Forums › Forums › Farktography General Chat › This week’s contest › 04-04-12 – Pinholes, Lomos & Holgas, Oh My!
- This topic has 121 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by CauseISaidSo.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 7, 2012 at 6:31 am #45004orionidParticipant
Oh, the other end. For the Soda Can Lens (TM), I took a cheapo body cap from B&H, used a dremel and a fine-point woodcarving bit to make a notch for the snap lock (springy thing that keeps your lenses from falling off) to latch into. Then I hollowed out everything inside the bayonets with a larger carving bit. Then I epoxied that to a piece of 2″ diameter PVC pipe that had already been cut to the right length. Works like a champ.
February 7, 2012 at 7:08 am #45005lokisbongParticipantWell I figured out with some messing around that the 35 mm lens thing I have wants to be closer to the sensor not farther away so it looks like focus will have to remain me stepping closer to my subject. the cheap piece o crap lens is off a fixed focus camera and it seems it sat closer to the film than it does my sensor and I cannot get it any closer. still going to use it but it will be slightly trickier.
February 10, 2012 at 2:41 am #45006orionidParticipantSo, in the world of farktography, scanning as a means of turning film into ones and zeroes is absolutely kosher. Dititization by means of a slide duplicating rig attached to your DSLR has been mentioned as kosher, though AFAIK, never been used. Now, before I drop the gauntlet on an incredible idea I just had, I need to clarify something that’s not exactly spelled out in the rules.
Say, I coat a three-dimentional object with emulsion, load it into a camera, and shoot/expose as normal, then develop said emulsion. The object in question is now certainly a photograph (or, errr, negative) in and of itself, but digitizing it raises questions. If I could lay it on a scanner and scan it, then I think that should be fine without question, but what about taking a digital photo of the object and cropping in to the edges of the photo? For the spirit of this theme, I’d say that’s still allowed (Unless everyone vehemently objects), but what about the greater farkdom? If I emulsify, say, a wine glass, load it into a view camera, expose myself onto it (not like that, ravnostic), and then scan or photograph said wineglass, could I use that for a self portrait theme?
February 10, 2012 at 3:14 am #45007lokisbongParticipantDamn Orionid! Always upping the ante huh? I would say that’s kosher but I am certainly not the only voice on here nor am I a photography expert. I still want to see the finished picture either way just to see how it comes out.
February 10, 2012 at 7:20 am #45008FarktographerParticipantI think I’d allow it just for the sheer, “you did WHAT?!” I think the rules are more there to prevent people going extreme with photoshop or digital editing; manual editing like this are so out-there that I can’t think they’d fall under the same rules.
February 10, 2012 at 7:48 am #45009ravnosticParticipantIf I emulsify, say, a wine glass, load it into a view camera, expose myself onto it (not like that, ravnostic), and then scan or photograph said wineglass, could I use that for a self portrait theme?
What? I sed no-ting… 😆
February 10, 2012 at 7:51 am #45010orionidParticipantIf I emulsify, say, a wine glass, load it into a view camera, expose myself onto it (not like that, ravnostic), and then scan or photograph said wineglass, could I use that for a self portrait theme?
What? I sed no-ting… 😆
No. Perhaps not. But you thought it, didn’t you? 😀
February 14, 2012 at 12:23 am #45011FarktographerParticipantWoohoo! After scouring Manchester for a place that does proper film development, I finally came across a camera store that, while like the others here ship out film for development with high price tags and no customisation available, had some friendlier staff. One guy pulled me aside, said that there’s a guy not too far from me that does his own in-store developing and is game for x-processing, 120, slide, whatever. He’s on vacation right now, but I’m hoping this means I *finally* can get some shots developed and scanned in time for this contest 😀
February 14, 2012 at 2:54 am #45012orionidParticipantWoohoo! After scouring Manchester for a place that does proper film development, I finally came across a camera store that, while like the others here ship out film for development with high price tags and no customisation available, had some friendlier staff. One guy pulled me aside, said that there’s a guy not too far from me that does his own in-store developing and is game for x-processing, 120, slide, whatever. He’s on vacation right now, but I’m hoping this means I *finally* can get some shots developed and scanned in time for this contest 😀
High Five! Great Success!
February 14, 2012 at 5:39 am #45013SilverStagParticipantSo, in the world of farktography, scanning as a means of turning film into ones and zeroes is absolutely kosher. Dititization by means of a slide duplicating rig attached to your DSLR has been mentioned as kosher, though AFAIK, never been used.
I’ve done that lots of times… a number of my entries have been slides or negatives that I duped in a DSLR copy rig.
i.e. this is a Tri-X neg copied with my D50 and a cheapo slide copy rig. Reverse the light/dark values in Photoshop, and Voila!
In fact, this entire Flickr set is copied negs and slides:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pjern/sets/72157603456291523/, as is this one:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pjern/sets/72157594487859396/February 20, 2012 at 7:38 pm #45014gambitsgirlParticipantwhat is this? I don’t even….
February 20, 2012 at 8:14 pm #45015YoyoParticipantArmy nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) mission oriented protective posture (MOPP) training with what looks like M-17 series protective masks as well as olive drag chemical protective over-garments (CPOG).
Or it could just be stills from the filming of a cheap zombie/horror/apocalypse movie.
February 20, 2012 at 10:37 pm #45016YugoboyParticipantFinally found my spiderman software… might have something for this theme after all…
February 23, 2012 at 2:30 am #45017orionidParticipantOkay, so first off, anyone planning on doing anything film other than 35mm C-41 process, keep in mind that mail-in places like Dwaynes take 10-14 days turnaround mailbox to mailbox.
That being said, I’m officially throwing down the gauntlet. I have four solid ideas for this one. All new shots, no archives. The pieces are coming together as we speak. I will have three new cameras for this theme. One, I’ve been working on for a few weeks, it should be ready for testing this weekend. The second is not far behind. All I can say about the third is that it’s cracking me up.
You’ve been placed on notice: I’m bringing it. I expect no less in return.
February 23, 2012 at 7:10 am #45018YoyoParticipantI will have three new cameras for this theme. One, I’ve been working on for a few weeks, it should be ready for testing this weekend. The second is not far behind. All I can say about the third is that it’s cracking me up.
Is one of them the X-mas gift pin-hole? I’m eager to know how that turns out.
For myself, I put down the money for the Holga lens kit for Canon. I might take that to the FarkCon next month. I also went for the 580EX II flash, since I figure most of the Con will be indoors or at night. It’ll be Holga-rific!
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘04-04-12 – Pinholes, Lomos & Holgas, Oh My!’ is closed to new replies.