and please use their services
Diary of a medium format virgin.
- Thread starter Kev M
- Start date
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Word up homeys it's time for another installment of the highly inexperienced, done it twice, room for improvement, medium formatter.
The camera has been languishing on a shelf for quite some time, working away, moving house and a lack of inspiration have kept me from picking it up for some time. Anywasy I got a text off a mate the other day saying he was doing a 24 hour mountain bike race in Burton so thought it was just the excuse I needed. With the KM5D suffering from an accute case of black frame shutter death and still being away for repair there was nothing for it but to pick up the lubitel with whatever film was left in it, raid the fridge for whatever film was in there and head for the hills.
Nothing much going on during the day so I decided to go home and return at night for some light trails, unfortunately I'd lost my radio triggers in the house move so flash was out of the question. On the way home I popped into Jessops thinking they may have a cable release, silly me, luckily Burton has a reasonably well stocked independant camera shop who happened to have one. Light trails were the order of the night but I've got no idea how they'll turn out the light meter read a big fat zero and I didn't have the safety net of a DSLR to practice with. That could be the biggest waste of film you've ever seen.
You will however, all be pleased to know that not once did I forget to wind the film on and double expose the film. No this time I learnt a new trick thanks to the cable release. To fire the shutter you have to use the cocking lever which is next to the shutter release which is pretty hard to forget when hand. However it's perfectly possible using a shutter release to press the button on the cable without remembering to cock the shutter or remember that you haven't done it. At least I remembered to wind the film on.
Looks the my DSLR isn't the only camera capable of producing black frames :bang::bonk:
The camera has been languishing on a shelf for quite some time, working away, moving house and a lack of inspiration have kept me from picking it up for some time. Anywasy I got a text off a mate the other day saying he was doing a 24 hour mountain bike race in Burton so thought it was just the excuse I needed. With the KM5D suffering from an accute case of black frame shutter death and still being away for repair there was nothing for it but to pick up the lubitel with whatever film was left in it, raid the fridge for whatever film was in there and head for the hills.
Nothing much going on during the day so I decided to go home and return at night for some light trails, unfortunately I'd lost my radio triggers in the house move so flash was out of the question. On the way home I popped into Jessops thinking they may have a cable release, silly me, luckily Burton has a reasonably well stocked independant camera shop who happened to have one. Light trails were the order of the night but I've got no idea how they'll turn out the light meter read a big fat zero and I didn't have the safety net of a DSLR to practice with. That could be the biggest waste of film you've ever seen.
You will however, all be pleased to know that not once did I forget to wind the film on and double expose the film. No this time I learnt a new trick thanks to the cable release. To fire the shutter you have to use the cocking lever which is next to the shutter release which is pretty hard to forget when hand. However it's perfectly possible using a shutter release to press the button on the cable without remembering to cock the shutter or remember that you haven't done it. At least I remembered to wind the film on.
Looks the my DSLR isn't the only camera capable of producing black frames :bang::bonk:
- Messages
- 5,161
- Name
- Nigel Cliff
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just the shere quality of the images Janice,maybe a Nikon D3 can matchit and certainly a digital Hassleblad would but for 20,30,40 times the cost of an old manual medium format camera.
For those brought up on digital its a whole new world but the FUN at the end of the day is having manually metered and manually focussed you do get a lot of satisfaction when the result turns out to be a good shot.
I dont use Medium Format any more but I am still a manual nerd and often take out my 350D with manual lenses just to make sure I can still get a good shot without the help of auto everything
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What have you got to lose? As this thread pays testament to, nobody is going to expect you to be Ansel Adams or anything like that with your first roll and you'll get some encouraging feedback and pointers from it.
Kudos TP members for not making me chcuk the thing in the bin (or post it back to the person who gave it to me).
