Bit of a windy morning, but I am going to brave the winds. Have to go out anyway, appointment already booked. I will be using up the last of my film, then I can get it off to be processed / developed.
Just thinking on, last time I used the camera it did over expose. I should have simply set it under expose slightly, by using the exposure comp dial.Any thoughts on why they're over exposed?
Over exposed is better than under exposed with colour neg film, they will likely be salvageable. Look forward to seeing the shots.View attachment 269485
Film been developed and got prints. Very badly over exposed, I just relied on the camera to get it right, by using aperture priority.
Over exposed is better than under exposed with colour neg film, they will likely be salvageable. Look forward to seeing the shots.
The film is black and white.
I quite like the last one...View attachment 269517
View attachment 269518
Just a couple of the poop images, YES I know they are c**p.
I quite like the last one...
View attachment 269517
View attachment 269518
Just a couple of the poop images, YES I know they are c**p.
Shush youis that because it"s wonky?…….like you!
I quite like the last one...
I'm not familiar with your camera...but, what lens did you use?.
I quite like the last one...
I'm not familiar with your camera...but, what lens did you use?.
View attachment 269517
View attachment 269518
Just a couple of the poop images, YES I know they are c**p.
Some investigation work needed as they don't look at least sharp.....just to add as you might have forgotten :- the more you use the telephoto end the more you have problems with camera shake. e.g, at 28mm you could probably get a sharp picture at 1/30 sec or less, but at 300mm you would need at least 1/250 sec preferably more hand held.
OK I am going to have to confess,
The above photos are were NOT scanned in, I took a photo of a photo. The prints don't look as bad, I did try to scan the photos, but they come up as tiny images, and look bad.
I only asked what lens you used because they didn't look particularly sharp.....Now had I kept notes of what lens I was using, I would have been able to tell you. But when I mentioned taking notes of my lens and settings, others on here said don't bother, just get out and take the photos. As they never bother noting things down, when using film.
just another point in case you have forgotten:- when there is a mass of white sky in the scene the camera can get fooled into exposing for the sky and not the subject that you want, but if blue sky in the scene it doesn't matter so much erm why? well if interested could explain
Are you able to post a few up that you have scanned?Even the indoor photos were exposed, lens was wide open.
Are you able to post a few up that you have scanned?
Can you change the scanner setting to output larger files?.Just going to try another scan first, if not will upload the little files.
Can you change the scanner setting to output larger files?.
What scanner is it? Most scanners designed for 135 film go to much more than 90 samples per inch! As Simon says, 2400 or thereabouts is a good choice, gets you about a 9 Mpixel file.