Show us yer film shots then!

abdoujaparov said:
In addition to the medium format shots I've put in the From Film forum, some 35mm shots. F601, 24mm Nikon lens, Poundland film.

I think the cheapness of AGFA Vista means I take more throw-away shots, which is the opposite of what I want to do. I may as well be spray-and-praying with a digikal. There's definitely a lot more consideration when I take medium format shots.

The biggest thing I took from these snaps is "I wish I had a lens that wide on my SQ-A".

35mm015-Edit-Edit.jpg by Arfonfab, on Flickr

35mm020.jpg by Arfonfab, on Flickr

35mm007.jpg by Arfonfab, on Flickr

Here's a shot from my SQ-A, too.

Beacons Reservoir, Brecon Beacons by Arfonfab, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I love all of these, great colours and and I really like the composition, particularly the last one and the juxtaposition of the decaying iron fence and the hills and lake in the background.
 
bastic said:
Here are my fist ever photos from MF :)

wanted them fast so got them developed and scanned at Snappys....and I wasn't sure if camera is all ok - but it is :)

View attachment 14111
this is a accidental double exposure :) seems like I forgot to roll to another frame ;)
looks like a window refelction while it is a garage door with graffiti on it
View attachment 14112
me ;)
View attachment 14113 View attachment 14114 View attachment 14115

now need to work on my scanning sklils and try to get more ' natural ' natural colours - ideally what RJ gets ;)
Click to expand...
Lukas a nice set of squares! Welcome to 6x6 MF, great place to be!
 
Jao said:
I love all of these, great colours and and I really like the composition, particularly the last one and the juxtaposition of the decaying iron fence and the hills and lake in the background.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Adrian!
 
djguru said:
From my first film through the Zero 2000 pinhole (6x6 on 120), using Fomapan 100. This is the only one on the roll which has some tones in it, the remainder are a mix of over-exposures, double exposures and emptiness based on not getting the hang of the wiiide field of view. Looks like Fomapan doesn't go too well with bright sunlight for long exposures, either that or the reciprocity table I'm using is carp, although it was ok for this subdued-light shot.

Anyway, better luck next time I'm sure and maybe a roll of Acros will help things along.

7 minute exposure; dev'd in Fomadon LQN 1+14 for 10 mins


Reaching Up_36-12 by djguru32, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Foma 100 reciprocal is hopeless truly, the contrast with a pinhole will be pretty unmanageable. Acros should be better, I did okay with fp4 but again you need to watch the scenes contrast and be careful when you start getting to very long exposures .
 
For a 100s exposure on Fomapan 100, you need to add something like 1500 seconds to it to get a reasonable exposure. It's been a long time since I used Fomapan for several reasons, this being one of them...
 
robhooley167 said:
For a 100s exposure on Fomapan 100, you need to add something like 1500 seconds to it to get a reasonable exposure. It's been a long time since I used Fomapan for several reasons, this being one of them...
Click to expand...

The table I used was specific to Fomapan 100 (from Pinhole Designer IIRC) and you're right about the lengthy times, the image I posted was metered at (from memory) about 1 sec at f22 and including reciprocal at f138 the exposure was 7 minutes.
Definitely going to try Acros instead...
 
A few shots from a roll I took on holiday. Lots of 'firsts' here: first roll of film I've used in fifteen years, first roll I've developed in almost 30 years, first B&W film I've ever shot and first time I've ever used a B&W home dev kit :)

I'm not sure my scanning skills are up to much yet, and I seem to have a few watermarks on the negatives, but overall, I'm really pleased.

Fed4 with standard f2.8 lens
Tmax 100
Processed with Ilfosol 3 (1+9 @ 20 degrees)
Scanned with Epson V550

Wish I'd cropped this tighter, but I really had no idea how well the viewfinder matched what the camera was taking! (As it turns out, it's really close).

View attachment 14281


View attachment 14282


View attachment 14283


View attachment 14284
 
@FujiLove Those are lovely. I'm going to be processing my own B&W for the first time next week - if they come out half as well as yours I'll be happy.
 
abdoujaparov said:
@FujiLove Those are lovely. I'm going to be processing my own B&W for the first time next week - if they come out half as well as yours I'll be happy.
Click to expand...

Thanks Keith. I'm sure you'll love it. Honestly, it was far and away the best part of the whole process. I'm absolutely itching to finish the second roll that's in the Fed4 so I can get the chemicals out again. Currently on frame 26 and desperately looking around for stuff to shoot, but not wanting to waste it!
 
