[sleeping]

There were various other things you could get to hold more film than the two-sided holders – the original one was a bag magazine that contained a stack of film holders, and you could slide one out into the bag and stick it in the back of the stack:

http://lommen9.home.xs4all.nl/holders/cut%20film%20magazines.html

Then there’s a grafmatic, which is a later, more automatic spring-loaded version of that:

http://graflex.org/speed-graphic/grafmatic/

There was also a similar system that used pre-loaded film packs (kind of like a polaroid except it didn’t eject the used film), but I can’t find a detailed page for that one, they stopped making the packs for it in the 80s apparently…

[sleeping]

Appropriate usage would largely be if you have a reasonable expectation of printing in larger than 8×10?
(Or at least wish to be ready for that?)

Or is it also about the ability to severely crop and still get good shots (like for birding or sports from the stands?)

It’s really got more to do with post-processing than straight-up quality. The thing is, when the image is converted to a JPEG a whole bunch of data that was originally recorded by the sensor gets discarded. So, basically, it’s to your advantage to do that conversion as late in the processing workflow as possible, i.e. after the image is completely processed.

If you’re using the camera settings to do all of the processing for you, then the advantage to shooting RAW is likely to be small (depending on how good the in-camera jpegs are vs the output of your raw converter), but if you have plans on working on the images later, it can be really significant.

[sleeping]

But…I really, really want that f/2 telescope rig…the shots taken with it are phenomenal, and it’s 20x faster than using the 6.3.

But that’s because the focal length is also ~1/3 of what it was before, right? I can’t see it making the aperture bigger…

[sleeping]

My Holga pin-hole lens for the DSLR arrived today. Looking forward to playing with it more when my remote shutter release finally arrives.

Use the self-timer – it’s not like you’re going to need split-second timing on the shutter release!

[sleeping]

What do you want it for? I mean, if you’re willing to go all manual you could probably get a used 300/2.8 (or maybe even a 400/3.5) AIS Nikkor and an F-EOS adapter for < 1000 without too much trouble. New, I'm pretty sure you're looking at slower or shorter.

http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Manual-Focus-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-NK06009045243N?r=FE

[sleeping]

That just means that when the whole shithouse goes up in flames, what’s mine stays mine, and what’s yours becomes mine.

…until the ammo runs out, then it becomes mine 😉

[sleeping]

(I screwed up the quote brackets in my reply)

Fixxored!

[sleeping]

Hay guyz whatz goin on ovah hyah?

Look! Kitties!

[sleeping]

Chicago has laws against using a Vickers or Maxim gun to mow down conscripted peasantry.

Damn, another place to scratch off the list…

[sleeping]

How do these cameras’ stand up when images are printed? That’s likely where the rubber’s gonna hit the road, especially at a larger print size.

It’s also, like it or not, becoming increasingly irrelevant. How many people do you know under the age of 60 who aren’t serious photographers who print images on a regular (or even irregular) basis?

[sleeping]

but how do you make it asplode so it illuminates the subject?

A couple grams of C4?

[sleeping]

If you read an article that actually has some details about what they’re doing, it’s rather more interesting than you might think at first. For one thing, it’s not really designed to give you 40-odd megapixels of output, but to take that data and downsample a low-noise 8 MP image.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/27/Nokia-808-PureView-with-41MP-sensor

[sleeping]

I’m not sure you have a wartime model, from what I saw on ebay. Those look more like this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/awrose/4426439002/ (almost all of the hardware on the camera itself is black-painted brass, even the shutter and stuff).

In terms of the focal plane shutter, they will always sound slower than the actual shutter speed at a lot of settings, because the shutter is a moving slit rather than opening all the way and then closing. It’s kind of cool to watch with the lens open….

I was able to scan 5×7 on a 4×5 scanner by stitching multiple scans in photoshop (the stitching was pretty easy because they matched exactly), I don’t know what your scanner looks like, but something like that might be possible?

I don’t know if it will fit (my speed graphic has a graflex SLR type back for some reason, so it won’t work at all) but a polaroid 405 back is the cheapest option I know of for instant film – it takes the smaller 3×4 packs (which fuji is still making). I could lend you mine if you’d like to try it out, but I would want it back….

[sleeping]

I *have* noticed that taller photos tend to get more votes. Strange psyche, these farkers.

Actually I think that’s mostly down to simple geometry – a 640x900px image has a lot more impact than a 640×400 one because it’s more than double the area.

[sleeping]

you can always tell they are Topazed. Nothing in nature or software looks similar

Oh, you can do that with photoshop too (people were doing it before topaz existed) it was just a *lot* more work…

[Author]

Posts