File: file.png (344 KB, 1320x743)

344 KB PNG

>>4340818
Does anyone here use a white balance card set or color checker? I recently got back some scans of color negatives. Every single lab I've ever used has delivered scans that need some color correction. It's typically not much, just the usual scanning crap where the shadows are too green or something.

It's normally not too hard to mostly correct them using Darktable, they turn out looking alright, but not perfect. I was thinking of using a color checker or a white balance card set so that when I go to correct my scans I can use the color checker once and then apply that to all the other images so I have less work to do and more consistent colors.

Thing is, when I downloaded a photo of a color checker and changed the RGB levels on purpose, then tried to use the color checker in my fucked up picture to try to correct the image, it didn't really work. So I figure if I'm using a color checker in a scan rather than a raw file from a digital camera it won't actually be something simple that saves me time.

Am I just using darktable wrong?

>>4340822
You would be correcting out the color of the film you’re shooting. Also you would need to use the checker in every scene you’re shooting. Color checkers are for digital dorks, learn to use curves.

>>4340826
>You would be correcting out the color of the film you’re shooting.
...isn't that the point of trying to get accurate colors? granted I don't really use pro film so that probably doesn't help.
>Also you would need to use the checker in every scene you’re shooting.
I wouldn't use it for snapshots when I'm out and about, I'd only use it for actual photoshoots.
>Color checkers are for digital dorks
they've had Macbeth charts for decades before they had digital cameras though, although granted, they would have just been eyeballing it while RA4 printing if working with color negatives
>learn to use curves.
I'll look into it. Just wanted a way to make this part of the process quicker and easier as well as more consistent.

File: RestStopBathroomE100D.jpg (2.19 MB, 2048x1359)

2.19 MB JPG

fuck it, I'll start

This was 6 hours into a drive to hike Moldoveanu. Before I had my 4x5 so the shits I got were mid.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:23 15:32:46
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4340832
Accurate colors are good for e-commerce. You’re trying to get good colors (what you think is good). The Macbeth chart wasn’t designed for scanning and then displaying on a variety of screens. You’ll want to trust your eye more than some chart or software tool.

Start by pulling the greens down from the black point and reds down from the shadows. Just a hair each. Tell me how that goes I think you’ll like that as a starting point.

>>4340839
I am of course trying to get good colors but I thought it would be pretty cool to be able to have accurate colors on film when I want them, you know?

I've been doing what you've mentioned using the color correction module in darktable and eyeballing it. It splits the color correction into highlights and shadows rather than using curves which makes it a lot quicker and easier but maybe less accurate. If that works, should I just keep doing that? Because it mostly does work, it's just hard to get the last tinge of color casts out of my scans that way.

>>4340822
>>4340832
>>4340840
I believe you're overthinking
There's a reason why no one does that
This is useful for situations where you need true-to-life colors
It's photography, man
You gotta see what kind of editing suits each photo, and use it to bring out the best of them
Photos gotta look *good*, not *absolutely accurate*

File: bg,f8f8f8-flat,750x,075,f(...).jpg (56 KB, 750x1000)

56 KB JPG

>>4340838

>>4340842
lmao, I've never got that roast before

>>4340838
nice colors
>those muscles
based + of course you shoot film

File: FoggedSalvageE100D.jpg (2.62 MB, 1359x2048)

2.62 MB JPG

>>4340847

Thanks! I tried to save it. The rest of the roll was pretty unsalvageable. Like a weird fog all over it. If I tried dehazing it looks radioactive. Maybe it was cause it went through an x-ray machine in Italy but that can't be it cause rest of the film was fine and this was e100d. I haven't shot e100d since cause all the rolls from that trip had something funky going on.

It could also be the vendor because they had issues with some Fujifilm F-Series 125T. Who knows.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:23 16:22:28
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4340818
>what film is in your camera(s) right now?
Nikon N80 - Kodak Tri-X 400 @1600 iso, red 25 filter during the day or no filter when low light

Olympus 35RC - Kodak Double-X @200 iso with orange 21 filter

Olympus Pen EE-3 - Fujicolor 400

Pentax Program Plus - Rollei Infrared 400

Pentax P3n - Ferrania P30

Mamiya Six - Kentmere Pan 100

>what do you plan on shooting with it?
fuck if I know lol, suggestions are welcome

File: [12] digitalização 2-Pano(...).jpg (3.82 MB, 5899x6186)

3.82 MB JPG

>i'm not the only one posting selfportraits anymore yay
I can't for the life of me edit this fucking photo
expired Provia, it has a green tint that's especially visible in the darkest parts
that's alright, though

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:23 17:25:36
Exposure Time	1/45 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	-0.1 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4340855
If you move the black point down, what happens? Usually that's the simplest fix.

>willingly posting your ugly visage on 4chinz
why

>>4340818
>what film is in your camera(s) right now?
35mm: Portra 160, CineStill 800T
120: HP5+
4x5: CineStill 400D and fpp's rebranded Foma 200
>what do you plan on shooting with it?
I've been taking the 35mm cameras on long bike rides, so mostly mountain landscapes with some adhoc pet and friend portrait snapshots. The medium format camera is just an old soviet 6x9 folder with no meter, so that's mostly mountain landscapes because it's easy to pop in a pocket and snap a quick portrait of a pet or a friend. The 4x5 is a Speed Graphic and takes a little more setup, so I use that for mountain landscapes but if I've got a friend or a pet handy I'm not above throwing a longer lens on and taking a quick portrait.

File: IMG_8091.jpg (2.17 MB, 2708x2660)

2.17 MB JPG

>self-portrait with ilford ortho 80 shot with candlelight and very dim sunlight


Shot on a rollei 2.8d, just got it and am mostly just messing around with it to see if I need to send it back on eBay.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2827
Image Height	2742
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4340860
Do you have any 400D scans to share?

>>4340857
Nut up or shut up.

It's alright to be ugly.

