Forums Latest Members
  1. Martin_J_N Aug 16, 2019

    Posts
    1,394
    Likes
    2,683
    Nothing wrong with that ‘dorky’ picture, it is beautiful, lovely use of light and shadow, well done.
     
    Dsloan and Deafboy like this.
  2. GuiltyBoomerang Aug 16, 2019

    Posts
    1,727
    Likes
    5,927
    I've gotten acquainted with a Pentax K1000 with the SMC Pentax-A Macro 1:2.8 50mm lens on Kodak 400 colour film. First film camera I've used, and learning light levels and shutter speeds as I go (as well as keeping a steady hand!)

    20190729_114301.jpg

    000017.JPG

    000024.JPG

    000001.JPG

    000018.JPG
     
    105012 and S.H. like this.
  3. S.H. Aug 16, 2019

    Posts
    1,515
    Likes
    3,511
    Pushing HP5 works well, I've had nice results with LC29. Pulling to 200 works too if you have an old shutter (I have some with a 500 top speed).
     
    Dsloan likes this.
  4. Dsloan Aug 16, 2019

    Posts
    2,517
    Likes
    15,950
    This is good to know. I haven't really done any push/pull before, and my Mamiya tops out at 500.
     
  5. Dsloan Jan 8, 2020

    Posts
    2,517
    Likes
    15,950
    Reviewing some negatives before a big session of scanning... And also checking out some lume damage...:unsure:

    IMG_20200108_211143.jpg IMG_20200108_211159.jpg
     
    105012 likes this.
  6. Canuck Jan 8, 2020

    Posts
    13,379
    Likes
    37,540
    Last time I shot film was because I needed a telephoto lens, and I’d misplaced the telephoto from my digital. I have a rarely used Canon Elan II with a telephoto, so I used it. The event was to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Vimy Ridge. Several replica Sopwith Camel bi-planes were here for several days. I didn’t get great pictures of their fly past, but some were okay.

    099B2D0D-0215-4848-85EE-D4FD8FE38716.jpeg E5651050-131D-411B-BC5A-559D7EAE3BD1.jpeg 40A7B69B-3FC3-49F4-845D-57137E576DAB.jpeg CB22C65A-F854-4319-B020-421F6945B87F.jpeg
     
  7. Dsloan Jan 8, 2020

    Posts
    2,517
    Likes
    15,950
    Also: holy moly, everyone was right: using a loupe on your watch collection is a terrible idea. Dials that look great under all normal conditions look downright gross under a loupe. So much previously hidden grime that I can't unsee...
     
  8. Dsloan Jan 9, 2020

    Posts
    2,517
    Likes
    15,950
    For anyone shooting film, what are you using to scan? My local shop rents a drum scanner for $50 an hour. So, by my calculations, that's about $2 a negative. Ouch. Between watches and cameras, I need to find some cheaper hobbies. :whistling:

    IMG_20200109_101603.jpg
     
  9. Observer I know nothing! Jan 11, 2020

    Posts
    806
    Likes
    1,878
    I used to use an Epson V600. I still use it for medium format. For 35mm I'm using the ES-2 attachment on a Nikon D850. The old method was slow and the image quality wasn't good. Now I'm focusing on the film grain and it's so much faster.
     
  10. micampe Jan 11, 2020

    Posts
    1,626
    Likes
    6,171
    I used to shoot mainly HP5 (+ D76) or Portra 400 but in the last few years I moved to (heresy!) Ilford XP2 and have it processed and scanned at the lab. I really like the results, the consistency, and the convenience.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Pazzo and Spacefruit like this.
  11. 105012 Jan 11, 2020

    Posts
    174
    Likes
    386
    I’m using a Pakon F-135+, fast and easy and with Kodak’s own film profiles.
     
    Paulomega likes this.
  12. Dsloan Jan 11, 2020

    Posts
    2,517
    Likes
    15,950
    Those are cool! I thought about just having the lab do batch scans, but I really like having the 16-bit latitude from the drum scanner.
     
