Thread 4453764

This is the Film General Thread, aka the /fgt/.
Please post film photos in this thread.
It's ok to ask about film gear in this thread.
old thread >>>4446953

Thread Question: What are you scanning with? Describe or show your setup.

>>4453764 (OP)
black and white street is the most based form of art in analog photography

>>4453768
I've underestimated the amount of aussies on this board.
>>4453764 (OP)
This is actually kind of nice. I'd do away with the car in the foreground, and off to the right, but this captures a specific mood.

>>4453786
> I'd do away with the car in the foreground
Yeah maybe, it's 200 speed though so I was leaning against it to take the photo. The ninkynonk V doesnt show ur shutter speed below 1/30 but I think it would have been around 1/6th or something.

Last week in Padang, Indonesia, after spending 24 hours in Padang we went on a 10 day surf charter, I have some pics from this trip if anyones keen to see?

All taken on Olympus Mju ii

Bump >>4453601

>>4453816
Color printing must be done entirely in the dark. Looks like cibachrome was for printing slide film directly onto paper. Everything is discontinued.

Black and white chems are cheap and last a while. Not sure about color.

Can i cross develop a slide film with just c-41 chemicals
or do i need a bw developer too for that ?
Just simply answer me that question please

>>4453819
>entirely in the dark
The tube on the left seems big enough for prints. Worst case I have plans on how to /diy/ a development system based off the Nova Print Processor.
>printing slide
I assume that the labeled things in the open box on the right are the filters. Idk if they can be used with C41 tho.

>>4453838
Yeah you stuff your exposed paper in there then do your processing with the lights on. Watch some vids on RA4 printing and see if you will have the patience for it lol.

>>4453819
Yes, but color shift.

Help i forgot to name the chem bottles
But it's 100% either bleach or fixer
>ecn2
Which is which in your opinion ?
Darker color is bleach and clear one is fixer i assume !?
Thx broskies

>>4453841
>ECN-2
Why not just mix bleach and fixer in one?

Remind me to never shoot CineStill again. Piece of shit canisters.

>>4453764 (OP)
>>4453768
>>4453770
>>4453771
Very nice anon. What film stock?

>>4453837
>Can i cross develop a slide film with just c-41 chemicals
Yes.

>>4453841
Well ofc it's the dark smelly one...what a stupid question
the provia 100f succeed cross developing in ecn2
but idk what happened to that kodak vision 3 250D behind it.
I've developed 6 rolls prior...
i usually fold/crinkle the film leader once i've shot it so i know it's exposed
but this one came out empty :(

>>4453844
>Remind me to never shoot CineStill again.
>he fell for the meme
Pretty sure it’s commonly held here that it’s bullshit. Just buy a cheapo end roll of vision on eBay and spool it yourself, ezpz
>but muh remjet
Yeah just wash it off dummy.

>>4453769
street isn't art

>>4453862
bait. anyone but me who replies to this comment is gay and retarded

>>4453862
Based

t. Smart and dogsexual

>>4453844
melbin, have you been to one of those mccevent (ig) photo walks, never been to one and it might be a good way to meet fellow /p/tards

>>4453769
that's not a street, that's a coupla asians

S-she is fast! (I have no idea what that line in the middle is, doesn't look like a light leak)

>>4453844
>Very nice anon. What film stock?
uhhhh was just fuji colour 200 I think

20x magnification of 35mm negative. Area is roughly 1.2mm x 1.8mm.

Fun. Film really is amazing.

Complete newbie when it comes to film. I've always been very curious about Brownies. How difficult are they (and other vintage cameras from the 1900s) to get into?

>>4453997
a roll of 120 film is going to be more expensive than the camera lmao.
They are just snapshit machines, you can't do any kind of specific focus and they just have like one speed and aperture.

>>4453997
It's a good "lomo" type "camera" if you believe in the existence of "lomo"graphy

If you had some ektachrome e100VS what would you take a picture of?

>>4454063
muhdik

>>4454069
Why tho? Would the increased saturation really be good for muhdik piks?

Hot damn 8x10 portraits look freaking incredible.

If your thing is portraiture get an 8x10 camera and take portraits.

Guess which film I used

>>4454326
Damn you know that really looks like it was taken with an Olympus E300

Thoughts on this picture?

Not another cellphone snapSHIT
REEEEEEE

We do not give up!

>>4454336
And this one?

>>4454336
meh
>>4454338
overdone to death

>>4454337
Literally the first if not the only large format photo you have posted that is actually good other than the bird one

And you STILL clipped the ear

Looking forward to how badly you fuck up the scan (OR maybe you'll finally do the based thing, and shoot it with a camera all in one shot so it doesn't magnify scratches and dust so much)

>>4454342
Wow! Thanks! See I am improving! I still have to disagree with you because clipping the ear automatically makes it a cellphone picture and not large format. I can see a few wrinkles in my backdrop also, so 0/10, sadly.

I don't purposely clip his ear btw. He moved his head 1 or 2 inches from when I very carefully framed it, which took me like 20-30 minutes to get it just right.
My studio space is quite small and I want to maximize the amount of dog I get into frame for when I contact print it. Next time I will move my rear standard a little bit so the box is lower in frame and I get a bit more margin on top.

You really think I should just take a picture of it with my 5dm3?

>>4454339
I was hoping for some constructive criticism

>>4454345
>claim 9001mp
>dont shoot with cropping room
such is the life of an enlargerlet

>>4454350
Contactprintlet actually, sir. There is no enlarging of my 8x10 film yet. If you're shooting big film you might as well use as much of it as you can, right?

I usually do leave a little room for adding a matboard, which I have been screeched at for, but the way I have my backdrop makes it very difficult to get a good amount of room on the top. I need a proper backdrop stand to elevate it a couple more feet up if I want to keep my camera at the perspective I have it. Too high and it won't look as awesome either.

>>4454342
Here you go. :D I like this one so much I am going to reframe to balance it a bit better, take another non-cropped ear shot, and then use a sheet or two of slide film! I think the lighting and pose is good enough to not cause mass outrage.

I also claim that thiss is the new highest megapickles equivalent shot of dog ever posted to 4chan.

>doghair posted a sharp, clean scan
fuck we cant call him doghair anymore

>>4454359
your name is tonality schizo

>>4454359
Incredible

>>4454361
TonalityGOD more like it. Thank you.
No! I like doghair too much.

I found a really cheap box of 8x10 hp5 on ebay so I will be able to use f45 instead of f22 for these studio shots. Very curious to see how much of a difference the larger grain will make. I think I could get an 8x10 headshot with f45!

Let's get comfy

>>4454365
>Tonality
You keep using that word; I do not think it means what you think it means.
Pic related; the luminosity noise of regular film grain creates incredibly subtle shifts in the perceived tone; your fine grain/shit quality film (paired with your apartheid-era scan/edit & insistence on posting 60mp jpegs at 10:1 compression) is just blotchy in areas of continuous tone.
>>4454359
The doghair is still IN the fucking photo, look at the floor. The scan is still dusty, but admittedly less than usual.

