Show us yer film shots then!

TheBigYin said:
//farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/4838378023_b8ddc7a2a3_o.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

You're not Coming in here Wearing Those...


All shot on the Canon A-1, Ilford FP4+, Ilfosol 1+14 and scanned on Canoscan 8800F with Silverfast SE software.
Click to expand...

Classically wonderful composition :thumbs: I just picked up an FD135 as well. It is in new condition for $60.00. I just need to find the right setting to use it in.
 
jgredline said:
Classically wonderful composition :thumbs: I just picked up an FD135 as well. It is in new condition for $60.00. I just need to find the right setting to use it in.
Click to expand...

They're a lovely lens, but definitely "Restricted Use" - makes a lovely head and shoulders portrait lens if you've got a bit of space to shoot in, but the depth of field's pretty fiendishly narrow (especially when I had to shoot wide open yesterday as it was just before the start of a thunderstorm. Picked mine up from Fleabay... £21 including postage - it's the old FD breechlock f3.5, and came complete with the Canon leather case and dedicated lenshood! Got to love the prices on that FD glass :) Even bigger bargain was the 35-105mm f3.5 macro zoom - I'd just been moaning that every one I'd seen had gone for £80-£120, and found this one that had been mis-labeled by the seller as a "35-05mm" - it was boxed, original packaging down to the polystyrene packaging, and had a UV filter fitted from new. Picked that one up for £22 posted. I'm a rather happy bunny at the moment!
 
TheBigYin said:
They're a lovely lens, but definitely "Restricted Use" - makes a lovely head and shoulders portrait lens if you've got a bit of space to shoot in, but the depth of field's pretty fiendishly narrow (especially when I had to shoot wide open yesterday as it was just before the start of a thunderstorm. Picked mine up from Fleabay... £21 including postage - it's the old FD breechlock f3.5, and came complete with the Canon leather case and dedicated lenshood! Got to love the prices on that FD glass :) Even bigger bargain was the 35-105mm f3.5 macro zoom - I'd just been moaning that every one I'd seen had gone for £80-£120, and found this one that had been mis-labeled by the seller as a "35-05mm" - it was boxed, original packaging down to the polystyrene packaging, and had a UV filter fitted from new. Picked that one up for £22 posted. I'm a rather happy bunny at the moment!
Click to expand...

Yep, I used mine for portraits as well. In fact, It seemed like just yesterday that I bought it, but indeed it was a year ago. I know this because I used it to shoot at a war reenactment show I went to. One thing that did surprise me was the shallow DOF and that it was only an F/3.5 lens. This is fine, because it keeps it small though.
 
Here are some from the FD135 from last year.
590237222_TTkbu-X3.jpg


590240773_PcVvU-X3.jpg


590240333_snsfN-X3.jpg


More here.
 
Nick,

I meant I need to get new light seals.
 
Last edited:
Just afew from a recent film i got developed :) Canon AE1 w/ 50mm 1.8 taken on Ilford XP2 :)

1.
4838514076_184d3ec2a1_z.jpg


2.
4837899871_a0eb82e451_z.jpg


3.
4837898825_5466255b4b_z.jpg


4. I can't take credit for this one though, as i never took it seeing as its me!
4837897819_6c9c4a8151_z.jpg


5.
4838510548_a860b61939_z.jpg


6.
4837896477_e644c150a0_z.jpg
 
and some more, nobody told me off for double posting last time, but if i'm doing something wrong please tell me!

1.
4838506776_a0dab1852a_z.jpg


2.
4838504788_7fd994728e_z.jpg


3.
4837889675_7e67c297a8_z.jpg


4.
4838511790_5ec861652e_z.jpg
 
andy1868 said:
and some more, nobody told me off for double posting last time, but if i'm doing something wrong please tell me!
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing wrong with what you call double posting Andy... :D

Especially when they a fine and interesting shots as yours are... :thumbs:

Keep 'em coming... :naughty:






:p




 
A couple of shots from my Pentax MX and the 28mm f2.8 SMC-M lens. The film was Kodak BW400CN developed (and badly marked:'() by Tesco.