  13. Wooden_spoon Jan 14, 2020

    Posts
    144
    Likes
    532
    Anyone have experience using a digital camera to "scan" (i.e., digitize) negatives? I've heard it's fairly simple provided you have a good macro lens.
     
  14. sxl2004 Jan 15, 2020

    Posts
    2,302
    Likes
    5,986
    C374C2A1-A04E-4392-9815-DE0C23D4144E.jpeg Found on the inter web.
     
    TJH, Pazzo, MRC and 3 others like this.
  15. bgrisso Jan 15, 2020

    Posts
    3,120
    Likes
    6,877
    I shoot medium format B+W film and then a Nikon 9000 film scanner w/ double glass carrier to get full frame scans. It's slow but the quality is really good, and full frame was a requirement, and there are few setups that will do this with really good quality.
     
  16. Flintlock Jan 22, 2020

    Posts
    164
    Likes
    74
    I'm using an Epson 4990 that is a few years old now. It can optically scan up to 4,800 dpi resolution. I usually keep it at 2,400 which yields about 6 mp. If you go to 4,800 that's about 4x as much. I scan about 20 images at a time. I do the prescan and set my parameters, start the scan, and come back in about 15 or 20 minutes.

    One of the downsides of shooting film is the crappy scanning the consumer oriented labs do. In the interest of speed these labs scan at a setting that only gives you about a 2 mp image. They also do not waste any time doing any color tweaks or latitude/contrast adjustments. Lately they have even gone to a business model where they don't even return the negatives. Are they kidding? You can find local labs that will give better service but I find these are becoming lax when I find dust or water spots on the film. This led me to start developing my own film. I never even did that back in the film days. It's easy to do your own developing with color film and you don't need a darkroom, but that's another topic.

    Edit: In response to the drum scanner: that drum scanner is a great idea for the special images that you want to print large. Use a good flat bed for your initial scans and if you think you have a winner pay for the drum for a clean 45 mp image with a ton of latitude. There is also the option to project transparencies on a screen the old fashioned way. You have not seen high resolution till you see 6x6 projected. It laughs at all those K's. You feel like you can just step into the screen.
     
    Edited Jan 22, 2020
    Paulomega likes this.
  17. Dsloan Jan 22, 2020

    Posts
    2,517
    Likes
    15,950
    Yeah, a flatbed would be more practical and plenty enough data for most of what I need. I am, however, finding that I really like the process of a drum scan. And, how can I deny my little weirdo all the latitude that I can afford?

    Though, you bring up a great point... he looks good in 645 but he'd look even more epic in 6x6... Or 6x9...

    Iggy_Beach_EditCrop_Green.jpg

    I do digital all day at work, so the analogue gear is reserved for family snapshots.
     
  18. Flintlock Jan 24, 2020

    Posts
    164
    Likes
    74
    We have little grands living with us, 6 & 8. Kids are a great reason to break out a camera. One thing about the digital world is we view images at very low resolutions anyway. I'm usually using a laptop lately that is only 1366x768. That's like one megapixel. Even good displays are only about double that. I have noticed that a lot of people are referring to film as analog as if it were a gauge or slide-rule. Is a mechanical watch analog? I guess that's next.
    Is the little boy your son? He seems serious about his portrait. Great background.
     
  19. steveb73 Jan 24, 2020

    Posts
    112
    Likes
    394
    Never shot film until last year and then went fully manual with a Pentax from the 60s.
    These are from the first roll of film I shot using Ilford HP5 Plus.
    I had them processed then used a macro lens and Photoshop to get them like this

    OI000219.JPG P7061498-Edit.jpg P7061485-Edit.jpg P7061493-Edit.jpg
     
    Pazzo and prontoprint like this.
  20. prontoprint Jan 24, 2020

    Posts
    281
    Likes
    559

    Great images , got a real Victorian glass slide feel
     
    steveb73 likes this.