>captcha 2GPAW

>>4453876
I personally haven't, but I imagine it is a great way to meet other photographers. There's a film one happening this Friday in the CBD. Maybe I'll check it out. See you there anon :^)

>>4454416
Looks like shit compared to 8x10

Usually I take pictures of pretty things (trees n shit) but I figured I'd mix it up with some ugly stuff so I went to the strip mall.

>>4454479
>photo of nothing

>>4454481
You can't take a picture of nothing.

>>4454481
Photos of things are so overdone

>>4454485
Photos are overdone, I guess you should stop shooting then

>>4454486
If he really wanted to take photos of nothing that is the only real way, although he would not be taking photos at that point.

>>4454483
>>4454485
photos without interesting subjects or interesting perspectives

>>4454489
I kinda wonder what would be living inside the dumpster shed. One time I tried opening a mysterious door and it was unlocked. Pretty cool if you ask me.

>>4454490
I don't think you could get away with that here, it's a pretty upscale establishment that panders to hipsters and karens.
Some of the dumpster sheds are quite spacious and clean though.

New lens has finally arrived. I heard precision pinholes produce better results so I got this one from edmund optics. They have a wide variety of sizes to choose from.

It will be a 28mm equivalent on 11x14 @ like f400ish. Should be a fun little snapshitter if I can get it to work.

>>4454495
That sucks at least we can still imagine things.

>>4454509
Calculations were bad, apparently. Still going with it.

should I buy it?

>>4454528
Yes, and then take pics of geese with it, of course.

>>4454528
Yes :D
It's a joy to use them.

>>4454528
no
wlvfs are miserable to use

get a mamiya m645 1000s. the ae prism is nice and small and no one grain peeps hard enough to notice the difference between 6x6 square and cropped 645 square if you do want a square

>>4454541
>wlvfs are miserable to use
For the most part I agree but they start to become okay again at 6x6 or 6x7, and with a magnifier.

Some kodak gold

>>4454541
>wlvfs are miserable to use
if you used jap TLRs then yes. I had the same opinion.
Now I use a Rolleiflex and they have perfect finders, bright and easy to focus, horizontal and vertical lines to help you compose

>>4454336
>>4454338
I like both

I'm going to Alberta soon and I'm not sure if I should briny my Mamiya C330 or Canon A-1. I'm already bringing a DSLR and small point and shoot so I'm not sure. The problem with the C330 is that its so big and would have to go in my backpack which isn't really lined with protection. Thoughts?

>>4454690
Buy a mamiya 7. It is really that simple.

>>4454692
I don't have time

>>4454693
Go to the Mamiya store tommorow.

>>4454694
Where

>>4454695
Idk man ask jeeves or something.

>>4454696
whose jeeves

>>4454698
Are you a zoomer? Jeeves is the guy you ask and he gives you the answer. I thought everyone knew that.

ask jeeves who he is

>>4454425
yeah, planning on going tomorrow

photos are awesome especially film. there’s something so cool about taking the photons from a scene and capturing them in a physical object.

>>4454698
>>4454700

>>4454722
>well poisining
No need

>>4454698
my Jeeves you stupid fucking kid
now go to bed

Sooooo what are you nerds taking pictures of today?

How is the new Pheonix II ISO 200 film?

Got one to try out and slapped it in my Canon 7s

https://youtu.be/eYB2bT0cJac
Just realised that I have three undeveloped rolls that potentially have overexposed photos due to a sticky aperture. A reminder to always test new equipment before running through too much film.

The last time it was a missing backing plate.

Cute lil test shot I guess.

>>4454809
It's good, still kinda weird. My photos of nothing are Phoneix2 in 120, and I did a 35mm exposure test >>4451848
I like it better than the old Phoenix but gold is better and cheaper.

>>4453764 (OP)
>What are you scanning with?
pic related

>>4454809
i just shot phoenix 1 for the first time last weekend and really liked some of the colors that came out. so now i'm a little sad that mk1 is going away

>>4454794
I've been taking unironic vacation slides in Vegas
I hope the lab appreciates all the nudes of my gf

Eh

>>4453997
Genuinely point & shoot cameras. Few if any settings – maybe bulb mode, maybe near/far focus.

Getting film is the first challenge. If it uses 120, you're in luck. It's readily available. If it's 620 like my Six-20 and Hawkeye uses, it's no longer produced. But is the same as 120, sometimes you might be able to jam the roll in, but you'll probably have to re-roll the film onto 620 spools.
The Baby Brownie on the bottom uses 127 which is 99% unavailable. I think one place sells it (and then I'd still have to get the thing developed.)
There's also the popular option of shooing 35mm on it, but you'll need to figure out a way to advance it the right distance.

These old cameras often have stuck shutters. But I've had luck so far by squirting lighter fluid onto the mechanism and firing it a couple times.

>>4453764 (OP)
anyone used a SCSI phase one scanner back for their medium format film camera before? worth it for still shots?

>>4454938
9000 pixels of oversharpened dog shit. thanks i guess?

>>4455042
>0 sharpening or anything of the likes added in post.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! RETARD! You prove to me again just how worthless your opinion is. Thanks lil goober.

Stay obsessed.

>>4453997
>>4454000
>>4455037
Thanks for the responses. I was primarily interested in one of the earlier pre-WWI Brownies, but 117 seems to be even harder to find.

Five hour hike tomorrow morning. How many calories can I replace the SB600 and AF D 35 mm (which has sticky aperture) with? Bonus points for unmeltable consumables which will not wreck havoc in the photo bag.

>>4455119
get >>>/out/

>>4455119
Based and outdoors pilled making the indoors only autists seethe.

About tree fiddy. Bring a bag of mixed nuts.

>>4454794
Rocks, leaves and back of heads. If I find a dog I’ll takes pics of him too

>>4455038
boomers might of used that back in the day in the studio, good like fren

>>4455134
Based. I hope you post some good dog pics.

What would you take a picture of with this film? Should I just do rocks and leaves? Asking for a friend...

>>4455125
Got some of those nuts. No time for breakfast tomorrow morning either, we gon' be collecting yellow beams on fujichrome.

>>4455186
Exceptionally based, outdoorCHADanon. I wish you good luck and even greater success on your hike.

>>4455169
Sexy women
Dogs
Guns
Cars
All of the above in varying combinations

>>4455169
kids

>>4455169
anime dolls

>>4455196
Based. I have those!

>>4455202
>>4455192
Cringe. I don't have those!

>>4455214
ok redditor.

>>4455119
based
I am packed, destination: bumfuck nowhere

>>4455216
Lmfao.

>>4455218
Based packchad. I just packed my bag to go photograph pigs.

>>4455214
>Cringe. I don't have those!
not YOUR kids stupid

>>4455243
Why tho? My friend is wondering.

Anyone else up developing they film right now?

>>4455319
i can't shitpost and develop at the same time, i feel like inversions tracking inversion time takes too much focus. 7 minutes without refreshing is not too much to ask.

