tibz

add sharpening?

one word: Olympus Trip 35-it's autoexposure, but without batteries!

I would quote this, but I figure I'll just send you directly there.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/portrait-lenses.htm

 

For flashes, there are really only two (good) nikon flashes (SB-800 and SB-600)...are you sure you want a flash for the portraits?

I've seen them at photo labs-they're still made. Some you get C02 cartridges with nozzles. Look harder.

Just don't drop them. Storage is a tough thing, and short of punch cards there really aren't fail safe methods to store data. I've had lacie's fail on me. Nothing's perfect, just get any good drive and BE CAREFUL. Two couldn't hurt--mirrors, backups...maybe even burning to CDs.

 

FYI your operating system makes no difference...

I have a roll in the freezer i'm taking on my photo trip tomorrow.

 

If I can find the secret to that $5 processing at CVS and can get a good scanner, I'm all for kodachrome. I'm still worried that I'll send it with CVS and it'll go to their E6 processor. Come to think of it, if they do that they'll end up screwing themselves and me at the same time, so...

I'm another poor soul attempting to expose ektachrome 64T in a super 8mm camera

designed to meter 160 and 40 ASA. I have a low light model so I solved this

problem last time by notching the cartridge so the camera reads it as 160 ASA

and then putting a psuedo ND filter over the electric eye to make it open up

more. I'm looking for different ways to do this, but how do I calculate stop

differences? 160 is 2x 80 so that's one stop, but how would you find the

difference between 160 and 64 ASA? I'm told 160 to 64 is 1 and 1/3 stops (or to

use an ND filter of 1 and 1/3 stops), is this correct (1/12 of a stop shouldn't

matter)? (160/64/2=1.25, is that correct?)

 

FYI if any of you have some kodachrome 40t super 8 film you're willing to part

with, that would solve this too.

You could send them away if you don't have several hundred hours on you're hands. It can get very tedious, and people will do it for you cheap. Google negative scanning.

yeah, that would work if it wasn't several TBs of information. How long would it take just to copy 1 tb? I understand what you're asking but I don't know that there are tons of people needing to convert 3.5 TB of images and keep the directories. You may have some trouble, if you haven't guessed.

oops. the not focusing well in bad light is normal. It should have an AF assist light? Check to see if that's on. I checked my D50 in airplane luggage a few years ago and it started going "Err". If you really think it's broken send it to Nikon under warranty. They'll fix it for free (I think, maybe they just did that for me).

get a carrier for aps film that can remove the film from the canister and replace it. Theres one for the coolscans, not sure about others.

just print it in size 1 font.

 

you could say "we can use the pictures we take for/of you any way we see fit"-maybe that's not specific enough

fisheyes work...unless this is one of those recessive fisheyes from the 50s. If it is, give it a shot. http://www.kenrockwell.com has a bit on those. do a search. the worst you could do is reap havoc with your camera mirror.

ok. You probably want to read a little on large format. Get a book, or read in this forum. Look under learning.

 

You focus by moving the front of the camera in and out. Depth of field is much less so you generally use small apertures (f32). controls are all on the lens for exposure. You can use an "exageratted depth of field" by tilting the film/lens plain and change the perspective. It's fun.

Try walmart-they'll be a bit off. You'll have to get actual black and white printing. Tell them it's black and white film and they might be able to do it right. For film scanners just tell the scanner it's a black and white negative and it should get it correct.