>>4340858
I use kodafix, I make 800 ml at a time and store the working solution in an accordion bottle.

>>4340862
The color on my last batch was fucked from old chemistry and the film is so thin it curls as soon as it's damp so there's a lot of streaking from it sticking to itself but I can dig something up

File: IMG_20240723_150405.jpg (151 KB, 1600x1315)

151 KB JPG

>>4340867
Here's the *least* fucked from the batch

>>4340861
LONDON
O
N
D
O
N

>>4340861
MOM!?

File: [2] digitalização 2-Pano_(...).jpg (4.31 MB, 5924x5786)

4.31 MB JPG

>>4340855
oh, I forgot the thread question
>what film is in your camera(s) right now?
120: Ektar 100 (6x7) and Kodak Gold (6x6)
35mm: Kodak Vision 3 250D @100
>what do you plan on shooting with it?
whatever catches my attention on the streets
>>4340856
everything gets awfully dark ):
but the photo itself is underexposed indeed, it was a test I was making with a flashcube
picrel came out way better and is from the same roll

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:23 16:50:57
Exposure Time	1/90 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	0.6 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4340832
You don't really need a color checker to get accurate colors. Make sure you've got a good scan, so that there's actual information to work with, without clipping. Then go to the color channels (in photoshop), set the white points to where the curvy part of the histogram actually starts/ends respectively, then set the grey point to the beginning of the center of like pit close to the middle if the histogram, it also should be the biggest. After this, use brightness and contrast for each channel to bring them to neutral (it's nice to have some kind of a reference point like concrete), and you'll have perfect colors. Maybe use automatic color correction as the final touch

>>4340805
...yes? What do you think is wrong?

>>4340854
shoot landfills
no reason

>>4340882
Again, you’ll be editing out the colors if you do this.

>>4340861
>happiest woman on 4chan

>>4340854
>Pentax P3n
how do you like that one? I have a lot of M42 glass that I want to use on a PK body.

Also, shoot some rusted metal stuff

>>4340908
why don't you shit on guys like >>4340850 or >>4340880 ?
>HuRr FeMaLe
fuck off

>>4340897
>editing out the colors
What the fuck are you talking about

>>4340913
Is there a more digestible way you need it said?

>>4340912
I get nervous around boys sis cool your tits

File: aiens_caught_on_camera_FR(...).jpg (4.81 MB, 3850x2857)

4.81 MB JPG

>>4340922
you are excused and redeemed this one time just because I genuinely laughed

Should I get an orange or red filter for shooting b&w?

File: 1714652540940.jpg (969 KB, 2000x1500)

969 KB JPG

>>4340818

>>4340936
Both, and a yellow as well.

>>4340936
It depends.

>>4340936
>>4340938
>>4340939
>4chan
nice timing

>>4340938
I already have yellow which I like. I just wanted something that would give different results

>>4340910
>M42 glass that I want to use on a PK body
is there an adapter for M42 to K-mount?

>how do you like that one?
it's fine.. nothing special but you can find em for dirt cheap (like mine) so there's no reason not to get one if you're interested. there's no iso override so you're stuck shooting at box speed, there's no exposure compensation, SS tops out at 1/1000, manual focus only, and you can only use if the batteries are working.

the P3(0)t has a diagonal split screen focus so you can use it in either orientation but I think it has a full plastic back cover or something so it's supposed to be a little flimsy or cheap feeling. I'd recommend the Program Plus if you want the features the P3n doesn't have - manual iso and exposure compensation dial or the Super Program has those and SS tops out at 1/2000

File: minox35.jpg (2.76 MB, 2750x1833)

2.76 MB JPG

>>4340818
i like mirror selfies what can i say. i think i absolutely toasted the film in dev though lol
>what film is in your cameras right now
gx680: Rollei RPX 100. shooting 6x8 on some local train yard, still in progress. also photo'd a nice church mural. we'll see if it turns out in BW.
Auto-Reflex: just half a test roll kentmere 400 to see if it works. bought it as "parts/not working" and wanted to try the mid-roll switch from full to half frame. Nothing special.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS R
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:23 20:00:10
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4340946
How did you manage to overdevelop so much? I’ve never had issues over or under developing. Just underexposing

File: 1721474413657031.jpg (2.57 MB, 5397x3602)

2.57 MB JPG

This was the first day trying out my new OM2n the other week, I was just testing to see if the self timer works.

File: IMG_5436.jpg (1.35 MB, 2117x2750)

1.35 MB JPG

>leica m3
>hasselblad 500cm

Which is more overrated? Each seems to be the gold standard for their respective formats.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2117
Image Height	2750
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: 7Q0A7072.jpg (2.47 MB, 2750x1833)

2.47 MB JPG

>>4340947
not sure, i don't remember what exactly i did to develop this roll. I think it was reused "one-shot" ilfosol 3 and guessed the time. this could just be negativelabpro doing it's thing though to be honest. unless foma100 just does this. Here's another shot on the same roll in the same soup, i think the camera's exposure is just all over the place but truth be told i have no idea.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS R
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:23 20:28:05
Exposure Time	1/8 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: Portrait.jpg (3.19 MB, 4526x3006)

3.19 MB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Perfection V800
Equipment Make	EPSON
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	4526
Image Height	3006
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:07:23 19:07:29
Color Space Information	sRGB
Light Source	Unknown

As a complete newfag to film, with a local lab that's shit with scans, I've got a Plustek 8100 but how am I supposed to know the baseline for what various films "should" look like

>>4340975
Post them here and someone will surely tell you if your scans are shit.

>>4340975

Honestly, Flickr or Lomography or even Instagram. Lomography probably has the easiest archive to navigate and it spans from absolute shit to good and great examples. I actually started shooting obscure or expired film cause the examples online were absolute fucking shit for the respective stocks. But for Portra 800 you should have plenty of good examples online if you look.

