Self-portrait editionLet's see you faggots/fgt/ daily reminder (courtesy by anon): one stop per decade is (generally) bullshit>negative film ages better than positive>black and white better than color>slow films better than fast>storage conditions (dry/cool) matter more than years>Negative film is shot 1 or 2 stops overexposed and then PULLED in development so that you build more density in the exposure and develop less such that the fog is limited>slide/positive film is shot at box speed or overexposed and pulled.>if you home develop you can also use benzotriazole as a restrainer for the the first developer in E6 processUseful links>[massive dev chart] gives times for home film developmenthttps://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php>[film dev] shows results of development regimeshttps://filmdev.org/>[news & community links]35mmc.comcasualphotophile.comkosmofoto.comemulsive.orgjapancamerahunter.comPrevious thread >>4339071Thread question:what film is in your camera(s) right now?what do you plan on shooting with it?
>>4340818Does 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?
>>4340822You 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 dorksthey'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.
fuck it, I'll startThis 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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:23 15:32:46Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4340832Accurate 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.
>>4340839I 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>>4340840I believe you're overthinkingThere's a reason why no one does thatThis is useful for situations where you need true-to-life colorsIt's photography, manYou gotta see what kind of editing suits each photo, and use it to bring out the best of themPhotos gotta look *good*, not *absolutely accurate*
>>4340838
>>4340842lmao, I've never got that roast before
>>4340838nice colors>those musclesbased + of course you shoot film
>>4340847Thanks! 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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:23 16:22:28Color Space InformationsRGB
>>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
>i'm not the only one posting selfportraits anymore yayI can't for the life of me edit this fucking photoexpired Provia, it has a green tint that's especially visible in the darkest partsthat's alright, though[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:23 17:25:36Exposure Time1/45 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness-0.1 EVExposure Bias-1 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4340855If you move the black point down, what happens? Usually that's the simplest fix.
>willingly posting your ugly visage on 4chinzwhy
>>4340818>what film is in your camera(s) right now?35mm: Portra 160, CineStill 800T120: 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.
>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 OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2827Image Height2742Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4340860Do you have any 400D scans to share?
>>4340857Nut up or shut up.It's alright to be ugly.
>>4340858I use kodafix, I make 800 ml at a time and store the working solution in an accordion bottle.
>>4340862The 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
>>4340867Here's the *least* fucked from the batch
>>4340861LONDONONDON
>>4340861MOM!?
>>4340855oh, 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>>4340856everything gets awfully dark ):but the photo itself is underexposed indeed, it was a test I was making with a flashcubepicrel came out way better and is from the same roll[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:23 16:50:57Exposure Time1/90 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness0.6 EVExposure Bias-1 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4340832You 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?
>>4340854shoot landfillsno reason
>>4340882Again, you’ll be editing out the colors if you do this.
>>4340861>happiest woman on 4chan
>>4340854>Pentax P3nhow 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
>>4340908why don't you shit on guys like >>4340850 or >>4340880 ?>HuRr FeMaLefuck off
>>4340897>editing out the colorsWhat the fuck are you talking about
>>4340913Is there a more digestible way you need it said?
>>4340912I get nervous around boys sis cool your tits
>>4340922you are excused and redeemed this one time just because I genuinely laughed
Should I get an orange or red filter for shooting b&w?
>>4340818
>>4340936Both, and a yellow as well.
>>4340936It depends.
>>4340936>>4340938>>4340939>4channice timing
>>4340938I 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 bodyis 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
>>4340818i 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 nowgx680: 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 MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS RCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:07:23 20:00:10Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length100.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>4340946How did you manage to overdevelop so much? I’ve never had issues over or under developing. Just underexposing
This was the first day trying out my new OM2n the other week, I was just testing to see if the self timer works.
>leica m3>hasselblad 500cmWhich 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 OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2117Image Height2750Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4340947not 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 MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS RCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.4 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:07:23 20:28:05Exposure Time1/8 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length100.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelPerfection V800Equipment MakeEPSONCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Vertical Resolution300 dpiHorizontal Resolution300 dpiImage Width4526Image Height3006Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:23 19:07:29Color Space InformationsRGBLight SourceUnknown
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
>>4340975Post them here and someone will surely tell you if your scans are shit.
