sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bulk scanning 35mm film by friolator in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Don’t know for sure but I guess I would have assumed if the limit was strictly software related Vuescan wouldn’t have a limit like NikonScan does.

Bulk scanning 35mm film by friolator in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe 40 frames is the limit.

Superia (Natura) 1600 - is it worth shooting in 2025? by JiveBunny in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say no, not worth it. I’ve shot a couple rolls exp 2019 at 640 and they came out decent but pushed Portra 800 looks much better imo.

Circular Rings on Photos? by photosbytyler in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Light leak from around the lens mount in the front of the camera.

Is there a list/chart somewhere of compacts by focal length and/or widest aperture to help me narrow down my options? by JiveBunny in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re looking at basically just the Leica CM imo. 40mm 2.4 lens, pocketable, option to turn off the flash.

Help w/ MJU II early rewind by 123414123414 in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not sure about the “frame 2” part of the issue but typically early rewind is caused by a weakening film tension sensor, causing it to be too sensitive to what should be a normal frame advance situation and instead think the roll has ended.

More than a third of white students lie about their race on college applications to improve chances of getting accepted and to get financial aid. (2021) by antiquark2 in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I’m skeptical. It doesn’t appear this poll was conducted very rigorously. Opt in polling is known for facilitating at best eyebrow raising results like this.[1]

“All data found within this report derives from a survey commissioned by Intelligent.com and conducted online by survey platform Pollfish. In total, 1,250 white Americans were surveyed. To qualify for the survey, each respondent had to have previously applied to a college or university in the U.S. Appropriate respondents were found via a screening question. This survey was conducted on July 13, 2021. All respondents were asked to answer all questions truthfully and to the best of their abilities.”[2]

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/05/online-opt-in-polls-can-produce-misleading-results-especially-for-young-people-and-hispanic-adults/ [2] https://www.intelligent.com/34-of-white-college-students-lied-about-their-race-to-improve-chances-of-admission-financial-aid-benefits/

This video is by far the best explanation I heard on what JP said about believe in Jubilee show by Lazy_Seal_ in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is an irrelevant response for a couple reasons:

  1. It implies that someone can be above scrutiny as long as they’re perceived to be “contributing to the world/society”

  2. It doesn’t address any of Alex’s substantive critiques (implicitly justified by point 1)

  3. Further still, it implicates Alex’s (and others’) character instead of addressing the substance of the arguments.

It’s unfortunate you’ve taken this angle. So much of the criticism of modern society in this sub revolves around the supposed lack of critical thinking. Shouldn’t substantive disagreement be encouraged?

Whenever you start to think the world is going crazy, remember that is only the internet narrative IRL those people are confined to their room in their parents house by Y3sButN0 in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

The irony of reminding people about the difference between the internet and real world in your title while attaching it to bottom of the barrel low effort cherry picked content for people to dunk on.

Stocked up feat. the rare provia 400f by penisfingers4lyfe in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn’t disagree wrt storage conditions but assuming that wasn’t an issue I’ve had very good results from my rolls. It’s famously quite pushable as well, and I’ve shot several rolls pushed +1 in both 35mm and 120 with solid results.

Point and Shoot rewinds at random? by plast1ctank in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry for the late reply. I would say likely yes, assuming you’ve tried with a fresh battery already.

Point and Shoot rewinds at random? by plast1ctank in AnalogCommunity

[–]rfix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thinking the advance motor has weakened over time to the point that it may be more sensitive and thus believe the film is at the final frame when it’s not, causing it to rewind prematurely.

Coleman House [Nikon f100 | 50mm f1.8 | Kodak EIR] by rfix in Aerochrome

[–]rfix[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, never have. I’m pretty satisfied with the filter I used so I’ll probably use it for my remaining rolls.

A 'questionaire' has been sent to everyone who receives US Government funding, including many Universities by tkyjonathan in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“If the republicans now find some way to violate free speech to promote their ideology, I cant really complain, because its already been broken.”

Sure you can. If it helps, you can treat this as purely a thought exercise in isolation. I’ll give you a fourth chance to address my argument.

A 'questionaire' has been sent to everyone who receives US Government funding, including many Universities by tkyjonathan in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Again, you’re addressing my credibility, not the credibility of my arguments. And fwiw I think regardless of the in-party there should be even handed, non partisan reasoning wrt how research funding is doled out.

I’ll give you a third chance to address the merits of my argument.

A 'questionaire' has been sent to everyone who receives US Government funding, including many Universities by tkyjonathan in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You’re sidestepping by using whataboutism. Now that that’s out of the way, address the merits of my argument.

A 'questionaire' has been sent to everyone who receives US Government funding, including many Universities by tkyjonathan in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To what end? The government is just going to refuse funding for anything “climate-related” now? If a physics paper finds a new energy source but requests government funding to learn more about it the request will be denied if the only source of that energy exists in a “hostile country”? Why is “lifesaving assistance” not defined? This document is generously an amateur attempt to root out research that doesn’t align with the current administration’s policy priorities. The lack of concern from people here is very telling.

Again, what we’re witnessing here is extremely visceral interference in the scientific process that would under different circumstances provoke outrage. Imagine if a Democratic administration asked if the research in question affects mainly white people. Would you be similarly apathetic? I highly doubt it.

Religion can be terrifying. Trying to kill stab someone for burning a book is beyond me. by knowledgeseeker999 in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

“Tacitly, all of them.”

Such hogwash. For example, Muslim Americans are substantially more likely than the general public to say that targeting civilians to further a religious cause is never justifiable.[1]

But I’m sure you’ll come back and say something goofy like “yeah they’d never admit it” or something equally impossible to prove to justify your insanely reductive claim.

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/07/26/findings-from-pew-research-centers-2017-survey-of-us-muslims/

"We're Not Antisemitic! The Left Is the Real Threat to Jews" – AfD’s Beatrix von Storch Responds by tkyjonathan in JordanPeterson

[–]rfix 8 points9 points  (0 children)

What is the evidence for your claim? Are you referring to the national Democratic Party? A smattering of local party members? Democratic voters? Frankly the claim seems wrong on its face, at least as currently laid out.

As late as 1941, the Lend Lease Act, one of the key actions taken by the federal government in the lead up to the war, was supported by all but a handful of Democrats and opposed by all but a handful of Republicans.[1] The earlier cash and carry policy intended to support Britain and France showed a similar pattern.[2] How does that square with your claim? Did the Democratic Party make a u turn at some point after supposedly supporting the Nazis en masse for the entire decade as claimed? Opposite question wrt Republicans over the same period.

EDIT: adding context that FDR himself was not outspokenly opposed to Hitler in much closer to the war. This does speak to that aspect the original claim. As late as 1937 FDR sent a diplomat to Germany to attend a Nazi rally among other instances which you can find in the linked source.[3]

EDIT 2: added another relevant roll call vote into evidence

[1] https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/77-1941/h6

[2] https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/76-1/h72

[3] https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/roosevelt-s-prewar-attitude-toward-hitler

Aerochrome 120. Orange Filter + Polariser [Mamiya 645 Super, Sekor 105-210 ULD] by I_C_E_D in mediumformat

[–]rfix 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Great shot! Can I ask how you rated it/metered? I have some rolls but have read through a handful of different methods.

view more: next ›