>>4340975
Im by no means an expert, but heres my 2 cents. You could shoot and post a few varied film stock rolls to a well renowned lab and use those as reference, either that or just Google various film stocks and take mental note of the colours and tones of each. It doesn't take long to understand traits of each film stock, im not saying I can identify which stock a particular photo is taken with but if I know what to consider and expect when shooting a certain stock.

>>4340975
i'm no film expert and the others may have good advice, but my question would be if your edits look nice, why should it matter what the stock "should" look like?

>>4340981
>>4340980
>>4340979
>>4340977
thanks anons

>>4340971
coward

>>4340984
I'm sorry, but it is impossible. I hope you liked the picture even if it is ruined by my censorship.

File: PlsTHID-07.jpg (619 KB, 2048x1379)

619 KB JPG

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8100
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 25.9 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4938
Image Height	3326
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2024:07:24 15:16:00
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1379

>>4340872
havent seen this in a while
thanks anon for reminding me how long i've wasted on this website

File: PXL_20240724_062951670.MP.jpg (81 KB, 1027x677)

81 KB JPG

ok so when do i start sucking cock?

>>4340861
you know the rules, get them out.

>>4341009
You can start now if you want.

>>4340952
You seem like someone I wouldn't be embarrassed to be in public with, which cannot be said for the rest of this board

>>4340822
scanner can be calibrated with IT8 transparent targets
you can even get it on specific film which you are planning to use
http://www.targets.coloraid.de/
(I just use standard monaco transparent target which I received with Epson scanner)

>>4341014
nta but kek

>>4340975
FWIW color print film has whatever "look" the printer decided on when printing
I really wouldn't worry about it much as long as it looks good

>>4341015
IT8 targets are only for slide film. For negative film that anon had the right idea, photograph a color target and calibrate to that. With the right target (eg. the Datacolor one) you can even automate it in Darktable.

>>4341034
or just use proper software
Silverfast negafix

>>4341041
negafix already contain calibration data for most of negative films available today

File: DSC_1034-positive.jpg (864 KB, 1488x998)

864 KB JPG

>>4340818
>Self-portrait edition
old one

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Negative Lab Pro v2.2.0
Photographer	SOP610
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	696
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2023:08:06 17:39:10
Light Source	Unknown
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>4340957
leicas are famous because they were the first popular 35mm cameras and what famous early street photographers used, thus hipsters that want larp as bresson think it's the best. slr is just better

>>4341034
>IT8 targets are only for slide film
what if your goal is to correct for the scanner and not the film
apply the resulting profile to the negative, then do other edits (assuming your editor lets you do that)

>>4341057
But the 500cm is overrated as a slr

>>4341062
not as much as the leica
i dont hear hasselblad owners speak of their components as if they were infused with magic at least

>>4341065
>>4341062
To be fair IMO there isn’t a better medium format camera than the 500cm. The versatility of it as well as the quality of components make it top notch. I’m not saying it’s mythical, but out of the 8 or so cameras I have shot that are MF it definitely is the best overall (although I’m not sure it’s my personal favorite)

>>4341058
oh wait I see
those aren't just transparent macbeth charts, they're specifically made for/from types of slide film
that's a shame

File: FerryPortra400.jpg (3.76 MB, 2048x2040)

3.76 MB JPG

>>4341069

Yeah, I love my 500CM. There's a reason there's so many carbon copies. It was so good it even made Rollei try their hand at an MF SLR. I think it's the best 6x6 format camera.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 08:44:04
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341069
Its a temperamental bitch and even hasselblad thought it had problems hence the 501c - the same camera but the viewfinder works with a 150mm

Bronica sqs and mamiya rb/rz are much better
>inb4 irrational fear of batteries

>>4341087

The Mamiya RB Pro-SD is phenomenal but I'd rather edc my 500CM. Fits perfectly in a 3L sling from Peak Design.

I've had to overhaul my 500CM twice in the 4 years I've had it, but once it was cause I fell off a cliff into the Pacific. I kept firing it overnight so that the salt water didn't seize it and I kept using it throughout my trip until I got back home to send it in for repair.

I never liked the Bronicas but to each their own.

>>4341087
>Bronica sqs and mamiya rb/rz are much better

this is complete cope, the rb/rz series is absolute trash compared to the hasselblad and to most other MF cameras in terms of build quality. There is for all intents and purposes zero tangible difference between the 500cm and 501c. 501c was to use different lens (in addition to 500 series lens).

>>4341091

501C has less features than the 500CM, but a better focusing screen (if it's still with the camera) and a gliding mirror so that the body doesn't vignette the WLF when using 150mm+ lenses.

>>4341091
>its cooope
Hasselblad users who aren’t coping abandon their blads for SQAi’s lol

Bronica? More like BRUHnica I am right

File: IHateTurquoise645Crop.jpg (3.94 MB, 2048x1537)

3.94 MB JPG

>>4341094

[Citation Required]

Why would they go for an SQAi if they already have a 500CM? Genuinely curious.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 10:02:44
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341099
It starts with “i wouldnt take my hassy there, too dangerous, i’ll buy disposable japscrap to use for fun”
And then “it has an overhaul coming up, better be gentle on it and take the bronica”
And then “why not add a ps 65mm to use while my ‘blad is at the shop? 150mm too, these are cheap”
And then “i cant remember which camera i shot these on”
And then they come around to reason, like when leica memers finally switch to nikon.

File: ImproperlyStoredAerochrome.jpg (3.15 MB, 2048x1967)

3.15 MB JPG

>>4341101

I said citation not anecdotal story you made up. I was legitimately expecting links or a video from someone about why they switched. Just cause you wouldn't take your Hasselblad out, doesn't mean others don't.

Yeah I guess if you don't have the money for it to begin with you'd baby it and have it as a shelf queen, inadvertently damaging it from disuse. At that point it comes down to the age old saying of staying within your means. Go for the SQ-Ai; if you can only afford the 'japcrap' stick to that. You shouldn't baby or be worried about a tool. I shot the Hasselblad for a week after I fell into the ocean with the entire kit. Sure I stayed up all night firing the shutter it make sure it didn't seize but it still worked.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 10:19:40
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341101
Film backs that work and stay working is a huge plus of going with japanese quality

A guy in my country is trying to sell a bunch of old film cameras and said I could name my price. Amongst them was a leica r3 electronic. I’m pretty new to film. Is it worth taking a look at assuming it even works? How much should I even be offering.

>>4340917
Well it's your thought, how the fuck should I know?
The method I've described simply makes shadows, midtones and highlights neutral, with no casts, as it should be. The only thing that is being "edited out" is errors in processing/film ageing

>>4341095
based

>>4341101
>it was real
>in my mind

>>4341101
>imagine creating all this slippery slope scenario in your head to justify that camera B is better than camera A because there are all these hypothetical photographers who switched from A to B
take your meds, schizzo

>>4341124
Why don't we have a photo battle between the brands instead of stupid arguing?

A Bronica and a Contax (Kyocera)

The thinking man choice

>>4341125
your moronic argument is not even about quality
also because my ego is not fragile as yours, I shoot my RB67 because I like it and love the results, not because strangers on the internet agree or not
>why don't we have a photo battle
because I'm not 12 and I don't shoot "competitively", what the fuck kind of retarded concept is that lmao

File: RubyBeachOverlookPortra400.jpg (3.78 MB, 1536x2048)

3.78 MB JPG

>>4341125

I'm not the guy you're responding to but
I've been posting nothing but Carl Zeiss 80mm 2.8 T example shots. I don't want this to devolve into that Contax rager from a couple threads ago but these have all been with the Hassy that's been underwater destroyed by sea salt and brought back to life.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 11:39:50
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341127
>>4341128
Huh? I'm just a random anon.

It seems like you just made every excuse imaginable to be a nophoto. If you don't have a fragile ego and scaredy pants why aren't you posting images to back your claims? The hassle guy is...

>>4341125
It would be pointless. The sheer imaging area of medium format means basically every lens looks equally sharp unless you're enlarging it to 16x20 or grain peeping scans.

You pick the specific camera for the memes basically

File: 18 - Superia 400.jpg (3.73 MB, 2572x3907)

3.73 MB JPG

>>4341105
what made the sky turn out black like that?
I like it, but I'd like to properly understand what's going on
it reminds me of picrel I took with my Pentax K1000
It was around -8ºC and the curtains were not properly working in some shots because of sticky lubricants under these conditions, so the top part got like this
I like it

>>4341131
Yes, but it would still be a lot more entertaining than an argument about two relatively similar film cameras.

File: Pano6x12Aerochrome.jpg (2.98 MB, 2048x1048)

2.98 MB JPG

>>4341130

All my responses have been with a photo, I did that on purpose so there's no confusion. I even named them all in a similar pattern, always mentioning the film stock too. This devolved cause of some slippery slope story about why one deluded guy would pick up a SECOND 6x6 camera cause he didn't end to hurt his precious Hasselblad in his made up story.

Use your tools regardless of what they are or what your preferences are. I asked him for links cause I thought it was a legitimate phenomenon but instead he made up some convulted story and also name dropped Leica and Nikon like if they're somehow related. When Zenza was literally created cause a Japanese farmer couldn't cope with the fact that he couldn't afford a Hasselblad. Nikon almost put Leica out of business, Zenza is a literal LITERAL coping mechanism.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 11:56:57
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: MissedFocusReala100.jpg (3.19 MB, 2028x2048)

3.19 MB JPG

>>4341135
It's actually cause the Aerochrome wasn't stored properly so that part of the sky just color shifted that, it's actually a very deep purple red and then it kinda shifts to blue at the end. Happy little accident, the CPL filter I had on also contributed to how deep the color is. I think I'll black out the blue so that it spans the entire frame. I kinda like it too. Seems that Aerochrome color shifts hard and loses sensitivity pretty fast if not stored correctly. Like faster than other slide. I guess that makes sense.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 12:01:12
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: anons_pacifier.jpg (4.2 MB, 7051x5843)

4.2 MB JPG

>>4341130
I'm just a random anon too who just thought the other guy was retarded for coming up with a very specific scenario full of arbitrary conditions, all of this to have the most retarded argument possible that a camera would be better because imaginary people said so, motivated by fear of getting mugged or something
but alright, if you want a photo I can provide
already posted this one before but fuck it
that's from a Mamiya RB67 Pro-S with a Sekor C 127mm f/3.8
if I remember correctly that's f16 handheld at 1/15" or something on Kentmere 400 pushed to 3200
>>4341138
now this one is gorgeous, anon
absolutely fucking alien landscape
reminds me of Ursula K. Le Guin's book "the left hand of darkness" that happens in a planet where the vegetation is red

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:28 14:19:44
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	2.1 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: SantaTeresaProvia100f.jpg (2.33 MB, 2029x2048)

2.33 MB JPG

>>4341142

Thanks that was 3 6x6 shots combined into one 6x12. Shot with a 500CM. Usually with panoramas you gotta take more photos than you think you need.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 12:14:27
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341142
Cool! It seems like it is either one nophoto or two nophoto having a silly and pointless argument, so I figured they could just solve it with a photo battle for all of our entertainment.

File: kentmere_400_@3200.jpg (3.52 MB, 7242x5891)

3.52 MB JPG

>>4341152
See how the other guy and I posted photos, and how we're fine with what we're using, while nophotos argue about the superiority of whatever?
I shoot with a Mamiya RB67 Pro S
Aerochrome guy shoots a Hasselblad 500CM
image quality of both are amazing etc.
the only people who care so much about what others shoot are precisely the ones who don't

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:28 14:01:57
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	2.2 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4341161
I really like this photo

Also going to an anime con in a few days, gonna be the first time that I am going to really use flash (With a potato masher lmao)

What film should I carry?

