The Film Thread: "for sale: packfilm back. never used."

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Film Thread: "for sale: packfilm back. never used."

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

So I have a bunch of old 35mm and 120 negatives that I want to make prints of. I'm trying to figure out what my best course of action is:

1.) Buying an Epson V600, scanning them myself and then sending somewhere to be printed

2.) Putting together a slipshod darkroom darkroom and printing them myself (I miss the whole printmaking process)
2a.) Renting time at a local darkroom and printing them there (i'm in Portland, OR, which I think has a few options.)

I'm leaning towards option 1, scanning and printing, purely from a time/money perspective. Does that make me some sort of heretic? Is the Epson V600 a good choice for that?

# ¿ May 19, 2016 07:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:18

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

What do you guys do with your developer/fixer when you're done developing film at home? Is it kosher to dump it down the drain or do you collect it and drop it off for disposal somewhere?

# ¿ Jun 2, 2016 07:58

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Picked up a Fuji Gw690III, as it's on my camera bucket list and couldn't wait any longer for tax return Christmas. First roll came out ok!

The only thing that's weird about the camera is the lack of a traditional bulb mode. You have to advance the film or change the shutter speed to close the shutter. Apparently advancing the shutter isn't a good option on my camera, as you can see some light streaks as the film was moved before the shutter fully closed.

frogbs fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Feb 2, 2018

# ¿ Feb 2, 2018 06:45

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

SMERSH Mouth posted:

I hope you can reliably make good low light/long exposures with that Fuji. I had a brief go-round with the mega-old interchangable-lens version, and while the normal bulb mode was great, other aspects... Weren't. Still took some of my favorite night shots with it, though. Sometimes I think about going for one of the later ones, but the lack of bulb mode dissuades me.

Lately, though, been thinking about a GS645S. I think they're supposed to be moderately more usable for long exposures without having to hat trick it, compared to the fixed-lens 690s, but it's still some T-mode BS.

I just want a 120 format moderate wide of some sort; I got rid of the two Bronica GS lenses in that range that I tried because they sucked (which is weird because the remaining 110 is great), so my only MF lens right now is a 55mm equivalent.

Yeah, I found out about the G690BLP and it's real bulb mode AFTER I bought the GW690. You can also get a wider lens for that, which would be more my speed too, although it's F8, which is a little much for night stuff.

What other options are out there for 6x9 that don't have the downsides of the 690 series for long exposure stuff? The only thing I can think of is one of those Zero Image or RealitySoSubtle pinhole cameras, and really that's a whole different ballgame from using a traditional camera.

For now i'm going to try the hat trick and see how it goes.

# ¿ Feb 4, 2018 00:27

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

WorldWarWonderful posted:

A few months ago I bought a lot of home processing stuff for black and white film, the reasons being twofold. One, the lab has a one-day turnaround on colour but a one week turnaround on black and white, meaning it can take two weeks for me to get it back depending on my schedule. Two, to "justify" shooting in larger formats (6x9, 6x12, etc) on those occasions where it merits it, and save money on the processing.

As expected, my first few tries were a disaster. I ruined my film (a mix of improper light sealing of the bathroom and forgetting how ratios work when mixing), yet decided to give it another go eventually. After a peristent flu and a miserable first quarter of 2018, I gave it another attempt yesterday. I quit in a fit of rage when I couldn't spool neither 120 nor 35mm film after trying for 45 minutes in a pitch black bathroom, and started to hallucinate (is this what Charles Bonnet syndrome is like?). After painting the walls with expletives and ruining another two rolls, I placed everything together on the kitchen table ready to be photographed and placed on Kijiji.

Are you using plastic Paterson reels? If so, check that the ball bearings in the ratchet mechanism aren�t bound/frozen. I�ve seen ones that are pretty corroded.

I�ve also found it helps to cut the corners of the film that you insert into the reel, especially with 120.

That being said, congrats for sticking with it! Subsequent tries will get easier!

# ¿ Apr 17, 2018 00:53

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Picked up a Fuji GW690III a few months back, and am really enjoying that 6x9 detail.

The scans come out ok, but optical prints are much more satisfying!

# ¿ Apr 17, 2018 06:12

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

alkanphel posted:

Nice but feels overly sharpened.

Thanks, yeah I�m still getting the hang of using the scanner, but the prints I�m pulling off an enlarger don�t look all that different. I can�t remember if I had unsharp mask enabled when I scanned these...

# ¿ Apr 17, 2018 07:17

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

unpacked robinhood posted:

I got lab scans back and wtf happened here, look at that garbage:

(This is a 100% crop from a sky area with a bit of cloud. )

Did they loving write in the middle of my scan ?
I am not a satisfied customer

e: the hosed up blotches happen on like half the pics of the roll, I assumed something happened during processing but then it should be everywhere.

Like others have said, this is 100% a Kodak issue with specific batches of backing paper/emulsion, don�t blame the lab! I had a problem with one roll, sent Kodak a note, and they sent me 5 rolls in the mail for free.

