|
can you do the entire process there?
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 10:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2023 19:43 |
|
|
I do my developing upstairs and my printing downstairs but yes, apart from coating my own film and paper I'm self sufficient
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 10:53
|
|
|
you literally know how to do things I do not
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 11:01
|
|
|
who needs a darkroom? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 11:22
|
|
|
the weurd al yankovich of czmeras
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 11:42
|
|
|
That looks like a pain to use but also very cool. Is there a filter tray so you can adjust contrast?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 11:44
|
|
|
Megabound posted:My reverse camera room got a big upgrade fuuuuck. very jealous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 12:56
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:you literally know how to do things I do not dude, a little over $100 and you can develop in your bathroom or at your kitchen sink. it’s super accessible. if you do, and you stick with 35mm film, just drop a few hundred more and get a dedicated film scanner too though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 12:58
|
|
|
seriously though. i tried all kinds of dumb, cheap, and jankety scanning setups before i finally pulled my head out of my rear end and bought a cheap and cheerful plustek 8100 and it’s one of the best equipment decisions I’ve made.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 14:24
|
|
|
i'd really love to be able to say I'm not so depressed that I could do anything at all that didn't provide me with instant gratification but ... like it's occurred to me that the reason I stick with photography (the way I do it), compared to every other great idea (crime committer jumps to mind) lying covered in dust in the corner, is because I can push a button and it's done. if it required more effort, it's likely I wouldn't do it. it's pathetic I know, and probably is also an exucse, but I am really quite well in tune with how down in the dumps I am these days I enjoy watching you people do and talk stuff though
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 14:33
|
|
|
i have a canoscan 9000f, i like it
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 14:41
|
|
|
Megabound posted:My reverse camera room got a big upgrade i miss skipping class and instead working in my highschool darkroom 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
i’d give my left nut for ad hoc darkroom access
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 16:20
|
|
|
I really would. i have two kids already and we don’t want any more. hell, take the right one too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
Megabound posted:That looks like a pain to use but also very cool. Is there a filter tray so you can adjust contrast? haven't put one on it, i guess i could stick one in, it was mostly a proof of concept
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 16:50
|
|
|
President Beep posted:I really would. i have two kids already and we don’t want any more. hell, take the right one too. over in the truck nuts thread we have a fine range of replacement nuts so you don’t need to feel like less
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:like it's occurred to me that the reason I stick with photography (the way I do it), compared to every other great idea (crime committer jumps to mind) lying covered in dust in the corner, is because I can push a button and it's done. if it required more effort, it's likely I wouldn't do it. it's pathetic I know, and probably is also an exucse, but I am really quite well in tune with how down in the dumps I am these days i get it, but if you do decide to give it a shot sometime b&w film is basically impossible to gently caress up and i think you'd probably enjoy the aesthetic. pull some hp5 and admire those lovely, grey blacks
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:18
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:over in the truck nuts thread we have a fine range of replacement nuts so you don’t need to feel like less tell the truth, they’re just the ones they make for dogs but repackaged, aren’t they?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:i get it, but if you do decide to give it a shot sometime b&w film is basically impossible to gently caress up and i think you'd probably enjoy the aesthetic. pull some hp5 and admire those lovely, grey blacks
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
if you use diafine it's literally impossible to mess up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:19
|
|
|
get some cheap but excellent rodinal and go 2 town.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
echi don’t listen to sagebrush. use rodinal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
rodinal is my second choice! but i like diafine bc i never learned to do all the messing with development to change the contrast etc. and i often screw up the exposure somewhat. diafine fixes all plain old d-76 is fine too tbh. film development is easy. it's printing that is a pain and needs a real darkroom
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
I don’t have any of the finesse stuff down myself, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:33
|
|
|
i still have my leitz focomat, just like the one on the left of megabound's pic, and i haven't used it in over 10 years. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
i’ve done semi-stand but that’s about as weird as i’ve gotten.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:i get it, but if you do decide to give it a shot sometime b&w film is basically impossible to gently caress up and i think you'd probably enjoy the aesthetic. pull some hp5 and admire those lovely, grey blacks my advice for developing? don't use a monobath. usually the nice thing about b/w film development is that you don't have to get everything exact, like "water is too cold, develop longer" or "water too hot? develop faster" or "agitate more for higher contrast and faster dev time". with a monobath? it's like "develop for 5 minutes at exactly 23c" and even a slight bit of variance radically changes your output. agitate too much? it'll underfix and overdevelop. agitate too little? it'll underdevelop, and maybe develop inconsistently. although you can reuse the chemicals, they have a highly variable shelf life, and if you look at them funny, they'll go off. in many ways, monobaths are more like c-41 processing, which also require highly specific temperature and times for reproducible results. with regular black and white film development? you can literally do the entire thing on vibes: inexact mixtures, irregular agitation, and casual estimates of development times, and things come out ok most of the time there's actual reasons behind this, but yeah, if you're worried about loving it up, use oneshot dev/stop/fix instead of a monobath, it's way, way more forgiving for time and temperature