<a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm">digital</a>

The possibilities are endless. If you're going to take a photo course with some old school teacher, try the Pentax K1000 (see ebay, about $30-50 with lens, great for saving money). It's fully manual and built like a tank, plus there are tons of lenses for it out there for under $30 a piece. I just finished my highschool photography course this year, and I chose this one. My dad used the KX (next model up) but it finally crapped out just this year (33 years aint bad). The K1000 will go anywhere, but you have to focus and set the exposure manually.<p>

 

You could try a Canon rebel. Comes with a kit lens 28mm-70mm(I think it still does...) which should cover the basics. It's slow though (idk maybe f3.5-5.6) so you could have trouble in low light. $160 new at <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/300537-USA/Canon_9114A001_EOS_Rebel_K2_Camera.html">B&H photo</a>. I don't see the kit there...maybe it's gone. Look for it in camera stores, or really any auto film SLR will do, but your teacher might demand you have manual on it. Auto cameras are nice because they can do the useless work for you (my photo teacher would shoot me for saying that). Old school teachers will demand you learn the exposure garbage, but you can still use that in manual if the world ends. These auto cameras will be more useful later after the course.<p>

 

Lenses-start with a standard 50mm(if you go with a modern camera, the kit lens will cover the wide to the narrowish, so ignore this), that's a little narrower field of view than what digital cameras are. They're fast so they're good for low light and they're cheap. K-mount for the K1000.<p>

 

Technique-shoot interesting things. Not just "here is a flower" shots. Try going places. Experiment with new techniques. Try different angles. Shoot in auto with modern cameras and you'll almost never go wrong. For the old ones, it's more complicated, but you're photo teacher can explain that!<p>

 

FYI about finding jobs-photo doesn't really pay well. It's fun to do on the side but unless you're REALLY good you won't earn a lot of money. Seriously, if you have a photo people like they'll offer you $30. Treat it more as a "I'll become a _____, and do photography as a hobby."<p>

 

If you end up liking photography try <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_8_mm_film">Super 8</a>. Think video but with film :-). It's fun.

I've given it a try, I like it a lot. I still want to try the Super 8 40t version, but it only comes up from time to time on ebay.

You could try the DVD-Video approach. Definitely low rez unless you want to sell them the digital files. They should be proofs, not for printing, but good enough for facebook profile pictures.

put it in the fridge. wait 1-2 years. sell it on ebay. You can fetch full price for almost anything, however, being that it is being discontinued, fridge it (DON"T FREEZE, bad news bears). Its value will increase slowly.

 

You sort of need the back to ooze the chemicals properly over the film. You could get the back and rig something up with coffee cans and pinholes if you felt ambitious.

You can gel them too to change the color temp

D40-it's simple, it takes good pictures

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm

I'm 15 and I buy kodachrome...

Here are my issues with Kodachrome:<br>

1. Processing is expensive, but I'd be willing to wait 2 weeks for cheaper processing. I just don't trust CVS with anything<br>

2. Film is hard to find, and expensive (20%)<br>

3. Scanning is difficult-I'm stuck with my highschool's coolscan 4000 <br>

4. Kodak may stop production tomorrow, or in 10 years, nobody knows<p>

 

I've heard Kodachrome 25 was much better, finer grained. I don't see why people would want a "blazing fast" 64 ASA over a 25 ASA with superior quality. All the professionals complain they only have 4 bricks of it left in deep freeze, I never got to shoot it.<p>

 

I understand that kodachrome slides have 22 megagrains (translated into megapixels). That would put it above affordable digital SLRS. I would like to try some 4x5s but I understand I'm around 55 years too late :-(.<p>

 

Can someone clarify for me on this-is the K14 process toxic? If so, what about it? My understanding-kodachrome developer is Color Developer with soluble couplers, which are expensive and unstable. Other than that, it's just a delicate balance which you can't screw with, and that's why it's so rare. Am I completely missing something?

You could shoot on film to get the film look. Just a thought.

 

I'd say the ratio of people shooting color film to black and white in general is moving towards black and white right now. Especially with the loss of consumer film shooting, and many students with black and white darkrooms, you're looking at less color film and more black and white. It's more forgiving and a lot of fun to experiment with. Color is moving more to digital.

 

FYI-digital cameras are designed to measure COLORS. this means, converting you're lovely COLOR image to black and white you'll be losing 2/3 of the information. The sensors are black and white, then a whole debacle goes into turning those 3 b+w filtered sensors into color values, and you start turning it to black and white again...does that sound redundant to you?