Jump to content

Colin O

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,132

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Colin O

  1. Colin O
    A nice write-up on that APS camera that Mike mentioned... A Quirky Guy with a Camera: Digitalesque: The Kodak Advantix Preview
  2. Colin O
    It's not obvious to me what clear flaw you see. Can you elaborate?
  3. Colin O
    Answering my own last question, I guess this innovation was just not what the masses wanted - they wanted digital images. And the non-masses, i.e. pros or fine-art photographers, maybe just didn't need it.
  4. Colin O
    Many (20?) years ago, I posted a question on this site asking why film cameras couldn't have a rear screen to preview composition and especially exposure, in the way digital cameras do, and I got sensible answers to the effect that there were just too many other variables involved for any preview to be useful/reliable in practicality. Just today I came across an old marketing leaflet for the Contax N1 autofocus SLR, mentioning the optional "Contax FE-1" LCD display for previewing composition and exposure. It could be mounted to the camera's hotshoe, but also seemingly usable separate from the camera, as a kind of (wired?) remote release. It seems my suggestion all those years ago was maybe not so crazy after all. I know of course why, ~20 years ago, digital photography took over from film photography, but I'm curious if this FE-1 device was any good, and why other camera manufacturers never explored this innovation in their last-ditch efforts to sell film bodies to the masses.
  5. Colin O
    From your days shooting Minolta, which was your favourite lens? Or the one you always coveted? Was there a lens that justified shooting Minolta all on its own? Or what about those questions in relation to other systems you shot with?
  6. Colin O
    So, ultimately, your argument is that you think Kodak is going out of business? Brilliant :facepalm: I really wonder how you became so bitter about it - I can only guess you lost money on Kodak investments yourself. You'll notice from my profile that I'm coming up on 20 years on this site, so I'm quite aware of all Kodak has gone through over recent years, and how they've structured their film business now. I'll come back to this thread and hold my hands up when you're proved right. In the meantime, I'll enjoy the film they are selling me, including this new one.
  7. Colin O
    I didn't see that mentioned. Is there a link?
  8. Colin O
    mmm, no. Just incoherent, non-arguments. There are some new films for me to enjoy. Thought I'd share that with the film community here. What reality am I missing? I really REALLY don't get what point you are trying to make. It would be nice if you listed, directly, some of the cons you see with Kodak's new product offering. Other than potential future price increases. I fully expect prices to rise in the future. What difference does that make today??
  9. Colin O
    Yes, I sometimes shoot Cinestill 800T. Needs the 85 filter in daylight, yes. I have 800T loaded in my Noblex camera right now. Sure, prices may go up in the future. What's your point? I'm supposed to be glum today because of that? I am not interested in Kodak's share price. Things seem to be going well enough for new emulsions/formats to be introduced - that's good in my book. Beyond that, I don't really care about their investors. These are really odd contributions to the film forum.
  10. Colin O
    I still don't really get your point. A new film option - colour, C-41, 120, useful ISO, cheaper, trusted brand - there are literally no cons to this. And, just now over at emulsive.org, another piece of positive news: https://emulsive.org/articles/news/a-new-everyday-film-from-cinestill-400dynamic-in-35mm-and-120-format Beats the hell out of price increase and discontinuation announcements.
  11. Colin O
    What do you mean? Too little too late for what? To save Kodak Alaris? I think a new, lower-priced colour C-41 option for medium format shooters, in a useful ISO, from a very trusted name in the film world is a great thing. What's not to like?
  12. Colin O
    Good news for medium format film shooters. I just saw that Kodak have announced the (re?)introduction of KODAK PROFESSIONAL GOLD 200 in 120 format. instagram.com/p/CbXWTYXuZgq Another sign that film didn't quite deserve the death knell that some commentators dogmatically insisted on. I'll be ordering some.
  13. Colin O
    I think this is a very bad idea. First of all... bright light does not automatically mean overexposure. That is, there is no automatic need to underexpose, just because you are photographing in bright light. That is the whole point of a meter - it meters the light and sets appropriate exposure settings. Trust your meter, and stay away from the exposure compensation dial. Second of all... colour negative film (which I am just assuming you will be using) is much more tolerant of overexposure than underexposure. If you underexpose your photos, you will probably be sadly disappointed with your images. If you overexpose, probably you won't even notice (because the film will handle a little overexpsure just fine).
  14. Colin O
    This will be my first time posting a "picture of the week". Mine wasn't taken this week actually, but rather on the 16th of January. It's not much more than a snapshot. I walked into my bedroom and noticed the moon was perfectly positioned out the window. I set up the tripod, opened the window, used the self-timer, and set exposure using the "Looney 11 rule". I was pleasantly surprised with the outcome, and I'll be sure to try more moon photos in the future. Sony α7 II, Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS at 300mm, f/11, 1/320sec, ISO 320, Auto White Balance, in-camera JPG, 100% crop resized to 700 px wide exact same image, but cropped tighter with no resizing, and a little unsharp mask applied
  15. Colin O
    Thanks for the replies all, and sorry if my question is not clear... I have to admit a bit of ignorance here... My understanding is that duotones (and tritones and quadtones) come from, let's say, pre-digital days - a way of combining a small range of colours (inks?) to produce an image, so it's not just monotone, but rather a kind of combination of "a few different monotones". So, what my question really relates to is - do those options in the Photoshop dropdown correspond to some kind of regularly-used tones used in creating traditional duotones? Also, what do the cryptic "Bl", "CG10", "WmG9", etc stand for?