Kudos TP members for not making me chcuk the thing in the bin (or post it back to the person who gave it to me).
the results aren't half bad, despite some awful subject matter around Runcorn ! Shall post some tonight once resized for the net.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So, what have I learnt about medium formattery this month then? Bugger all really, this month most of my lessons have been about photography in general and how much I hate autumn.
Inspiration has been sadly lacking recently yet this hasn't stopped me from buying stuff for the Bronica even though I'm not using the damned thing. This months shopping list includes a 50mm lens a polaroid back, a UV filter, a CP filter and a waist level finder.
The 50mm lens was a bargain, there's a mark on the outside but the optics are spotless but do you know what, despite the rumours that it's equivelant to about 36mm on a 35mm (full frame for you 1s and 0s lot) square wides just aren't that wide it seems. Oblong pictures, despite being ungodly do have a certain advantage when you're trying to use distortion. Still, square is where its at (aint that right Joxby)!
The Polaroid back was another bargain, 99p! And you lot say such terrible things about eBay. However it wasn't quite as cheap as it could have been after I wasted all but one of a pack of polaroid because I loaded it wrongly. I won't be making that mistake again. What I also learnt is that polaroid is as hit and miss trying to develop in the cold november air as it is shoving it down my boxers trying to get some heat into it! Leave it indoors I say.
The waist level finder, oh how I love the WLF, I though the metered prism the camera came with would be perfect but you know what, the metering is rubbish and the eyepiece doesn't get on with my glasses.
Okay now onto the real lesson I've learnt this week. I hate autumn, not just because its bloody freezing but because it's too short, well the good bit of it is too short. The weekend before last I went for a walk with the wife and dogs around the woods at Calke Abbey, now I'm no landscaper, far too young to find fields interesting, but the colours on the trees and the golden leaves on the floor that lined our route were inspiring. Perfect for some mountain bike sportraits thinks I. Unfortunately it was too late that weekend so I starting planning to do it this weekend just gone.
What a difference a week makes, virtually no leaves on the trees left and what was on the floor had that brown colour of decay, mmmmmmmmm, pretty. Added to the ugly scene I was now faced with was my wife the unwilling model, embarrased by wearing mountain biking gear, embarrased by standing in fron of the camera and most of all, miserable at the baltic temperatures we were encounering. Oh how she suffered for my art, oh how she made sure I knew just how much she suffered. Next time I'll just get a pro in and to hell with her insecurities
Lots of lessons this month, the most important being, when you see an opportunity seize it because in a weeks time it could have turned to ****.
MFV OUT.
Inspiration has been sadly lacking recently yet this hasn't stopped me from buying stuff for the Bronica even though I'm not using the damned thing. This months shopping list includes a 50mm lens a polaroid back, a UV filter, a CP filter and a waist level finder.
The 50mm lens was a bargain, there's a mark on the outside but the optics are spotless but do you know what, despite the rumours that it's equivelant to about 36mm on a 35mm (full frame for you 1s and 0s lot) square wides just aren't that wide it seems. Oblong pictures, despite being ungodly do have a certain advantage when you're trying to use distortion. Still, square is where its at (aint that right Joxby)!
The Polaroid back was another bargain, 99p! And you lot say such terrible things about eBay. However it wasn't quite as cheap as it could have been after I wasted all but one of a pack of polaroid because I loaded it wrongly. I won't be making that mistake again. What I also learnt is that polaroid is as hit and miss trying to develop in the cold november air as it is shoving it down my boxers trying to get some heat into it! Leave it indoors I say.
The waist level finder, oh how I love the WLF, I though the metered prism the camera came with would be perfect but you know what, the metering is rubbish and the eyepiece doesn't get on with my glasses.
Okay now onto the real lesson I've learnt this week. I hate autumn, not just because its bloody freezing but because it's too short, well the good bit of it is too short. The weekend before last I went for a walk with the wife and dogs around the woods at Calke Abbey, now I'm no landscaper, far too young to find fields interesting, but the colours on the trees and the golden leaves on the floor that lined our route were inspiring. Perfect for some mountain bike sportraits thinks I. Unfortunately it was too late that weekend so I starting planning to do it this weekend just gone.