# ¿ May 1, 2018 07:14

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

pseudorandom posted:

Alright, just checked one of them. The glow is present in the negatives, so it's not the scan.

By bleeding, do you mean does it appear to flow between negatives continuously (like along the film, rather than produced by the lens)? I'll check that tomorrow; I've already cut the negatives apart and will need more time to compare.

My dev process was basically what's described in Helen Highwater's video; no-presoak, HP5+ 400 film with D-76 1:1 for 13 minutes, agitated every 30 seconds or so (I was not particularly disciplined with this and followed it more as a guideline than a rule).

Temperature is . I know I definitely need to work on this. I was trying to cool the warm developer after the initial mixing, so I left some of it by an open window to cool down. My impromptu thermometer doesn't have labels below 75F, but after extrapolating I'm guessing the final developer mixture was somewhere between 65F and 70F. Room temperature was also probably somewhere in that range.

Agitation was 2 initial inversions, then 3-5 twists back and forth every 30 seconds or so (one direction being one "twist").

Like I said, I recognize there are a ton of things I didn't do perfectly (or even okay) here. I'm mostly hoping I can figure out some of the areas I should most focus on improving.

How long did you fix for? Looks to me like it might not have been long enough?

# ¿ Jan 18, 2019 09:28

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

SMERSH Mouth posted:

Folks were talking about too-short fixing times earlier. I fixed a couple of rolls with some older Fomafix today for the usual 5 minutes and while things generally turned out usable, a roll of TMAX 400 had pink blotches on it, a sign of underfixing. It has a negligible effect on density and disappears when I convert the scans to grayscale, but one frame on each of the two rolls I developed had a dark patch, which is harder to deal with. Luckily they were on worthless throwaway shots:

The first was TMAX 400, the second Delta 400. Both were developed with Xtol and fixer from the same batches, but in different tanks at different times. The dark patches are visible on the negatives.

Also a result of underfixing?

Tmax generally requires longer fix and wash times than something like HP5. I usually fix for something like 13 minutes with Kodak fixer and never have any issues. 5 minutes seems way too short. What was your agitation like?

It�s always worth doing a test with a piece of leader to get a good fix time. For most films the rule of thumb is fix for twice as long as it takes the test piece to clear. For Tmax I�ve heard go three times as long.

# ¿ Feb 3, 2019 09:33

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

SMERSH Mouth posted:

Thinking about getting a half frame camera recently.

The interchangeable-lens PEN's are beautiful but their price has inflated and I've heard that their porro mirror viewfinders desilver and darken with age.

So that basically narrows it down to either a PEN EE-D or a Yashica Samurai. (Or a Chaika, which seems like a lol option but from a Flickr search appears to actually have a pretty decent lens)

Besides the different zoom ranges, is there any important difference between the Samurai X 3.0 and X 4.0? Anything else to look out for when buying a Samurai?

Have you considered a Canon Demi EE17?

# ¿ Feb 10, 2019 22:50

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Anyone here have experience with an Omega D-II enlarger (note, not the D-2, which is apparently distinct!)?

I was using a community darkroom nearby, but since it doesn't seem like that'll ever open again i've been considering picking up an enlarger to print at home. I'm primarily going to be printing 6x9 negatives, so I think that gives me the D-II, D2, Beseler 45, or Beseler 23C as my best options. There's a D-II nearby for $50, but it looks like i'd probably need to source a 105mm lens and a 6x9 negative carrier. Should I go for it, or am I better off waiting for a Beseler to show up, since it's a little more adaptable between formats? From reading a bit it seems like there are a lot more 'gotchas' in terms of parts i'd need with the D-II.

# ¿ Sep 2, 2020 00:09

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

I've found an enlarger on Ebay that's prettymuch exactly what i'm looking for at a reasonable price, but am a bit worried about shipping. Should I ask the seller if he's going to pack the condenser separately, or maybe wrap the lenses individually? Or are they robust enough that he can just leave everything together when shipping?

Blackhawk posted:

A few 35mm shots I just got around to developing, mostly ektachrome except for the last one which is velvia 100.

These are awesome, nice work!

# ¿ Oct 11, 2020 22:16

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

I have an Epson V600 scanner, and I finally updated my Mac to Catalina, and realized that my Epson scanner software doesn't work with it. Fortunately Epson has provided free downloads of Silverfast! Just downloaded it and, man, do I hate it! Somehow it's even less intuititive than the Epson software. I'm making it through using the 'Workflow Pilot', but it's still pretty confusing. I tried a demo of Vuescan and that's definitely better, but I have to deicde if I want to spend $100 or not.

What are other home scanners using?

# ¿ Nov 1, 2020 04:24

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Helen Highwater posted:

You need Epson Scan 2, which is the 64 bit version of Epson Scan. I'm using it just fine on Catalina, and there are even a few small QoL improvements to it from the original.

Oh awesome! I apparently glossed over this on the Epson support page. They send people to SIlverfast because Epson Scan 2 doesn't support ICE, but that doesn't really bother me. So far ES2 has been working great. Thanks again!

frogbs fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Nov 1, 2020

# ¿ Nov 1, 2020 19:27

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Dudeabides posted:

Canon AE-1, Pentax K1000, Pentax ME and ME Super are ones that you can get at above bargain pricing for not too much.

