Film (Analog) Photography Thread
- Thread starter PacificRimJob
- Start date
No.Quarter
Active member
13078046:omnidata said:Best 25 cents I'v ever spend, a Hama film cutter.
Perfect for for cutting those rolls filled with bokeh shots of pussy to size.
how do you like it? I should probably pick up something similar soon.
No.Quarter
Active member
Hands so shaky...
...must not cut into frames...
*sweat drips onto hand*
*snip*
...must not cut into frames...
*sweat drips onto hand*
*snip*
13078371:Balto said:
Yeah, but for 25c? That' cheaper than a pair of shitty scissors.
plorr
Active member
13080445:zbphoto said:Ektar +1, Leica M6, CV 35mm f1.4, Pakon
What about this shot are you drawn to? Personally I think the composition is boring and cluttered. And a sleeping old guy at a beach is a really easy/generic street photography subject IMO. Looks a little soft to me too. With such an oblivious subject you could have definitely taken the time to nail focus. I do like the contrast of the blue chair and his incredibly orange skin though.
No.Quarter
Active member
So I just scanned my first roll from my RZ67...
Everything is shit and I'm horrible and I hate myself.
Everything is shit and I'm horrible and I hate myself.
zbphoto
Active member
13080972:plorr said:
Over the last year, I guess through school, I've become very drawn to Martin Parr's work; it's quirky, vibrant, and unusual...
I feel like I almost focus 'less' on composition when shooting in colour, as you mentioned what really draws me to this shot in particular is the extreme contrast of blue and orange. I do quite like the cut off chair and feet, showing it's not just him. As a primarily B&W shooter, I tend to hyper focus on colour theory, this shot wouldn't have worked in B&W.
Ironically, he is surrounded by family well aware of what I was doing and who didn't seem very pleased with my (drunk) group of friends and I. We had left the public beach to drink some beers and were basically tresspassing on private property. I kind of snapped this while walking by (zone focused at around 7 feet, probably f8 or f11), whats weird is on both the negative with a loupe and on my laptop, it is fairly sharp and in focus. In this case I think its just ye' old web compression; on Facebook this photo, in my opinion, looks awful. Regardless, I've never cared to much to have perfect tack sharp images, heck most of my favourite photographs are actually much much much more out of focus.
13081110:JakeSmith said:
Your first roll using any new format is likely to suck. Especially in Medium Format. It's just for tools that want to show off their big arms that they get from carrying around such stupendously heavy junk.
Do what I did, get rid of your RZ67 and invest in only Leicas forever. Nothing else is worth shooting, anyway.
No.Quarter
Active member
Goddamn, I love Gold 200
TijmenDal
Active member
13081148:zbphoto said:Over the last year, I guess through school, I've become very drawn to Martin Parr's work; it's quirky, vibrant, and unusual...
I bet you'd like Tadao Cern's beach work. There's something about the beach that's just so funny. I'm really wondering how he's made those shots without casting his own shadow...
Laurent.
Active member
13081464:plorr said:
In that respect Sally Mann is much bolder, but she can get away with it because she's a woman but if we are going that route we may as well mention J.P. Witkin, Saudek, Ionesco, Serrano, Mapplethorpe, Uncle Terry, etc...
Give them all a google if you haven't already, I'm not responsible for the FBI partyvan parking on your driveline though.
plorr
Active member
13081536:omnidata said:
Sally Mann took photos of her own family on her own private property. Terry Richardson shoots in hotel rooms or wherever else he creeps around but definitely not in public. Most of those other guys are in a studio. The photo itself isn't the most subversive, I'm just noting how ballsy it is to point your camera at a sleeping naked kid in the middle of a public beach.
Americans:
13082247:Link. said:
Tons of awesome videos on youtube. Easy to research, but here are the basics.
What you need -
A developing tank to mix the chemicals and the film (there are tons of options, I use a Patterson tank)
Chemicals: Developer (Ilford Ilfosol 3 is great for learning with, and easy to find for cheap.) a stopbath and a fixer (you can also just get a rapid fixer like Ilford's or Photographer's Formulary TF5, and skip the stop bath chemical entirely, or just use water)
A changing bag, to change the film into the tank
Water - distilled if you can, a timer, and some measuring cups.
Then follow any instructions for the film's developing time - note that this is for BLACK AND WHITE ONLY, and developing C41 film, or colour print film is a whole other process that has a bit more to it.
13082519:Link. said:
If you have a good camera store nearby, they might carry what you need. I'd check it out.
If not, then online isn't a bad place. Check craigslist to see if somebody is basically giving away darkroom supplies... you might score big.
zbphoto
Active member
13082363:DingoSean said:
Such an ugly developer, not to mention it will expire/die on you out of no where. Having personally used it I would never recommend it to anyone.