14269658890_419b3e79bd_c.jpg


Flickr Linky

14459753312_08a73d01da_c.jpg


Flickr Linky

Both shot last weekend in Cambridge.
Bronica SQ-A camera
Zenzanon PS 150mm f/4 lens
Foma Fomapan Creative 200 film
Developed in FirstCall R09.
 
abdoujaparov said:
Not the most obvious of street cameras there, @XA2inmypocket ! I do like the results, though. And maybe you aren't as obvious with a WLF?
Click to expand...
Shussh, I'm experimenting. My favourite street camera is my little 50p car boot sale XA2 compact for that reason. However, I'm trying to be brave and a bit more honest. I've played a little using the Bronica recently, in Norwich, and in Gdansk. There is this argument that looking down into a WLF makes you invisible. So far, I'd say - it does, sometimes. I'd dare say that shooting previously with older cameras in manual without even range finders has helped me. I need to get closer though.
 
Wow, this is a seriously good page of images, wonderful stuff all round.

Andy
 
FujiLove said:
Love the colours in those shots Rob, especially the first portrait.
Click to expand...
^^^WHS^^^ great colours! a really nice set all round.
 
RaglanSurf said:
^^^WHS^^^ great colours! a really nice set all round.
Click to expand...
Thanks guys I had done done some research on that fuji film and a lot of people recommended overexposing it which is what I did.
 
Buachaille Etive Mor, the Great Shepherd of Etive. Fuji GW690 III on Kodak Ektar 100.

Buachaille-Etive-Mor5 by andysnapper1, on Flickr

It takes great pictures but I still can't feel any love for the big Fuji....:grumpy: I might have to move it on soon, I think I'm just a square kind of chap and looking down through that big waist level viewfinder in the Mamiya or the 'Cord does it for me far more than squinting through a rangefinder window and trying desperately to getting something in focus in the tiny patch.
 
Andysnap said:
Buachaille Etive Mor, the Great Shepherd of Etive. Fuji GW690 III on Kodak Ektar 100.

Buachaille-Etive-Mor5 by andysnapper1, on Flickr

It takes great pictures but I still can't feel any love for the big Fuji....:grumpy: I might have to move it on soon, I think I'm just a square kind of chap and looking down through that big waist level viewfinder in the Mamiya or the 'Cord does it for me far more than squinting through a rangefinder window and trying desperately to getting something in focus in the tiny patch.
Click to expand...

How many rolls have you put through the GW690 this time around, Andy? As you're probably aware, I'm a 6x6cm guy, but there is something to be said for having a camera such as your Fuji for shooting landscapes. Although I stubbornly shoot 6x6 for everything, there is no question that many of these sorts of shots are better suited to rectangular formats.
 
skysh4rk said:
How many rolls have you put through the GW690 this time around, Andy? As you're probably aware, I'm a 6x6cm guy, but there is something to be said for having a camera such as your Fuji for shooting landscapes. Although I stubbornly shoot 6x6 for everything, there is no question that many of these sorts of shots are better suited to rectangular formats.
Click to expand...

I think its 14 rolls so far, but its just the rangefinder patch is quite small and my eyesight is just not good enough to focus it at anything other than infinity. I really like TLRs, I believe they are the coolest of cameras, ergo I am cool as well :D
 
Andysnap said:
I think its 14 rolls so far, but its just the rangefinder patch is quite small and my eyesight is just not good enough to focus it at anything other than infinity. I really like TLRs, I believe they are the coolest of cameras, ergo I am cool as well :D
Click to expand...

Doesn't the lens have distance markings? You could simply use hyperfocal distances to achieve focus without needing to rely on eyesight then, especially as it's a fixed lens camera.

For instance, back when I owned my GA645, the autofocus cousin to your large Fuji, I printed out the depth of field chart from the manual onto a sticker and put it on the back of the camera for reference. I could then set the lens to focus at a certain distance and then I'd know that everything within a certain range would be in focus without needing to worry about seeing precise focus through the viewfinder.

I've just had a look at the GW690 manual and there's a chart in that manual too:

View attachment 14384

As an example, looking at this chart, if you were shooting at f/16 and focused 10 metres away, everything from 5.22 metres to infinity would be in focus with the GW690.
 
skysh4rk said:
Doesn't the lens have distance markings? You could simply use hyperfocal distances to achieve focus without needing to rely on eyesight then, especially as it's a fixed lens camera.

For instance, back when I owned my GA645, the autofocus cousin to your large Fuji, I printed out the depth of field chart from the manual onto a sticker and put it on the back of the camera for reference. I could then set the lens to focus at a certain distance and then I'd know that everything within a certain range would be in focus without needing to worry about seeing precise focus through the viewfinder.

I've just had a look at the GW690 manual and there's a chart in that manual too:

View attachment 14384

As an example, looking at this chart, if you were shooting at f/16 and focused 10 metres away, everything from 5.22 metres to infinity would be in focus with the GW690.
Click to expand...
I've often done this using older manual cameras with no range finders - or unreliable range finders such as the Lubitel. It's good practice to learn it. While the Canikon crowd are tuned into fast lens for their BOKEH - I find it cool to use an ickle aperture (f11 - f22) to zone focus. Rather like they use to do.
 