>>4455329
I've been using the ago film processor for like 6 months now and I love it so much.

>>4455111
seething. sorry your "work" looks shit i guess? lol anyway

There's some contrarian on /p/ who thinks EVERYTHING is oversharpened, oversaturated, and has too much contrast

Does he have a misconfigured monitor or is he a fujislug?

>>4455346
Wrong again and powerful projection, my sweet little dweeb.
I am legitimately laughing at your stupidity and weird obsession with me. Must be the autism that makes you fail to recognize emotion correctly... yeah...

Go ahead and continue making a fool of yourself and I'll keep having fun posting my photos that are much better than yours.

>>4455347
I swear on my dog I didn't sharpen that image. You don't even really need to sharpen 8x10 scans for gods sake.

I also realized that posting my scans at such a high resolution is actually a hilarious troll to pixel peepers, and I will continue to do it. I suggest you try it as well.

>>4455347
He has both fujislugs in his brain and he is posting from a lenovo thinkpad. It is the only real answer.

I should really pull this expired txp by a stop... cant really complain for 3 bucks a sheet...

>>4455221
>>4455218
Good morning.

>pay thousands of dollars for a metal box
>throw on a $400 lens and call it a day
Why is it always like this? It's always this piece of shit Nokton. Why not save money on the body and get a better quality lens, which is the only thing that matters when shooting film?

>>4455433
Yeah I mean personally I hate rangefinders and the concept of spending that sort of money on any camera with a cloth shutter and a top speed of 1/1000th seems ludicrous to me. Like the SLR equivalent of that spec wise is a Spotmatic which is like a 30 dollar camera. They're not even particularly easy to service. Only difference is the spotmatic actually has a light meter.

>>4455356
you have zero ability to compose a photo god damn

>>4455433
First off, they are cargo cultists. Secondly, they don't understand how photography works. Thirdly, they're fashion victims. It's easier to market an easily recognizable camera than a lens (where the recognizable part is the look of the pictures themselves))

>>4455433
what do you mean? that nokton is sweet. i bought two of them, except the single-coated version. even if i got an m6 or an m11, i'd still use this lens. also, the lens is obviously not the only thing that matters when shooting film. what cheaper body and what better lens would you recommend?

>>4455442
1. If that photo was taken with the Nokton, then you've just proven my point. Dogshit sharpness and strong vignetting.
2. Yes it is. The lens plays the biggest role in how a photo looks when using film. Second is the film stock. And third is the format type (6x7, 6x9, etc.), which only applied to medium format cameras.
3. Bessa body paired with a Zeiss or Konica M-Hexanon lens.

>no photo argues what kind of gear you have to use to be able to take good pictures
lmao

just use whatever you like using
don't be a gear fag
a good photo is a good photo no matter what it was shot with
a bit of vignette or softness never ruined any great picture

How many of you develop and scan your own rolls vs sending them to a lab?

>>4455486
I dev everything at home
fuck labs
fuck waiting a week or longer to get your photos back
fuck that little fag at the lab who always made my pictures look yellow

>>4455438
>seething nophoto

Stay obsessed

>>4455487
>fuck labs
we cant say this when cinefag is around anon

>>4455330
Rich boy in the thread huh. Be real is it really worth the price. I love the idea of the product but 700 bucks like damn

>>4453764 (OP)
>>4454566
>>4454336
Favorites.

>>4455498
It's 700 now??? I got it for 400 when it was first released and it is absolutely worth it.

>>4455500
Buck broken Canadian peso unfortunately. Plus tax it’s probably closer to 800

>>4455495
You think I'm part of that racket? He's right, fuck them.
>oh btw there's some remjet remnants teehee

>>4455504
Holy moly. Well, you can do the math and see how long it would take you to start saving money on developer. If you shoot lots of roll film and you dont use rodinal you could start saving relatively quickly.

Rotary development is so darn convenient I could not go back to doing inversions. I am completely spoiled.

>>4455522
yeah there's no universe where i break even on this thing. picrel, if i used ilford dd-x (one of the pricier developers i have here) as one shot for two rolls at a time. and i definitely do not shoot a roll a week lmao. this thing would be purely a luxury gadget for me, but i still want it.

>>4455478
1. it was. removing neither of those things would make the lens significantly better. besides, i can't see any vignetting and you can't tell how sharp the lens is with a dingy scan of a dark alley on expired film. strong lens aberrations appear when wide open but it's normal when stopped down.
2. duh. but how the image looks is not the only thing that matters. i want my camera to be pleasant to operate and have longevity, ie repairability, etc. furthermore, i and many others are happy to shell out heavily for a beautifully designed machine.
3. i shoot two bessas. they are good but you're making plenty of compromises compared to a leica m. those 35s look nice but the zeiss lacks a proper focus tab and neither opens to 1.4. and i doubt either can match the wildness when opened up. more neutral is not the same as better
in the end, your answer is very simple. people spend a lot on the leica and a little on the lens because the leica is more unique, special than the lens. anyways, i've seen the 35mm color skopar in far more setups like this than the nokton. and the skopar is maybe the smallest cheapest 35mm lens on m mount and has a more standard look like those you listed

>>4455486
I don't dev my own rolls but I do scan them myself

Hey can you guys help me out? My grandfather gave me 3 FD lenses but I don't really know anything about manual lenses. Is there anything interesting or special here or just standard stuff for the time? Also doesn't anyone know how this mount works? I'm having trouble getting the aperture to move even though the ring is moving just fine. Seems like it has to do with the arms coming out of the back.
Right is also Rokinon just doesn't say it.

>>4455595
basic cheapo third party lenses and the kit lens from canon. nothing really special but usable.

Would you look at that swing! Creative focus for the possible win? Doubt it!
Love seeing this thing setup in the field with a longer lens.

More snapshits coming in a few hours.

>>4455603
It's going to be more underexposed pigs isn't it

>>4455622
Dried up milk thistle! :D I also took a cool one of some decayed wood I liked the look of.
I think these are going to be a LOT better than yesterdays! Maybe... Ill show you them in a bit. I am busy dealing with chickens atm.

>>4455486
Dev and scan b&w myself and scan colour myself. Want to dev colour by myself too in the future

>>4454884
Bros wtf I dropped my slides off at the lab and they told me it can take up to 2 weeks for them to be done!? I'm not even asking for scans, development only. Hopefully they're overestimating but I fear it's gonna be a while until I get my first E-6 results. And it's not even like they're shipping them off, they do it all in-house as far as I can tell. Meanwhile the lab I normally use for c-41 develops rolls fast enough that I usually get a call that they're ready for pickup in the time it takes to walk down the street and grab lunch.

>>4455629
most labs do that nowadays since there is not a lot of demand for E-6 they wait until they have enough rolls that "makes sense" to develop the batch and not waste chemicals.