>>4340975Honestly, 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.
>>4340975Im 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.
>>4340975i'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>>4340977thanks anons
>>4340971coward
>>4340984I'm sorry, but it is impossible. I hope you liked the picture even if it is ruined by my censorship.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePlustekCamera ModelOpticFilm 8100Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 25.9 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Image Width4938Image Height3326Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8Compression SchemeUncompressedPixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2024:07:24 15:16:00Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width2048Image Height1379
>>4340872havent seen this in a whilethanks anon for reminding me how long i've wasted on this website
ok so when do i start sucking cock?
>>4340861you know the rules, get them out.
>>4341009You can start now if you want.
>>4340952You seem like someone I wouldn't be embarrassed to be in public with, which cannot be said for the rest of this board
>>4340822scanner can be calibrated with IT8 transparent targetsyou 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)
>>4341014nta but kek>>4340975FWIW color print film has whatever "look" the printer decided on when printingI really wouldn't worry about it much as long as it looks good
>>4341015IT8 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.
>>4341034or just use proper softwareSilverfast negafix
>>4341041negafix already contain calibration data for most of negative films available today
>>4340818>Self-portrait editionold one[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareNegative Lab Pro v2.2.0PhotographerSOP610Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern696Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2023:08:06 17:39:10Light SourceUnknownColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4340957leicas 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 filmwhat if your goal is to correct for the scanner and not the filmapply the resulting profile to the negative, then do other edits (assuming your editor lets you do that)
>>4341057But the 500cm is overrated as a slr
>>4341062not as much as the leicai dont hear hasselblad owners speak of their components as if they were infused with magic at least
>>4341065>>4341062To 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)
>>4341058oh wait I seethose aren't just transparent macbeth charts, they're specifically made for/from types of slide filmthat's a shame
>>4341069Yeah, 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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 08:44:04Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341069Its a temperamental bitch and even hasselblad thought it had problems hence the 501c - the same camera but the viewfinder works with a 150mmBronica sqs and mamiya rb/rz are much better>inb4 irrational fear of batteries
>>4341087The 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 betterthis 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).
>>4341091501C 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 cooopeHasselblad users who aren’t coping abandon their blads for SQAi’s lol
Bronica? More like BRUHnica I am right
>>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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 10:02:44Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341099It 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.
>>4341101I 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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 10:19:40Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341101Film 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.
>>4340917Well 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
>>4341095based
>>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 Btake your meds, schizzo
>>4341124Why don't we have a photo battle between the brands instead of stupid arguing?
A Bronica and a Contax (Kyocera) The thinking man choice
>>4341125your moronic argument is not even about qualityalso 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 battlebecause I'm not 12 and I don't shoot "competitively", what the fuck kind of retarded concept is that lmao
>>4341125I'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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 11:39:50Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341127>>4341128Huh? 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...
>>4341125It 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
>>4341105what made the sky turn out black like that?I like it, but I'd like to properly understand what's going onit reminds me of picrel I took with my Pentax K1000It 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 thisI like it
>>4341131Yes, but it would still be a lot more entertaining than an argument about two relatively similar film cameras.
>>4341130All 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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 11:56:57Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341135It'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 SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 12:01:12Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341130I'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 somethingbut alright, if you want a photo I can providealready posted this one before but fuck itthat's from a Mamiya RB67 Pro-S with a Sekor C 127mm f/3.8if I remember correctly that's f16 handheld at 1/15" or something on Kentmere 400 pushed to 3200>>4341138now this one is gorgeous, anonabsolutely fucking alien landscapereminds 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 MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:03:28 14:19:44Exposure Time1/200 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness2.1 EVExposure Bias-1 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341142Thanks 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 MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 12:14:27Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341142Cool! 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.
>>4341152See 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 SAerochrome guy shoots a Hasselblad 500CMimage 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 MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:03:28 14:01:57Exposure Time1/250 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness2.2 EVExposure Bias-1 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341161I really like this photoAlso 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 200Pro Image 100Vision3 50DComedy gold: Shanghai GP3 100All on 35mm
>>4341161Yeah, 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 MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:24 13:03:32Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341163thanks, 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 flashbut I'd advise you bring another roll>>4341166I 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 MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:03:28 13:53:00Exposure Time1/250 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness2.3 EVExposure Bias-1 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341091Weird how RZs are the current favorite for studio shooters.