XA2inmypocket said:
I've often done this using older manual cameras with no range finders - or unreliable range finders such as the Lubitel. It's good practice to learn it. While the Canikon crowd are tuned into fast lens for their BOKEH - I find it cool to use an ickle aperture (f11 - f22) to zone focus. Rather like they use to do.
Click to expand...

Well, what's handy about the Bronica SQ system is that there are depth of field markers on the lenses themselves, so it's very easy to zone focus or find your hyperfocal distance at any given aperture. That said, I use whatever type of focusing will get me that shot that I'm looking for, whether it's pre-focusing, zone focusing, focusing carefully through the magnifier, or using the split prism when viewing at waist level.

Oh actually, @Andysnap, it appears that the GW690 has some DOF markings on the lens as well like the Bronica, although it looks like it might only start at f/8:

dsc_0124.jpg
 
skysh4rk said:
Well, what's handy about the Bronica SQ system is that there are depth of field markers on the lenses themselves, so it's very easy to zone focus or find your hyperfocal distance at any given aperture.
Click to expand...

I took a few shots with post hoc zone focusing today. ie, "Oh, bugger, forgot to check focus" *looks at lens markings* "Oh, it'll be fine"
 
skysh4rk said:
Well, what's handy about the Bronica SQ system is that there are depth of field markers on the lenses themselves, so it's very easy to zone focus or find your hyperfocal distance at any given aperture. That said, I use whatever type of focusing will get me that shot that I'm looking for, whether it's pre-focusing, zone focusing, focusing carefully through the magnifier, or using the split prism when viewing at waist level.

Oh actually, @Andysnap, it appears that the GW690 has some DOF markings on the lens as well like the Bronica, although it looks like it might only start at f/8:

dsc_0124.jpg
Click to expand...
It does have them.....but I still don't really like using it. I just havent connected with it for some reason, I thought if I bought the newer mark iii version that it would find it nicer, easier to like but I don't. It somehow feels mechanical and uninvolved, almost digital. I know it is probably just me but there you have it.... I am slightly peculiar.:D
 
Andysnap said:
It does have them.....but I still don't really like using it. I just havent connected with it for some reason, I thought if I bought the newer mark iii version that it would find it nicer, easier to like but I don't. It somehow feels mechanical and uninvolved, almost digital. I know it is probably just me but there you have it.... I am slightly peculiar.:D
Click to expand...

That's exactly how I feel about the F100. I think it doesn't matter how good a camera is, if you're not looking forward to taking it out with you then it's probably not right for you. :)
 
Trefforest Estate Station underpass. Bronica SQ-A, Ilford FP4+. Developed in Ilfosol 3 1+14 BY ME! I DID IT! I actually developed three rolls of film and by the magic of chemistry I don't understand, they all have images on them. This is the first one out of the scanner.

Cheers to everyone in F&C who has offered advice and encouragement about developing (not only to me). I would never have tried this otherwise.

View attachment 14476
 
Well done Keith :clap: Its a great feeling when you see you've actually got something on the negs, it still makes me smile :D
 
Last edited:
Well done mate, its a marvelous feeling. Next step...colour....and then printing.:D
 
Another couple from the still unloved Fuji on Portra 400.

Buachaille-Etive-Mor2 by andysnapper1, on Flickr

Glen-Etive-Cottage by andysnapper1, on Flickr

And a couple from the very much loved Mamiya C330f on Portra 400 again

Tramsvision-vamped2 by andysnapper1, on Flickr

Murrayfield by andysnapper1, on Flickr

And finally a couple of test shots from the newly acquired and quickly becoming loved Rolleicord Va Type 2 on Fuji Acros 100. Devved in Ilfotec LC29.
img012 by andysnapper1, on Flickr

img007 by andysnapper1, on Flickr

As is often the case flickrrr has sucked the contrast out of these two shots.

Andy
 
abdoujaparov said:
Like 'em all, Andy, but the detail the Unloved Fuji has recorded of that mountain is exquisite.
Click to expand...

Thanks Keith, yes, its a big dilemma for me. It really is a cracking good camera but it doesn't give me the same satisfaction I get from the Mamiya.....
 
Andysnap said:
Thanks Keith, yes, its a big dilemma for me. It really is a cracking good camera but it doesn't give me the same satisfaction I get from the Mamiya.....
Click to expand...
If you were doing this for money, that would be an argument to use the Fuji. As you're doing it for fun, it's an argument to use the Mamiya.
 
They are all very clean and well taken,as,Keith states the detail with the Fuji is great,but,for some reason I am attracted to the quality of The Bridge Inn shot. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top