Analog film photography and cameras

I always find people seem to be more relaxed behind a TLR. Also rangefinders for that matter GA2G, something about them I guess. Most of my rangefinders look like toys so that could be it.

My scanner has shit the bed, and I haven't got round to printing anything recently, so here are a couple of backlit shots of negatives, or as I like to call them 'GhettoScans'.

Not gunna lie, thought this was a dude...

Not weird at all Wools. It's well known that people feel more relaxed when not having a photographer staring straight at them.

Pretty much, a big SLR with big lens often feel imposing, especially if you're doing a small wedding, think of how photojournalist behave with their SLR camera trying to get the best shot possible in a finite amount of time.

Rangefinder work brilliantly as well simply due to the size (less imposing) and of course since everyone use their compact camera make it easy to blend in, I've used a Leica M9 (was given one to try) at an social events and everyone much to my surprise are more relaxed and sometime spark conversation simply because of the silly red spots on the camera.

Do you think that the shots seem to look better if shooting from hip level rather that eye level.

Lynx, strange as it is, for social images, the answer is yes.

I say strange, because I never expected a pertinent question from you on photography.

Conversely, in documentary reporting, a lower or much higher viewpoint is often the advantage.

Do you think that the shots seem to look better if shooting from hip level rather that eye level.

depend on the subject, portraiture photo usually look better if it shot lower than eye levels.

but it's subjective either way.

I do do a bit of snapping and prefer waistlevel shots, or I like shooting from the waist. It gives me the abilty to look up and see the full shot and decide what i like to be in the shot.

When I take pictures I'll take the same picture from lots of differing angles and see which one I find more pleasing to the eye.

ed what camera did you use to take that photo?

medium format 6x6 slr with standard lens.

where can one develop and print 120mm film for cheaps? does anyone know?

snappy snap in bloomsbury do it in an hour.

Ed the enigmatic.

You just answered "what type", but not make/model.

;)

the question here is; will it make any different? hell I even have fungus on that lens.

Warming camera lenses next to one's genitals does have that side effect.

Fungus. Ewwwww.

*holds nose, puts Ed on "avoid"*

;)

Is it worthwhile to update the first post to include recomendations for printing and developing differing formats and types?

Sorry lynx, I won't be helping you with that. Just live with the thread as it is, or better yet,
why not start an extremely similar thread and see how that gets on.

..........

wblati, forgive me, but what exactly are you trying to show? If it is that you can correctly expose pictures at the taking stage, well that is fine. But wouldn't it be better to show us examples that do stand out? After all, on this thread, if anyone wishes to show their images, at least they would be expected to be exposed correctly. Framing and composition are a bit hit and miss in your images - I'm not having a go at your images, just giving feedback.

The last one is very good, especially as they are in step together.

The others also seem to really suffer from being overly contrasty. I'm not sure if its your scanner, or your photo-editor is set on too contrasty a setting.

chalk and coal with no midtones as the technician at college used to say. (just as well the sun wasn't shining eh?)
or was grade5 paper on special offer?

Sam - nice shots, I haven't tried delta 100 before but now I think I'll give it a go. What was it developed in?

Cheers. I used tmax on that roll. I'm a real fan of it as an all-round developer. Used Ilfostop and Ilford rapid fixer.

wblati, forgive me, but what exactly are you trying to show? If it is that you can correctly expose pictures at the taking stage, well that is fine. But wouldn't it be better to show us examples that do stand out? After all, on this thread, if anyone wishes to show their images, at least they would be expected to be exposed correctly. Framing and composition are a bit hit and miss in your images - I'm not having a go at your images, just giving feedback.

The last one is very good, especially as they are in step together.

The others also seem to really suffer from being overly contrasty. I'm not sure if its your scanner, or your photo-editor is set on too contrasty a setting.

I wanted the images to be contrasy/grainy to stand out from the clean images you see these days - I am still experimenting on the kind of look that I want. I appreciate the feedback.

Wassup people, my Dad showed me Click 2 Print today, they offer cheap 120 processing. Was wondering if anyone has used them before? whats the quality like etc.
http://www.click-2-print.co.uk/professional-processing-and-printing-packages.html

You can send film off to some of the places in the link below. While I'm here - can anyone recommend one in particular that processes and scans colour negative/black and white 35mm film? Decent hi-res scans if poss... Fanks!

http://www.lfgss.com/thread8385.html

You can send film off to some of the places in the link below. While I'm here - can anyone recommend one in particular that processes and scans colour negative/black and white 35mm film? Decent hi-res scans if poss... Fanks!

http://www.lfgss.com/thread8385.html

Peak Imaging mate, say no more!

I second Peak, but for convenience I use Jessops/Snappy Snaps, stright to CD.

Nice to see so much interest in film BTW :)