What a difference a week makes, virtually no leaves on the trees left and what was on the floor had that brown colour of decay, mmmmmmmmm, pretty. Added to the ugly scene I was now faced with was my wife the unwilling model, embarrased by wearing mountain biking gear, embarrased by standing in fron of the camera and most of all, miserable at the baltic temperatures we were encounering. Oh how she suffered for my art, oh how she made sure I knew just how much she suffered. Next time I'll just get a pro in and to hell with her insecurities
Lots of lessons this month, the most important being, when you see an opportunity seize it because in a weeks time it could have turned to ****.
MFV OUT.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
LOL. Good post Kev.
I have mixed views about square format, having shot weddings in the format it was a PITA always having to allow for cropping to fit standard print ratios.
The new blad wont change my love of the RB67, but it's so sexy and seductive, sort of like a mistress you can't quite stop seeing.
I have mixed views about square format, having shot weddings in the format it was a PITA always having to allow for cropping to fit standard print ratios.
The new blad wont change my love of the RB67, but it's so sexy and seductive, sort of like a mistress you can't quite stop seeing.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cropping FROM the square format? Wash your mouth out CT! Didn't realise you bought a Blad, we've not seen anything from the) and you're moving on already.
Speaking of which, why haven't we seen any of your exploits Mr Venomator?
Speaking of which, why haven't we seen any of your exploits Mr Venomator?
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm not moving on mate, just diversifying.
Don't worry I'm gonna be shooting lots of film just now in various formats. I've been stuck behind the 500mm for about two years and I'm feeling decidedly stale and in need of a change of direction.
- Messages
- 8,758
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
I dunno, I like 6x7 and 5x4, but the disparity between length and breadth is far smaller than 35x26 or 645.
It always appears to me that there is something missing from a 6x9, even though its 1/2 as big again as a 6x6.
Its like....where's the rest of it ?? stupid, I know.
I suppose its a bit of half full/half empty psychology....or less is more....I dunno.
Pano's just look weird, like looking at the world through a letter box..:shrug:
That's it, that's it exactly, oblong feels like a restricted view.
6x7 & 5x4 feels like you're getting a bit extra...
I think its about 28mm, it varies depending on what rubbish I read, 36 seems a bit high.
I'm interested in what you base that on, I mean fitting square pegs into round holes in my head, I see that 645 could be slightly wider fitting it into the same image circle as square, but there can't be more than a couple of mm in it...can there..?
There's another factor, distortion, (just sliding away from 645 a bit cos I can only compare 6x6's, but the principle is the same I think) My Bronica 50 is no wider than the Mamiya 6 50, but the Mamiya distortion whilst not straight, is much more controlled than the Bronica.
Oh gods, I'm gonna have to find a Bronica neg now, and shoot the same thing from the same place with the Mamiya....:bang:
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Don't get too stressed over it mate it's based more on perception than science. I was looking for something to distort the shape of a car a bit when you shoot close to one corner and what I think it perhpas boils down to more is that cars are the wrong shape to do this sort of thing to. What I need to do is a test with my 50mm and my DSLR properly but at the minute its just from what I've lined up through the view finder than actually shot.
For this type of thing I think square is the wrong shape, in fact this weekend I will take the shots to explain myself better. When I first got the 50mm and found it didn't quite give the look I had imagined and immediately thought that I needed the 40mm instead. Then I got to thinking that it's because a sqaure isn't as wide in a circle than a rectangle (645 say) is. But then I got to thinking that it's going to be hard to prove and in fact is probably down to something wrong in my head. You can't really compare 50mm on a 6x6 and 50mm on a 645 because in the case of the bronica they are completely different bodies and lenses. Even if you fit a 6x4.5 back on the SQA it won't be any wider because it will just crop the top and bottom off of the square rather than strectch the oblong to make full use of the image circle (again I haven't got a back to prove this but from an engineers point I'm assuming this is how it works).