>>4455628
sous vide gadgets becoming common kitchen appliances has made c41 much simpler to do imo. i got one at a thrift store for 20 bucks and it can hold temp just where needed for colour. i recommend one. don't get gypped by things like the "cinestil water bath" thing, it's just an aliexpress sous vide with their shitty logo on it.

>>4455629
>>4455631
or they might just do one shot manual development when they have some downtime, if it's like one of those 'hipster instagram garage' "labs". The reason they can turn c41 out is the commercial machines are tuned for it and they can easily batch and run continuously. depends highly on your "lab". in house means nothing really.

>>4455637
yeah my normal lab doesn't do E-6, but they definitely have the process down - dark area where they load the can into whatever machine they're using, and then for scans/prints a big fuji machine they run it through. since I couldn't use them for E-6 I just went to the closest place that does, and it is definitely a hipster vibes place.

>>4455631
I guess this also makes sense, I see a couple of places selling ektachrome around here but clearly it isn't as popular as c-41 or b&w

Behold the power of a view camera. Could have used movements a little bit better, but it's pretty close. I didn't have my geared front standard. Sharp enough for contact printing!

I think compostion would be better if I shifted camera to the right a little bit. It feels kind of unbalanced left to right. Overall I think it's pretty, subtle, and it has a nice desolate kinda vibe to it, but could be improved with a more refined composition.

>>4455701
Here is no 2. This is a crop from the full image.
I was a little too indecisive on what part of this stump I wanted to photograph. I think I will revisit it and find a composition closer to this crop.

>>4455628
is that an optical aberration in the top-left? I've never seen something like that on a digital photo.

>ditch LR
>no more NLP
>look into different programs for converting negative scans
>all expensive as shit with not so great results
>fuck, what do I do?
>take some time learning darktable
>shit results
>invest some more time getting good
>like results more than ones from NLP now, pic related
feels good, should have ditched Adobe a long time ago

>>4455628
C41 process is actually pretty easy, just have to have a solution for getting chemicals up to temperature and keeping them at that temperature (water bath and sous vide is what I do, works well)
neat thing about C41 is it's a standardized process, no matter what iso your film is or what brand you use, it's all the same dev times
only difference is some put bleach and fix together (fuck blix, hate it, messy and stinks)

>>4455595
The lens aperture on FD lenses doesn't adjust unless mounted. If you have the rear cap attached I believe that should get the aperture to change with the ring.

>>4455712
I use sekor C lenses so that might be from that

How are you all dealing with the chemicals and the fumes they produce? Most sources say you should do dev and stuff in well ventilated areas but most people only have bathrooms to work with and when doing prints for example you are basically stuck with 0 ventilation for a couple of hours.

Have you noticed any adverse effects because of this? Im thinking about getting a couple of sensors and filters to make it a little safer. Im worried that my bloodshot eyes are this way from formaldehyde exposure or something in that direction.

Also not properly drying calibration strips and letting them stick to each other produces some interesting results. Picrel.

>>4455486
I don't scan. I print them by myself.
Developing and printing is like half the fun.

>>4455809
most people deving in their bathroom usually have those bathroom vent fans i imagine? i know the old darkrooms in uni just had the usual in room hvac no dedicated fume hood or anything. maybe wear one of those respirator things??

nothing like taking a good huff of those tasty fumes
it's the best part about home dev

>>4455822
Mine has no active ventilation sadly. Im thinking about DIYing one of those filter cubes to scrub those fumes out of there. But its sorta difficult to measure how well they preform just because of how many gasses are out there.

>>4455823
I actually really like the smell of rodinal and i never got sick during my printing sessions but i sorta got worried about my health recently. My eyes are sorta bloodshot all of a sudden despite me not working with photochemicals for a while until i discovered the strips in >>4455809 which despite all that time still sorta smell. I don't actually know if they are the reason for my eyes but they still started me going down this rabbit hole. So if a couple of strips can do this to you (over some time admittedly) then just how much more harmful is rawdogging much higher quantities of the same stuff??

I mean i always wear gloves and don't use the chemicals in my kitchen sink like others do so why am i not working on air quality too you know?

Just loaded something called apx 400. Think Ill push it to 800, no idea what this film is like, what am I in for?

>>4453764 (OP)
dat helios 44 swirl

>>4455862
The afga of today is not the same as 50 years ago. Its mostly a brand name various companies slap on random products and the APX line is just film made by Harman Technology i think. I used both the 100 and 400 ISO versions and its nothing special i think.
But please do tell us how your pushing went. Its something i wanted to do but never did so im interested.

>>4455595
>anything interesting
As the other anon said, third party cheap zooms, and the kit lens, which is not bad by any mean, but the 1.4 is better.
>how this mount works?
When not installed an FD lens will always have its diaphragm closed, and it will open to the set aperture when you mount it on a compatible camera or adapter. If you were wondering, the A notch in the aperture ring allows the camera to control the aperture automatically. If you want to play with the lens, you need to depress a couple of interlocks in the bayonet and turn the inner flange of the lens, to simulate the lens being mounted on the cameta; there are videos that explain how to do it.

t. Canon A-1 enjoyer

I wish my viewfinder had some some lines on it so set up straight shots better.
The few shots i took recently that i liked are all skewed just enough to bug me.

>>4455944
Redpill: The world is not straight. It's curved.

>>4455967
>The world is not straight. It's curved.
I don't think there is really any compelling evidence to support this claim, but on the off chance it is true that is still a bit different than being tilted 7 degrees to the right

Pigs, eggs, horses, sticks, leaves, rocks.

What should I take my two pictures of today?

>>4455944
Hotshoe spirit is what you need.
>>4455971
>I don't think there is really any compelling evidence to support this claim
Look at approaching ships from a distance if you are near some coast. The highest point always shows up first. Also the effect of the moon's gravity on tides.

>>4455973
Sticks and stones next to a controversial book, still life composition.

>>4455357
Based lefse packer

>>4455976
It is hot today. Maybe I will do a still life incorporating rocks and sticks. Idk if I have any controversial books with me rn. Thanks

>>4455975
>Hotshoe spirit is what you need
Thanks didnt know that was a thing. Sounds good until i can get a more intuitive feel
As for the rest it was a joke
Obviously

>>4456037
heh, I dropped the "level" part just to be a funny guy.
Small adjustments might still be needed in post for ultimate perfection but that should get you in the ballpark.
And well, it's never a bad opportunity to debunk FE, be it the disproven once scientific theory or the mount))

Do I need to write an essay on the meaning/symbolism of my picture before taking the picture for it to have meaning? This one guy gets really mad when I say my photo has meaning/symbolism.

trying out the Reddit Approved™ method for extending C-41 chem lifetime

>>4456151
Developing in piss? )))

Here's my sticks and rocks still life. I think it looks pretty cool. Lots of awesome textures and nice contrast. Maybe the overall balance could have been better in some way. Usually takes a couple revisions to get that just right.
That 2001 expired TXP works pretty nice shot at 160 iso with 10:30 dev in 1+100 510 pyro. Some base fog, but not too much.

What do you think about it? Do you think it has meaning? I just made it cause I thought it looks cool.

