joe_hodge

You can still buy new mercury lab thermometers. For instance: Precision Mercury Laboratory Thermometers

Recognizable as a leaf, but at least to me, the light & shadow stand out more than the subject at first glance. Bronica SQ/TMAX 100

Model rockets move pretty quick, so I was luck to catch this launch at just the right time! Bronica SQ/250mm/TriX

Loading a reel is one of the things I'll do when I'm sitting at my desk and need to keep my hands busy while I think. I've got a roll of practice film that I'll load/unload while my mind is elsewhere - it's basically muscle memory by now. Either that or pick locks.

Adorama has Hewes reels for both 120 and 220, although the 220 are special order (hewes reel buy or learn at Adorama). I have the 120 reel, and find it almost as easy to load as their 35mm. Since there are no sprocket holed, there are no prongs, but both the reel and spring clip are very sturdy and well designed.

Agreed on all counts - the negs do OK as far as I can tell from the photos. The other test I can think of is to cut them down to single frames and scan them rotated 90 degrees (if your scanner can handle that). If you do and the lines change orientation to match the scan, you have your answer.

If you look at the negatives on a lightbox (for this purpose, an iPad set to a white background will do) with a loupe or magnifying glass, do you see those lines? They look like banding from the scanner to me, but examining the negative will tell you for sure.

I’m not sure that’s correct as a blanket statement, since trademarks apply within a scope. If I used a photo of that tree to advertise saplings from a nursery without any mention of Pebble Beach, for example, that may well be far enough removed from golf to avoid infringement. I won’t be the one to test it, but trademarks aren’t absolute.

EOS M5/EF 50/1.4

I shoot a lot of graffiti, but I don't sell my work. If I post it (here, for instance), I note that while the photo is mine, the original art is not. I'm not a lawyer, but my assumption is that I'm safe, as a practical matter, making prints for personal use around my home & office.

This is the camera: Kodak Pocket Instamatic 30 - Camera-wiki.org - The free camera encyclopedia It takes a K battery (which was seriously hard to find and cost more than I'm willing to admit). The cubes are magicubes, so I suppose that the failure to flash is unrelated to the battery.

Just in case anyone was curious, I’ve been defeated in my attempt to use these old flash cubes. I picked up some old 110 film and a sealed “size K” battery from Ebay, loaded it all up in the camera, and...nothing. The battery seems weak on a multimeter, and I’m not paying for another one! Since the cubes (magicubes) are probably bad in any caseI think I’m done here.

I agree with this - proper exposure is a decision for the photographer, not the camera, because the camera can't know your intent.

Spring on the Potomac river:

Can you spot the picnic? Taken 24 May 2020: EOS 630, EF 20/2.8, Tri-X

I'll be keeping my social distance from this one: Taken by the Potomac river 5/24/2020.

Here's a frame from that roll I'm glad I didn't mess up. This appeared to be executed in chalk, so it's most likely gone by now with all of the rain we've had. Photo is mine, but the original artist is unknown.

I set up to develop a roll of 120 the other day, and somehow lost focus badly enough that I loaded the backing paper on to the reel rather than the film. Thankfully the paper is enough longer than the film that it wouldn't load all the way - otherwise it would have been a very unhappy moment when I pulled everything out of the changing bag! I have no idea how I separated the film and backing, removed the paper from the spindle, and then 'decided' to load the paper instead of the film - that actually tool extra work compared to doing it right. All of which has me wondering - did I (almost) find a novel way to mess up developing, or have others done this before?

What's wrong with this sign?

It's spring, and there's life out there!

It's dress-up time for eggs!

Cherry Blossoms, without the festival! It was an overcast day, and I could have 'fixed' it in post, but I like the cool, low-contrast look here. EOS M5, 50/1.4, somethig@F4

Not "really sure" yet, but I do have a hybrid environment - Polaroid Sprintscan 120 film scanner. I just enjoy the traditional process - I spend all day at work in front of a computer, so when I'm on my own time I enjoy getting away from that and going hands-on.

I appreciate the pics, but no bathroom possibilities in this house! Also a great point about cooling/airflow for gear (I'm an IT guy by trade, but you wouldn't have known that). At least I don't still have the rack-mount servers and disk arrays any more - those doubled as a nice auxiliary heating system in the winter. [uSER=2403817]@rodeo_joe|1[/uSER] "What reason would that be? As far as the general user is concerned, they're only there to make the gear look more impressive, and as a diagnostic tool they're almost useless. Like, who cares if port A has more traffic than port Z? And if the whole thing goes wrong, none of the LEDs will light up" You know what - you're probably right! After 20+ years of 'reading' the blinkenlights, I actually do get a decent status at a glance from them, but it's a home network, so as long at Netflix works, nobody but me cares.

With my community darkroom closed indefinitely, I'm very idly considering a home darkroom setup. Given that I already develop my own film at home, I'm pretty sure all I need is: dark room enlarger enlarging lens(es) film holder safelight trays paper developer timer contrast filters (which I already own since the packs in the community darkroom are often incomplete) Of these, #1 is the hardest. My utility room has a sink that I could use and a workbench I could place an enlarger on, but also two windows that I'd need to seal and all of the telecom/computing gear with their many, many blinky LEDs. Taping over each one individually will be a real PITA, and I'm hesitant to paint over them - they're there for a reason, after all! I know the real answer is to test, but does anyone have an idea just much fogging I can expect from blinking green LEDs a few feet away (4-5') from paper? I don't have any way to test until/unless my local darkroom reopens, so anything the collective wisdom here can tell me is welcome.