F & C Week long trip to Cornwall!

Which week (sat to sat) in May would you prefer?

  • 6th - 13th

  • 13th - 20th

  • 20th - 27th

Results are only viewable after voting.
Mysterious forces only annoy those that it can't detect Cornish DNA :D
 
Andysnap said:
I actually had both of the Nikons working again this morning.... for a while :( So the original one is off to Miles for a CLA etc and I will contact Ffordes tomorrow and work out the next step. We may get the black one they have and try that until Miles fixes the original. The Olympus is dead I'm afraid, the rewind spindle is bent beyond use and it won't wind on or fire. sad as it was a nice little camera.
Click to expand...

If I can help with the RC I'm happy to take a look? I've spent enough time with them in pieces to possibly sort out anything jamming for you.
 
stevelmx5 said:
If I can help with the RC I'm happy to take a look? I've spent enough time with them in pieces to possibly sort out anything jamming for you.
Click to expand...

Cheers Steve, very kind. I've got your address still so I'll pop it over to you some time this week if that's ok. (y)

Andy
 
So today I posted off the films from Cornwall to Filmdev... then when I got home I noticed the order form sitting on my desk! Emailed a copy to them, hope it's OK. It's a large enough order that it should be easy to identify...

Definitely missing Cornwall already, and Mrs R has been quite forlorn. :(
 
We posted ours (15 films!) on Saturday and got the scans back this evening. We've just spent the last hour trying to work out who took each film and with which camera!
 
Last edited:
10 for me, plus one roll of Redscale that I finished off on the way to the PO... perhaps explains my error with the order form...

OMG there's incredible golden hour light right now, just think how that would look in Cornwall....:grumpy:
 
OK, what filters should I get to replace the 3 I lost? I think I had a ND4, a ND1.2 and a ND1000, all 49mm circular filters (almost all my lenses are 49mm, though I now do have 52mm and 58mm zooms). I also have an ancient Cokin square holder with 49mm thread.

Anyone use variable NDs? Somewhere I read there can be colour effects...
 
ChrisR said:
OMG there's incredible golden hour light right now, just think how that would look in Cornwall....:grumpy:
Click to expand...

Woody and I just looked out the window and said the exact same thing!
 
ChrisR said:
OK, what filters should I get to replace the 3 I lost? I think I had a ND4, a ND1.2 and a ND1000, all 49mm circular filters (almost all my lenses are 49mm, though I now do have 52mm and 58mm zooms). I also have an ancient Cokin square holder with 49mm thread.

Anyone use variable NDs? Somewhere I read there can be colour effects...
Click to expand...

So firstly, can you confirm the number of stops that each of the filters you had were? Only ND1.2 is the only one that makes sense at 4 stops. A neutral density of 4 is something like 13 stops... unless you mean 0.4 - which is 2.5 stops? So, ND1000?

Not had any experience with variable ND's.

Edit. Eurgh. never mind, I see there are stupid conventions even with the naming of ND filters. NDnumber points towards the fractional 1/number difference in the amount of light (ND8 - 1/8th of the incident light is transmitted), whereas ND.number refers to actual optical density I = I_0 *10^(-.number)

I guess then by ND4, you're referring to an ND 0.6, and by ND1000, you're referring to ND 3.0?
 
Last edited:
I have a variable nd filter and a couple of others knocking about somewhere. They might even be 49mm. I don't remember a colour shift with the variable but I was using it with a digital and auto white balance.

I take it back. I seem to have mostly circular polarisers! I have a 7day shop nd8 in a 62mm which I don't remember using.

I'm sure I looked at getting a variable but didn't.
 
Last edited:
I took a cheap variable ND with me to Fuerteventura last time we went away to use on my PenFT. I shot Velvia and didn't have any issues with colour shifts or exposures at all (why did I sell it again?) :0)
 
Woodsy said:
So firstly, can you confirm the number of stops that each of the filters you had were? Only ND1.2 is the only one that makes sense at 4 stops. A neutral density of 4 is something like 13 stops... unless you mean 0.4 - which is 2.5 stops? So, ND1000?

Not had any experience with variable ND's.

Edit. Eurgh. never mind, I see there are stupid conventions even with the naming of ND filters. NDnumber points towards the fractional 1/number difference in the amount of light (ND8 - 1/8th of the incident light is transmitted), whereas ND.number refers to actual optical density I = I_0 *10^(-.number)

I guess then by ND4, you're referring to an ND 0.6, and by ND1000, you're referring to ND 3.0?
Click to expand...

It's thoroughly confusing isn't it! There are multiple conventions AFAICS. So yes, my ND4 was a 2 stop (AKA ND 0.6), the ND 1.2 was a 4 stop (AKA ND 16), and the ND1000 (most common name) was a 10 stop, AKA ND 3.0 and Big Stopper (at least by Lee).

If I put a polariser on, I get 1-2 stops ND, I think, so with the 2 and 4 stops and the polariser, I could have (roughly) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 stops! But I suspect with the cheaper filters I've been looking at, the colour cast might be horrendous by that point (and the polariser doesn't have an outside thread, which would mean taking it off, adding the ND filter and then putting it back... :( ). The 10 stop was for really slowing down in daylight, never used so far, but I've liked the idea ever since Mark @TheBigYin suggested it might have benefited a shot I took of Warwick for one of the POTY rounds a year or so ago, to get the passing public out of the shot.
 