>>4341179Which studio shooters? Legitimately want to see some work.
>>4341179weird how 500cm's have been since their release keke
>>4341180Tyler 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.
>>4341184Literally whothey don't even have a tripcode on 4chan
>>4341184lol I wouldn't lead with him next time
>>4341187yikes
>>4341187you 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...
>>4341192because ektachrome looks better
>>4341192yes, because I thought it would look okay if pushed to 400never push ektar, it looks like shitthat's my fault, thoughwhen metered at 100 it's always been pleasant
>>4341193I'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.>>4341194Those reds do be spicy.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFujifilm eSystems, Inc.Camera ModelDigital LinkCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.0 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution95 dpiVertical Resolution95 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 21:12:07Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341195oh buoy, that one is from a roll that came out FINE keknot my best edit, sure, but the Ektar has some pungent primary colors, I love its reds and orangesnow THIS is what Ektar pushed to 400 looks likelooks like expired shit because of the colour caststhis one I didn't even edit properly apart from inverting colours, it's not worth itAt least I'm not dumb enough to shoot important things when testing out new stuffbut 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 exampleYou can push 250D to 1600 almost unnoticeably[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:03:28 14:43:46Exposure Time1/125 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness1.0 EVExposure Bias-1 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341195>prices have increased since COVIDColor me shocked faggot
>>4341201reading abilities of a retarded baby
>>4341195Holy 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>>4341190Crabs in a bucket
>>4341195Gold 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.
>>4341217Unfortunately 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?
>>4341222Still get new? Xx, maybe?
>>4341222fomapan
>>4341220>literally critiquing Literally, are you? Literally where?
>>4341220>enviousIs that the crab metric for other’s work?
>>4341229Googling crab bucket would explain it to you. >>4341227Yikes 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".
the lonely life of a fire watchmanI call this "looking for fire (in my heart)"[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNORITSU KOKICamera ModelEZ ControllerCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 14:43:21Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341236americans 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 capitalismI agree with everything else, I just profoundly disagree with this partno, 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>>4341238yes, it's almost like artistic, cultural productions and human well being are not priorities under capitalismp.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
>>4340851wtf did you do to this file? did you index it? why is there ridiculous stair stepping artifacts
>>4340983svol shitty noise from compression
>>4340983>>4341244The m43 look, nice
>>4341236Your lifelong ducks at the park project would be famous if only you had connections, surely.
>>4340983beautiful shot, what camera is it? The noise reminds me of harmon phoenix >please god not m43
selfie thread[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, 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?
>>4341267I 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 MakePlustekCamera ModelOpticFilm 8200iCamera SoftwareVueScan 9 x64 (9.8.18)Image-Specific Properties:
>>4341267just 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 OrientationTop, Left-Hand
I feel like I should better my editing skills with this one, but that's satisfactory for now>>4341267you are not importantyou just gotta realize thatno one is gonna track you down or any shit like thattake part in the self portrait thread and post your face already and you'll see it literally doesn't matterp.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>>4341269I 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 MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 19:29:00Exposure Time1/750 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness4.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341271>so you can, like, you know, not be racist (:Counterpoint, embrace it and racist harder.
>>4341270>you CAN post on 4chan and not be a racist dumbassNot possible>>4341269That 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>>4341271not being racist is for fags
>>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 MakePlustekCamera ModelOpticFilm 8200iCamera SoftwareVueScan 9 x64 (9.8.18)Image-Specific Properties:
>>4341279man, no one carespost whatever
>>4341283It's just easier and safer to not post. >>4341282Yeah 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>>>4341267How do I get over my fear of posting my shit here?
>>4340818oh 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 strangerspretty much u can get fucked before i bother with that particular line of pointless self-immolation
>>4341286what[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFujifilm eSystems, Inc.Camera ModelDigital LinkCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:07:01 22:33:06Color Space InformationsRGB
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?
>>4341290Well 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.
>>4341257lol thanks - canon 7
>>4341295okay so it is film? Good. We almost had a moment there.
>>4341300lmao
>>4341271got these scans today, if anyone wanna say something[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 21:25:15Exposure Time1/750 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness4.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341302[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 21:17:41Exposure Time1/750 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness4.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341282That’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>>4341302Too dark IMO, did you meter em or sunny 16 it?
>>4341306the metering was fine, did it with a Gossen LunasixI too think these are dark but I think they match the mood I want them toFortunately, because Ilford Delta 100 pushed to 400 doesn't hold all that wellKentmere is somehow better in this aspect, it can be flatter even when pushedit gets very contrasty with flash[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 21:34:58Exposure Time1/750 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness4.6 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341306did this other version as well, but I'm not sure[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 22:50:32Exposure Time1/750 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness4.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341302>>4341316brighter edit as well, still not sure[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:24 22:56:26Exposure Time1/750 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness4.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4341306do you mean rpx 25 or is rpx 125 a real thing? 2 stops is nbd, 4 stops could be a problem>>4341317the 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.
>>4341318I’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 helpedagreed, but 77mm filters are way too expensive ):>or crop out that sky.it would feel cluttereda filter would be the way to go indeedI'm glad I took this photo, though
>>4341324You 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 ModelCanon EOS 5D Mark IIIEquipment MakeCanonCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Vertical Resolution300 dpiHorizontal Resolution300 dpiImage Width5243Image Height3840Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:24 19:41:54Lens Aperturef/5.0Exposure Bias0 EVExposure ProgramAperture PriorityColor Space InformationsRGBWhite BalanceAutoRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoExposure Time1/1250 secFlashNo FlashF-Numberf/5.0ISO Speed Rating100Focal Length150.00 mmMetering ModePatternScene Capture TypeStandardLight SourceUnknown
>>4341317Stand 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 MakesamsungCamera ModelGalaxy S24 UltraCamera SoftwareS928U1UES2AXE4Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Focal Length (35mm Equiv)23 mmImage-Specific Properties:Compression SchemeJPEG Compression (Thumbnail)Image Height3000Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:23 12:28:48Vertical Resolution72 dpiHorizontal Resolution72 dpiImage Width4000Lens Aperturef/1.7Exposure Bias0 EVExposure ProgramNormal ProgramColor Space InformationUncalibratedUnique Image IDHK0XLQE00SMImage Height3000Brightness2.7 EVWhite BalanceAutoExposure ModeAutoExposure Time83/10000 secFlashNo FlashF-Numberf/1.7ISO Speed Rating160Image Width4000Focal Length6.30 mmMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeStandardLight SourceUnknown
>>4341267Dunno 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 hourdudebro you dont have to sit in the darki usually just bring my tank to the computer and lower the quality of this board and others while developing
>>4341218At the bottom of the glass lies the Gold 200 blackpill...>>4341210I 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 MakeFujifilm eSystems, Inc.Camera ModelDigital LinkCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 8.0 (Windows)Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution95 dpiVertical Resolution95 dpiImage Created2024:07:25 11:26:10Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341290its 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
>>4341391Tray developing only for now. :[
>>4341466i 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?
>>4340897You're a fucking retard, it's it going to turn into a black and white image?
>>4341530In 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.
>>4341543practically no one has 30m bulk rolls of tri x in stock in europeonly one i can find sells it for €300double x can be bought for about half thatif (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
>>4341546My 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>>4341546In 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.
>>4341563There is actually a film that's basically XX, but in 70mm. It's very rare, so you're still out of luck.
>>4341571Cinestill has xx which is literally just double X spooled up onto 120 rolls.
>>4341109What 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.
>>4341530I 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 OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>4341590Well 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
/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 examplebut 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 ownand it doesn't even make sense having underexposed photos because the flash duration is shorther than the leaf shutter, everything is clearly synchronizedI'm using a Nikon Speedlight SB-22 and a Mamiya RB67 ProS coupled with the 65mm Sekor-C lenshow 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 eitherwhat intrigues me though is the RBsometimes the flash triggers, sometimes it does notand when it doesn't I check on the Pentax and the flash is still good, it still burns, it works just fineand yes, I'm switching the flash sync to M when using it although it really shouldn't matter, I guessall cameras work fine with the SB-22 electronic flashI was going mad with the fucking random odds of the flash working, so I just ditched it and I'm using the electronic flashbut the flashcubes are so much brighter and warmer, I wish I could usem them with the RBsorry 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 MakeSONYCamera ModelILCE-6000Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 15.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:06:22 00:44:11Exposure Time1/250 secExposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Brightness3.0 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryColor Space InformationUncalibratedRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
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 MakeMinoltaCamera ModelScan Dual IICamera Softwaredarktable 4.8.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:25 13:49:50Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width2597Image Height3700
>>4340818Anyone wanna try guessing the film?
>>4341685But 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 MakeMinoltaCamera ModelScan Dual IICamera Softwaredarktable 4.8.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:25 13:49:13Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width3786Image Height2611
>>4341681Even 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 retardedof course I'm talking about shooting with a proper aperturethe thing is: sometimes I get different results comparing what are basically the same shots, but with different shutter speeds using a leaf shutterconsidering 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 lightthe 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
>>4341687My 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 MakeMinoltaCamera ModelScan Dual IICamera Softwaredarktable 4.8.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:25 13:54:12Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width3665Image Height2383
60mm distagon[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPad Pro (11-inch) (3rd generation)Camera Software17.5.1Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)29 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:07:25 19:37:44Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/1.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/1.8Brightness-3.0 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length3.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width2452Image Height2312Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>434173980mm planar[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPad Pro (11-inch) (3rd generation)Camera Software17.5.1Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)29 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:07:25 19:38:50Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/1.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/1.8Brightness-2.9 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length3.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width2246Image Height2178Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>4341739>>4341741I prefer Zenzanon, the image is much sharper than this garbage
>>4341821bruh he just took a photo of his viewfinder lmao
>>4341741>>4341739>viewfinder photo shot on ipadIs the color change even the lens or the fucking ipad camera
>>4341830Cope, those are film borders. He can't even frame right
>spoopy[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGooglePhotoScanImage-Specific Properties:Image Created2024:07:26 01:11:53
what film would you /fgt/s recommend for night shooting at disney world?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGoogleImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationUnknownImage Width2048Image Height3089
>>4341739>>4341741bro what were you doing in my kitchen
>>4340838You look nice Anon!
>>4340861I like the faded look Anon(ette)
>>4340855Honestly I like it how it is. You look like a chill guy too.>>4340937Nice shot>>4340946I like the fading + the sign>>4340952Your shots were great in the other thread!>>4340971Cute cat>>4341047I like the composition>>4341259I can feel the Americana
>>4341700neatthanks for posting some un54 in rodinaldid you try other orwo films?
>>4341187what;s the problem with this picture?>>4340818closest thing i have to a self portrait on film. i shoot myself on digital sometims but it feels like it'd be a waste of film plus i dont want to seem vain to the lab tech>>4341270this is what i do
>>4341878oop[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.10.38Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:25 22:47:45Color Space InformationsRGB
>>4341835No faggot it's my viewfinder why would I waste film to show that shit
>>4341835You can see the cross hairs in the glass lmao
What are your 5 favorite film stocks?>tri-X>Ektachrome>Iilford Ortho 80>Gold 200>Kodak xxI have a personal hatred for foma due to how curly their rolls are and how thin the negatives are unless you over expose/develop.
>>4341949Since when was 100TX discontinued?
>>4341945>>4341897lol how easy
>>4341949>Provia 400X>Elite Chrome 200>XX>FP4[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>4341949>The one that I get for free>The one that's on sale>The one that's just cheap at the time>The one that's cheap at the time but only as a 3 pack>The one that's cheap at the time but only as a 5 pack
Are there any downsides to skipping the stop bath if I have no plans to reuse the fixer?
>>4341984Do a good 2min rinse with a few dumps/refills and you'll be fine. My fixer lasts 30+ rolls still doing this.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>4341984>>4341986I do like a 30 second rinse with faucet water and my fixer lasts over 30 or so rolls as well
>>4341968this is nice. you faked it with digital, admit it
>>4341991Nah was just crooked AF[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeGoogleCamera ModelPixel 6aCamera SoftwareSnapseed 2.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2024:07:26 13:32:32Exposure Time4169/100000 secF-Numberf/1.7Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating107Lens Aperturef/1.7Brightness1.1 EVExposure Bias0 EVSubject Distance0.11 mMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length4.38 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2000Image Height1500RenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoDigital Zoom Ratio1.3Scene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeMacro
>>4342016Obvious photoshop.
