Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Film (Analog) Photography Thread

profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24703 - Karma: 29,680
Might as well be time to have a dedicated thread on this. Call it a consolidation if you will (or at least another thread to chat about our artz)

Ask film related questions... Post film related discussion topics... Get stoked on real photography with real cameras with real reels of real film...
Mar 18 2014 1:13PM
935 135
profile picture
loganimlach
Posts: 5132 - Karma: 14,052
yup they were sick. i remember the picture of the two kids standing against the wall had really good tones. was it ektar or portra? i forgot.
Jan 9 2015 2:33PM
0 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
Picked up all this for 75€.
Leica II from 1932 that was converted to a IIa after the war. With Elmar 5cm 3.5 and Hektor 13.5cm in good condition as well as an original case in really good condition, VIDOM finder and ABLON leader cutter. The VIDOM is broken, but still a cool accessory. HCB used it..
Camera is in great condition with all speeds working correctly.

Jan 9 2015 6:17PM
2 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10054 - Karma: 25,277
TijmenDalPicked up all this for 75€.
Leica II from 1932 that was converted to a IIa after the war. With Elmar 5cm 3.5 and Hektor 13.5cm in good condition as well as an original case in really good condition, VIDOM finder and ABLON leader cutter. The VIDOM is broken, but still a cool accessory. HCB used it..
Camera is in great condition with all speeds working correctly.


#Jealousy
Jan 9 2015 6:33PM
1 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
loganimlachyup they were sick. i remember the picture of the two kids standing against the wall had really good tones. was it ektar or portra? i forgot.


Thanks Logan!



I was shooting both while I was there, but I'm 80% sure that the kite photo was on Ektar. I remember my film not being fast enough for a photo I took later that day.
Jan 11 2015 3:11AM
0 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10054 - Karma: 25,277
ONE dollar, a 52mm Rodenstock 8x Red filter.
Glorious glass, fat thick heavy brass mounting ring, no engraved letters though.

Jan 13 2015 12:56PM
5 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
So where's the cheapest place to buy 35mm these days? Preferably Tri-X, Pro 400h, Portra 400, and Ektar...

Holy shit 400h is expensive now. Why is it always my favorites that get marked up?
Jan 13 2015 6:31PM
0 0
profile picture
*DUMBCAN*
Posts: 2447 - Karma: 5,627
lIllISo where's the cheapest place to buy 35mm these days? Preferably Tri-X, Pro 400h, Portra 400, and Ektar...

Holy shit 400h is expensive now. Why is it always my favorites that get marked up?


Because you chose a favourite made by Fuji.
Jan 14 2015 8:07AM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
*DUMBCAN*Because you chose a favourite made by Fuji.


Maybe if Kodak could make color film without a warming filter built in, I'd be more inclined to use their stuff. Instead I have to be economically arm wrestled into using Portra.
Jan 14 2015 4:50PM
0 1
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
lIllIMaybe if Kodak could make color film without a warming filter built in, I'd be more inclined to use their stuff. Instead I have to be economically arm wrestled into using Portra.


35mm for your new XA? Kodak Gold 200 is a very 'warm' film, much more so than any of the Portra series.
Jan 14 2015 5:27PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
zbphoto35mm for your new XA? Kodak Gold 200 is a very 'warm' film, much more so than any of the Portra series.


How is the Fuji Superia 400 stuff? I like it cold.
Jan 14 2015 5:30PM
0 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
lIllIHow is the Fuji Superia 400 stuff? I like it cold.


Superia is much better than Gold/Ultramax if you want to go for a colder look. Fuji film in general is cooler than Kodak.
Jan 14 2015 5:55PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
TijmenDalSuperia is much better than Gold/Ultramax if you want to go for a colder look. Fuji film in general is cooler than Kodak.


