steve_gallimore1

(n)ever ready case?

Left by the wayside: E-PM1, 17/2.8

It's important to get clients to check the backgrounds of reportage style photos in order to ensure you don't accidentally share any trade secrets. (and should be part of your contract)

Nothing special, small barn: X-T10, TTa 23/1.4

Earth Bank - detail

I'm in Corrèze, France. There's a lot of variation with altitude, but our blossoms are finished here. I was lucky to pick up the Mini 90 for around half price in the sales, our local shops have no photo section either, but Instax appears to have found a home nestled between the car GPS sets and the smartphones. Buy the film in bulk. As to digitising, I think a softbox and copy stand is the way to go, needs work...

End of the cherry blossom season: Fujifilm Instax Mini 90 (not figured out a good way of turning physical Instax prints into digital images yet)

In fact, I'd challenge anyone to be able to do better than 50/50 in guessing which was which, unless one of the lenses was known to be an absolute dog. Even lenses with distinctive signatures are not easy to identify from real world photos, two short teles will be almost impossible to separate...

Detail, watermill, Deiro, Corrèze: Fuji X-T10, TTartisan 23mm f1.4 @ f2 or f2.8 Rawtherapee on Raspberry Pi

Waterwheel lost in inky blackness, mill, Deiro, Corrèze: Fuji X-T10, TTartisan 23mm f1.4 1/30 @ f1.4, ISO6400

Actually, the problem with old Windows software is often the installer, not the software itself. While recent versions of Windows (whether 32 or 64-bit) still retain the 32-bit compatibility subsystem and will run 32-bit software just fine, they dropped the 16-bit compatibility subsystem in all 64-bit versions of Windows and made it an optional extra in 32-bit versions post XP. The problem is, a lot of software from around the turn of the millennium actually used a 16-bit installer stub, presumably to ensure it would at least start the install on any PC going back to the Windows 3.1 era? Anyway, it is frequently possible to get around the problem by replacing the 16-bit installer with a later 32-bit version - all the installer does is copy files and update the registry, it has nothing to do with the program itself. Source of this knowledge? Persuading CAD-CAM software that is still 'current' (ha) to work on modern PCs! My father had something similar, Vivitar I think, 640x480, used it for years, did a passable job and actually better than the first mobile phones with cameras.

Agree with Ludmilla, one of the attractions of the "gear" threads outside of No Words is the opportunity to chat with like-minded people. I'd be interested in participating, though 99% of what I shoot on instant film is family stuff which I won't post, might persuade me to try some other subjects though! One of the biggest attractions of instant prints is their physical, tangible nature, which is really, really hard to convey once scanned, be interesting to see what people come up with there. Don't have a GoPro, but I do have an old Fuji MX-2900, thing is, it actually takes rather good pictures! Bakelite film cameras with interesting lenses and limited settings, got a few of those... There is naturally going to be some cross-over with "Classic Manual Cameras", but I don't see that as an issue. I'm assuming that this would be a friendly, informal thread with no strict rules on what is and isn't allowed? Monthly sounds about right, maybe even every two months, depending on participation? Happy to help out in any way I can.

If you just want to try digital with little financial outlay, then look at a used Fuji X-E, X-T or X-Pro, controls are very 'Leica like' and you can use your existing lens(es) with an adaptor, though, as noted, your 35mm will become an effective 50mm. If you don't like, you can resell for little to no loss, or move up to a full frame body. The 16 megapixel Fujis are very capable. I'm currently using (among others), a Fuji X-T10 with a Ttartisan 23mm f1.4, very happy and the whole kit is worth less than €300...

What do you currently use? If you're coming from classic manual cameras, definitely consider Fuji.

Absolute truth there, but lost on many people.

If you bias the program towards larger or smaller apertures, does it keep that setting?

Indeed, there be prior art and ferocious lawyers...

Indeed, no room for the mirror box. The Soviet Zenit SLR did use a 39mm thread mount, but with a flange-film distance similar to other SLR mounts, so rangefinder lenses could only be used for macro work.

Try a section of bicycle inner tube (or similar) between the quick release plate and the camera body. Not tried myself (I use a l-bracket that fits the camera body), but the president of my photo club swears by it on big DSLR cameras.

Photo forums and review sites are full of photos of brick walls, in fact, some photographers take nothing but photographs of walls! Am I doing this right? (inspired by: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2021/04/selecting-the-proper-brick-wall-for-photographic-tests/ ) Lens, should anyone actually care, is a TTartisan 23mm f1.4, probably stopped down to about f4, pramheld. Wall is one of my favourite local semi-abandoned houses. Compositionally, I should have included all of the rock that anchors the rope that keeps the door shut. Anyone else got a wall to share?

Darktable and RawTherapee are the two big open source projects, both free. They have different ways of working, but both are extremely powerful. Worth a try? Should handle D800 files without problems.

You should be able to batch convert them using ImageMagick (command line tool). imagemagick.org

Not to worry, I'm sure they'll solve it in software. While I fully support learning from first principles, this generation (get me, I'm not even 40!) seems to have an indefatigable need to reinvent everything.

Additionally, the working life of Rodinal, particularly at very high dilutions, is so short (tens of minutes) that it'll be exhausted by the time you finish the first roll. So one shot only. Concentrate keeps pretty much forever though.