The proof as they say is in the pudding and this weekend I will go and shoot the test.
As an aside, how long can exposed film be kept before developing and how should it be stored, somewhere dark of course but does it need to go back in the fridge? I can't keep posting one roll at a time so need to save this weekends until there is more ready to go.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It'll keep for yonks if you keep it cool and dark. Stick it back in the fridge, but I'd say take it out and leave it out overnight before you develop it to get rid of any possible condensation problems.
- Messages
- 109
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is a top thread Kev!
It's making me want to get my dad's old (now mine!) Mamiyas out of storage. I tried using my dad's 645 this Summer but it had been laid up for years and it leaked light on the one film I actually loaded properly! I can't afford to get it repaired and serviced so it's just languishing...
I nicked his C220 TLR as well though, I bet that's still ok. I have the same light meter as your father in law and it's absolutely spot on - try and rob it from him if you can!
It's making me want to get my dad's old (now mine!) Mamiyas out of storage. I tried using my dad's 645 this Summer but it had been laid up for years and it leaked light on the one film I actually loaded properly! I can't afford to get it repaired and serviced so it's just languishing...
I nicked his C220 TLR as well though, I bet that's still ok. I have the same light meter as your father in law and it's absolutely spot on - try and rob it from him if you can!
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Orby,
You can expect cameras of that vintage to need the seals replacing. It's an easy job to do yourself. Have a read of THIS
John Goodman is a very helpful guy, I e-mailed him and he sent me full walk thru instructions for resealing my RB67 - the job is easy with the kits he supplies, in fact if you paid a fortune to have the job done, the chances are it would be one John's kits which were used, and they're really cheap.
There's enough material in John's kits to reseal several cameras.
You can expect cameras of that vintage to need the seals replacing. It's an easy job to do yourself. Have a read of THIS
John Goodman is a very helpful guy, I e-mailed him and he sent me full walk thru instructions for resealing my RB67 - the job is easy with the kits he supplies, in fact if you paid a fortune to have the job done, the chances are it would be one John's kits which were used, and they're really cheap.
There's enough material in John's kits to reseal several cameras.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You're welcome mate, just don't be scared of the job. I was really bricking it - there's a lot of seals in an RB67 and just one back, but this kit makes the job a doddle. If John has full instructions for a particular camera, he'll send you them, so don't be afraid to ask.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I did it, I bloody well did it, I only went and lost my virginity for a second time. It was dark, I fumbled a lot and couldn't find where to put it and when I could find where to put it I couldn't get it to stay there, the time just flew by, it was over before I knew it and despite the sense of satisfaction of doing it I'm left slightly disappointed that it didn't go as it had in my mind and need to have another go.
That's right dear readers I developed my first roll of film, ever, and many of you here can share some of the joy in this seminal moment as without you guidng me and offering fatherly advice I wouldn't have done it at all.
ta ta for know,
The M.F.V.
That's right dear readers I developed my first roll of film, ever, and many of you here can share some of the joy in this seminal moment as without you guidng me and offering fatherly advice I wouldn't have done it at all.
ta ta for know,
The M.F.V.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Here it is, the fruit of my loins, my first roll of home developed film. Levels tweaked during the scan and some slight croppping but too lazy to put it through photoshop and do anything else. The film got damaged as I was loading it, getting jammed and creased in places and there's some marks on the negative. It's a shame but I'm not being too hard on myself as it was my first go. There shots I've cut out 5 shots as they're a bit samey as I was just trying to rattle the film through as quickly as possible.
All shot with Bronica SQA, 50mm at about F4, Ilford HP5 and plenty of off camera flash.
1. Slightly underexposed but was as slow as I'd dare go handheld.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. I had high hopes for this as the test shot in my DSLR came out as I wanted it but I moved position slightly when changin camera and lost the reflection that ran the full length of the top of the crank rather than just the litle bit you can see towards the gears. I also missed focus (which should have been the truvativ sticker), my eye was starting to get strained at this point and at minimum focusing distance the DOF is about an inch at best.
All shot with Bronica SQA, 50mm at about F4, Ilford HP5 and plenty of off camera flash.
1. Slightly underexposed but was as slow as I'd dare go handheld.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. I had high hopes for this as the test shot in my DSLR came out as I wanted it but I moved position slightly when changin camera and lost the reflection that ran the full length of the top of the crank rather than just the litle bit you can see towards the gears. I also missed focus (which should have been the truvativ sticker), my eye was starting to get strained at this point and at minimum focusing distance the DOF is about an inch at best.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not bad at all Kev - well done mate. Slightly under-exposed as you say, but easily sorted in editing. These are very compressed images - only 72kb in the case of the Spaniel and you can see the compression artifacts in the shadows on the left of the image. They'll only show more by lightening the image, but less compressed images should be no problem to sort out.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sorry Freester only just seen this. In answer to your question no I don't. The only person I have to go biking with is the wife and she's a fair weather rider through and through, plus it's been a hectic year so haven't had the time.
So, what did I learn this week?
Aperture is set on the lens. When you change that lens for another lens the camera doesn't magically inherit the ability to transfer your previous settings to the new lens. Under-exposed shots, yes indeedy.
I also learnt that I still can't load a film onto a reel without damaging it. I hope it gets easier, two attempts, two fails.
Cactus flash triggers might be reliable but not when there isn't enough juice in the flash to fire itself. Ten minutes wasted swapping recievers and leads round to no avail, changed the batteries in the flash and hey presto, let there be light!(which will then be under-exposed because the retard holding the camera forgot to change the aperture on the new lens).
Other than that it was an alright days shooting but it has raised one question though.
I was using a flash to blow out a wall behind the wife, set the ISO and aperture I wanted on the DSLR and upped the power until the wall was white. I've just scanned the film and the histogram has no blown whites and no dark shadows, everything is in the middle and quite low contrast. I can fudge the levels to blow the wall out but I'm wondering why film retained the detail that digital didn't?
Any pointers for a virgin?
T.T.F.N.
Kev
So, what did I learn this week?
Aperture is set on the lens. When you change that lens for another lens the camera doesn't magically inherit the ability to transfer your previous settings to the new lens. Under-exposed shots, yes indeedy.
I also learnt that I still can't load a film onto a reel without damaging it. I hope it gets easier, two attempts, two fails.
Cactus flash triggers might be reliable but not when there isn't enough juice in the flash to fire itself. Ten minutes wasted swapping recievers and leads round to no avail, changed the batteries in the flash and hey presto, let there be light!(which will then be under-exposed because the retard holding the camera forgot to change the aperture on the new lens).
Other than that it was an alright days shooting but it has raised one question though.
I was using a flash to blow out a wall behind the wife, set the ISO and aperture I wanted on the DSLR and upped the power until the wall was white. I've just scanned the film and the histogram has no blown whites and no dark shadows, everything is in the middle and quite low contrast. I can fudge the levels to blow the wall out but I'm wondering why film retained the detail that digital didn't?
Any pointers for a virgin?
T.T.F.N.
Kev
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sorry Freester only just seen this. In answer to your question no I don't. The only person I have to go biking with is the wife and she's a fair weather rider through and through, plus it's been a hectic year so haven't had the time.
So, what did I learn this week?
Aperture is set on the lens. When you change that lens for another lens the camera doesn't magically inherit the ability to transfer your previous settings to the new lens. Under-exposed shots, yes indeedy.
I also learnt that I still can't load a film onto a reel without damaging it. I hope it gets easier, two attempts, two fails.
Cactus flash triggers might be reliable but not when there isn't enough juice in the flash to fire itself. Ten minutes wasted swapping recievers and leads round to no avail, changed the batteries in the flash and hey presto, let there be light!(which will then be under-exposed because the retard holding the camera forgot to change the aperture on the new lens).
Other than that it was an alright days shooting but it has raised one question though.
I was using a flash to blow out a wall behind the wife, set the ISO and aperture I wanted on the DSLR and upped the power until the wall was white. I've just scanned the film and the histogram has no blown whites and no dark shadows, everything is in the middle and quite low contrast. I can fudge the levels to blow the wall out but I'm wondering why film retained the detail that digital didn't?
Any pointers for a virgin?
T.T.F.N.
Kev
So, what did I learn this week?
Aperture is set on the lens. When you change that lens for another lens the camera doesn't magically inherit the ability to transfer your previous settings to the new lens. Under-exposed shots, yes indeedy.
I also learnt that I still can't load a film onto a reel without damaging it. I hope it gets easier, two attempts, two fails.
Cactus flash triggers might be reliable but not when there isn't enough juice in the flash to fire itself. Ten minutes wasted swapping recievers and leads round to no avail, changed the batteries in the flash and hey presto, let there be light!(which will then be under-exposed because the retard holding the camera forgot to change the aperture on the new lens).
Other than that it was an alright days shooting but it has raised one question though.
I was using a flash to blow out a wall behind the wife, set the ISO and aperture I wanted on the DSLR and upped the power until the wall was white. I've just scanned the film and the histogram has no blown whites and no dark shadows, everything is in the middle and quite low contrast. I can fudge the levels to blow the wall out but I'm wondering why film retained the detail that digital didn't?
Any pointers for a virgin?
T.T.F.N.
Kev
- Messages
- 1,602
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Put quite simply film has a wider dynamic range than digital.
So for this sort of look you really want the background 2 stops higher than light at the subject...
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think that's where I went wrong. I set the flash at half power to try and keep the recycle times sensible, adjusted the aperture until the wall blew out, the aperture suited what I was doing so I left it at that. You're right I should have either opened up another stop or upped the power on the flash at that point.
- Messages
- 8,758
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
mam6...................................................................bronny
Well, I dunno, need to get down to bronny on a tripod level :bang:
the 6 doesn't squash the buildings as much in the middle ?? the chimney doesn't tilt as much ??...all perspective ?? :shrug:
Whatever, I don't think there's much to choose without target shooting.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fings *** I learnded recently.
Check the battery in your camera, when it's flat it defaults to 1/500 and underexposes everything apart from the first frame on the roll to the point where the blacks have zero detail.
Stop rushing. I shot three rolls in the college studion on Saturday with a model I paid for. I wasted a couple of frames before I realised the flashes weren't going off. Stupid Bowens triggers with their arse about face connection points. I didn't take the time to set my lights properly and didn't ask for help. I now have a white background and a grey floor because I don't know how to light the floor without lighting the models legs. My main light was too big, needed something smaller and pointier to give harder shadows. Remeber that the image is flipped in the WLF, if it looks right to the eye it'll be wrong on the negative. 1 hour in the studio isn't enough, just as you get into the swing of things it's the next persons turn. For christs sake just because there isn't a spiral for the big Patterson tank it doesn't mean that there shouldn't be one and everyone else must be getting by without it. Fogged frames galore. College chemicals leave crusty streak on your negatives. Air bubles are pretty hard to get rid of in a massive tanks with 1.5 litres sloshing about, probably not helpd by the lack of a spiral either. Loading reels is difficult to do when you're not in a rush, when you are in a rush you'll crease and dent the film (again). When developing is finshed don't rush, you'll drop one of your films on the floor.
Working in the darkroom gives me a funny feeling in my tummy and it's nothing to do with the fumes. I want one.
Check the battery in your camera, when it's flat it defaults to 1/500 and underexposes everything apart from the first frame on the roll to the point where the blacks have zero detail.
Stop rushing. I shot three rolls in the college studion on Saturday with a model I paid for. I wasted a couple of frames before I realised the flashes weren't going off. Stupid Bowens triggers with their arse about face connection points. I didn't take the time to set my lights properly and didn't ask for help. I now have a white background and a grey floor because I don't know how to light the floor without lighting the models legs. My main light was too big, needed something smaller and pointier to give harder shadows. Remeber that the image is flipped in the WLF, if it looks right to the eye it'll be wrong on the negative. 1 hour in the studio isn't enough, just as you get into the swing of things it's the next persons turn. For christs sake just because there isn't a spiral for the big Patterson tank it doesn't mean that there shouldn't be one and everyone else must be getting by without it. Fogged frames galore. College chemicals leave crusty streak on your negatives. Air bubles are pretty hard to get rid of in a massive tanks with 1.5 litres sloshing about, probably not helpd by the lack of a spiral either. Loading reels is difficult to do when you're not in a rush, when you are in a rush you'll crease and dent the film (again). When developing is finshed don't rush, you'll drop one of your films on the floor.
Working in the darkroom gives me a funny feeling in my tummy and it's nothing to do with the fumes. I want one.
- Messages
- 1,227
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
im scared. I dont have a lab developer id use in this country (its 9 euros to develop 35mm FFS!) and ill prob have shot a few rolls before get any developed. i was hoping to get some decent portrait stuff done over the next month (back in scotland to see my niece and *ahem* collect my new camera) but on the evidence of this thread im going to need a lot more time.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
€9 to develop! I know Spain is expensive but that's robbery. You'd be better off stashing your films and getting them done in bulk over here. It's fine when you take your time, I was rushing. Everything was setup on a tripod so what I should have done was focused and then left the viewfinder alone and directed the model by site instead of watching the viewfinder and directing her from there.
Have a look at developing your own B&W, it's not that difficult (providing you have all the bits and non-crusty chemicals) and a rewarding part of the process. Not to mention it's probably a shed load cheaper even in Spain.
Have a look at developing your own B&W, it's not that difficult (providing you have all the bits and non-crusty chemicals) and a rewarding part of the process. Not to mention it's probably a shed load cheaper even in Spain.
- Messages
- 1,227
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah i'd like to develop my own stuff but we're in Madrid for another 3 months then back in the UK so not worth the hassle of getting loads of chemicals out here just to take them back. I'm hoping we get another visitor before we head back and then i can give them film to take back and develop.
- Messages
- 21
- Edit My Images
- No
my first film was loaded backwards then I spent 3 hours in a moonlit wood alone taking notes and getting creeped to discover when I got home that the etrs was on multi
excalibur2
My F4's Broken...
- Messages
- 11,771
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
***€9 to develop! I know Spain is expensive but that's robbery. You'd be better off stashing your films and getting them done in bulk over here.***
I have the Wallace Heaton (used to be a posh place in Bond st) 1967 blue book for prices, and they used to develope 120 or 220 B/W film for 2'6=13p (London price).......so no matter what you take into account from labour costs to inflation, you are being ripped off now.
I have the Wallace Heaton (used to be a posh place in Bond st) 1967 blue book for prices, and they used to develope 120 or 220 B/W film for 2'6=13p (London price).......so no matter what you take into account from labour costs to inflation, you are being ripped off now.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tis funny. Regardless of how dispondant I get with a lack of progression in my photography I never stop learning new things. Unfortunately those lessons normally come at a cost of some sort.
This week I learnt that when you're pre-mixed developer which has been sitting on the shelf in the garage for an unknown period of time turns brown there really is little point in trying to develop a film with it. That'll be one roll of Neopan 400 straight in the bin then.