Good to know. Red tint makes vegetation look ugly - hence my preference for Fuji stocks.
Jan 14 2015 6:03PM
0 0
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
lIllIMaybe if Kodak could make color film without a warming filter built in, I'd be more inclined to use their stuff. Instead I have to be economically arm wrestled into using Portra.


I misread this on my phone, thought you were complaining about needing to use a warming filter with portra...

lIllIGood to know. Red tint makes vegetation look ugly - hence my preference for Fuji stocks.


Superia 400 is good stuff, very cheap and scans well.
Jan 14 2015 8:20PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
Speaking of scanning, what's the easiest way to scan 35mm these days (Pakon notwithstanding)? Or am I still stuck with either paying for a lab or polishing turds on a flatbed?
Jan 14 2015 8:27PM
1 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10054 - Karma: 25,277
Pay the lab, show them you'r in a superior monetary position in your life then them since you can afford to make them scan your #artz, they are your bitches, you own them, you're the boss.

It's all mind games.
Jan 14 2015 9:01PM
1 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
omnidataPay the lab, show them you'r in a superior monetary position in your life then them since you can afford to make them scan your #artz, they are your bitches, you own them, you're the boss.

It's all mind games.


Since I work at one of the largest investment banks in the world, I probably own them one way or the other. Still, I can't be bothered to drive out to a lab all the time. Are there any good mail order services?
Jan 14 2015 9:08PM
0 0
profile picture
Caleb.E
Posts: 3556 - Karma: 1,014



this shit, dont know by but it is just blowing me away. It all looks surreal like some wanky fantasy movie set from the 60s
Jan 15 2015 1:55AM
2 0
profile picture
cydwhit
Posts: 5065 - Karma: 42,823
Caleb.E



this shit, dont know by but it is just blowing me away. It all looks surreal like some wanky fantasy movie set from the 60s


Dude that's the Enchantments, in Leavenworth, One of the most beautiful places I've ever been, gotta get you hiking up in there next summer!
Jan 15 2015 12:17PM
0 0
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
lIllISince I work at one of the largest investment banks in the world, I probably own them one way or the other. Still, I can't be bothered to drive out to a lab all the time. Are there any good mail order services?


FIND Lab basic scans, or just get a Pakon honestly its the best thing ever if your not doing large prints.
Jan 15 2015 12:43PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
zbphotojust get a Pakon


There's no way I can justify something like that when I'm not even a photographer. I might just use a flatbed to scan Costco prints for ultra 90's nostalgia effect.
Jan 15 2015 12:53PM
0 0
profile picture
cwphoto
Posts: 2332 - Karma: 780
I'm pretty excited about this one, its my second roll of self developed tri x (1:25 rodinal) and one of the first good scans that I've done with my t4i. @zbphoto warned me about shitty dslr scans but I'm getting better at it and I don't think it looks too bad. Definitely room for improvement but i think i can make it work.

Clifton by connor_wyckoff, on Flickr
Jan 16 2015 12:50AM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
lIllISpeaking of scanning, what's the easiest way to scan 35mm these days (Pakon notwithstanding)? Or am I still stuck with either paying for a lab or polishing turds on a flatbed?


connorwyckoffI'm pretty excited about this one, its my second roll of self developed tri x (1:25 rodinal) and one of the first good scans that I've done with my t4i. @zbphoto warned me about shitty dslr scans but I'm getting better at it and I don't think it looks too bad. Definitely room for improvement but i think i can make it work.

Clifton by connor_wyckoff, on Flickr



I actually bought a bellows and film dupe setup, been using it with the d800. I get fantastic results, and they are RAW files, which is great.
I would gladly post a 100% here so you can see what I am working with, but I don't have the file with me right now, so the preview will have to do

Jan 16 2015 7:44PM
2 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
TWoodsI actually bought a bellows and film dupe setup, been using it with the d800. I get fantastic results, and they are RAW files, which is great.
I would gladly post a 100% here so you can see what I am working with, but I don't have the file with me right now, so the preview will have to do



What exactly do you mean? You're mounting the negatives on a fixed device to shoot with your d800?