4841142326_0d8fb816cb_o.jpg


4841149982_e85d9ee639_o.jpg
 
Like all of those Jox, but as Javier says the last one is excellent.

Andy
 
Some more from the Voigtlander VF 101 on Fuji Superia ASA 200 fillum.

4841168971_664096d175_b.jpg


4841168667_81f3bbb429_b.jpg


4841168399_fea36e5290_b.jpg


4841168005_b6921dd333_b.jpg


Thanks for looking folks.

Andy
 
Bit of a fail roll of Velvia. The slides look fine on most of them, but the scans are terrible.

59750005.jpg


59750006.jpg


59750019.jpg


59750021.jpg


59750027.jpg

This would've been nicer if id remembered to bracket the apertures like I did with a similar shot. A large DOF would improve it allot I think.
59750028.jpg
 
I'm not so sure how well the hyperfocal distance technique would work there, the rails in the foreground are probably too close. If you stood back a little you may be OK.
 
If you have photoshop, a quick fix way of getting rid of that disgusting colour cast is to select a black point of the image using the levels adjustment layer (highlighted with the pink circles). I set it to the shadow of the pole, and then set the white level to the whitest part of the cloud (green circles). It's not the best solution as you can see by the 'holes' in the histogram, but at least it should give a better representation.

aB00w.jpg
 
:thinking: "disgusting colourcast"?



**Edit - oh right, that one... only saw it when I adjusted. Old eyes, see. (or rather don't)

colourcast.jpg
 
Last edited:
Gold & Green. Fujifilm 400 if I recall taken as a test shot on an old Yashica Electro 35 GSN Rangefinder camera I picked up cheap. I like the way the colours turned out, and the fact that it doesn't look like I've got any light leaks! :)

4800291064_2e256e0e47_b.jpg
 
#1
Photo14_13Acs5.jpg

#2
Photo15_14Acs5.jpg

#3
Photo17_16Acs5.jpg


Centuria 200Asa
 
Mr_T said:
I'm not so sure how well the hyperfocal distance technique would work there, the rails in the foreground are probably too close. If you stood back a little you may be OK.
Click to expand...

Maybe the camera is too close to the rails; but that will depend on what the f stop is set at. If the f is 22 or more, it could easily take that depth for a 50mm I reckon.

The reason Javier I usually use hyperfocal for such shots is that its very easy to set up, and quick; dont have to faff about with focussing. Set the f stop to the highest possible - f22, set the infinity stop to 22 mark; and almost any foreground that you cant reach by hand is in focus. The point is, there is no need to bracket ( I still hate losing films by bracketing, being a cheapskate and all) Of course serious togs will take time to set it up, but thats just me.:)
 
Last edited:
Talking of focus, these are a bit off since they are from the GS645S, you know, the 120 thing that I don't have a scanner for :thinking:

That meant I had too find a flat bright light, lay the negs over it, grab the Caplio and on macro mode try and get pictures of the film! Sort of worked I guess, proves anyway that the camera is exposing properly (I exposed +1 stop for the K2 yellow filter, or in other words set the ISO to 25 as this is PanF plus in ID-11). Subject matter a bit boring but I wanted to get something cooked tonight.

RIMG0012-800.jpg

This is the church where Mrs A and I got married 13 years ago ... sometimes I think I should have stayed this far from it... :D


RIMG0013-800.jpg

One of these is a toilet!


Bit of fun in the changing bag as it's the first 120 film I ever did... there's that moment when you screw the lid down on the tank (many thanks due to Ujjwal for supplying it :thumbs:) and open the bag - did you roll the film onto the reel or the backing paper?

Anyway, done now but whether I'll do it again I am not sure, such a faff getting pics out of the negs and I don't want to have to go buy a scanner since they get silly-price-level for big negs. Oh well... got the 9 to look forward to I guess!
 