D76 (identical to ID-11) is by far the simplest to use, it not only has minimal change in times for temperature, but it works pretty damn well with nearly every film ever made. Film stock is about half what the image will end up looking like, different developers will directly impact grain and contrast.
13082978:zbphoto said:
I haven't had this problem at all... it's like 10$ for 500 ML of it, and I use it at 1/9. I also go through it pretty quick, really, so expiration isn't exactly an issue.. Comes out with pretty clean images to me! HC110 is my absolute favourite, but it's a lot harder to find.
D76 is a great developer though, absolutely. Cheap, easy to use, and consistent. It's just not already liquid (In my experience, absolute newbz don't like things that aren't already liquid for some reason)
cwphoto
Active member
I recently got back from a trip to NYC, and i finally got my film back. i shot 7 rolls total but here are my favorites! the more i shoot film, the more i absolutely love it.
this wasn't taken at nyc, but at my local reservoir. i posted a picture from the same morning a while ago. this happened to be at the beginning of a roll i took to nyc so i only just developed it!
this wasn't taken at nyc, but at my local reservoir. i posted a picture from the same morning a while ago. this happened to be at the beginning of a roll i took to nyc so i only just developed it!
No.Quarter
Active member
Voigtlander VITO CSR
I just found one of these at a Savers for $5. pretty much brand new condition except for an engraving.
Most of the ones on google images are Lanthar while mine is Skopar, I couldn't find much info on camerapedia or much else anywhere so does anyone know anything about this camera?
cwphoto
Active member
13085272:Walter.White said:
All of these are on my ae-1 program. i forget which ones are which, but i shot 4 rolls of portra 400, a roll of ektar 100, a roll of ektachrome vs100, and a roll of foma 200. the foma tore inside the canister so i don't have any of those pics. film is awesome but it does suck when a roll gets ruined
zbphoto
Active member
I'm heading out to Victoria & Vancouver for a week at the end of the month. Trying to decide if I'm loading work's XPAN II with the Provia 100f I have, or if I'm better off picking up some more Ektar or Portra. When you nail the exposure slides are incredible, but negatives are obvoiusly easier to work with, but I feel like I should take advantage of the trip and shoot slides before its even harder to get E6 processed.
As always my M6 will be loaded with Tri-x at various speeds.
As always my M6 will be loaded with Tri-x at various speeds.
CheddarJack
Active member
Hit up a thrift store today looking to find a decent film camera, saw a Minolta XG-1 and impulse bought it for $27. Although I don't know really anything about the camera, I love the way it looks. It's battery operated so I couldn't test if everything works but they have a 7 day return policy. Apparently the shop is stocked from a vendor that the salesman said was pretty reliable too. The cheapest I could find online were $25 so I figured 27 was a good price to take the chance with. It has a very clean 50mm f/2 on it too.
The only thing is that there's what seems to be residue from a strip of tape on one of the mirrors when I look through the viewfinder. There also may be mold on it. It's annoying, but as long as it's only on the viewfinder I think I can deal with it being there. I don't trust myself enough to take it all apart, unless someone knows it's an easy fix? I couldn't find much on it online.
Other than that, who can tell me much about this camera? Is it any good?
The only thing is that there's what seems to be residue from a strip of tape on one of the mirrors when I look through the viewfinder. There also may be mold on it. It's annoying, but as long as it's only on the viewfinder I think I can deal with it being there. I don't trust myself enough to take it all apart, unless someone knows it's an easy fix? I couldn't find much on it online.
Other than that, who can tell me much about this camera? Is it any good?
CheddarJack
Active member
dammit. The advance lever is broken. Good thing I can return it.
You can just buy an XG-1 for cheap as hell on ebay or KEH.
They aren't bad cameras. Manual/Aperture Priority AE... not the highest quality build or anything, but they're not bad. If I were you, I'd go for an X700 if I was looking at that era of Minoltas, though... Just a better camera overall.
I like the XD11 the best out of Minolta's SLR's though.. It's what Leica used as the basis of their R4.
They aren't bad cameras. Manual/Aperture Priority AE... not the highest quality build or anything, but they're not bad. If I were you, I'd go for an X700 if I was looking at that era of Minoltas, though... Just a better camera overall.
I like the XD11 the best out of Minolta's SLR's though.. It's what Leica used as the basis of their R4.
Dude, that's an XA1, and that camera kinda S's on the D. I mean, it's fine, but compared to it's bretheren? esp. the OG XA?
...this is what you were looking for.
and in comparison to the rollei
...this is what you were looking for.
and in comparison to the rollei
That said, there are other options out there that are pretty fun.
Canonet, Minolta Hi-Matic 7s-ii, Olympus RC35 etc.
Canonet, Minolta Hi-Matic 7s-ii, Olympus RC35 etc.