  16. Colin O
    I shoot (film and digital) in colour, but sometimes I'll feel that an image would work well in black & white, and I've come to enjoy using Photoshop's "Duotone" mode in these cases (which actually includes tritones and quadtones). I generally stick to one of the presets built into PS, but I've just been wondering where these presets come from. Maybe nobody can answer – they might be just settings that PS developers find pleasing – but does anyone know if the presets have some significance/pattern/origin?
  17. Colin O
    I think you might be on to something here - good advice, thanks. Thanks for the reply. I bought an excellent Rollei reference book a number of years ago, and it is fantastic at listing these kinds of changes introduced throughout a model's production run, even for accessories. It helped me choose the exact model I wanted to buy, and to know which "essential" features to watch out for. Actually, I just use a 3/8"-1/4" adapter with a Manfrotto 200PL-PRO Plate - works perfectly for me. When I bought my camera, it didn't come with a case, so if I wanted one, I'd have to search one out on eBay, and they're not cheap. I've managed for several years already without one, and I really don't think I'll bother with one.
  18. Colin O
    I don't have nor use an ever-ready case - I find them impractical and frankly, kind of ugly. (I'm wondering - isn't the 12/24 switch exposed in any case inside the ever-ready case?) Yesterday when this happened to me, it was because I was inserting the Rolleiflex into my camera backpack. It has side entry, and I have a compartment set up for the Rolleiflex, but I inserted the camera with the 12/24 switch pointing down, i.e. as the camera was being inserted, the switch was rubbing against the "floor" of the compartment, and rotated in the process. I guess I'll just have to pay more attention to the switch in general whenever handling the camera.
  19. Colin O
    A couple of times now I've inadvertently knocked/rotated the 12/24 switch on my Rolleiflex 3.5F over to the 24 setting when I'm midway through a roll of 120 film. I did it again today. When it happens, I can hear a very short whirring sound - presumably the sound of the frame counter whizzing back to 0, as you can see in the photo. I'm pretty sure (though not 100%) that I'd taken 6 photos on the current roll, and the film had been wound on ready for exposure number 7. I'm just wondering what's the best way to use the rest of the roll for another 6 photos, if possible. If the shutter was cocked when advancing to frame 7, is it still cocked? Or maybe the Rolleiflex, having been "reset to 0", requires me to advance the film again, skipping a frame? Is there any way that the camera will detect the end of the roll as it usually does? Or do I just have to estimate it - taking as many photos as I think remain on the roll, and then just advancing the film fully onto the take-up spool? (Any special tips here?) I think it would be quite easy to get into a situation where I think I've taken only 11 or even 10 photos, when I've actually taken 12, and end up trying to take photos beyond the normal usable length of the roll. I appreciate your advice/experience with this situation.
  20. Colin O
    of course should be "presets"
  21. Colin O
    I have basically 4 (stills) cameras (including my phone) that I use regularly, split into 2 digital, 2 film. I'm comfortable with Photoshop, but have to admit that I don't really relish spending time post-processing. I shoot C-41 and E-6, but send my film to a lab for developing and scanning. I rarely do any Photoshop work on the scans - maybe slight rotation and cropping. I am not a pro - for me it's just a hobby. I am never tempted to shoot chromogenic B&W film. For me, I don't see the point. I always shoot colour, and if ultimately some image just feels like it would work better in B&W, I convert in Photoshop. I don't go crazy, but I do like the control, and often experiment with the presents in duotone mode. If you have a fully "analogue workflow", then I'm sure your situation will be different, but that's my point of view.
  22. Colin O
    Post a couple of samples if you can
  23. Colin O
    Yes, I think Cosina made the Zeiss Ikon and also the Rollei 35 RF. Those cameras were based on Cosina models I believe, rather than being identical rebadged clones. Yashica making Contax cameras is a bit different - it was actually Kyocera behind everything in that case, they just owned the rights to both brand names. But actually you make a good point - it was Hasselblad who made the H1 which was sold by Fuji as the GX645AF. Very similar situation, with roles reversed. I just don't understand the business logic behind this kind of thing. (Correction to my initial post... the Fuji GF670 and GF670W were not technically manufactured by Voigtländer but by Cosina. But currently, Voigtländer means Cosina – Cosina owns the rights to the Voigtländer brand.)
  24. Colin O
    Not sure if anyone knows the definitive answer, but I was wondering... Why was the Hasselblad XPan manufactured by Fuji but marketed as Hasselblad? Whose idea was it? Did Hasselblad come up with the concept and just get Fuji to do the manufacture? Why then was Fuji permitted to market it as the TX-1 / TX-2? Or was the camera Fuji's idea, and rather than market it themselves in Europe/America, they just offered it to Hasselblad? Why would they do that? It's not like they are an unknown brand - they already had plenty of market recognition and a presence in these territories. Or was the entire project a pure joint venture? Again, why would they have come together for this project? I don't really understand why either company needed the other, or needed a joint venture. A similar thing happened around 2008 or 2009 with the Fuji GF670 and GF670W which were, I believe, manufactured by Voigtländer, and marketed in certain territories as the Bessa III and Bessa III W respectively.
  25. Colin O
    Ed Hurley General manager of film - Eastman Kodak Company from this video: Vinyl is not "apparently" making a comeback. It is making a comeback. See: https://www.statista.com/chart/7699/lp-sales-in-the-united-states/
×
×
  • Create New...