>>4456267
Nudos anon, I'm not sure what the meaning is but the textures are nice. My suggestion was a play on "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" but this works in its own way too.

>>4456268
Thanks, that's sorta what I figured. Making a whole series of still lifes inspired by children's rhymes and/or idioms could be really cool.
For this one I just wandered around with a bucket and picked up old trash and cool looking things to make a picture out of. Fun little exercise.

You ever hide in the bushes?

>>4456340
>be me
>hiding in bush with an SLR
>lining up the shot, dialling in settings
>voyeur victim walks past
>wind on
>*CRRRT TNK*
>take the shot
>*CH TNK*
>*eeeeeeeeeeee* (canon wheeze)
>they look my way
>too fat for the bush to hide me
>mfw

>>4456341
>be me
>rangefinder with leaf shutter f1.5 in my sports bag
>cable release all up though my long sleave
>walk by some girls
>summer is beautiful
>actuate camera while looking at something else
>literally inaudible against the background noise
>artistic angle achieved
>no one is none the wiser
>no bush needed (even prefer no bush)
>blow up my prints at home to poster size
>its just a hobby

>be me
>exclusively use SLR blobmera with 70-200 f/2.8
>NO FEAR shirt and original NIGGON neck strap is all I sneed
>stand in the middle of walkways and in plain view of streets
>follow subjects in broad daylight
>burst entire rolls of kodak gold at the staggering speed of 3fps in peoples' faces
>normies need not approach (i'm super ripped, and could fight a gorrilla)
>*WHZZZZRR*
>another successful day of le street photographie

>>4456341
>>4456346
funny
>>4456388
cringe

>>4456395
Woah nothing slips past you huh anon

HUGE fleabay score the other day.

I bought a modern lens from a seller in japan and had no problems. Looking at buying some film gear from ebay japan but it seems like such a roll of the dice, much more than I'm used to on russian craigslist. Any tips for finding good sellers that do a real amount of inspection or cla?

>>4456426
it's a crapshoot even when they use their grading systems. once you track japanese items long enough it starts to become pretty clear that they have some kind of "central warehouse of old shit" system and the sellers themselves actually don't ever really see the product. multiple different sellers listing the same thing with different prices, locations, etc. listings being deleted and relisted over and over. generally a little better than the "untested as is" type stuff, but you never really know til you get it. bought an EOS 5 sold as working, and it did, but it was intermittent, if they never tested it more than battery in, power on, fire once kind of thing, they never would have known. just had to do a bit of cleanup and such and its fine now but that's kinda what i mean. also bought an old sureshot multitele which works but the seller was banned off ebay like a day or two after i bought it so no recourse for if anything had been wrong lol.

>>4456426
Japanese almost always overprice their shit.

>>4456431
japanese on ebay*
Lots of cheap and nice shit on yahoo auctions.

>>4456440
Correctu.

1. Grab something for background
2. Grab one or more cool things
3. Arrange them all in a tray
4. Light it up
5. Take picture

Fun!

>>4456459
>no rocks
so close, yet so far.

>>4456459
All those steps taken and it looks like the camera fired accidentally while being carried through the forrest

>>4456461
There is dirt on the blackberry root, so it still counts!

>>4456463
Pleb lmao. Lets see your sticks and leaves pic.

>>4456464
I dont have any pics of the ground. Closest I could find. Here are the steps
1. Enjoy nature like a normal person (not gathering leaves and sticks along the way wtf)
2. See cool stump and snap a shot

>>4456465
Wow you aren't a nophoto! Not a great shot, but it's better than nothing. Too busy imo.

I just wander around my property looking for cool things to take pictures of, and picking up old trash. Whoever owned the property in the 40-50s used the seasonal creek as a dumping ground so there's loads of cool old bottles and random garbage to find and remove. It's like a treasure hunt!

I wanted to use these leaves as a background for a shot, and I like how the blackberry root kinda looks like a heart. Totally normal behavior! :D

>>4456467
>too busy
Lmao have a quick look at your own photo again. Which one has a clear subject that doesnt disappear into a sea of derail because of poor lighting and lack of contrast? Its even funnier since you use artificial light

>>4456468
Okay, now you're just making shit up! The leaves surrounding the root are way lighter than the root and there is almost a vignetteing effect from the light. Everything draws your eye to the center of the image. Very basic stuff bro.

You've got a distracting cut off path on the left and the pure black portions on the left and right are also distracting. My eye is not naturally drawn to the stump, which is what you wanted the subject of your photo to be.

>>4456468
Oh yeah, and I would to thank you for imagining me as an absolute chad carrying a 40lb 8x10 camera around the forest and accidentally taking perfectly in focus shots with it.

>>4456473
Not gonna criticise your work further, and I respect the whole forrest gump naiveté schtick. Keep on collecting old bottles, thats what large format was invented for

>get expensive lens for rangefinder
>1 shot of roll is at minimum focus distance
>completely out of focus
>mad for months, thinking it's not calibrated correctly
>do some more mf shots few days ago
>perfectly in focus
rangefinders sure can be exciting
thx for reading my blog

>>4456474
I post them to discuss. Pretty dissapointing you failed to provide an informative critique, but whatever. I fully accept that studio work is an iterative process like most other forms of photography.
Maybe next time you frolic by that stump again you will take a better shot of it! My advice is to try your stump shot with an 8x10 camera. That's one of the many things big film is for! It will come out a lot better. Thanks.

>>4456477
I dont agree with a single thing you said and your "advice" on composition in the other post is straight up wrong. Troll? Otherwise I recommend color & light by Gurney and then Paynes outdoor painting composition book. It should give you the fundamentals. Also drop the superior tone if you want discussion

>>4456479
Nope. Your picture is just really busy and has many distracting elements.

Your opening statement of "looks like you accidentally took a picture of the floor" doesn't get you a nice attitude, but I will be honest and descriptive of why your snapshot is just a snapshot. Name all the books you want it won't change that.

>>4456479
But I do agree I could take a better shot with some improvements to lighting. You just failed articulate anything useful because of your weirdly shitty attitude.

I hate how fgt is just doghair’s catty blog now these days. I guess it’s all our fault for not posting and letting him take over it with his shitty ego

>>4456493
Shut your bitch ass up. I post 1 or 2 pictures 4 or 5 days out of the week.

Just remember I give what I get. Don't be a dickhead and I won't be one back. Always happy to hear real criticism, but unfortunately most people believe that saying "your foto bad! Me no likey!" Is real critique and should be happily accepted. Nope.

>>4456493
11 or 12 pictures out of 72 ppsted images depending on which ones you want to count. Stop complaining and take/post more pics.

>>4455944
I really like the colors and subject in this shot, but I think a cleaner composition may have improved the image.
If you either got a bit closer to the water so the bordering trees and white car were not in frame, or included more of tree on the left I think it would be a better image.

>>4456493
>doesn't post a photo
>does complain about his 4chan boogeyman

>>4456505
You gave me an idea for a new still life. Thank you blessed titi appreciator.