Sadly the only cameras I own are the XA, my iPhone, and a Lumix point and shoot.
Jan 17 2015 2:46PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
Jan 17 2015 3:56PM
1 0
profile picture
cwphoto
Posts: 2332 - Karma: 780
TWoods


That's pretty cool, your scan looks really good. I want to get some bellows at some point too.
Jan 17 2015 5:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10054 - Karma: 25,277
TWoods


Lel, taped off Nikon logo's, yes your giant black brick is slightly less inconspicuous now. ;)
Jan 17 2015 5:22PM
2 0
profile picture
jeano
Posts: 333 - Karma: 104
omnidataLel, taped off Nikon logo's, yes your giant black brick is slightly less inconspicuous now. ;)


not sure why people tape off the model number lmao but i gaff tape my prism because it protects it from scratches and shit

any thief will know an expensive dslr lol
Jan 17 2015 10:47PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
omnidataLel, taped off Nikon logo's, yes your giant black brick is slightly less inconspicuous now. ;)


Makes me feel a lot cooler than I am, so, you know...

I actually have a friend who did it to all his cameras, and I didn't ever understand why. So now whenever I get a new electronic anything, I tape off the logo with black gaff tape and send him photos. I've got a two computers, laserjet printer, several lenses, a card reader, my avy beacon, a couple hard drives... all blacked out. It's become a thing.
Jan 18 2015 3:21AM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
connorwyckoffThat's pretty cool, your scan looks really good. I want to get some bellows at some point too.


I will post a 100% crop when I get back to my studio, probably tomorrow or monday. It works really really well, and it cost me just over 200$. Just a pain in the ass to get perfect focus, and the 50mm lens doesn't work the best... but it is worth it to me. Super cheap and really great quality. Lots of control... just have to make sure your negs are clean.
Jan 18 2015 3:22AM
0 0
profile picture
*DUMBCAN*
Posts: 2447 - Karma: 5,627
TWoods


2 questions:
1. What are you using for light source? Common sense tells me you'd need a source of even temperature and intensity, like a light box.
2. Are you zoomed so 1 shot = 1 photo? Are you getting enough magnification to see the grain?
Jan 18 2015 5:12AM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
*DUMBCAN*2 questions:
1. What are you using for light source? Common sense tells me you'd need a source of even temperature and intensity, like a light box.
2. Are you zoomed so 1 shot = 1 photo? Are you getting enough magnification to see the grain?


I do it during the middle of the day so I can use live view zoom to focus. With live view I can tell that I am focused perfectly. I can see the grain, even with the 50mm which isn't the optimal lens for this at all.

I have the whole thing on a table and I have white roll blinds on my windows. The intense white light and a wide open aperture allows the live view to show me what's going on with little enough digital noise to focus accurately.

I stop down the aperture to f/11 because I've found that works the best. Then I pick the whole thing up and I turn it towards a mattebox with a strobe, point it straight at the mattebox and shoot.

It's one frame per photo, yea, and I can see the grain for sure. It's pretty great.
Jan 18 2015 11:37PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
That is really neat.
Jan 19 2015 3:23PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385





That's 100%, shot at low ISO... Just for comparison, here's D800 noise at 400 ISO:



Jan 19 2015 3:50PM
0 0
profile picture
No.Quarter
Posts: 5257 - Karma: 16,956
Anyone got some tips for star shots when I don't have a digital to make test shots with? I have a Luna-pro sbc, but I haven't really been able to test it out at night. Also what is a decent color film that has moderately good reciprocity failure resistance.
Jan 22 2015 12:44AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,325
JakeSmithAnyone got some tips for star shots when I don't have a digital to make test shots with? I have a Luna-pro sbc, but I haven't really been able to test it out at night. Also what is a decent color film that has moderately good reciprocity failure resistance.