These are all great suggestions, but I�m going to throw out a less traditional suggestion in the Canon EOS Rebel G. Yes, it�s plasticky, but they�re cheap as hell and every one I�ve found has worked straight away. That, along with a nifty 50 and you�re good to go!

# ¿ Dec 8, 2020 20:41

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

President Beep posted:

That�s pretty why I�ve sworn off X-700s and the like.

Does the x700 use LR44�s? I�ve had bad luck with coin cells before, but the Rebel G uses 2 CR123�s, which I think tend to last a bit longer.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2020 02:29

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

So I lucked out this weekend, and a very generous person was giving away a Beseler 23c II on Craigslist. It did need a few parts that i've already ordered from ebay (the lamp top cap and the condensor adjustment knob).

It also didn't come with a lens, I'm going to be printing some 6x9 negatives, so I picked up a 100mm Schneider-Kreuznach Componon-S for like $50. Based on the limited reading I did, that should be in about the same league as a Rodenstock Rodagon ore El-Nikkor for a more reasonable pricepoint. Did I do ok, or are there better options out there that aren't super pricey?

I also couldn't stomach the new prices for 6x9 negative carriers, and used ones seemed a little hard to come by, so i'm trying one of these 3d printed ones. Anyone used one before? https://www.ebay.com/itm/3D-Printed-Beseler-23C-Negative-Carrier-Version-2-Pick-A-Size/143615819214?var=442574953440

Edit: It also could use a little grease/lubricant a few places. I've read that Lubriplate is what Beseler used to use, so I think i'm going to pick some up: https://www.amazon.com/Lubriplate-L0044-086-No-130-Aa-Tube/dp/B002M956OW/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=lubriplate&qid=1614640940&sr=8-4

frogbs fucked around with this message at 00:23 on Mar 2, 2021

# ¿ Mar 2, 2021 00:16

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

King of Bees posted:

I have a couple of Navy besler topcon 35s that i shoot with all the time and the history of the company is cool

Whoa, I had no idea they made cameras too! Looks like they did some 4x5 press cameras in addition to 35mm, but most if not all were imports of Topcon from Japan: http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Beseler_4x5_Press_Camera

# ¿ Mar 2, 2021 00:59

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Megabound posted:

That's rad frogbs, welcome to the wet printing world. We do have a darkroom thread that needs some love. I haven't printed in a bit cause it's too drat hot but I'm looking forward to getting back in there when the weather cools down a bit.

I imagine the Compoanon-S is just fine, the 100mm should get you the coverage you need for 6x9.

Oh awesome! Didn't realize there was a darkroom thread, i'll post in there as I get things setup. I've done a little printing somewhat recently. In pre-pandemic times I frequented one of the community darkrooms in Portland, but I have a hunch it isn't coming back for a while, so it's time to figure out a home setup!

Where are you that it's that hot this time of year? I'm facing the opposite problem most days.

Also, glad that lens will do! I also almost bought a similar Schneider-kreuznach Componon 105mm lens, which was labeled as 'rare'. One interesting aspect is that it apparently has 16 aperture blades which is....a ton for an enlarging lens, right? Would that make any appreciable difference?

frogbs fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Mar 2, 2021

# ¿ Mar 2, 2021 03:48

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

aricoarena posted:

Do people have a Black and White developer they like? I've only developed Black and White at home with Rodinal Stand developing and it's been inconsistent. I wanted to try something else to use with a more standard development procedure. Mostly shooting kentmere and Tri-X. Thanks

D-76 is my go to, I�ve never had to scrap a roll or really had any issues in all my years using it.

# ¿ Dec 3, 2021 07:36

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

Cacator posted:

Vice has a timely article on the current colour film shortage. It mentions a price increase of 20% in March for Kodak.

I�m sure there�s plenty of other business factors behind the price increase, but I�m starting to think Kodak are going to price film so high that it starts to lose steam again, just as it�s popularity is on the rise for the first time in decades.

# ¿ Jan 24, 2023 23:46

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

I want them to get to the point where they�re following the Gillette model, and each roll of film costs as much as a new Leica M6.

# ¿ Jan 25, 2023 03:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:18

frogbs: May 5, 2004; Well well well

LimaBiker posted:

Every black and white film has to be developed for a different time. So when you send it to a development place where all black and white stuff goes through the same machine, you might end up with unexpected results.

Oh...no. I hope most labs don't use the same dev time for different films? In my experience that's why B&W development usually costs more. Has anyone worked for a lab, do they really process stuff in bulk?

Megabound posted:

I got a new camera today, a lovely little Minolta rangefinder with a fixed 45mm lens and a party trick of being able to shoot at 1/2000th with a leaf shutter

This is a beautiful camera! What the model number? It reminds me a bit of the Fujica Super Six with the rounded top edge.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2023 18:22

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Film Thread: "for sale: packfilm back. never used."