>>4456505
I do post in the thread from time to time but you wouldn’t know me because I’m not a drama queen who spergs the fuck out any time someone doesn’t slob my knob over my shitty pictures just cause the negatives are big.

Photography?

>>4456526
Your delusions about me prove his point perfectly, which is just the icing on the cake of your hilarious post. I give what I get. It is that simple and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

See this critique I wrote >>4456504. If I got criticism along these lines there would be no drama, and I would be thanking whoever wrote it if it was actually helpful. It's really that simple...

>>4456534
Im working on my next still life. These things take time!

shaddap and post photos
flowers in my grandma's garden, it was rainy so instead of venturing into city I did some work with Rolleinars. Shooting so close with a TLR is tricky because of parallax

>>4456538
Something feels off about it, but I don't really know what. Maybe the perspective, or how the flowers are pointed away like that. Cool vibes and I like the edit.

It's about time to stock up bw films again.
Last time i purchased fomapan200 in 100ft and 15x 120 ones.
the 120 ones had production faults bc they applied too much of that shit on the backing paper.
and my negs had black dirt marks all over...
contacted foma and they told me to get some chemicals and bath them for 40min then wash it off
fuck that.

foma 100 feet 35mm is a must !
but what do i get for 120 ?
Should i go for foma 100 or get the Kentmere 100/200 ?

I call this one "p brain". It is my greatest work. Highly symbolic and deeply meaningful. Possibly too powerful for some to handle.

Inspired by this very thread. Thank you.

>>4456584
>roll of foma is only about 75$ after conversion
fuck you uros are lucky as shit, the cheapest local sourrce here in cucknada is like 130$.

>>4456504
It is too bad about the car. I have a few closer up but i liked that one a lot more because I'm happiest with the look of it
In reality it was a bit greyer than it looked and most of the colors in those shots weren't as nice.

>>4456587
Youre right it does have a good look to it. You can always use ai to remove the car and print digitally. :D

>>4456592
Maybe next time
If i keep the picture shitty it gives me a good reason to go back and try again

>>4456598
Wow that is based. You can post the shitty ones on p, maybe get halfway decent advice, upset a few people, then go back and take a better picture and not share the improved version!

devved a roll of ektar that's been sitting around for about a year
all the photos are mid
>>4456429
>pretty clear that they have some kind of "central warehouse of old shit" system
actually what's going on is they're reposting someone else's listing from other sites (mercari, yahoo) for a markup
when someone buys the item they have listed on ebay, they then go actually buy it from the original seller and ship it to you
that's why the listings get suspiciously removed, and frequently reposted, because the original listing expired or was sold
I've undercut jp ebay sellers a couple times by just hunting down the original listing and buying direct or via a proxy
unfortunately for me, I'm in the market for a GX680III and looks like almost all of those are listed on ebay, and legitimately — guess they know the market
>>4456538
>>4456547
it's upside-down

>>4456649
Why not a view camera?

>>4456652
The drooling retard above already explained that
>thank you for imagining me as an absolute chad carrying a 40lb 8x10 camera around the forest
View cameras are for studio work. Or trash and dirt collections if you reject society

Ektar does not like being underexposed
>>4456652
no interest in large format
6x17 mite be cool though

>>4456656
Fair enough. The gx680 is a funny camera for me because you can get a field camera that is way smaller with much bigger movements and then you just use a 120 film holder for it. You can even get ones that switch between 645 all the way up to 69 or 612 I think. Sinar zoom. Expensive, but really cool.
It is sorta nice to have be able to view/compose while taking a picture instead of the whole film holder deal. I think the gx680 lenses may also be a touch nicer for medium format as well.

>>4456654
Still seething, coping, and acting like a complete retard. Lmfao. You are so cute. Completely humorless, but still very cute.

>>4456649
>GX680III
i got absolutely spooned locally buying out a retiring photog in calgary, two bodies, 6 lenses, couple backs and other accessories. basically a whole kit ready to go. overpayed for it i think (3 grand canuckbucks) but the convenience of local-ish and impulsiveness won out. great camera. it's about as much of a pain in the ass to take out as my cambo, but in use it's a much more simplified experience, once you're set up. just a very fat slr.

>>4456663
fuck the skew is really bugging me now that i look at this again lol, might have to go back out and do it again.

>NOOOOOO STOOOOP!!!!! Dont you know view cameras are only for studio work!

Snaps a picture with better resolution and tonality than 40 of your 35mm shots combined. Nothing personel, kid.

>>4456493
I posted these
>>4456475
>>4455780
what did you post?

>>4456665
>proceed to take a photo that wasn't even worth it to take on 110 film

>>4456668
Now THAT is pure and objective projection.

Git gud, kid. Maybe one day you'll earn the RIGHT and PRIVILEGE to shoot big boy film!

>>4456671
You compensating for something?

>>4456673
I just have fun using the cameras I like that let me have even more fun making prints how I like.
There is no compensation. Just the simple enjoyment of a hobby. How about you? You seem awfully upset about silly jokes and someone having fun doing photography.

>>4456665
How do you post both opinions
>you cant take a view camera out its too heavy
>lmao only seething coping retards dont take their view camera out
And still not realize its time to log off 4channel to go be with your trash collection full time

>>4456682
That's what in the old days we called "a troll". The answer was always the same: don't feed the trolls.

>>4456682
My retarded friend that cannot read, I was making fun of the angry guy!

Seems like you should take your own advice! HAH!

>double and tripple replying
>not knowing when to stop
>thousands of euros into hobby and lacks even surface level understanding
I wish his posts had at least something funny because this is prime lolcow behavior, but less interesting

>>4456675
I just don't like gear faggery, despite not being immune to it myself.

>>4456692
basically what i was getting at >>4456493, dude's either a shitty troll or a turbo sped with zero self awareness. or on 4chan i guess that's the same thing.

>>4456694
Depends for me. Cameras are fun. Im not a chart nerd and I never argue about camera stats. It's just so boring and retarded.
My absolute favorite thing to do is shoot a big view camera. I do not think it's gearfagging to shoot large format if you're using them to make contact prints, and especially alt process. Digitizing and printing enlarged negatives for contact printing is just inferior. You can't get the same look I love from big film.

>>4456692
You should probably go to bed, lil bro. You're just aimlessly seething and not making any sense... Or you could post some photos, maybe? Lets see those skills you got!

Is 650 euro overpriced for a Bessa R and Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f1.7 ltm? seems like sold listings on ebay work out to around that price, sometimes more

>>4456547 >>4456649
thx, and yeah it's upside down my bad
another one

>>4456714
Very nice anon

>>4456712
Meh more than i'd pay. They do seem like the best option if you want an RF though. They seem more reliable than the contax and more features than the leicas.