Colorplus 200
Pro Image 100
Vision3 50D
Comedy gold: Shanghai GP3 100

All on 35mm

File: MemeOnPortra400.jpg (2.76 MB, 2048x1358)

2.76 MB JPG

>>4341161

Yeah, just use your tools. Like it's fine if you shoot Mamiya, it's fine if you shoot Hasselblad, it's fine if you shoot Zenza. Just shoot.

This isn't a Hasselblad shot, I just thought it was funny so I took the shot.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2024:07:24 13:03:32
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: [2] Kentmere Pan 400-Pano(...).jpg (4.32 MB, 7001x5973)

4.32 MB JPG

>>4341163
thanks, man!
given the options I'd go with the 50D if you're doing ECN-2, the colours are beautiful, and having a 50 iso film wouldn't be a hassle if you're using flash
but I'd advise you bring another roll
>>4341166
I wish we could see his photo, I've never seen a basketball hoop shot on film before :/
such unique photo, forever lost

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:28 13:53:00
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	2.3 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4341091
Weird how RZs are the current favorite for studio shooters.

>>4341179

Which studio shooters? Legitimately want to see some work.

>>4341179
weird how 500cm's have been since their release keke

>>4341180
Tyler Mitchell, Arturo Torres, Martin Schoeller. That gives you a nice variety of fashion, commercial, and editorial. Those are just off the top of my head as they use the same labs and studios here. You’ll never hear people in the industry talking about “build quality” with 20 year old film cameras. It’s whatever though believe what you want anon.

>>4341184
Literally who
they don't even have a tripcode on 4chan

File: Screenshot_20240724-144258~2.png (2.61 MB, 1644x2654)

2.61 MB PNG

>>4341184

lol I wouldn't lead with him next time

>>4341187
yikes

>>4341187
you fags will bully to death for posting this wtf, fucking nepobaby shit

Have you ever regretted choosing Ektar? If so, why?
I have wasted many rolls of RVP50 to overcast weather and harsh daylight...

>>4341192
because ektachrome looks better

File: [0] Ektar 100 - 120_med.jpg (4.51 MB, 3000x4500)

4.51 MB JPG

>>4341192
yes, because I thought it would look okay if pushed to 400
never push ektar, it looks like shit
that's my fault, though
when metered at 100 it's always been pleasant

File: R1-03547-0002.jpg (1.16 MB, 3590x2402)

1.16 MB JPG

>>4341193
I'm talking about Ektar 100, the color negative film. Ektachrome 100 is nice, but now very expensive. Dabbled in the stuff back in 2019 at €26, now it's upwards to €40..
I would make the same argument for Porta 160 as well. Never regretted it, though a bit bland at times.
>>4341194
Those reds do be spicy.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Fujifilm eSystems, Inc.
Camera Model	Digital Link
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	95 dpi
Vertical Resolution	95 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 21:12:07
Color Space Information	sRGB

File: [9] Ektar 100-Pano_med_res.jpg (4.53 MB, 7277x6034)

4.53 MB JPG

>>4341195
oh buoy, that one is from a roll that came out FINE kek
not my best edit, sure, but the Ektar has some pungent primary colors, I love its reds and oranges
now THIS is what Ektar pushed to 400 looks like
looks like expired shit because of the colour casts
this one I didn't even edit properly apart from inverting colours, it's not worth it
At least I'm not dumb enough to shoot important things when testing out new stuff
but in short, Ektar is beautiful, but it behaves kinda like a slide film: it will give you amazing results if use it as intended. If you play around it will look like shit.
It's a color negative film you cannot experiment with, much different from Kodak Vision 3, for example
You can push 250D to 1600 almost unnoticeably

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:28 14:43:46
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	1.0 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4341195
>prices have increased since COVID

Color me shocked faggot

>>4341201
reading abilities of a retarded baby

>>4341195
Holy shit, are we talking 120 right? if you are paying that for 35mm is literally highway robbery. The chinks at reflex lab sell it like 12 usd a roll

>>4341187
>>4341190
Crabs in a bucket

>>4341195
Gold and ultra max are literally good enough and “muh portra colorz” is a cope for being retarded enough to pay double or triple the price.

File: Screenshot_20240724-165552~2.png (1.24 MB, 1644x2340)

1.24 MB PNG

>>4341217

Unfortunately that doesn't apply here. We were discussing RB/RZ artists. We're not envious of him or his work, look at it, we're literally critiquing the work.

The point of the comment you're responding to is the exact opposite of your analogy; if it was an anon posting that work we'd tear it to shreds just the same.

what is the oldest, unchanged, b&w film stock you can still get?

>>4341222
Still get new? Xx, maybe?

>>4341222
fomapan

>>4341220
>literally critiquing
Literally, are you? Literally where?

>>4341220
>envious
Is that the crab metric for other’s work?

>>4341229
Googling crab bucket would explain it to you.

>>4341227
Yikes is a criticism.

>>4341217
>You aren't allowed to dislike the work of anyone else or you're a BUCKET CRAB!
Nah. He sucks, and he got where he is by meeting famous niggas, not by doing good work, which he still doesn't do. Many such cases any time "american" and "artist" are found in the same paragraph. This country is a slimy bottom feeder that kicks up mud. Nothing more. We don't have culture. We don't produce artists. We produce legs up and free IP money for friends and family, and a great deal of our laws are based on fucking over the little guy to keep that free money system running for the chosen folk who contribute no artistic value to society (it's all wanked over by the undeserving upper class) and no material value to society either.

WE are why people hate capitalism - because this isn't even capitalism, it's corruption that runs deeper than the oceans with a sparkly foam on top. And it's 100% acceptable to hate the products of american "culture".