>>4342017>I need you to post proof>No that's not good enough>Obviously photoshop ^(we are here)^>Post driver's licence next to your setup>I need a witnessed, signed legal declaration with a judge present claiming you actually did it>Give me your address so I can verify what you say is true, goyFuckin' please, faggot.
>>4341877I am meaning to, but its not that common over here and so its expensive, but I would love to try the color film[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeMinoltaCamera ModelScan Dual IICamera Softwaredarktable 4.8.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:25 10:54:11Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width3209Image Height2265
>>4342027Are you asking me out on a date, my sweet bb grl?
>>4340861It's weird to imagine that there are women here in the /fgt/, but it does go some way to explaining why some retard has been posting inverted phone snaps of their handheld negatives all this time; i'd always assumed it was a 3rd worlder>coffee cuplrn 2 scan already you fucking moron
>>4342098>he doesn't know3 out of 10 people you have ever replied to were girls. you've been talking to girls. don't sweat too much now buddy.
>>4342099eww I've been talking to americans??
>>4342098>"Women could be here", he thought. "I've never been on this board before". The cool breeze from his desk fan felt good on his bare chest. "I hate women" he thought. After Dark by Mr. Kitty reverberated in his headphones the feels reverberated throughout his entire body, even as the $2.30 Monster Ultra coursed through his veins...
>>4341302>if anyone wanna say somethingThey are shit, they're always shit, nobody wants to see your disgusting huemonkey body or your unwashed and unshaven sadboi pouty cocksucking face or the street furniture in your fucking favela shithole.We especially don't want to see them through the medium of low-effort unedited scans that you re-post continually for weeks because I assume that each roll you shoot devastates you financially and you can't just take more but you still align with doghair-man's mantra that attaching an image file elevates your esl gibberish posts above everyone elses.
>>4342099>implyingmost of those are trannies, god I wish they let me photograph their small pps with Gold 200
>>4342109>50+ rolls in the fridge>shooting constantly>I edit each one of my scans>I only ever repost when giving an example of somethingI actually post lots of photos here, you just don't know they're mine, nophotocry harder lmao
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeMinoltaCamera ModelScan Dual IICamera Softwaredarktable 4.8.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:14 12:19:46Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width2627Image Height2092
>>4342115You should put a few dog hairs on one of your scans.
>>4342118I have nothing to do with doghairanon apart from actually shooting, unlike you lol
>>4342123I am doghairanon aka 8x10snapshitterGod. It would probably get that guy angry if you added some additional artistic flair(doghair) to your scans.
>>4342125ah got it kekapparently he's already pissed off just by my photos lmaocouldn't even articulate something more than incoherent ramblings, so yeah, opinion dismissedkeep doing your stuff, manp.s.: pls do a 8x10" macro of your dog's snout pls
>>4342126I'm going to do a picture like this on 8x10 with my studio strobes, but I want it to be perfect, so I will test lighting with a human subject first. I know I can get the dof required, but I want the lighting to look epic as well, and I am a noob at strobes.1:1 is still macro no matter the format, so technically a headshot of him would be macro if I stayed around 1:1. I may try it eventually![EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelPerfection V800Equipment MakeEPSONCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.2.2 (Android)Image-Specific Properties:Image Width2880Image Height4380Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:04:25 12:44:52Color Space InformationsRGBLight SourceUnknown
>>4342130did you took this with a soda can LMAO
>>434213135mm XX@800 and a little oof. I only posted it to show my idea for the 8x10 shot, silly little contextlet.
>>4341984The point of stop bath is to prevent overdeveloping by neutralizing the developer quickly, not to protect your fixer. If you want to avoid contaminating your fixer you need to rinse with water, regardless of whether or not you used stop bath. Unless your dev times are very short or you're being unusually precise, stop bath is usually not necessary.
