Show us yer film shots then!

Asha said:
Some nice photo potential there then ....I really need to get out myself and shoot some close ups of the local arcitecture down here....some of the detail is beautiful but easily disregarded if you don't actually stop and look for it.......I for one would like to see more of this church.....I wonder if you're allowed to get internal shots too?
Click to expand...

Its a problem I've found, so much beautiful architecture round here but I still struggle with finding inspiration some times. Familiarity I suppose.

Hopefully with the softening light of more-winter I should be able to get some more shots might make a morning of it and take the *ahem* digi too.

Any one else find them selves at times carrying more cameras than is probably healthy

wwwphil said:
For cheepo curly wurly Shangai film and a first outing with the camera exposure in this shot is just about the dogs dangely bits.
Click to expand...
:lol:
Cheers. I reckon it could have done with a little more time in the soup for some the highlights.
 
menthel said:
I can only but agree with this. Working in the "figital" age, I think using both film and digital PP techniques is the best way forward. I personally try to keep within the character of the film used but then that has already been altered by my choice of developer and the way I developed it!
Click to expand...

Indeed. It's not to say my film images are basically Photoshop with a little bit of film on the side - most of mine are actually very little, if any PP - but at the end of the day a final image can be delivered via multiple means, and it is the end result that counts. I love the process beforehand, but we are the minority frankly...
 
Hi, I have managed to stop :dummy: about the demise of Efke film, just about, honestly, no more tears:dummy: well maybe one or two. Today I visited the local Botanical Gardens to try a roll of Rollei 80S through the RB67. The first shot was taken without any filters at ISO 25
Rollei_80s_IR_Filter_070912001editnet.jpg


The second shot was taken using a 720 IR filter. Unfortunately I over compensated for the filters :nuts: I used on the other shots these two are all that were readable to my V500 scanner

Rollei_80s_IR_Filter_070912002editnet.jpg


Developed in D-76 for 9.5mins @20c
 
Last edited:
I've had a look back at some of the images I've posted on here and I think, in the main, they are over processed. So I have decided to try and keep processing down to a minimum and only tweak images to get them to how I saw the scene at the time. I also reserve the right to ignore this advice and go completely over the top every now and again.:D

Andy
 
Andysnap said:
I've had a look back at some of the images I've posted on here and I think, in the main, they are over processed. So I have decided to try and keep processing down to a minimum and only tweak images to get them to how I saw the scene at the time. I also reserve the right to ignore this advice and go completely over the top every now and again.:D

Andy
Click to expand...

Err...yeah...okay
 
Andysnap said:
I've had a look back at some of the images I've posted on here and I think, in the main, they are over processed. So I have decided to try and keep processing down to a minimum and only tweak images to get them to how I saw the scene at the time. I also reserve the right to ignore this advice and go completely over the top every now and again.:D

Andy
Click to expand...


Andy - your images, your choice :thumbs:

Personally, I always feel a little uneasy doing a great deal of "digital work" on film shots, mainly because when I shoot on film, it's because I want it to LOOK like I have shot on film, but when it's the only shot I have (i.e. I haven't also shot the same image on digital), and I want a particular effect, then it's nobodys business but mine what I do with it - and if it makes the end result come out like the shot I had in mind, i'll be happy.
 
I don't post many shots on here, not least of all as what I can produce ( especially with some of the old kit i have!) is a long way off the superb work that some of you post.

My lack of photographic skill obviously goes against me too :D

Nonetheless I'm hoping to become more involved , particulary in this thread as I love to use this old gear.......

Here is one of "Anthony Ant" ....a metal "ornament" who looks after our inscence sticks!!

The dado rail is a little distracting and could be cloned out but given the era of the camera, i was fairly pleased with the result.

Shot with a Half Plate Lancaster Instantograph (1891 model) which has holes in its red square cornered bellows and has a lens locked solid at F/10.....loaded with Adox quarter plate 100 iso film...30 second exposure.

anthonyantlancasterinst.jpg

Shot at 2012-09-08
 
That's very impressive, particularly for a camera that would have been cutting edge technology for my father's grandfather.
 