File: KodakPortra160-32.jpg (2.19 MB, 1358x2048)

2.19 MB JPG

the lonely life of a fire watchman

I call this "looking for fire (in my heart)"

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NORITSU KOKI
Camera Model	EZ Controller
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 14:43:21
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341236
americans be like
>we're trying really hard to make this person famous despite them lacking any talent and no matter how hard we try people refuse to like them. let's give them a talk show. they went to art school in new york, come on, like them!
>meanwhile, talented people: 97% of my income goes to rent and i live in the middle of chicago

>>4341236
>WE are why people hate capitalism - because this isn't even capitalism
I agree with everything else, I just profoundly disagree with this part
no, nigga, this IS capitalism. That's exactly what capitalism is about. You almost recognize that capitalism sucks, you can recognize why its failed but then choose denial wtf
>>4341238
yes, it's almost like artistic, cultural productions and human well being are not priorities under capitalism

p.s.: ban me again and delete my comments for "talking politics" and then never ban the ones defending capitalism because oh it's not politics when it's defending the status quo

>>4340851
wtf did you do to this file? did you index it? why is there ridiculous stair stepping artifacts

>>4340983
svol shitty noise from compression

>>4340983
>>4341244
The m43 look, nice

>>4341236
Your lifelong ducks at the park project would be famous if only you had connections, surely.

File: prayge.png (614 KB, 1102x1015)

614 KB PNG

>>4340983
beautiful shot, what camera is it? The noise reminds me of harmon phoenix

>please god not m43

File: 1719881800873219.jpg (913 KB, 1600x1600)

913 KB JPG

selfie thread

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

How do I get over my fear of posting my shit here? I don't want people irl to know I browse 4chan and say racist things on the internet. What if people are mean to me and track me down?

File: durkeh.jpg (2.02 MB, 3000x2057)

2.02 MB JPG

>>4341267
I make a conscious effort to avoid posting anything with people I know, identifiable landmarks, unique exif or images that I have posted or intend to post anywhere associated with an account

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	VueScan 9 x64 (9.8.18)
Image-Specific Properties:

File: 1720296464571077.jpg (857 KB, 1600x1600)

857 KB JPG

>>4341267
just don't be a dickhead that says racist shit. you CAN post on 4chan and not be a racist dumbass

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

File: [11] Ilford Delta 100 @ 4(...).jpg (3.92 MB, 6499x5422)

3.92 MB JPG

I feel like I should better my editing skills with this one, but that's satisfactory for now

>>4341267
you are not important
you just gotta realize that
no one is gonna track you down or any shit like that
take part in the self portrait thread and post your face already and you'll see it literally doesn't matter
p.s.: if you're ashamed of being racist, maybe you do realize being racist is bad?
so you can, like, you know, not be racist (:
easy peasy
>>4341269
I started doing this years ago but then you see it literally doesn't matter

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 19:29:00
Exposure Time	1/750 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4341271
>so you can, like, you know, not be racist (:
Counterpoint, embrace it and racist harder.

File: 1719991561770220.png (268 KB, 656x679)

268 KB PNG

>>4341270
>you CAN post on 4chan and not be a racist dumbass
Not possible

>>4341269
That precludes basically everything I take and it means that I cannot post those same photos to my social media without it being able to be reverse searched.

>maybe you do realize being racist is bad?
No, it's that being racist has consequences irl that it doesn't online. Racism is true, but I can't be honest irl

>>4341270
>>4341271
not being racist is for fags

File: buzzz.jpg (1.75 MB, 3000x2044)

1.75 MB JPG

>>4341279
>That precludes basically everything I take and it means that I cannot post those same photos to my social media without it being able to be reverse searched.
Think of it as a challenge. I often take some images specifically for 4chan and different images for my "real" accounts. Like b&w, primes, etc. limitations encourage creativity.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Plustek
Camera Model	OpticFilm 8200i
Camera Software	VueScan 9 x64 (9.8.18)
Image-Specific Properties:

>>4341279
man, no one cares
post whatever

>>4341283
It's just easier and safer to not post.

>>4341282
Yeah I guess, I have considered posting my 'C tier' stuff here, but it will just make me look like a worse photographer than I am, so I don't bother.

>>4341284
>It's just easier and safer to not post.
yeah, sure, but the question was
>>>4341267
How do I get over my fear of posting my shit here?

>>4340818
oh yeah like i spent 25 thousand diggitydamn dollaroo just to reduce my tedious snapshittery to fuckin lo-rez jaypeggs for you closeted dweebs to fucking gawk at without jack shit for context for a half second and shit out your mouths over bc i'm in such dire need for approval from random strangers

pretty much u can get fucked before i bother with that particular line of pointless self-immolation

File: Gold200-14.jpg (2.32 MB, 3492x2333)

2.32 MB JPG

>>4341286
what

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Fujifilm eSystems, Inc.
Camera Model	Digital Link
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:01 22:33:06
Color Space Information	sRGB

Bros...
I work 5 days a week and in any given workday I'm out of the house for about 12 hours when including my working shift and commute so I get no more than 3-4 hours of "relaxation" at home.
On the weekends I'm tired and the weather has been dogshit (winter).
How do you find the motivation to go out and take worthwhile photos on film knowing you didn't waste your roll on dogshit photos?

>>4341290
Well the easiest solution is to get a less shit job with a shorter commute.

In general though I also stop shooting during the winter. The weather sucks and it makes it harder to get motivated to get out. I have just become okay with taking breaks during the winter. But you could take short walks and keep your camera on you. It's not like you need to travel 2 hours to get photos. Another thing I do, when I want to get my shooting time up is to keep it on me when I go get groceries or gas, I've gotten quite a few nice photos that way.

>>4341257
lol thanks - canon 7

File: wealmosthadamomentthere.png (1.59 MB, 1920x1075)

1.59 MB PNG

>>4341295
okay so it is film? Good. We almost had a moment there.