Early morning in Portsmouth, NH.

more eye rape from this roll
>>4456654
>View cameras are for studio work.
funny you should say that
because every time I read about / see view cameras being used (yt, here, etc.) it's outdoors
>>4456661
honestly I just think GX680s are neat
like the final form of a bygone technology niche (working professional film studio cameras)
honestly the main reason I shoot film at all is to play with cool old cameras
but yeah I've also heard good things about the lenses, probably all from this anon >>4456663

>>4456849
haha maybe it is all just me, i haven't seen anyone else on here that has one. and i don't post it often lol. But i like it, it's definitely a "cool old camera" experience for sure. didn't see i missed focus badly here til i scanned, it was on a riverbank and i had a mirrorless tripod instead of something that actually holds up well, and excuses excuses. i really need to run some colour through it one of these days.

>>4456849
Yep. I love old cameras and I love modular lego piece cameras even more. That's why sinar is my absolute favorite! Lots of practical, convenient, and creative setups you can come up with. I have a lot of fun with a setup where my 8x10 is pointed straight down/parallel with a table. Very nice for still life/product photography type stuff.

The rollei x-act 2 is another really neat medium format camera. You use a sliding back to switch between viewfinder and film or digital back. The control module is jame packed with interesting features as well. You can also adapt any digital camera to the back.

I think most people take their view cameras outside as well. I would really love to see more large format studio work posted here. Not a very popular subject on /p/ sadly.

Today I spent a lot of time working on both composition and lighting, and I think it paid off.
I used the fibonacci spiral and golden ratio for multiple parts of this still life while maintaining a cohesive theme to each of the elements.

For the lighting I wanted to create a very soft even light to practice and understand it better. I surrounded my stage on 3 sides with white cards, and on the fourth side I used a translucent paper. I then pointed a baffled LED light at the translucent paper. I think it is quite pleasing.

This was taken on expired TXP shot at 160, devved in 510-pyro for 10.5 mins. Shot at f64 with a 5 minute exposure! Txp has terrible reciprocity. The exposure reading was only 30 seconds.

Critique and your thoughts on composition, lighting, theme would be appreciated! I spent around 2 hours working on this picture today. :D

>>4456885
engineering major attempts art for the first time/10

>>4456885
Placing random stuff at mathematically defined points does not art make

Look at this by /p/'s favorite photographer. Look at this and learn.

What hurts the most about film getting more popular is it is no longer possible to acquire medium format bodies for a fair price <($350 w/ 80mm). By and large every single one of these is a ticking time bomb and replacement is how they are repaired. But then youtube happened.

>>4456889
>>4456891
>inb4 five replies with I do it for me I don’t care what you think, let’s see your photo, wow shitty critique you’re obsessed with me, and wherever other copes he throws out all the time

>>4456893
and just so you know that camera is really hard to use! >:(

>>4456889
But why is it bad? I think it has a nice flow, it's visually pleasing, and there is a good coherence between all the elements.

>>4456891
That is not strictly what I did, but I used it to influence my placement.

>>4456893
I just want a better explanation.

>>4456897
Sir this is literally a pile of garbage

>>4456898
That is one way to look at it, or you can try to see what the elements are and why I chose them as the artist. You can reduce any picture to "it's just X".

>poured my working volume of blix into my dev bottle by mistake
Please help I'm retarded

>>4456899
>scrap cloth
>rusty/weathered ???
>toilet paper/spool/container
i am seeing some deep artistic meaning here

very abstract

yes it is coming to me, ohmmmmm
got it
your photo is titled
"i really need to clean up"

>>4456900
Clearly label your bottles for next time.

>>4456900
happens to the best of us lad, my favorite is pulling out the reel and walla, clear film. F in the chat for you.

>>4456901
It's an old women's garment, rusty thing, siding to a barn, and the round pieces are used to ceramic insulators used to terminate electric fencing wire or bring them around a corner. I think they also look like spools of thread.

Decay is a totally valid subject to explore through photography.

>>4456904
this is the "having to explain the joke" of photography

>>4456905
And? It's pretty obvious what each element is if you actually look at the picture.

>>4456907
>how are you not familiar with the junk on my farm?
Peak ineffective communication

>>4456902
>>4456903
The bottles are labeled, I just need to label the graduated cylinders now too. Luckily I was all done with development, so no lost film.

>>4456909
Label everything on all sides so you can see it from any angle. Labelling lids is also a good idea.

>>4456891
If I took this picture people would just call it a pile of bricks and some chunks of wood in front of a building.

Can you explain to me what it makes it so great?

>>4456885
Hotel art, but not in a bad way honestly.

>>4456891
I hate to sound cliche (and I can't be assed to look up the photographer so this is just on reaction to the image) but its very painterly, very academic. I do think it kicks ass however.

>>4456920
This is the core of your pathology. You think everyone is critizicing you because you are you. Everyone is critizicing your photo. You yourself are anonymous, no one gives a shit.

You say these things about your photos: subject is valid, composition is good, lighting is good, its visually pleasing and coherent. It means nothing coming from you. When someone other than the artist says it, it starts being true

>>4456930
Thanks. I'll take it. I wanted to practice composition and lighting today. Hotel art is maybe generic or a little boring but pleasant to look at. I'm pretty excited to see how it looks printed.

>>4456938
put a border on it and people will assume it’s more artistic
see:
>the retard above arguing there’s a meaningful difference in the quality of your photo and the “gold standard” of /p/

>>4456941
I've considered it, maybe for my next one I'll give it a shot.
It would be funny to take a picture of a real 8 ply matboard cut to 4:5 and use it as the template for the borders. Corny as hell, but possibly a good troll.

>looking for a cheap color enlarger to get into printing
>find automatic color paper processor in mint conditions
>seller doesn't ship and is just half an hour drive from me
>€1000
>tfw realize it's an amazing find
>tfw I have nowhere near enough disposable income for that

Has anyone shot vision 2 before? Is it worth an extra $3.80 over the new remjetless vision 3 rolls for the novelty? Or will it just look same-ish with slightly worse latitude and resolution?

Feel like taking an egg pic today. Anyone want to have an egg type photo battle with me today?

>>4456947
Bro just grab it. What model is it?

>planned to buy some medium format camera
>rather brought another lens for LF

>>4456967
whoever is selling you vision 2 for more than vision 3 is scamming you bruv.

>>4456937
this is what it meant that its his "blog". it's become like a personal space about him as much as the work if not more so. and that's why it irritates people. and i don't know if he's just autistic or something but that doesn't seem to make sense to him.

>>4456977
Those lenses are godly. If you actually got a sironar-s you are in for a treat. What FL did you get?

>>4456979
this, nigga that shit is waaay expired

>>4456984
I have 4x5 Sinar X and F
and few lenses: apo sironar s 135, super symmar 150 HM, super angulon 90XL and apo ronars 240 and 360

>>4456989
I like apo sironar-s because it's kind of universal lens
it can be used for close up and for landscape

>>4456975
>what model
Durst RCP40
>just grab it
Dude I can't spend a thousand euros just like that: I have a dead end 9 to 5, €1k is like five months of savings, I don't even know if I enjoy printing to begin with.
I wanted to spend less than 150 for the enlarger, then /diy/ something like the Nova Print Processor and 3D print the rest. Also I need to /diy/ a micro-darkroom out of a shelving unit, 'cause space is limited. With chemicals and paper I didn't want to break €500. That thing must be amazing, but it's way out of my reach.

