But those chems will last a while (I'm still on my first bottle of fixer) and the film will be cheap at like $2.50/roll for Arista EDU 400.

Edit: expired film is for goony fucks who already know their camera works properly and understand how to use it. You, on the other hand, will be loving up exposure and possibly dealing with light leaks, use fresh film and eliminate that additional variable.

ExecuDork
Feb 25, 2007

We might be fucked, sir.
Fallen Rib

Captain Organ posted:

If you can get your hands on an x-570/700 they are a great deal.
My first camera was a Minolta X-700 that I still have and dammit I need to ruin a few more rolls through it.

But yeah, pretty much any 70's / 80's manual-focus SLR will teach you the basics. I love my Minoltas, my Konica, my old Pentaxes (MX, ME Super), and I sent my Canon AE-1 around the world (currently stranded in Antarctica - I should rename it Shackleton if I ever get it back). And everything Pham Nuwen said about film is correct - especially the part about goony fucks like me who love to score stupid deals on stupid old stupid expired film because I'm stupid. But I'm having fun!

Cameras (3 of 3) by Martin Brummell, on Flickr

HPL
Aug 28, 2002

Worst case scenario.

ExecuDork posted:

dammit I need to ruin a few more rolls through

Typo or great truth of film photography?

Hyrax Attack!
Jan 13, 2009

We demand to be taken seriously

Quick question, what would be a good option for ordering several hundred prints? I was planning to go through Costco but wanted to check if there was a better online choice for value or quality. Thanks!

alkanphel
Mar 24, 2004

Mojo Threepwood posted:

Quick question, what would be a good option for ordering several hundred prints? I was planning to go through Costco but wanted to check if there was a better online choice for value or quality. Thanks!

Adoramapix?

emdash
Oct 19, 2003

and?
mpix is really wonderful in my experience

ExecuDork
Feb 25, 2007

We might be fucked, sir.
Fallen Rib

HPL posted:

Typo or great truth of film photography?

Deliberate, and pretty much the truest thing I've said or written in at least a year. And it's not like that's restricted to film, I'm sure my SD cards will revolt against me sooner or later.

Everybody should get a manual-focus 30-year-old SLR and shoot it at least once, though.

Comrade Red
Jul 9, 2013
I was looking around in a local shop and found a Minolta sr7 for about 30ish, the shutter seemed to work for the most, and it had a 55mm rokkor lens. Does anyone have experience with the sr7 and does this seem like a decent find?

ExecuDork
Feb 25, 2007

We might be fucked, sir.
Fallen Rib
The Rokkor Files suggests the SR7 is an interesting and quite useable camera, but doesn't recommend it as your first 35mm film SLR.

If it's in reasonably good shape, I don't see any reason to pass on a $30 SR7 that comes with a decent lens.

Karasu Tengu
Feb 16, 2011

Humble Tengu Newspaper Reporter
I'd go for it, I bought an XG-7 with a 50mm Rokkor-X lens and had a ton of fun with it for a while. The 50mm I got with it I still use all the time because how good it is.

doomisland
Oct 5, 2004

So I made the mistake of using my shirt to wipe water off one of my lenses since it was raining and now there are some tiny scratches all over it. This won't be too much of an issue right? I feel like an idiot for forgetting my microfiber cloths too.

Geektox
Aug 1, 2012

Good people don't rip other people's arms off.

doomisland posted:

So I made the mistake of using my shirt to wipe water off one of my lenses since it was raining and now there are some tiny scratches all over it. This won't be too much of an issue right? I feel like an idiot for forgetting my microfiber cloths too.

Is your shirt made of sandpaper? I've never heard of that happening. Maybe try cleaning it again? It. Might just be streaks

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

doomisland
Oct 5, 2004

Geektox posted:

Is your shirt made of sandpaper? I've never heard of that happening. Maybe try cleaning it again? It. Might just be streaks

Yeah, it's just little light scratches. I have to assume it was the shirt or the lens was in worse condition when I bought it off Amazon. It was "New" but when it showed up it was an amazon warehouse deal. It looked fine at the time and they gave me a discount when I complained since I was heading out on a 2 month trip the next day. I'll try rubbing it again. Is there some kind of rubbing alcohol I can buy?

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