>>4341300
lmao

File: [16]_Ilford_Delta_100_@_4(...).jpg (4.2 MB, 6586x5437)

4.2 MB JPG

>>4341271
got these scans today, if anyone wanna say something

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 21:25:15
Exposure Time	1/750 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: [13]_Ilford_Delta_100_@_4(...).jpg (3.9 MB, 6507x5395)

3.9 MB JPG

>>4341302

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 21:17:41
Exposure Time	1/750 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4341282
That’s too much work, just do what I do and post nowhere else except shitposts here. Ez

Bros, I fucked up, I’m five shots into a roll of RPX 125, and today I took two mistakenly metered at 400. Forgot I used my meter with another camera on the weekend, doh! Will those two shots be salvageable if the rest is shot and developed at 125? 7/9 shots will be metered for box speed, just the two off.
Rookie mistake and I might trudge back out with my gx680 if the results point at something to do it right, but still, what a pain.
>>4341303
>>4341302
Too dark IMO, did you meter em or sunny 16 it?

File: [19v2]_Ilford_Delta_100_@(...).jpg (3.62 MB, 5616x4657)

3.62 MB JPG

>>4341306
the metering was fine, did it with a Gossen Lunasix
I too think these are dark but I think they match the mood I want them to
Fortunately, because Ilford Delta 100 pushed to 400 doesn't hold all that well
Kentmere is somehow better in this aspect, it can be flatter even when pushed
it gets very contrasty with flash

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 21:34:58
Exposure Time	1/750 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	4.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: [13] Ilford Delta 100 - 1(...).jpg (3.57 MB, 6507x5395)

3.57 MB JPG

>>4341306
did this other version as well, but I'm not sure

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 22:50:32
Exposure Time	1/750 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: [16]_Ilford_Delta_100_@_4(...).jpg (4.59 MB, 6586x5437)

4.59 MB JPG

>>4341302
>>4341316
brighter edit as well, still not sure

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:24 22:56:26
Exposure Time	1/750 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	4.4 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4341306
do you mean rpx 25 or is rpx 125 a real thing? 2 stops is nbd, 4 stops could be a problem
>>4341317
the trouble is you got no contrast in your subject. the contrast is all between the sky and the tree which is not what you want to focus on. you're just lifting the shadows when you brighten it up. color filter when you took it may have helped, or crop out that sky.

>>4341318
I’m retarded, it’s rpx100. I also have some rolls of 25 hence the mixup. 2 stops of under exposure I guess will just make two thin frames? In Lightroom I suppose that would likely be largely correctable, but would have been nice to get it in camera, as they say. If I’m printing (6x8 so highly unlikely but), would just overexpose then to balance, right?

>>4341318
>color filter when you took it may have helped
agreed, but 77mm filters are way too expensive ):
>or crop out that sky.
it would feel cluttered
a filter would be the way to go indeed
I'm glad I took this photo, though

File: 5E7A6428.jpg (1.72 MB, 3145x2304)

1.72 MB JPG

>>4341324
You would need to burn your sky in very heavily depending on the density of your highlights. You could balance the mids and shadows with split contrast. Prints don't look as nice if there isn't atleast a tiny bit of gray in your skies to make a complete border around your print.

The reverse happened on this picture I took the other night. 30 minute exposure at f32. Took 80 seconds of exposure to get detail on the van and only 30 seconds for everything else using a 0 contrast filter.

I used rodinal with very minimal agitation when developing this sheet, which I think saved it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Software	Adobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Image Width	5243
Image Height	3840
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:07:24 19:41:54
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
Color Space Information	sRGB
White Balance	Auto
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
Flash	No Flash
F-Number	f/5.0
ISO Speed Rating	100
Focal Length	150.00 mm
Metering Mode	Pattern
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

File: 20240723_122848.jpg (2.15 MB, 3224x2798)

2.15 MB JPG

>>4341317
Stand dev would have been better, but there is no way I am sitting in the dark for an hour.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	samsung
Camera Model	Galaxy S24 Ultra
Camera Software	S928U1UES2AXE4
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	23 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Compression Scheme	JPEG Compression (Thumbnail)
Image Height	3000
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:07:23 12:28:48
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Image Width	4000
Lens Aperture	f/1.7
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Exposure Program	Normal Program
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Unique Image ID	HK0XLQE00SM
Image Height	3000
Brightness	2.7 EV
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Mode	Auto
Exposure Time	83/10000 sec
Flash	No Flash
F-Number	f/1.7
ISO Speed Rating	160
Image Width	4000
Focal Length	6.30 mm
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Light Source	Unknown

>>4341267
Dunno I would love to post stuff from work here because I think some of you may find it interesting but it would be a bad look if I ever had to answer for posting here.

>>4341331
>sitting in the dark for an hour
dudebro you dont have to sit in the dark
i usually just bring my tank to the computer and lower the quality of this board and others while developing

File: R1-09055-035A.jpg (1.39 MB, 3625x2433)

1.39 MB JPG

>>4341218
At the bottom of the glass lies the Gold 200 blackpill...
>>4341210
I miscalculated the prices since I'm a victim of controlled devaluation of my currency. 135 E100 is in the realm of €31. Roll of 120 E100: €22.

You're talking of Reflx Lab 100R?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Fujifilm eSystems, Inc.
Camera Model	Digital Link
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	95 dpi
Vertical Resolution	95 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:25 11:26:10
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4341290
its winter here too (australia). pushing bw film when scene contrast is low. also its easy to "waste" a roll when i have hundreds in my fridge. i go out almost every weekend (when it doesnt rain) even in winter. last winter i took one of my favourite ever photos. i remember that period of time, i couldnt even rewind my film because of how cold my hands were, it was that bad

>>4341391
Tray developing only for now. :[

>>4341466
i live in the tropics. had to turn my fan off last week, winter has been brutal so far. got into single digit temperatures for forty, maybe fifty minutes.

Should I shoot double XX over tri-X?

>>4340897
You're a fucking retard, it's it going to turn into a black and white image?

>>4341530
In terms of price, it's not that different these days thanks to Kodak getting production back to full capacity. I dig the look, though. Give both a shot, and see which one you like better.