I've also learnt that when shooting through fences at acute angles, even if you think you've got between to lines of wire in the fence you probably haven't. That'll be a load of film wasted because they've got blurry fences in them then.
Split image focus screens don't work with lenses below F4 unless you have really good light, my eyesight is terrible, giraffes and elephants don't stand still long enough for manual focus, I still can't load a film into a reel without creasing it (but I blame the reels for this), passing the squeegee over the film twice doubles the likelihood of scratches, metal grips get so cold in winter that even gloves don't stop your fingers from freezing and the gripped, prism'd, 250mm SQA weighs a bloody ton.
It's not even the end of the week so there's plenty of time for more lessons yet (especially as I'll be pushing Neopan and HP5 to ISO1600 for the first time).
Pics to follow, don't hold you're breath in anticipation though, disappointment is a given.
This week I learnt that when you're pre-mixed developer which has been sitting on the shelf in the garage for an unknown period of time turns brown there really is little point in trying to develop a film with it. That'll be one roll of Neopan 400 straight in the bin then.
I've also learnt that when shooting through fences at acute angles, even if you think you've got between to lines of wire in the fence you probably haven't. That'll be a load of film wasted because they've got blurry fences in them then.
Split image focus screens don't work with lenses below F4 unless you have really good light, my eyesight is terrible, giraffes and elephants don't stand still long enough for manual focus, I still can't load a film into a reel without creasing it (but I blame the reels for this), passing the squeegee over the film twice doubles the likelihood of scratches, metal grips get so cold in winter that even gloves don't stop your fingers from freezing and the gripped, prism'd, 250mm SQA weighs a bloody ton.
It's not even the end of the week so there's plenty of time for more lessons yet (especially as I'll be pushing Neopan and HP5 to ISO1600 for the first time).
Pics to follow, don't hold you're breath in anticipation though, disappointment is a given.
OP
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
7. SCRATCH! This one disappointed me, I hope it would show the similarity between the shape of the fallen tree and the antlers but it's badly composed, under exposed and shot from too far away.
8.
These are the only ones I've done anything with. I don't know why I took them as I don't really have that whole artistic door fetish going on but the film needed using up so I did. All they've had is a crop of the film border, a little curves tweak and a slight sharpen (all in lightroom).
9.
10.
11. Here we can see how badly I can't load film into the reel still, the white marks on the LH side are creases.
12.
Nothing to see here, the camera went off in my hand while pointing at the ground.
8.
These are the only ones I've done anything with. I don't know why I took them as I don't really have that whole artistic door fetish going on but the film needed using up so I did. All they've had is a crop of the film border, a little curves tweak and a slight sharpen (all in lightroom).
9.
10.
11. Here we can see how badly I can't load film into the reel still, the white marks on the LH side are creases.
12.
Nothing to see here, the camera went off in my hand while pointing at the ground.
- Messages
- 5,335
- Name
- matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ah, film and MF in particular bring back memories of what it used to be like, not too distant ones either. I dragged my 645 Mamiya out of retirement this year for my daughters wedding, no pressure then, bought a long lens and a replacement 80 as mine was not working. Great fun, but it was a lot easier for me in that the Mamiya has a prism and AE, just like a big SLR really.
Tonal range and spread is so much better than digital, film lattitude is a lot better too.
You just have to slow down and "think" so much more, the bigger viewfinder helps of course.
Having said that I still love my 50D and I dont think I'd swap either for either, different tools for different jobs I reckon.
Good thread, brings back the days when it wasnt just a case of turning it
on, putting it in P and getting an image everytime.
Matt
Tonal range and spread is so much better than digital, film lattitude is a lot better too.
You just have to slow down and "think" so much more, the bigger viewfinder helps of course.
Having said that I still love my 50D and I dont think I'd swap either for either, different tools for different jobs I reckon.
Good thread, brings back the days when it wasnt just a case of turning it
on, putting it in P and getting an image everytime.
Matt