>>4456993
Absolutely, and they have nice projection size as well. The ronars are good for near 1:1 because of their symmetrical lens design also.

My 300mm apo sinaron se is probably my favorite lens for 8x10 aside from my 180mm macro lens. Copal 3 shutters are so beefy.
I am very very excited to see what slide film looks like with the 300mm.

>>4456995
Fair enough! Color printing is something I am unsure about enjoying as much as b&w printing also. Seems like it is a very tedious process.

>>4456979
>>4456985
They said it was frozen and that it still looks as it should at box speed. For reference, I pay $11.7 US for a roll off new vision 3, and this shit is $15.5
>>4456995
>€1k is like five months of savings
Bruh are you from Albania? Do u want a job? One year term and I can almost guarantee you'll go home with €25k in savings. You'd need to relocate temporarily and also be under 30 for the visa. I have a room available for €80 a week, just don't be a pig and don't eat my stuff from the fridge.

>>4454336
>>4454338
excellent focus and exposure

>>4457032
>They said it was frozen and that it still looks as it should at box speed. For reference, I pay $11.7 US for a roll off new vision 3, and this shit is $15.5
yeah no i don't think you understood me, whatever shit about it being frozen or this or that is irrelevant. if they are charging you more for vision 2 than vision 3 its a scam. simple as. no amount of 'but they said this they said that" matters.

>>4454336
Yo is that in Perth? I swear I've been there before
and 2nding this >>4457035

>>4454485
>>4454560
>>4454562
>>4455442
>>4453764 (OP)
nice pictures

>>4456413
don't leave them too much in the fixer though, only the prescribed time

>>4457042
Ill be using amidol + tf4 @ 1 min then I slap them all in water until I get to washing. I've used the adox silver chloride paper before to grewt effect.
It's like a grade 3. Really looking forward to having lower contrast contact paper, and 500 sheets is many years worth of the stuff.

>>4457003
I never tried b&w either, but I like the nostalgia of color film, I now want to learn printing to have some degree of freedom in composing the final print.

>>4457032
I'm a mech engineer in (north) Italy, 3 years experience, over 30yo, clinically depressed. I will escape this hell one day, but for the time being I'm stuck.

>>4457050
good, good, I've forgotten kodak vario contrast paper in the fixer for hours, but they were new... wouldn't try it with old ones lol

>>4457053
>I never tried b&w either
pls try b&w first
color is a bitch

>>4457054
>vario contrast paper
Shieeeet I just remembered those enlargers with integrated pink/yellow filters you could dial in... do they still make them???

>>4457036
Ok ok how about fuji eterna 250d for the same price as vision 3? I miss fuji and I'm still seething that they killed c200. I have dozens of 120 rolls of 400h and 160ns because I knew they'd be killed off, but I never bothered stockpiling c200
>>4457053
That sucks bro. If you were under 30 I'd legit take you on as a labourer and pay you €800-850 a week netto. I used to work with this italian guy called Marco, he was very chill and relaxed but he was also reliable and he took work seriously.

>>4457062
Yes they do exist. My leica focomat has it built in. You can use any color enlarger as well, but you have to figure out the settings.

>>4457053
I highly recommend everyone makes prints. A 35mm only enlarger is pretty inexpensive.


>>4456982
Defeat me in an egg photo battle and I will stop blogging. I'll give you until sunday. The only stipulation is that I will need proof it is your photograph.

You know many people "blog" on fgt. It really isn't a big deal kiddo. Your offtopic whining and lack of contribution is far worse.

>>4457064
>Yes they do exist. My leica focomat has it built in. You can use any color enlarger as well, but you have to figure out the settings.
thanks, most color enlargers I've found were monsters, the one I worked on was a Kaiser and wasn't much bigger than a b&w enlarger

>>4456982
Just ask /an/ about him. He literally took over the /dog/ general and now it's "leo and friends". He blames everyone but him, because some schizophrenic from a dog hating subreddit dropped in around 2020 did spam zoosadism and CP to try and force mods to ban dogs from /an/, but it's not like he helped with how annoying he is

>>4457067
I hope you know your lies are just hilarious entertainment for me.

Defeat me in an egg photo battle and I will stop "blogging".

>>4457074
If it makes you feel better, you and huskyfag are basically the same person both here and on /an/ so don't feel too singled out.

>>4457076
Its a complete lie spewed by an obsessed retard aka Funny shit. Go look at the /dog/ general right now and you'll see how stupid he sounds.
And yeah I know we both live rent free in some weird people's heads. Corgichad also.

>>4457064
How will the winner be decided?

>>4457102
coin toss, obviously

>>4457102
I will decide. If the only thing at stake is my own blogging then it will be up to me. It will be obvious who has won and I'm not going to be a little bitch about it. There is too much bias against me to trust any sort of honor based voting system. We both know there will be people that will not vote based on the photograph, but who posted it.

If you don't like that then you must also put something up. For example, if I defeat you then you must stop obsessing about me.

>>4457115
Lol

>>4457121
Sunday afternoon is your deadline. I've got a banger egg pic I'm working on right now that will be hard to beat. Ill post it in the next fgt.

I think you're going to get whipped by my egg pic. I am a professional egg photographer after all...

>>4457123
So you start early, dictate the rules and judge the winner. Have fun

>>4457127
Sounds like you are chickening out. You have 5 days lil bitch boy, and I'm going to post my pic in the new fgt, so you will know what you have to beat. You really need 5 whole days to take an egg picture better than mine?

>>4457127
If you want voting we can ask canon, cinefag, clueless faggot, sugar, and burt to vote. I don't think they hate me, and will maybe vote in an objective way.

>>4457131
Here are the terms. Category is street photog and you have 24 hoirs otherwise I win and you are a chicken bitch boy. If you pst I post and then we strawpoll the winner

>>4457133
Retard, the only thing at stake is on my end. Egg photograph and tripfags vote.

You have an opportunity to stop my blogging, or you can bitch out like the little egglet bitch that you truly are. Strawpoll is not a fair way to vote. Tripfags voting is the only fair vote I will accept.

Your choice.

>>4457136
Smells like bitch boy one trick pony in here

I made a new bread
>>4457140
>>4457140
>>4457140

>>4457139
>he admits he can't take a better egg picture than doghair

HAHAHA! You really are bitching out aren't you? Sunday is your deadline, one trick pony.
You know you could have a little fun instead of being a cry baby bitch boy 24/7, nophoto.

>>4456851
just thought to ask, since I'm buying more negative binder sheets
how do you store the developed film for the 680?
6x8 generally gives 9 shots/roll right, but with strips of 3 being a bit longer than 3x 6x7, which it seems most sheets max out at supporting

>>4457143
Who are you quoting?

>>4454163
love this kinda stuff