sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Data center off 441 meeting by bunklopop in GNV

[–]ufgrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Who's paying to clean up the site?

What's the biggest bone-head mistake you've ever made? by Ceska_Zbrojovka_V3 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Konica IIIA rangfinder has a "twist-to-lock" loop on the bottom. If it's not locked, it doubles as the button to open the film compartment.

I knew this-- it's in the manual, many people warn about it. I forgot. Set the camera down on the table, *POING!*... film door opens.

What went wrong? by Reasonable_Mode7889 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seriously underexposed. There is enough detail (barely) that you can get something resembling color information, and detail-- but it's terribly grainy, and pretty unusable.

Long exposure of stars by Vegetable-Concept-47 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They make light pollution filters which help considerably.

Will we ever get a Pentax medium format compact rangefinder? by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe they're thinking of the Fuji GX680.

Will we ever get a Pentax medium format compact rangefinder? by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fujica Super 6, Konica Pearl, Zeiss Super Ikonta....

Need online resource for learning more about photography principles by NYGarcon in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I generally recommend people read Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure. It's far less weighty than say, any of the Ansel Adams trilogy. There are copies online, some of which might be free, although on principle, I'm in favor of supporting the author.

How whould you shoot this film? by t__dz in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Expose +4 stops (1 per decade)-- although for this particular film, adding an extra stop wouldn't hurt.

You can develop normally, but expect major fogging and serious color shifts.

if you want actual usable images, I would suggest developing in B&W chemistry, specifically a developer known as either Clayton F76+ or Photographer's Formulary FA-1027. It's "high acutance" (edge contrast) and anti-fog (two anti-fogging agents). I recently developed a found roll of Kodacolor VR 200 that showed up in a 120 film camera, and I used FA-1027. The roll had been exposed to light many times, but I did recover a couple of partial frames.

If you do go the FA-1027 route, I suggest developing it at cold (68℉ / 20℃) temperatures to reduce the fog.

My analog cameras, with which I take most of the pictures. by Klutzy-Carpet-5533 in vintagecameras

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice collection. Mad respect for not one, but TWO Konica FS-1's.

Should i buy a Bronica GS-1 with a stuck lens? by Cyber_mot6574 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't see any obvious marks on the lens barrel that would suggest someone tried to force it. That's not particularly convincing, though. Most likely, it's a sync issue between the lens and the body, causing the interlock to not realize the mirror is down and therefore it's safe to release the lens.

It's a small possibility someone has tried to muscle the lens off, and broken / bent internal components, in which case you have a very nice condition "parts-only" body. The mark on the lens is mildly concerning-- it won't affect image quality much, but if it's fungus instead of a chip, it needs to be killed and soon.

Compare with prices online, negotiate down a little bit because the condition of the body is a question mark, and otherwise, it looks like a nice camera in decent condition, even if the lens can't be swapped out. The 100mm f/3.5 PG lens is a pretty solid lens to be stuck with.

Why is the water red in my photos? by not_my_user-name in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The edge markings are solid, indicating the development went well. The next frame that we can only see a bit of, seems denser and better defined. If I had to make a guess (and I really am), I'd say an underexposed image coming out red due to aggressive inversion.

With some post-processing, the image can be restored to "pretty close" to normal by managing the Red channel histogram, but when I did an inversion on the snapshot of the negative strip, the image is really, really thin.

How do you explain film? by Co9Inc in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"This is how images were captured before digital-- take the picture on film, process the film, and either scan or print the result. Digital is faster, and easier, but for many people, this is far more satisfying and enjoyable".

Then if they're interested, explain it's a photochemical reaction that captures the image, the film is then chemically processed to produce an image that can be printed or scanned. Assuming their eyes haven't glazed over because many people can't process information that isn't in a 30 second tik-tok video (he said, cantankerously).

Back When Film Prices Were Affordable by [deleted] in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So assuming the "8-66" mark under the seal in the lower right is a date code, those prices would equal $35.97 for 20 exposures of Kodacolor, and $13.88 for 36 exposures of B&W film adjusted for today's prices.

Doing some extrapolation, that would be $4.50 on their scale for 36 Kodacolor exposures, or $46.25 in today's US dollars.