ChrisR said:
If I put a polariser on, I get 1-2 stops ND, I think, so with the 2 and 4 stops and the polariser, I could have (roughly) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 stops! But I suspect with the cheaper filters I've been looking at, the colour cast might be horrendous by that point (and the polariser doesn't have an outside thread, which would mean taking it off, adding the ND filter and then putting it back... :( ). The 10 stop was for really slowing down in daylight, never used so far, but I've liked the idea ever since Mark @TheBigYin suggested it might have benefited a shot I took of Warwick for one of the POTY rounds a year or so ago, to get the passing public out of the shot.
Click to expand...

A polariser won't give you an equal level of attenuation over the whole frame because it's specific to the nature of the light entering the filter. Unpolarised - or more accurately, light with evenly distributed but random linearly polarisation axes - will suffer a transmission loss of exactly 1/2 according to Malus Law. On the other hand, light with a definite tendency towards a specific polarisation axis can be made to almost perfectly transmit or almost perfectly attenuate at the filter, depending on the purity of the polarisation. (I say almost perfectly because in the former, I'm ignoring extinction and Fresnel reflections at the surfaces, and extinction ratio of the polariser in the latter) As such, one shouldn't really use a polariser as an ND filter.

With film, I'd probably get a 2 stop and a 4 stop filter. Combined that gives you 6 stops, and in lower light levels, that'd probably be sufficient to force the addition of exposure time for reciprocity failure anyway, thereby extending the exposure further. 1 stop filters are a little pointless imo, and in any case the exposure latitude of negative film would happily absorb a 1 stop push or pull if you really needed that stop either way. It's also fewer filters to look after, and less stuff to carry around.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, FP4, sunny 16: 1/125 at f/16 on a sunny day. 6 stops takes you to 1/2 a second, a bit short for reciprocity failure to kick in. A cloudy dull day, no shadows, would give another 4 stops to 8 seconds plus RF... to about 25 seconds, according to the data sheet.

I'll wait until I have seen the results of my long exposure "experiments" from Cornwall... quote marks as there was nothing scientific, such as recording actual exposure times for particular shots, though I did bracket the exposure compensation to get varied exposure times for the same scene.
 
I've got a few shots devved and scanned now. Here's one, the Rolleiflex on HP5 at the Maritime Museum.

Diver by Andy, on Flickr

Shall I start a thread in the Photos from Film section or are we happy popping them in here?
 
nikki_s said:
For a moment I thought you were going to say you found your filters in there!
Click to expand...

No such luck... :(

I've reported it on the Loss Report website, happily Devon and Cornwall Police subsidise that so I didn't have to pay the usual £4.95 fee. But not holding out much hope. The sad thing is, few if any modern lenses have a 49mm thread so they're only really useful to mad folk like us!
 
Andysnap said:
I've got a few shots devved and scanned now. Here's one, the Rolleiflex on HP5 at the Maritime Museum.

Diver by Andy, on Flickr

Shall I start a thread in the Photos from Film section or are we happy popping them in here?
Click to expand...

I like the idea of at least some of them happening here...
 
Andysnap said:
I've got a few shots devved and scanned now. Here's one, the Rolleiflex on HP5 at the Maritime Museum.

Diver by Andy, on Flickr

Shall I start a thread in the Photos from Film section or are we happy popping them in here?
Click to expand...
When I first saw that photo I thought it was future suggested attire for some F&C regulars when going anywhere near the sea... then I realised it wasn't available in mustard! ;)
 
Spent the night scanning and organising my 5x4 photos from the trip. Took a fair while to figure out which notes I'd taken referred to which photos! :LOL: Anyway, here's a couple from the walk up by the cliffs along Porthcothan way that I'm reasonably happy with.

Both on the Nagaoka with 90mm f/8 Super Angulon. Provia 100F developed by Peak. Top one was 1/4th at f/32 and the bottom was 1/8 at f/45.

LF0096.jpg

20170525_132105.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think Filmdev may be struggling, they've had my 35mm and 120 since yesterday and still no sign of my scans :(
 
RaglanSurf said:
I think Filmdev may be struggling, they've had my 35mm and 120 since yesterday and still no sign of my scans :(
Click to expand...

They're probably fed up with seeing photos of Cornwall. :)
 
I sent mine in plenty of time for the post on Monday, got the download email Wednesday morning, an hour before the phone call for the money! This time there was an odd screw up in that the sequence is out; the "first few" pics were all from different films (I think they arrive in date/time order in Aperture) and others were scattered at random wrong places. It's cost me a few hours to try to get them right, then when I made an album from all the "1 star or better" shots they were screwed up again!

Struggling to go through them all. I've now done preliminary ratings, but the ones I like are still far too many to put up (including many similar ones, where I've obviously got to choose).

Couple of things I've learned: If you go long exposure in an evening, it might look almost dark but may turn out looking almost like day; and it's certainly possible to go too long exposure with moving water!
 
Last edited:
I've had the funny date problems a few times. I think one of the scanners has it set wrong as they come out as 1901 or similar for the year. Seems to happen more often with 120 from what I remember. I usually load them in one film at a time as they are ordered correctly by name in the file system so I just alter the date on the weird ones in Photos.
 
I'm struggling to choose from some rather similar shots in the general "sunset/golden hour" category, but I thought this gull eying me up to see whether I have some sort of black ice cream in my hand was worth a starter for ten. EDIT: In Padstow...

R1-06518-024A by Chris R, on Flickr

Pentax LX, Pentax-M 35-70 (really, 70-35 given the way it works) f/2.8 lens, Portra 400. A cracker of a lens!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top