>>4341739First shots from my 60mm distagon. Ignore my husbands shitcan in the back.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2641Image Height2614Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4342123>i have nothing to do with doghairanon apart fromdickriding each other constantly>>4342125>>4342126>>4342130>>4342115>you just dont know theyre mineoh yes we do, how many other fucking kleinfelter sufferers with goat head tattoos do you see posting selfies here?
>>4342168>dickriding>normal interaction between two non-hateful peopletouch grass>oh yes we do, how many other fucking kleinfelter sufferers with goat head tattoos do you see posting selfies here?99% of my photos are of something elseas I said before:only ad hominems, no actual criticism, nophoto, opinion dismissed
>>4342159Are you happy with it?Based test shot subject.
>>4342159what an ugly dogtake pics of the shitcan next time
>>4342138Is 4 minutes short
>>4342201pretty short yeahThe theory goes like this: you add your dev at 0:00 and it starts converting silver halide to silver metal. At 4:00 there is enough silver metal to make an image so you pour out your dev and pour your fix in. The fix dissolves the remaining silver halide and removes it from the film, but this takes something like 10 minutes. At 4:00 there is still a few drops of developer left on the film and that had absorbed into the gelatin, so the dev is racing with the fixer to convert the remaining silver halide. You basically made an accidental monobath, and your dev time is going to be something between 4:00 and 14:00, though the latter portion will be at much higher dilution. If you had used stop bath it would have neutralized any developer that remained on the film instantly.That is the theory but I think it's mostly bullshit. It was probably more relevant when fixers worked slower so the remaining dev would have more time to continue working. Or for printmaking where dev time is measured in seconds and you can watch it and pull it out when it reaches the exact density you want.
LF lads, what’s the cheapest 4x5 I can get reasonably easily in North America (or Canada if any of you are as unfortunate as me to be here). Local shops only carry one or two ilford and some Kodak stuff. There’s cheaper sheets out there? Does foma do 4x5? Finally got some free weekends and want to use that cheap monorail I got a while back but don’t want to waste nicer film sheets figuring it out.
>>4342262Foma does make 4x5. The Chinese film is cheap as well, but has quality issues. You can also get xray film for cheap.
>>4342262I'd save the Graflex or even Linhof searches on eBay and snag a deal. Basically all the major brands, actually. If you want something good that's new I'd go for a Toyo. If you want something for the studio I'd go for a Sinar P1 or P2. Linhof is highly regarded but you can find them for cheap if you're patient. I'd check multiple sources and not just eBay. I'd also check sold listings to get an idea. >>4341872Thanks![EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeOLYMPUS CORPORATIONCamera ModelE-M10MarkIVCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)Maximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Focal Length (35mm Equiv)24 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:27 01:38:41Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/9.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/9.0Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length12.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4342266>lesbians of /fgt/
>>4342268I do want to get a Subaru as a second car lol
>>4342270What's your primary, a Jeep?
Speaking of Sinar and LF... Just developed this picture I took on my P1 today. Looks to have come out pretty well. 34 inches of bellows extension on a 120mm lens. 3 minute exposure at f32 on delta 100. Contact print tommorow.I plan to photograph the front of the moth and hang the two pictures next to each other. Should be pretty cool![EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelGalaxy S24 UltraCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.4.3 (Android)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Focal Length (35mm Equiv)23 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:07:26 23:00:28Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/1.7Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating1000Lens Aperturef/1.7Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length6.30 mmColor Space InformationsRGBExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>>4342266Ah my bad dawg, I meant 4x5 sheet film. I picked up a cheapo cambo rig for 40 bucks at a thrift shop and I’ve used it a bit with an instax back, but I wanna try some sheets. The other anon mentioned xray film that does seem like one of the cheaper options just for fucking around.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeAppleCamera ModeliPhone 13 Pro MaxCamera SoftwareAdobe Lightroom 9.2.2 (iOS)Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:05:11 17:41:19Exposure Time1/120 secF-Numberf/1.5Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating64Lens Aperturef/1.5Brightness4.6 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length5.70 mmColor Space InformationsRGBExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAuto
>>4342268>>4342270>>4342272KEK
>>4342266Beautiful place, where is this? Canada?