Jan 22 2015 12:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Jamartini
Posts: 408 - Karma: 1,663
TWoods


Can someone please explain to me whats going on in this? I am highly curious as this looks very cool.
Jan 22 2015 4:59PM
0 0
profile picture
*DUMBCAN*
Posts: 2447 - Karma: 5,627
JamartiniCan someone please explain to me whats going on in this? I am highly curious as this looks very cool.


There are 5 components here:

At the front is a film holder. Film is inserted and held still on here with a translucent background. The background is roughly, possibly a little larger than, the size of a single frame on the film.

The bellows come next, these block light that would reflect off the film. Their shape means they also absorb light diffracted from the film. As a result the only light that progresses must travel straight through the translucent screen and the film.

Next is the lens, this is just a camera lens.

Macro bellows are then fourth stage. This brings the lens away from the camera, which (for reasons beyond the scope) increases the close-focal magnification of the lens. Basically if you have a 50mm lens and you put it 50mm further away from the sensor you now have a 100mm lens with a much closer minimum focus distance.

Finally there is the camera. It's just a camera.


This whole set-up allows for digitising film photos extremely quickly, just by pressing the shutter. It's faster than scanning and can, potentially, give much better results than all but the most advanced scanners. The key word is potentially, to get the absolute best results you need an even more complicated set-up than this. This will still take 'scans' that are superior to most CCD scanners however.
Jan 22 2015 5:13PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
erikK


That's not what Provia 100 looks like...
Jan 22 2015 6:29PM
0 0
profile picture
KingTaco
Posts: 2510 - Karma: 2,824
threads. in a darkroom photography class right now and ive shot a bunch of 35mm in the past
Feb 16 2015 7:14PM
0 0
profile picture
rudedog41
Posts: 605 - Karma: 135
My photo teacher gave me a changing bag, 2 film reels and a canister today because we don't use those specific ones at school so I'm thinking about developing at home.

Anyone tried this? What chemicals do you recommend? I'll be shooting mainly tri x or hp5.

Also what are your thoughts on scanning the negatives instead of making prints with an enlarger?
Feb 16 2015 7:37PM
0 0
profile picture
rudedog41
Posts: 605 - Karma: 135
The referenced post has been removed.


I just got the olympus xa and it's great. Perfect size. My only issue is the extremely dim rangefinder patch but I've read that it can by remedied with a small piece of tape covering the patch on the outside of the rangefinder window.

But really its a lot of fun to use and seems pretty versatile to me.
Feb 16 2015 7:58PM
0 0
profile picture
*DUMBCAN*
Posts: 2447 - Karma: 5,627
rudedog41My photo teacher gave me a changing bag, 2 film reels and a canister today because we don't use those specific ones at school so I'm thinking about developing at home.

Anyone tried this? What chemicals do you recommend? I'll be shooting mainly tri x or hp5.

Also what are your thoughts on scanning the negatives instead of making prints with an enlarger?


Depends on your throughput. One shot rodinal/R09 is always a good call because it's so stable it lasts forever, but you have to dilute it every time you want to use it. If you're saving money you needn't use a stop bath, just wash many times between developer and fixer. If you prefer precision then use a stop, really shouldn't make a difference when you're learning. When you're learning the technique just keep it simple.

Making prints is an art form in its own right, some people just can't be bothered with it. It's far more technical and time consuming than developing and, in some respects, the actual photography. Scanning is easier, potentially similar quality, much less fun. The argument over how to scan will go on forever, but there are 3 main (cheapish) methods:

- flatbed scanners: cheap, convenient, fast scanning, work across virtually all formats. Dreadful for dust so expect to spend forever in photoshop. Resolution is always miles off the quoted values and they really struggle with dynamic range.

- dedicated scanners: plustek etc. More expensive, slighlty slower scan but much higher resolution and reasonable dynamic range, often capable of HDR to boost the dynamic range. With good practice you can keep the dust down, but it'll still be there.