>>4341543
practically no one has 30m bulk rolls of tri x in stock in europe
only one i can find sells it for €300
double x can be bought for about half that
if (you) know of somewhere in the eu where bulk rolls of tri x is sold for a comparable price of double x, hit a nigga up

>>4341546
My bad, I wasn't thinking of EU prices. Until the bulk rolls come back down, then Double-X is the way to go, no question.

>>4341550
>>4341546
In the US, for 120 (which is all I shoot), double X is like $5 more a roll tjan tri-X because kodakniggers do not sell doubleX in 120 (or 135) and bulk loading 120 isnt feasible.

>>4341563
There is actually a film that's basically XX, but in 70mm. It's very rare, so you're still out of luck.

>>4341571
Cinestill has xx which is literally just double X spooled up onto 120 rolls.

>>4341109
What you’ve described is halfway what the auto levels button does. If you think that’s how to color correct a film scan, it’s a free country.

File: 1719872162260383.jpg (910 KB, 1600x1600)

910 KB JPG

>>4341530
I much prefer xx. Bonus point is it's cheaper too.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand

>>4341590
Well yes, but not quite. Autoadjustment doesn't always work well, it can be easily fooled, and it can't adjust the contrast. So I always balance manually and then hit the Auto. But even then, sometimes it doesn't work properly, and I have to finish everything manually

File: [9] Kentmere 100 - 120_medres.jpg (3.22 MB, 5241x3907)

3.22 MB JPG

/p/, I've been shooting film for quite some time, but only in the last year or so I've started using flash, and I have 2 questions about it that often come and go, so I'll ask before I forget it
>why does my subjects look underexposed when using faster speeds with leaf shutter and electronic flash?
of course if I use a faster speed like 1/400" it would get less ambient light than at 1/30", for example
but the duration of an electronic flashlight's actual flash is around 1/1000" to 1/8000" (reaching 1/10.000" for some high end studio stuff)
but the calculations for the flash cannot be counting on ambient light, they should stand on their own
and it doesn't even make sense having underexposed photos because the flash duration is shorther than the leaf shutter, everything is clearly synchronized
I'm using a Nikon Speedlight SB-22 and a Mamiya RB67 ProS coupled with the 65mm Sekor-C lens
how the fuck does this happen?
it generally works fine, but sometimes they come a bit underexposed
>why the fuck does the RB67 not always sync with a flashcube adapter?
I'm using Konica's flashcube adapter, it works fine with my Pentax K1000 (hotshoe and PC cable), my Canon FT and my Yashica D (neither have a hotshoe, but both work with a PC cable)
Rollei 35 has a hotshoe and no PC port and doesn't work with it either
what intrigues me though is the RB
sometimes the flash triggers, sometimes it does not
and when it doesn't I check on the Pentax and the flash is still good, it still burns, it works just fine
and yes, I'm switching the flash sync to M when using it although it really shouldn't matter, I guess
all cameras work fine with the SB-22 electronic flash
I was going mad with the fucking random odds of the flash working, so I just ditched it and I'm using the electronic flash
but the flashcubes are so much brighter and warmer, I wish I could usem them with the RB
sorry for the wall of text, I just wanted to give as much detail as possible to solve these

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:22 00:44:11
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Brightness	3.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: 2024-07-25-0009.jpg (2.35 MB, 2597x3700)

2.35 MB JPG

Shoot a roll of Orwo UN54 this weekend.

What I realized:

I like the film but I am not sure if am going to keep shooting, its not that common over and I don't feel that looks that different from say, Foma. But again I develop everything on Rodinal so lmao, maybe is the Rodinal look?

And, I really don't like 28mm I need to stick to 35 or 50mm. Too fucking wide for me

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Minolta
Camera Model	Scan Dual II
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:07:25 13:49:50
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2597
Image Height	3700

File: 1000002466.jpg (1.28 MB, 6048x4011)

1.28 MB JPG

>>4340818
Anyone wanna try guessing the film?

File: 2024-07-25-0007.jpg (2.4 MB, 3786x2611)

2.4 MB JPG

>>4341685
But also it was very overcast so maybe I am not being fair to the film, I have another roll that will try when light is better or I have a flash at hand.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Minolta
Camera Model	Scan Dual II
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:07:25 13:49:13
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3786
Image Height	2611

>>4341681
Even shooting on digital with ttl flash and everything sometimes a calculated exposure doesn’t come out quite right for me. Could be skill issue sure but flash just seems fucky. That said, your subjects being lit is controlled by aperture, not shutter speed anon. Maybe you know this already, but your post seems to blame shutter speed for it. Try it on digital, you’ll see, shutter can be slow or fast, even hss speeds, your subject lighting will generally remain the same.

>>4341688
>That said, your subjects being lit is controlled by aperture, not shutter speed anon
>Maybe you know this already, but your post seems to blame shutter speed for it.
with all due respect but I'm not retarded
of course I'm talking about shooting with a proper aperture
the thing is: sometimes I get different results comparing what are basically the same shots, but with different shutter speeds using a leaf shutter
considering it's a leaf shutter the shots should be the same with the same aperture and what is basically the same scene with barely any ambient light
the triggering mechanism of a leaf shutter makes it basically impossible for both of the scenes to be different, unless the electronic flash lasts for more than 1/400" (which I doubt)
hence my question

File: 2024-07-25-0016.jpg (2.46 MB, 3665x2383)

2.46 MB JPG

>>4341687
My favorite from the roll, nothing like almost getting run over to get KINO

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Minolta
Camera Model	Scan Dual II
Camera Software	darktable 4.8.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:07:25 13:54:12
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3665
Image Height	2383

File: IMG_0146.jpg (1009 KB, 2452x2312)

1009 KB JPG

60mm distagon

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPad Pro (11-inch) (3rd generation)
Camera Software	17.5.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:07:25 19:37:44
Exposure Time	1/15 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Brightness	-3.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	3.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2452
Image Height	2312
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard