Monthly photo contests will be the feature of this forum. Discussions of photographic techniques, gear, software, etc will (hopefully) discussed here.
User avatar
By Heero
#334895
Hi Guys!

I am getting back into taking pictures with antiquated technology, specifically Soviet made Rangefinders, so I thought Id start a topic here for others with like interests to post their stuff.

*crickets chirping*

Ok, so itll probably just be me.

Anyway, I have a backlog of film to develop that will probably never be developed, but here are a couple from my 'test roll' I shot to make sure I still knew how to develop stuff without fucking it all up.

Image

Image

Ill spare you street photography, wedding photos (its wedding season, and I am the creepy guy sitting all alone in the corner taking pictures of the pretty ladies), and other random nonsense from the past month. I gotta a lot of work ahead, but this is shaping up to be a successful project.
#336717
funny i remember when the first digical slr's came out. those big assed f4's with a digital back thingy, weighed 5 lbs. then we got the D1 and whatever the hell canon was making. all the pros were bashing digital saying they would never switch and digi sucks monkey balls and all that. what was that like less than ten years ago? now i can't give away film? btw do you want some well stored provia? seriously.

those shots look well exposed and well developed. i think you need better subjects and street stuff would be perfect for it. old city building stuff with a lot of grain in the sandstone and concrete moldings. mongrel dogs sniffin bag ladies nappin. barrel fires. chalk outlines. syringes at cool angles in morning light, you know. i would love to see more bw film shots.
User avatar
By shunned
#336938
m.o.

he will take film.
he will take pretty pictures.
he will say "I send you pretty picture."
he will not send pretty picture.
User avatar
By vaku
#337149
If you need somewhere to do the film and do the scans, try "A and I" in LA. Good folks that do an awesome job.

my film quiver includes all of my F1's, a pen EE ( half frame ), a few holga's, 4 rollie's, a hassy, a pentax 645, a linhoff 8x10 misc rangefinders. Most of those are from the 40's 50's 60's, except for the f1's, they are from the late 80's.

Pro's ended up switching to digi because clients demanded it and the quality got there. I have some clients request film, but not too many. We were just discussing how glad many of us are that most of our files are slides, negs and prints. These can be scanned and updated, but not the early 90's digi stuff. that your just stick with and man, does it look like crap. I waited unitl digi was pretty good quality, so most of my files are ok, i hope. except for the ones saved on zip disks!

here are a couple I took a bit ago using polaroid 665, which they stopped making. I have about 15 packs stored waiting for something worth while to shoot with it. I shot these with a 1950's polaroid 110 converted by four designs to take polaroid pack film ( a very wise investment it seems ) -
Attachments:
cactus8.23hsmlwm.jpg
cactus8.23hsmlwm.jpg (43.77 KiB) Viewed 3292 times
cactus3.15.05.lsmalwm.jpg
cactus3.15.05.lsmalwm.jpg (41.65 KiB) Viewed 3292 times
User avatar
By Heero
#337203
Real nice, vaku.

I am developing and scanning all my own black and white, but I need to purchase a submersible water heater before I start doing the color again (any suggestions?). I agree about having the benefit of having a real, physical copy for posterity. There are digital images from fishing trips I took just a few years ago that I no longer have after a couple computer upgrades, OS upgrades, etc. Its easy for this stuff to get corrupted (or worse, put on a zip disk) and if you dont have multiple backups ya could be screwed.

But really its just more fun, more engaging, to shoot manual with film (especially the rangefinders), then develop it on yer own. I hope to start wet printing again, as well, but thats a little ways off (and I no longer have access to the darkroom at the University).


Anyway, I have a stockpile of old stuff here--an OM-1, OM-2, 3 FEDs, a Zorki, and a ton of lenses for all of them. The next purchase will be an M2.

Here are a couple other recents (I might have already posted them):

Image

Image

Here are some older ones I just scanned (that werent developed by me):

Image

Image

Image


None of these are all that interesting, I suppose, but Im gonna try harder from here on out.
User avatar
By vaku
#337249
Heero wrote:Real nice, vaku.