RaglanSurf said:
That's very impressive, particularly for a camera that would have been cutting edge technology for my father's grandfather.
Click to expand...

Tbh Nick I was surprised that the camera threw out anything like a half decent result given the state it was in when i got it......The seller stated it was only good for the dustbin!

All the brassware was as black as coal ...took a complete strip down and many many hours of polishing to even see brass!!

The bellows are extremely delicate and the lens actually has blemishes on the glassware!
 
Asha said:
I don't post many shots on here, not least of all as what I can produce ( especially with some of the old kit i have!) is a long way off the superb work that some of you post.

My lack of photographic skill obviously goes against me too :D

Nonetheless I'm hoping to become more involved , particulary in this thread as I love to use this old gear.......

Here is one of "Anthony Ant" ....a metal "ornament" who looks after our inscence sticks!!

The dado rail is a little distracting and could be cloned out but given the era of the camera, i was fairly pleased with the result.

Shot with a Half Plate Lancaster Instantograph (1891 model) which has holes in its red square cornered bellows and has a lens locked solid at F/10.....loaded with Adox quarter plate 100 iso film...30 second exposure.

anthonyantlancasterinst.jpg

Shot at 2012-09-08
Click to expand...

Nice one Asha, I recon you got a excellent result out of that camera and it's always nice to make or keep something old in a working condition....I was pleased when I put a B & W film though my Brilliant and they all come out good, so I am going to try some colour in it and risk a roll of ektar .
 
Tigger.ufo said:
... but to me the whole essence of shooting with film is to minimise pp and capture the image as it was.

Just my opinion though! :)


Heather
Click to expand...

Not having a go Heather but playing around with photo's has been around for an awfully long time. I do appreciate that getting it right in camera is desirable but it's not always possible. And just in case proof was needed this is a photo of my Great-grandparents with my grandmother as a baby. My Gt Grandmother had died in giving birth which kind of explains why my Gt Grandfather is holding the baby, pretty unusual for the period. So this is an early example of photo-manipulation.

7954600264_47c500da09.jpg
[/url]
Gt Grandparents & Grandmother by Raglansurf, on Flickr[/IMG]

So basically Photoshop for the 19th century :lol: There's nothing new in photography, just the methods have changed.
 
Steve-B said:
Nice one Asha, I recon you got a excellent result out of that camera .....
Click to expand...

Thanks Steve....I actually have some half plate sheet film so might dabble with that soon :thumbs:


Steve-B said:
it's always nice to make or keep something old in a working condition .
Click to expand...

LMAO...First thing that came into my head when i read that was my Mrs!!!! She always falls for the brunt end of my humour!.........Yes Nick i know, another piece of furniture gunna be wrapped around my neck!:D

Steve-B said:
I was pleased when I put a B & W film though my Brilliant and they all come out good, so I am going to try some colour in it and risk a roll of ektar .
Click to expand...

Be sure to post the results on here.......I've heard a few people say they have had decent shots from their Brilliants so I'm impatient to try my own once I get the focusing sorted on it.....one of many ongoing projects!
 
Asha said:
I don't post many shots on here, not least of all as what I can produce ( especially with some of the old kit i have!) is a long way off the superb work that some of you post.

My lack of photographic skill obviously goes against me too :D

Nonetheless I'm hoping to become more involved , particulary in this thread as I love to use this old gear.......

Here is one of "Anthony Ant" ....a metal "ornament" who looks after our inscence sticks!!

The dado rail is a little distracting and could be cloned out but given the era of the camera, i was fairly pleased with the result.

Shot with a Half Plate Lancaster Instantograph (1891 model) which has holes in its red square cornered bellows and has a lens locked solid at F/10.....loaded with Adox quarter plate 100 iso film...30 second exposure.

I just had a look at some pictures of the Half Plate Lancaster, what a glorious piece of engineering to use, lots of fun.
Click to expand...
 
