Analog film photography and cameras

Posted on
Page
of 969
  • I already wanted to go to places like that, those shots make me want to more!!

    My latest attempt at pictures...

  • that is absolutely top notch!
    (friends of yours?)

  • Just seen that on the blog, sick.
    I think I've just lost another roll of exposed film. There are no words. I've never lost a single one until recently I've lost 2.

  • that is absolutely top notch!
    (friends of yours?)

    She was from Singapore, got in touch through my tumblr and then she just happened to be backpacking through London this weekend

  • ..am posting this in non-digital, as the man (afaik) solely shoots film -


    Mark Borthwick

    (Click-though image) ..there is quite some commissioned stuff, fashion etc. -
    but also a bunch of personal work; quite a lot of people / portraits. Pretty neat.

  • Just seen that on the blog, sick.
    I think I've just lost another roll of exposed film. There are no words. I've never lost a single one until recently I've lost 2.

    Lost as in misplaced or lost as in screwed up? If the latter you devving yourself?

  • Dropped, misplaced, abandoned etc.

  • Bummer. Hope you find it soon.

  • just remembered that someone mentioned Water Light Time a while back, I got some books to freecycle, potentially of interest:

    Heaven & Earth: Unseen by the naked eye (mostly microscope and telescope photos) - A5ish paperback - VGC
    Isabel Toledo: Fashion from the Inside Out, Valerie Steele & Patricia Mears - bigger than A4 hardback - rear of dustjacket curling at the bottom edge
    Water Light Time, David Doubilet - bigger than A4 paperback - VGC

    London-based, no post. can deliver to Souths, SEs, central, LMNH etc

  • I think it was mentioned on here a while ago that xp2 at least, and probably other films can benefit for a little over exposure, which results in a reduction in contrast.

    I've been looking into up/down rating my film and I just wanted to make sure I fully understand the process.

    I was hoping someone might be able to answer a couple of questions I have, I've been doing a little research but have not ended up more confused.

    Firstly is it correct that if I'm exposing something that is ISO 400 as if it was 200 will be downrating the film, and so this will need to be pulled in the lab and if I under expose it will need to be pushed in the lab.

    OR

    Do I up/down rate the film as I choose while shooting and develop as normal? My only concern there being that I am then scanning at home rather than doing a traditional print and so do not have the same flexibility

  • Arguably both are correct.

    If I understand it correctly, your first proposal would apply to any film where you are not using the 'correct' (i.e. manufacturer's) rating.

    Your 'develop as normal' approach should largely work with XP2 (and other chromogenic?) film where variations in exposure give useable images but with some variation in apparent grain size.

    When it first came out, XP was a bit like photographic marmite with lovers and haters espousing all manner of claimed advantages or problems - many of these ideas can still be found even when they are complete twaddle. Read more ( http://www.flickr.com/groups/64599571@N00/discuss/ for example ) then test your thinking by noting what works for you and what doesn't.

  • The weather wasn't conducive to cycling today so Itook some photos inside the flat instead,


    Untitled by mechanical_vandal, on Flickr


    Untitled by mechanical_vandal, on Flickr

  • Finally got round to dev first roll of Portra 800 I shot.
    Pretty content with how it scans in terms of grain & colour, given it's high iso C41 film.

    (this is unedited bar some minor adjustements in scan)

  • I just finished some Portra 800 too. It goes really super green under fluorescent light! I should probably have done a little more research.

  • Wicked shot.

  • Flipping fantastic, those steps

  • Haha, wow..

  • Two from the Getty Center, Los Angeles, last year. Just had lots of film developed and scanned at 'digitalab': disappointed the low-res scans are 72dpi.

  • cracking shots though! Colours are fantastic

  • They're Velvia 100. The scans came through a little drab so I pushed the vibrance and saturation a tad in Lightroom and the colour just popped out.

  • cracking shots though! Colours are fantastic

    +1

  • awesome shots snoops

  • Nice weather for shooting most of this weekend!

    Had fun overexposing a roll of XP2, I really like it when it's overcast!

  • Lovely shots, I especially like the 3rd and 2nd last ones!

  • Thank you very kindly. Although I'm not 100% sure about XP2 anymore. I was a really big fan of it, but having tried portra I'd rather stick with it for now, as it does look rather nice if you desaturate it in post

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Analog film photography and cameras

Posted by Avatar for GA2G @GA2G

Actions