Last edited:
ujjwaldey8165 said:
Maybe the camera is too close to the rails; but that will depend on what the f stop is set at. If the f is 22 or more, it could easily take that depth for a 50mm I reckon.

The reason Javier I usually use hyperfocal for such shots is that its very easy to set up, and quick; dont have to faff about with focussing. Set the f stop to the highest possible - f22, set the infinity stop to 22 mark; and almost any foreground that you cant reach by hand is in focus. The point is, there is no need to bracket ( I still hate losing films by bracketing, being a cheapskate and all) Of course serious togs will take time to set it up, but thats just me.:)
Click to expand...

At 50mm at an aperture of f/22 you'd need to be 13 feet away from the rails (your subject) to have focus all the way from 6.3ft to infinity. If for example your subject distance was 5 feet away, you'd only have from 3.75 feet to 8.34 feet in focus at the same focal length and aperture.
 
medwaygreen said:
#1
Photo14_13Acs5.jpg

#2
Photo15_14Acs5.jpg

#3
Photo17_16Acs5.jpg


Centuria 200Asa
Click to expand...

A most enjoyable series for me. What I love about these pics and this style of photography is that I get to visit places I would never other wise see. Many places have intrigued me so much, That I have flown on 1-3 day trips just photograph them. Thanks again.
javier
By the way. I found it interesting to see a starbucks there. It seems we can't get rid of them :)
 
Last edited:
ujjwaldey8165 said:
The reason Javier I usually use hyperfocal for such shots is that its very easy to set up, and quick; dont have to faff about with focussing. Set the f stop to the highest possible - f22, set the infinity stop to 22 mark; and almost any foreground that you cant reach by hand is in focus. The point is, there is no need to bracket ( I still hate losing films by bracketing, being a cheapskate and all) Of course serious togs will take time to set it up, but thats just me.:)
Click to expand...

Oh, please don't misunderstand me. I am not knocking Hyperfocal / Zone focusing at all. In fact I use it 90% of the time in all I shoot. I have taken very special care in choosing my lenses so that I can shoot them at between F/5.6 and F/11 at Hyperfocal, Even F/2.8 to F/4. This usually means lenses between 18 and 40mm max. And my personal style is getting up close and personal. Setting one up at F22 can lead to diffraction. It helps that I am also a huge fan of DOF for street shots :)

Given the choice though, if the object is stationary, I would rather open up the lens and manually focus on the object. The downside to this is that My eye site is not what it used to be and so I ended up getting a Katz eye for all my bodies, even my DSLR's :)
 
Last edited:
Hi Folks. I just got back 2 rolls of filmed processed and scanned by a Pro Shop that is 2 blocks from my house. So close, yet so far. They have been their since 1918 and I have bought many things from them, but never thought about having them process my film. The film processed and scanned to a CD cost $7.00. Not bad at all.
What I did was crop for comp and resize them for web use.


Joe is a diabetic who sits in the corner giving out candy all day long.
ME-FM40F28UltraMax400ProShopScans.jpg


This I shot wide open and this is where the focus confirmation on the ME-F really shines through. This fellow is a mute. He had his tongue cut off. I have gotten to know him over the years and I call him the bird man. I call him this because with the money he collects he buys bread to feed the birds. He is greatly misunderstood, but he is my friend.
ME-FM40F28UltraMax400ProShopScans2.jpg


Street performer at the Santa Monica boardwalk
ME-FM40F28UltraMax400ProShopScans3.jpg


His Partner
ME-FM40F28UltraMax400ProShopScans4.jpg


A street artist
ME-FM40F28UltraMax400ProShopScans6.jpg


One more
ME-FM40F28UltraMax400ProShopScans7.jpg
 
Fantastic set Javier, the first 2 are stellar.

Richard, the Canterbury shots are extremely good as well. Been a long time since I was there but may have to return soon.

Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top