Be sure to post the results on here.......I've heard a few people say they have had decent shots from their Brilliants so I'm impatient to try my own once I get the focusing sorted on it.....one of many ongoing projects![/QUOTE]

All of this has had me thinking now...I have also got a eastman Kodak no 1A with the original scribe sitting in it's holder, I took the camera apart a while ago the lenses have come up really clean the bellows are clean without any holes ( I think ) And the shutter and aperture controls function ok...what has been stopping me from playing up till now is film ..or not being able to get any. so I am now thinking that being as I have the proper winde on spool for the camera and a workshop with a lathe and a milling machines, I should be able to make a pair of spacers for 120 film and some sort of spacer to go onto the wind on spool to keep the film central as I wind it on.. All I have to do then is work out how far to wind the film on each time..being as the frame size is 9 x 6 I think...

Sounds like a lot of work ..but is also sounds like a challenge :), the thing is can I get it all ready to take to scotland with me next month to try out some 9 x 6 landscapes....
 
[/QUOTE]
All of this has had me thinking now...I have also got a eastman Kodak no 1A with the original scribe sitting in it's holder, I took the camera apart a while ago the lenses have come up really clean the bellows are clean without any holes ( I think ) And the shutter and aperture controls function ok...what has been stopping me from playing up till now is film ..or not being able to get any. so I am now thinking that being as I have the proper winde on spool for the camera and a workshop with a lathe and a milling machines, I should be able to make a pair of spacers for 120 film and some sort of spacer to go onto the wind on spool to keep the film central as I wind it on.. All I have to do then is work out how far to wind the film on each time..being as the frame size is 9 x 6 I think...

Sounds like a lot of work ..but is also sounds like a challenge :), the thing is can I get it all ready to take to scotland with me next month to try out some 9 x 6 landscapes....[/QUOTE]



IIRC its 116 format camera...yes use 120 film ...dead easy by using a rawlplug ...I'll come back to you with how exactly in due course...i have to go out i'm afraid but don't start lathe work just yet!! lol
 
OK Steve here is the adaptation

Get yourself a plastic rawlplug (colour irrelevant :D)that you can push several millimeters into the end of a 120 spool of film....just be sure it's a snug fit!

Now using pliers/wire cutters cut the rawlplug so that the total length of plug and film spool match the same as your 116 take up spool.

Place the modified film spool into the camera body in the same way you would load any other spool with. The rawlplug will be toward the top of the camera ......

Now take a little care pulling the film leader across to attach to the original 116 take up spool.
Because of the distance between film and take up, there can be a chance of fogging the start of the film if you advance too far before closing the back ....one answer to this is to lengthen the backing paper of the film by simply attaching additional paper from an old film with cellotape.

Close the camera back then wind on the film until No 3 shows in the red window ( be sure it is the No 3 of the actual film and not any additional backing paper!!

No 3 is effectively frame 1

Subsequently:

No6 is frame 2

No 9 is frame 3

No 12 is frame 4

No 15 is frame 15



Shooting:

What you see in the viewfinder will not be what is recorded on the film!

In landscape format the width will be fine but the top will be cropped slightly because of the narrower film.

Similarly if you turn to portrait format then one side will be cropped.

Bear this in mind when composing and you could end up with 5 slightly panoramic style shots out of a 120 film.

I hope I've covered all the points....It's more than a year since I last used 116/616 format but fortuanatley I keep notes! :thumbs:

Best of luck....

Edit...Just to add, if you have an old roll of 120 backing paper on a spool then it's worth doing a dummy run with the back open to see all runs smoothly etc
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info Asha, I am at a motorcycle club rally at the moment so am on my iPhone.. Will have a proper look when I get home... Got plenty of rawl plugs and rolls of backing paper still on my darkroom floor... So fingers crossed and watch this space..
 
RaglanSurf said:
So basically Photoshop for the 19th century :lol: There's nothing new in photography, just the methods have changed.
Click to expand...

