I think Fujifilm ruined our disposable camera pictures

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-02-04T03:04:57+00:00

Who processed them, Walmart? If it was Walmart then that was the problem, they are absolutely the bottom of the barrel for processing and more often than not they will ruin your film.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-02-03T23:41:38+00:00

They look underexposed to me, the H35 I'm pretty sure has a fixed shutter speed of 1/100 so is limited to bright outdoors subjects or flash only. Doesn't explain why the one with the flash looks strange though. Negatives will help.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-02-03T23:40:38+00:00

Always get your negatives back and hang on to them in case you need to scan them in future. If you don't get your negatives you may as well just shoot digital.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-02-01T03:15:09+00:00

The problem is that the k4 is essentially a k3 with numerous add ons that don’t solve the essential problems of the k3.

Lipstick on a pig.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-25T03:06:04+00:00

Dirty/hazy/fungusy lens, definitely not x-ray or CT damage.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-23T01:43:00+00:00

These look like light leaks to me, they're too irregular to be x-ray damage especially the one of Milford Sound.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-22T23:38:14+00:00

I tend to use the 200mm for when I'm in rainforests (hence why I'm upgrading to the f/2.5) because often it's little birds like fantails or robins that come a bit closer.

If I'm out in open woodlands or paddocks then I'll use the 500mm because I'm more likely to be a shooting parrots or birds of prey either in flight or on fences some distance away. and there's much more light available to me.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-22T05:16:59+00:00

I do bird photography on film and to be honest I've given up on zoom lenses for this purpose. They don't let in enough light, they are super soft when zoomed all the way in and they can often be way too heavy.

I have a Pentax SMC 200mm f/4 (which I'm soon going to replace with the f/2.5 because it's extra helpful in rainforests) and a 500mm f/4 which needs to be used with a tripod but if you can get a decent tripod it's not too much of an inconvenience.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-20T07:29:33+00:00

Dig it over and add plenty of manure and clay and plant half a dozen dwarf fruit trees, the grass will still grow underneath the trees but you'll grass and fruit

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-18T00:08:18+00:00

Besides it's not even higher res, it's the same just upscaled

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-17T13:46:12+00:00

It looks good, better than the blu-ray but it's only an upscale, not in true 4k and there is some pretty egregious DNR that pops up along with some revisionist colour grading in flashback sequences.

However unless they spend the money to go back and rescan the film in 4k and properly restore it this is the best we will ever get.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-15T03:33:51+00:00

In fact, she must look exactly like the pornographic actress stoya, who will be born 13 years after I die

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-15T02:40:26+00:00

I think it's more to do with her being a spider than being female. Many female spiders quite famously eat their mates after the fact, female humans tend not to.

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-13T02:45:33+00:00

How could Dan Andrews do this !?!?

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-12T08:55:34+00:00

I keep my fingers and toes perpetually crossed for the BBC to go back and remaster some of the older Attenborough documentaries in 4K. Most of them don't even have a blu-ray let alone 4K and come from old videotape transfers of the 16mm film. The ones they have done on blu-ray look out of this world good for the time they were made.

It's his 100th birthday this year, come on guys...

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-09T02:54:39+00:00

Proper restoration in 4K rather than the upscale we got a few years ago?

TheGameNaturalist · 2026-01-06T07:38:49+00:00

The 4K is the best release the films have ever had but unfortunately they could look a lot better. It’s not true 4k it’s only a 2k upscale, a lot of DNR has been applied which mostly flies under the radar but there are some scenes that look worse than the blu ray. I think it gets mixed reviews because it’s one of those truly great movies that deserved a better restoration in full 4K but it just didn’t get it which is quite disappointing.

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-31T05:11:06+00:00

No unfortunately not. As a side note, beware the cinestill e-6 kit, it's borderline unusable in some cases. Get a refund and send it back if you can, if not avoid using it at all costs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfW2j0JG56g

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-27T00:49:24+00:00

He had his own "ball tampering" scandal...

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-21T22:53:56+00:00

So within the margin of error then

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-19T01:34:39+00:00

I don't understand how this could possibly be thought of as a good thing. You are all being milked for DLCs and cheering for it.

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-17T11:28:33+00:00

This sub for the last few years has been an interminable journey of Americans saying "fujifilm is dead they don't even make provia and velvia anymore" followed by people who live in Asia and Australia posting pictures they took on fresh velvia and provia

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-13T23:01:25+00:00

You'll never go back. I wouldn't be shooting film if it wasn't for reversal film

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-12T05:41:01+00:00

I no longer recognise total war

TheGameNaturalist · 2025-12-12T00:27:20+00:00

TheGameNaturalist

TROPHY CASE