- Messages
- 3,102
- Name
- RJ
- Edit My Images
- No
Or you shoot medium format and just swap film backs...
For the same camera, you could have a separate back for colour, black and white, and, if you're flush with cash, even digital.
Critique Final reflections - changing ISO
- Thread starter manda
- Start date
Or you shoot medium format and just swap film backs...
For the same camera, you could have a separate back for colour, black and white, and, if you're flush with cash, even digital.
- Messages
- 11,302
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If it really is a case of just wanting a b&w or colour option you may as well look at getting another F100 body, would make swapping between the two really simple. If, however your looking for a different experience, an old fully manual camera or a rangefinder for example then that's opening up a whole different camera bag
D
Deleted member 21335
Guest
Some beautiful images here, Amanda and some great advice with regards to exposure etc. With Portra 400, I always meter at 200ISO, usually for the shadows and shoot that way, so effectively overexposing by at least a stop. Seems to work well so far.
OP
- Messages
- 777
- Name
- Amanda Herbert
- Edit My Images
- No
These are stunning, Amanda.
I saw your SPAG questions - but didn't dare answer myself
OP
- Messages
- 777
- Name
- Amanda Herbert
- Edit My Images
- No
Some beautiful images here, Amanda and some great advice with regards to exposure etc. With Portra 400, I always meter at 200ISO, usually for the shadows and shoot that way, so effectively overexposing by at least a stop. Seems to work well so far.
I've been reading and admiring your posts, sorry I didn't leave a positive comment sooner! Thanks for the info .
OP
- Messages
- 777
- Name
- Amanda Herbert
- Edit My Images
- No
Another question, whilst this thread is still active - I loaded film in the camera and my TFP model cancelled. I've tried to store the camera in a cold area of the house. Does the quality of the film degrade whilst in the camera or am I worrying about nothing? Unloaded film is in the fridge. Thanks, Mandy
- Messages
- 1,717
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It'll be fine.
ChrisR
I'm a well known grump...
- Messages
- 11,028
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Most of us on here have partly-shot film in one or other camera for months, even years, as Keith says, don't worry. No need really to worry about which part of the house it's in. Film lasts MUCH longer than most digital sensors...
Once the film is shot, it is a good idea to get it processed soon... as in, within a month or twelve, maybe. But people are still getting found film processed that's decades old.
- Messages
- 1,076
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I inherited my Grandad's Kodak Retinette whe my grandmother died in 2007... I actually received the camera in 2012! A year later, I decided to try it out and discovered it had a film still in it. Two years after THAT I got said film developed! These are a couple of pics from the roll.
This, consensus established was probably shot around 1987. I recall the old boy going into a bit of a flurry and running out with his camera when he saw the veteran car rally gong past.
This, from the same roll of film, consensus concluded was probably shot on their holiday to the Lake district in 1977, we 'think'!
The film must have been in the camera for the best part of a decade, between being 'loaded' and being 'unfinished', remained there another decade, until he died, and another until I inherited it, and half of one more, before I got the film souped!
This is probably a more 'extreme' example, but, no, you shouldn't need to worry about the film being left in camera!
In years past, the average family took 20 photo's a year... camera's often sat in draws for years between shots! Going through some old family negatives, I have some that show just that! One roll in particular, a 120 cartridge film; that has pictures covering an entire decade, starting with some holiday snaps of my father, ages 16, through his wedding, aged 20, and finishing with a silver jubilee flower display when he was 26!
A few weeks or months in the camera shouldn't be an issue.
This, consensus established was probably shot around 1987. I recall the old boy going into a bit of a flurry and running out with his camera when he saw the veteran car rally gong past.
This, from the same roll of film, consensus concluded was probably shot on their holiday to the Lake district in 1977, we 'think'!
The film must have been in the camera for the best part of a decade, between being 'loaded' and being 'unfinished', remained there another decade, until he died, and another until I inherited it, and half of one more, before I got the film souped!
This is probably a more 'extreme' example, but, no, you shouldn't need to worry about the film being left in camera!
In years past, the average family took 20 photo's a year... camera's often sat in draws for years between shots! Going through some old family negatives, I have some that show just that! One roll in particular, a 120 cartridge film; that has pictures covering an entire decade, starting with some holiday snaps of my father, ages 16, through his wedding, aged 20, and finishing with a silver jubilee flower display when he was 26!
A few weeks or months in the camera shouldn't be an issue.
D
Deleted member 52414
Guest
excellent shots
OP
- Messages
- 777
- Name
- Amanda Herbert
- Edit My Images
- No
I inherited my Grandad's Kodak Retinette whe my grandmother died in 2007... I actually received the camera in 2012! A year later, I decided to try it out and discovered it had a film still in it. Two years after THAT I got said film developed! These are a couple of pics from the roll.
This, consensus established was probably shot around 1987. I recall the old boy going into a bit of a flurry and running out with his camera when he saw the veteran car rally gong past.
This, from the same roll of film, consensus concluded was probably shot on their holiday to the Lake district in 1977, we 'think'!
The film must have been in the camera for the best part of a decade, between being 'loaded' and being 'unfinished', remained there another decade, until he died, and another until I inherited it, and half of one more, before I got the film souped!
This is probably a more 'extreme' example, but, no, you shouldn't need to worry about the film being left in camera!
In years past, the average family took 20 photo's a year... camera's often sat in draws for years between shots! Going through some old family negatives, I have some that show just that! One roll in particular, a 120 cartridge film; that has pictures covering an entire decade, starting with some holiday snaps of my father, ages 16, through his wedding, aged 20, and finishing with a silver jubilee flower display when he was 26!
A few weeks or months in the camera shouldn't be an issue.
Thanks for that lovely story (and reassuring advice).
- Messages
- 1,097
- Name
- Alistair
- Edit My Images
- No
I really like your shots Manda. The tones are great. It's really encouraging to see someone shooting portraits on film, makes me want to shoot more film. I now have 5 fresh films waiting for me in my drawer. I do have 2 film cameras though, so I tend to load b&w film into my fully manual Pentax Spotmatic as it's a bit more forgiving of over exposure if I get the settings wrong, then load colour into my Canon EOS100QD, which has modern metering and more likely to get the exposure right.
As suggested above though, a second F100 should allow you to just swap between during a shoot, although you'd need a duplicate lens to match.
Just for fun, here's a film vs digital shot I did last year.
Film vs Digital by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr
As suggested above though, a second F100 should allow you to just swap between during a shoot, although you'd need a duplicate lens to match.
Just for fun, here's a film vs digital shot I did last year.
Film vs Digital by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr