Farktographers and Film

Forums Forums Farktography General Chat Pollage Farktographers and Film

This topic contains 59 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  clouddancer 8 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 60 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38507

    Curious
    Participant

    Dwayne’s still does runs of 110 and Disc film if you are of a mind to actually shoot some

    as a moderator i could simple delete your post but that would be the cowards way out. so i will patiently explain to you that the negative sizes of both those film types don’t allow sufficient information to be captured to make decent sized prints. to say nothing about crappy optics or the the lack of creative controls both cameras have.

    or i could own up to using the “no film” excuse as a cop out.

    #38506

    Curious
    Participant

    to be semi serious IMO the one thing 126 instamatics had going was film size.

    i found an argus manual on line for my mothers camera and downloaded it. it is a scan of the original and will be a big help in getting decent images from the camera. not having that before meant the few rolls i shot were real hit and miss as to picture quality. well that and it was many years ago when i knew practically nothing about cameras or film. to stay true to the time i may shot b/w although that will mean special processing again since all my b/w film is tri-x.

    and yes orionid and ennuipoet if i hadn’t got rid of all my developing tanks i could do it myself.

    #38505

    sleeping
    Participant

    My biggest barrier to using film cameras more often is how irritating my current scanner is.

    Most developers will give you a CD of scans if you want (I usually do that instead of getting prints so I can decide which frames to scan at full resolution). They’re usually not that high-res, but fine for web use….

    #38504

    linguine
    Participant

    My biggest barrier to using film cameras more often is how irritating my current scanner is. I bought it on a whim at Fry’s without doing enough research and then found out it’s not supported on Linux. And since my Windows system is seriously underpowered, that makes me a grumpy negative scanner… If/When I get a replacement scanner I’ll start using the film cameras more. Digital is just too convenient for me to ever switch back for good. But I love the uncertainty and occasion randomness of film, especially with oddball cameras that are prone to distorting images. I bought two Lomo’s on vacation in Prague years ago and I’d definitely start carrying them in my gear bag again.

    I’ve never done much with scanning and never scanned negatives but I’ve found some scanning programs in ubuntu that I was just able to plug my scanner in and use no problem for things like this past contest.

    #38503

    ennuipoet
    Participant

    Dwayne’s still does runs of 110 and Disc film if you are of a mind to actually shoot some

    as a moderator i could simple delete your post but that would be the cowards way out. so i will patiently explain to you that the negative sizes of both those film types don’t allow sufficient information to be captured to make decent sized prints. to say nothing about crappy optics or the the lack of creative controls both cameras have.

    or i could own up to using the “no film” excuse as a cop out.

    A lot of people find that crappy optic and a dearth of creative control is a “Thing”. They would tell you that the utter lack of quality is an inherent feature of the the film, they even have a movement or something. They call it lomography. I have a name for that sort of thing, but I can’t use it in a family friendly setting 😀

    #38502

    Curious
    Participant

    A lot of people find that crappy optic and a dearth of creative control is a “Thing”. They would tell you that the utter lack of quality is an inherent feature of the the film, they even have a movement or something. They call it lomography. I have a name for that sort of thing, but I can’t use it in a family friendly setting 😀

    i’d seen that word but went to their about us home page. ouch. that and holgas i just don’t understand. sorry farktography holga fans.

    of course i think andy warhol was a scam artist so what do i know.

    #38501

    orionid
    Participant

    Just don’t confuse the people that do it for fun, by resurrecting antique cameras, with the people that think they need to pay a gazillion dollars for a crappy plastic camera (like the Blackbird Fly for just $119 – I could do the same thing with a Brownie reflex from ebay for $10 and a piece of black tape). And the photos would be higher quality.

    Heh – Holgas are fun, but got old after a couple rolls. If light leaks are so much charm, why do I go batshiat insane with black tape to eliminate them on my bakelite brownies?

    #38500

    Zero_Exponent
    Participant

    I’ve got seven film cameras, and two digital (three if you count my videocamera that has a craptastic “snapshot” function). Three of the film cameras are antiques, bought from a restaurant that had them on display as knickknacks (along with a Victor 16mm movie projector, all 4 for $100)–I don’t know if they work.
    I’ve still got my first camera, a Kodak Instamatic X-15 w/126 film, that I got around age 11.
    The last time I shot w/film was when I bought a disposable underwater camera for $10 two years ago. I had a hell of a time finding somewhere to get it developed. I guess I’ll be shooting new stuff for the upcoming “film only” theme, as looking at my archival stuff makes me cringe for the most part 😳

    #38499

    ennuipoet
    Participant

    Just don’t confuse the people that do it for fun, by resurrecting antique cameras, with the people that think they need to pay a gazillion dollars for a crappy plastic camera (like the Blackbird Fly for just $119 – I could do the same thing with a Brownie reflex from ebay for $10 and a piece of black tape). And the photos would be higher quality.

    Heh – Holgas are fun, but got old after a couple rolls. If light leaks are so much charm, why do I go batshiat insane with black tape to eliminate them on my bakelite brownies?

    Nor do I, particularly as I’ve a shelf full of old cameras for just that purpose. It’s the morans who buy crap for a lot of money, take bad photos and call it “art” that I mock. I actually went to the Lomography store a few weeks ago (http://microsites.lomography.com/stores/gallery-stores/nyc) and was mortified by the prices on things and the pretentious jackassery that oozes from the pores of the people in there. I had my Canon with me, people actually sneered at it while I browsed.

    #38498

    orionid
    Participant

    Wow…. Holy crap.

    Oh, and fair enough 😀

    #38497

    Kestrana
    Participant

    Is Lomography work really gallery worthy right now? I mean, granted there are probably artists out there who can use it to their advantage in an interesting way but it’s such a fad! One of the reasons I love my Voigtlander is the clarity of the images it produces after 80 some odd years. The simple quality of the images in Lomography *bothers* me.

    #38496

    Curious
    Participant

    Just don’t confuse the people that do it for fun, by resurrecting antique cameras, with the people that think they need to pay a gazillion dollars for a crappy plastic camera (like the Blackbird Fly for just $119 – I could do the same thing with a Brownie reflex from ebay for $10 and a piece of black tape). And the photos would be higher quality.

    Heh – Holgas are fun, but got old after a couple rolls. If light leaks are so much charm, why do I go batshiat insane with black tape to eliminate them on my bakelite brownies?

    i don’t. looked at the blackbird fly website. they admit it’s a toy but want $120 for it. no thanks. the photos in their gallery are mostly crap. i may end up with crap but i sure don’t set out to make it.

    re holgas and other light leaking stuff. again no thanks. i spent an inordinate amount of time trying to find a light leak in a “tower” TLR camera. it’s a cheapie sears btw. finally a camera repair shop in austin found it. a missing tiny screw at the take up winder. turned out to be a decent camera.

    #38495

    Curious
    Participant

    Zero_Exponent i have a fairly nice panasonic camcorder with the snapshot feature. it has an xD card for that capture. it takes nice pictures but the file sizes don’t allow for big prints.

    #38494

    Curious
    Participant

    slightly off topic questions. do any of you have video capabilities in your DSLRs? do you use it?

    i just don’t understand the selling point behind “OMG it’s got 1080 HD video” in a DSLR.

    #38493

    CauseISaidSo
    Participant

    Don’t have it in my dSLR, but I do in my P&S and that was one of the deciding factors for me. I’d like to have it in my dSLR and my next one definitely will.

    If you’re like me and photography is a hobby and not a profession, then you’ll eventually find yourself in a situation that would be best captured on video instead of stills and having that option without carrying around a camcorder too is nice. I don’t consider its primary usage as a video camera, but it is convenient and they do take decent video (consider the lenses you’re shooting through).

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 60 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.