Amazing stuff, thanks for sharing that... cool what people were doing even with the relatively new fangled photographic processes available.
 
A few more from my hols in Ibiza the other week, all Asda dev and scanned and reduced in contrast and all dust spots removed with Photoshop, and Reala film expired 2007

flek181000px.jpg


flekt241000px.jpg


flekt211000px.jpg
 
Excellent shots Brian, the first one is a stunner.
 
Another visit to Venford Dam to try out my new (to me) 72mm Super Angulon XL. Shot at 1/30th sec @ f22 with a 100m Hitech yellow filter held in front of the lens on Ilford Hp5+.

This was my first ever attempt at wet scanning an image and I used Kami fluid with my 'Better Scanning' film holder and then scanned at 1200 dpi on my V750 scanner.


Venford Dam 72mm SA XL yellow 5x7 1200 Wet by Ed Bray, on Flickr
 
Hi Rod, that was the first and only time I've used it so far. I haven't even tried it with its centre filter yet either. I am looking forward to using it for architectural subjects.
 
Working through some old prints and files. I know these have been posted again, But really, these have to be 2 of the best pictures i've taken.

7369134000_e8cbdb75b4_z.jpg


5822124676_ab9bcfc9ae_z.jpg


Once i get a camera again. Deffo going on the Portrait hunt! :)
 
Nguss said:
For me this is the best one out of the series. Did you find wet mounting made a difference?
Click to expand...

The jury's still out but it does seem sharper. I will have to do a check with a different image dry and then wet.
 
Andysnap said:
Excellent shots Brian, the first one is a stunner.
Click to expand...


Thanks Andy...I was very pleased with the M42 CZJ Flektogon's performance and is now added to my Sigma 24mm superwide II as my favourites..:thumbs:
 
Nothing special, run a roll of pound shop Kodak through the Trip to test it and rather pleased with the results. Focus is a bit hit-and-miss as I get used to the zones but I was impressed by the detail captured in the corners.


Wool by Strappster, on Flickr

And an old one taken on my Electro 35 GX, Fuji Press 800.


Graffiti by Strappster, on Flickr
 
Strappy said:
Focus is a bit hit-and-miss as I get used to the zones ..
Click to expand...

There's your problem, it's a common rookie mistake. It's a Trip so can only be used to take pictures of 1 person, a small family group, a large family group and mountains.

It's a bit limiting but ok once you get the hang of it :lol:
 
The real problems happen when you want to take a 1 person shot in the mountains, the camera may actually explode under certain situations.
 
Andysnap said:
The real problems happen when you want to take a 1 person shot in the mountains, the camera may actually explode under certain situations.
Click to expand...

This is true, just Google it for some tales of woe, the trip should really come with a health warning :lol:
 
EdBray said:
The jury's still out but it does seem sharper. I will have to do a check with a different image dry and then wet.
Click to expand...

I'd be particularly interested in seeing how this goes Ed - it's something I've thought about a few times. How does the film mount? Is there fluid on both sides of it?
 
:lol:

Oops, laughing at the wrong post there, my response was to the Trip warnings, of course.

I'll try focusing with the camera upside-down, see if that helps... ;)
 
Last edited:
But if you focus upside down all the people will fall off the mountain. A disaster waiting to happen and I should know.

Andy
 
Oh, I like that Simon, very ethereal.

Andy
 
i think i had a lucky day to be honest :LOL:
the weather was amazing all week down there, and this one day there was the thickest of fog/mists then this little old sail boat came creeping toward the harbour to dock.
got one of the outer harbour wall, makes a nice companion for the boat shot i think.
IMG_0003-3.jpg

anyone who knows padstow will appreciate the quietness of these images for this time of year
 
Simon photo said:
one from a recent trip to padstow.
IMG_0001-1.jpg

shot on my trusty 35-rc through an orange filter onto fomapan 400, devved in ro9
Click to expand...

Hi, tranquility captured in one frame, a quality photograph.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top