I am developing and scanning all my own black and white, but I need to purchase a submersible water heater before I start doing the color again (any suggestions?). I agree about having the benefit of having a real, physical copy for posterity. There are digital images from fishing trips I took just a few years ago that I no longer have after a couple computer upgrades, OS upgrades, etc. Its easy for this stuff to get corrupted (or worse, put on a zip disk) and if you dont have multiple backups ya could be screwed.

But really its just more fun, more engaging, to shoot manual with film (especially the rangefinders), then develop it on yer own. I hope to start wet printing again, as well, but thats a little ways off (and I no longer have access to the darkroom at the University).


Anyway, I have a stockpile of old stuff here--an OM-1, OM-2, 3 FEDs, a Zorki, and a ton of lenses for all of them. The next purchase will be an M2.

None of these are all that interesting, I suppose, but Im gonna try harder from here on out.
Heero - I used to do all my own color neg in unlikely places. I was a sports and news guy for a long time. I used to set up a portable darkroom in anyplace that had a sink. Bathrooms mostly, kitchens sometime, press boxds, janitor closets, you name it. We used submersible heater. I gave all that shit away years ago. I can't find the heater I used to use, but did find these -

http://www.ndtmart.com/index.php?cPath=1_9

http://www.novadarkroom.com/product/346 ... eater.html

you can also try an aquarium heater, but they can be a little fragile if they are the glass covered ones.

There are companies that specialize in recovering data from obsolete systems. Just do some searching if you need em, but I don't think they come cheap.

pt
#337499
your provia is on the way. those shots are again well exposed and developed. compared to the ones you didn't develop, they are even better.

i don't miss the DR at all and love my digital DR right here on my mac. i started using PS on the original version when i was in printing and we were still doing everything mechanically so i got used to it quickly and a long time ago. pixels to chemicals it's no comparison for me. i just got a new version of CS5 and fuck that DR shit!

so far i haven't had storage issues and just formatted my old HD for the new mac, no problemo. now finding something i shot on digital 5 years ago may be another subject but when i do find it it still works. CD's, DVD's and external HD's have all held up well. i just pulled some images from a CD from 2002 made on windows 95 and opened them on the mac and all good. keepin my fingers crossed.

nice work there too vaku, i do get the antiquated technology thing but that's about as far as it goes for me. i can appreciate good work but the interest in sloshing chemicals has waned after 15 years in that business. prolly save a priceless brain cell or two by now, though likely burned them off somewhere else anyway.

keep them coming.
#338162
I've got an early build Rolliflex from my late father. It would probably be great for Everglades swamp landscapes with the right ND grads. Any good resources for getting it back in action?

I've also been playing with my A-2 and some crappy (C-41 process) Ilford B&W. I hate the development with the beige and pink tints. And the scans come back way oversharpened - practically hurts my eyes to look at them. This is probably the result of dropping them off at the production line. Any resonably priced B&W film recs?

I did the darkroom BS years ago and will stick to scanned negs - digitally worked in PS, if needed. I do love how much brighter the old viewfinders look, when compared to some of the new DSLRs.
User avatar
By Heero
#338168
I hated every single negative and every single scan I ever got from every photo lab I tried. Seriously. Id spend time photochopping the shit out of them to get them to look how I wanted. Those ones I posted (except the last 3 which are old, lab developed negs) have no phtochopping other than Auto Tone.

Kodak Tri-X is all you need for B&W and is ~$3.50/36 exposure roll form B&H. It is box rated 400, but it pushes easily down to 100 or up to 800 and beyond (just be sure you tell the lab if you arent developing it yourself or youll get some fucked up negs).

Here are a couple from a wedding a couple weekends past (not my favorite, but no faces per Drake protocol):

Image

Image

Im out of fixer, but once it arrives Ive got a roll of fishing stuff to soup.
Thumbing Through Some SBSs

Europa 12 Harklan https://live.staticflickr.[…]

you're keeping the fire stoked. And a few oth[…]

The return of Stolen Hours

4/8/20 #17 18:49 that’s a strange amount[…]

What's w/ the "W"?

Looks like a Wordpress logo. When are you bringin[…]

Subscribe to The Drake Magazine