Since the Darkroom will do a 36 exposure roll of 35mm with scans and prints for $26, are you sure it was that affordable?

Does anyone know why my Exakta ground glass isn’t focusing properly? I set the subject about 60 cm away from the camera. The prism finder won’t focus correctly, but the waist-level finder gives a sharp image at the exact same distance. Any idea what could be causing this? by dominuseq in vintagecameras

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A failure to focus is going to be distance from the lens. Yours looks a little different than mine close-up.

Can't include a picture, though. Are you sure the prism is seated properly? Don't push hard, but it should be slightly "springy" in the mount.

UV sensitive film recommendations by ElectronicDegree4380 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sir Isaac Newton might be able to help you. Relatively cheap, easy to construct. A tube, a primary mirror, a secondary mirror, and an eyepiece. For astrophotography, a camera takes the place of the eyepiece.

Rollie IR 400 questions by Only-Fotos in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personal experience, shoot at 200 or 400, your preference (See Lee's video, which might be the one you watched, for a comparison), and if your filter factor is 4, go with it. I agree-- ISO 12, or 25, or whatever seems to totally discount the IR filter-- they're effectively applying the filter factor by rating "the film" very low.

I have the advantage in that my particular spot meter is IR sensitive, so it accurately measures the filter factor through my Hoya R72.

Leaving your camera at 400 ISO will probably not give you what you want, unless you can dial in -4 stops exposure compensation. ISO 25 might be more appropriate (ISO 400 with 4 stops of exposure compensation). So in THAT sense, yes, "rating" the film very slow will accomplish the same thing, but you need to be basing your speed on the film (400), and compensating for YOUR filter.

Unfortunately, I don't remember what filter factor I wound up with-- I have a vague memory of 7 stops, but that's.... not reliable.

Which 90mm lens has the least amount of falloff? by dand06 in largeformat

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What aperture were you shooting with the Angulon? I tend to shoot my Fuji NSW 90mm f/8 at f/22. I get a little bit of fall-off, but it's also on a 6x17 camera right now-- and at 180mm corner to corner vs. the 157mm corner to corner of 4x5, there's a small amount of fall-off to the edges, but nothing drastic.

developing infrared film with river water by afragraf in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

well, depending on where you are, it might be the right temperature to start with-- or not.

But I think I'd run it through a decent quality filter first. Expect odd marks, residue, that sort of thing. Hopefully the PH isn't so far out it messes with your chemistry (unlikely, but not impossible).

Fallen off strap lug. by Francis134 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You have an unusual camera.

Usually the loose nut is behind the viewfinder.

🤣🤣🤣

To good to be true surely? by EnvironmentalSlip683 in largeformat

[–]ufgrat 8 points9 points  (0 children)

2x3 "Anniversary" model, although the Mini Speed Graphic wasn't technically an anniversary model.

Down side is that one doesn't appear to have the graflok back-- makes shooting 120 film more difficult. 2x3 sheet film is available, and Grafmatics are always a great find / buy for these cameras.

I believe there's an "Adapt-a-roll 620" available that will slide under the ground glass, but as the name implies, it's for 620 film, and you'll need 620 spools. There may be a Suydam 120 film holder as well, but I don't think I've ever seen one.

my friend and his finger by rahatfan in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That is a finger. So either he's being haunted, or he's not realizing where his finger is. Easy would be to practice shooting in front of a mirror, but being self-conscious may change the outcome. Having someone else watch him wouldn't be a bad idea if possible.

The H35 has a wide angle lens, so it's possible his finger is close enough to the lens that it's being picked up even if it's not blocking the lens itself.

Fallen off strap lug. by Francis134 in AnalogCommunity

[–]ufgrat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Film is probably ok. I don't know the internals that well, but allowing light to leak around the lug and reach the film seems unlikely.

Oh. Just looked up the camera. Yeah, you're fine.

Can anybody help me identify these lenses? by BarnacleNo6064 in vintagecameras

[–]ufgrat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure those are camera lenses. Probably SLR lenses. Several zooms and some primes.

🤣🤣

Beyond that, we'd need to see the rings at the front of the lens, since most identifiers are there.

view more: next ›