- dslr + macro lens: Normally this is done with a normal lens and extension tubes to get the magnification. This is completely manual, the quality of results is dictated by the quality of your setup. This can range from complete shit to ~$40k drum scanner quality, depending on your setup. A couple of key points: focal plane and film plane need to be precisely parallel, but this should be a no-brainer; you need a consistent light source behind the film.
Feb 16 2015 8:00PM
0 0
profile picture
rudedog41
Posts: 605 - Karma: 135
*DUMBCAN*Depends on your throughput. One shot rodinal/R09 is always a good call because it's so stable it lasts forever, but you have to dilute it every time you want to use it. If you're saving money you needn't use a stop bath, just wash many times between developer and fixer. If you prefer precision then use a stop, really shouldn't make a difference when you're learning. When you're learning the technique just keep it simple.

Making prints is an art form in its own right, some people just can't be bothered with it. It's far more technical and time consuming than developing and, in some respects, the actual photography. Scanning is easier, potentially similar quality, much less fun. The argument over how to scan will go on forever, but there are 3 main (cheapish) methods:

- flatbed scanners: cheap, convenient, fast scanning, work across virtually all formats. Dreadful for dust so expect to spend forever in photoshop. Resolution is always miles off the quoted values and they really struggle with dynamic range.

- dedicated scanners: plustek etc. More expensive, slighlty slower scan but much higher resolution and reasonable dynamic range, often capable of HDR to boost the dynamic range. With good practice you can keep the dust down, but it'll still be there.

- dslr + macro lens: Normally this is done with a normal lens and extension tubes to get the magnification. This is completely manual, the quality of results is dictated by the quality of your setup. This can range from complete shit to ~$40k drum scanner quality, depending on your setup. A couple of key points: focal plane and film plane need to be precisely parallel, but this should be a no-brainer; you need a consistent light source behind the film.


So the rodinal is just the developer? And we just use water as a "stop bath" at school anyways so that I have to problem with. What about a fixer?

The only reason I'm looking to alternatives of actual prints is because I want to do this on my own (this summer) until I can use the darkroom in college. I've tried the dslr/macro lens option and it was a lot of work and variables to be dealt with although I may resort to that if I can't find a flatbed scanner (however, I don't have a macro lens for my gh4 currently).
Feb 16 2015 8:49PM
0 0
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
This is what you want.
Feb 17 2015 2:59AM
0 0
profile picture
rudedog41
Posts: 605 - Karma: 135
Good things it's only a cool 750 dollars...
Feb 17 2015 11:12AM
0 0
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
rudedog41Good things it's only a cool 750 dollars...


Nah, maybe on Ebay. You can get them for $250-300. Prices are going up though, stock seems like its running out.
Feb 17 2015 1:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10054 - Karma: 25,277
zbphotoNah, maybe on Ebay. You can get them for $250-300. Prices are going up though, stock seems like its running out.


Or he can get a Plustek and rave about their excellent customer service and read the entire collective literary body of works from Proust in the time it takes for a scan.
Feb 17 2015 1:27PM
2 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24703 - Karma: 29,680
God I missed shooting the Hasselblad. Took it out today to do some street photography.

I love the inconspicuousness you can have with a top-down viewfinder. Just hold your phone in the opposite hand, pre-focus the camera and get candids all day long.

Tempted to make this my go-to camera for the 1-1-1 project, but I need to get over my street photography fright, and 35mm gives you 3 times as many photos.
Feb 17 2015 8:49PM
0 0
profile picture
No.Quarter
Posts: 5257 - Karma: 16,956
I am considering trading my OM-1n for a OM-2 or maybe a OM-2s. Does anyone have any experience with these? What are the pros and cons of an electric shutter vs the mechanical one in the om-1? Did quality go down much as the OM line progressed?
Mar 17 2015 9:29PM
0 0
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
SLR to SLR is pretty minimal, I would just keep what you have? Mechanical shutter seems like it would be less likely to fail and easier to repair.
Mar 17 2015 10:25PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)