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 18:31
|
|
|
actual advice: film development is super fun but scanning your own negatives is a huge pain in the rear end
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 18:35
|
|
|
^^ also agreed Again, that's why I like diafine, assuming you can still find it. I googled just now and there's one pack on eBay. The procedure is literally: pour in solution A for a few minutes. Time and temperature don't matter. Pour solution A back into the bottle and replace with solution B. Let that sit for a few minutes as well then put it back in the bottle. Rinse with water. Fix. Done. All of your images will be properly developed even if you blew the exposure by two or three stops. Supposedly photojournalists used to keep a couple of bottles of the stuff in their desk drawer along with a daylight tank so that they could develop film for breaking news on the spot in a couple of minutes and be confident that all the shots would come out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
quote:All of your images will be properly developed even if you blew the exposure by two or three stops. to be honest, this is true of most developers and most films, you just might get thin or dense negatives, but nothing that can't be fixed in post diafine is however, a compensating developer. you tend to get much lower contrast, but as a result your shadows or highlights won't be as blown out. you don't need to do a two bath developer to get a compensating developer, (semi) stand developer achieves the same effect which is why diafine and stand development are a little tricker when it comes to pushing and pulling film. i would not put delta 3200 through diafine quote:Supposedly photojournalists used to keep a couple of bottles of the stuff in their desk drawer along with a daylight tank so that they could develop film for breaking news on the spot in a couple of minutes and be confident that all the shots would come out. i've also heard stories of dektol for horse races, but the thing i heard about photojournalists was that they tended to pull film, rather than push it, because it was easier to pull details out in development
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
i have no idea what any of this means but would like to understand
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
Achmed Jones posted:i have no idea what any of this means but would like to understand c41 chemical packs are still called “press kits”
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 19:54
|
|
|
President Beep posted:c41 chemical packs are still called “press kits” did you just tell me to go gently caress myself? dang beep
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:02
|
|
|
the internet told me: Pushing or pulling film is when you rate your film at a different speed from the one written on the box. Then, you compensate for the difference when you develop it. Pushing will mean giving the film a higher rating and pulling a lower rating
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:03
|
|
|
pushing film is when i see what the developed shots look like, and weeping, try to push it back into the canister.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:05
|
|
|
Achmed Jones posted:i have no idea what any of this means but would like to understand 1. iso is a lie, box speed is a myth 2. you can over or underexpose film a few stops, too 3a. an overexposed film will start to crush the highlights, 4a. you can compensate for an overexposed film by under development, lowering the contrast 3b. an underexposed film will start to crush the shadows 4b. you can compensate for an underexposed film by over development, raising the contrast so: pulling film one stop: means shooting it at half the iso (overexposing) and then underdeveloping to reduce contrast pushing film one stop: means shooting it at double the iso (underexposing) and then overdeveloping to increase contrast similarly: if your film is overexposed, then you want to use a low contrast development method, like a compensating developer, or stand development, and if your film is underexposed, you may want to develop for much longer to bring out acceptable negatives
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
if you want to understand why this happens, you gotta learn about the characteristic curve of a film on one hand, it's simple: it's a graph exposure vs density, or how much light makes how dark a spot in the film on the other hand, everyone measures it differently and ilford don't even put units in. i'm somehow too lazy to embed a picture but here's a paragraph on what this curve means a characteristic curve has three major parts: the toe, the straight line section, and the shoulder. the straight line bit of the film is usually what you want to expose for, where there's a linear mapping from light in your subject to black on the negatives. the toe and shoulder are where things get weird. exposing in the toe tends to crush the shadows, exposing in the shoulder can often crush the highlights, it's no longer a linear mapping between the exposure and the negative density. or, this is why pushing film gets you that stark contrast, both from overdeveloping, and also crushing any tones in the shadows, making things seem darker and why pulling will get you better shadow detail in your image—it'll be hitting the straight line section—but the highlights might get clipped a little, even with underdevelopment and it's also why you can over or underexpose an image and still get something acceptable: if the image doesn't have high contrast, most of it should still fit in the straight line section
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:40
|
|
|
wait they don't make the easy to use stuff any more? dangit
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
also: thank you all for bearing with me on this
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2023 19:43 |
|
|
it seems like adorama sells diafine; am i missing something? https://www.adorama.com/chdg.html?g...c-google-shop-p
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 20:47
|
|