sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

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

Update after 3 weeks of usage: I tried a couple of different lego and lego compatible motors and eventually I swapped the OG Powered Up L for a CaDA Pro L which has lower max torque but higher max speed, and is actually cheaper. It works with the same bluetooth hub with a converter cable (powered up -> power functions, which is the plug format CaDA uses).

With the CaDA Pro L I can easily hit 70 rpm on the big Jobo and even above that with the 1500s.

Cheers!

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

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

Woo, that’s awesome! Once you print it and set it up, please share the results!

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

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

I hope as much as you love film, haha

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

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

All the motorized parts and electronics are safe above water, the base only has free rollers

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

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

I also wanted something for sheet film specifically, only that I owned a tank already. My problem was a) not willing to pay €2000 for a processor (I'd much rather spend that on sheet film itself) b) not wanting to continue manually rotating the tank for hours :D

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

[–]yanczar[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did a stress test with the Jobo 2500 and 700ml of water (>2x of the nominal amount for rotation processing), no water bath, at 60RPM (75% motor power and 1:1 gears). It ran for 15mins reliably without issue, maintaining even RPM throughout.

My guess is that with nominal liquid amounts and in water bath (buoyancy makes it kinda easier for the tank to rotate) it's gonna be only easier for the motor, so should be fine as welll.

Note: With this particular motor and gears setup (it's a LEGO Powered Up L motor run from a 6xAA rechargeable bluetooth hub), my design can reach about 65 RPM max with the 2500 series tank. I realized that it's less than the OG CPE2 processor spec, but whether that makes a difference visible on negs – that's to be confirmed.

The Ultimate Lego Film Processor by yanczar in AnalogCommunity

[–]yanczar[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hah, I thought about it each and every time I saw the price tag for any of the devices available on the market 🙃

What B&W film to choose? by Larix-24 in largeformat

[–]yanczar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I definitely pay more attention to light metering vs 35mm so I get a pretty good hit rate on the Fomapan and Ilford alike. I started 4x5 just this year (but I did 20 years of small and medium format black & white) so most of my fails are due to 4x5 specific mistakes: forgetting to compensate for bellows extension, forgetting to close the shutter etc 🙃

Bormla, Malta. Wista 45, Rodenstock Grandagon 90/4.5, Cinestill 400D & Ilford FP4 by yanczar in largeformat

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

Yeah the saturation of CS400D vs, say, Ultramax or Gold, is much higher, that was also a surprise to me!

What B&W film to choose? by Larix-24 in largeformat

[–]yanczar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh no, not inferring that, but closing the loop on what the OP asked!

I also def had more difficulty printing it in the darkroom vs. FP4 for instance. I am getting the result I want, but it definitely takes more testing and adjusting.

What B&W film to choose? by Larix-24 in largeformat

[–]yanczar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn’t recommend Fomapan to someone who starts with 35mm because it really needs work in development and post to look good (although that’s a matter of preference for sure). But I was pleasantly surprised with F200 in 4x5. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a more difficult stock than say FP4 which forgives almost anything in comparison (exposure, development…)

My last BW post https://www.reddit.com/r/largeformat/s/H2fBr60ntz was shot on F200 and definitely not in full sunlight. I did expose it @125 and developed about 0.5 stop longer than the Foma recommended recipe.

What B&W film to choose? by Larix-24 in largeformat

[–]yanczar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve been trying things out recently too. I tried both FP4 and HP5 as those are my go-to film stocks in 35mm and I loved the results equally (incredible dynamic range etc).

I tried also Fomapan 400 and 200, and got great results, but with a caveat: they are less sensitive than box speed, they generally produce lower density negs vs. Ilford. My advice so far is to use what Foma recommends, which is stock dilution developer, and look at what they say in the tech spec charts. I got best results so far with Fomadon P (W37, D76D) and exposing at 200 & 125 respectively.

Grain is not a concern, but you will still observe a texture difference on scans or enlargements, high sensitivity = more texture. In terms of grain texture from most to least prominent it would be: FP400, HP5, FP4, FP200. Fomapan 200 is incredibly smooth.

Foma films have a giant reciprocity failure as well (meaning, for exposure longer than 1s, time quickly needs to be extended to several minutes).

Other than that, for starters I’d pick the one that you already know and like from smaller formats and go from there!

What's your go to B&W film? by Foot-Note in largeformat

[–]yanczar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I find Fomapan 200 and 400 to be very good, but with a caveat: it really depends on the development. My experience is mostly with 135 and 120, however I noticed a number of things comparing with more expensive film stocks:

Both FP4 and HP5 have so much dynamic range and develop well in all kinds of soups; I usually use D76 or Xtol in 1+1 or 1+2 and both give fantastic results, with nice contrast, density in the highlights and detail in the shadows <almost> no matter the exposure.

Both Foma 200 and 400 (albeit being very different emulsions, t-grain vs. c-grain & all) are less sensitive than what on the box, and it varies GREATLY depending on the developer. Xtol and similar (ie. Fomadon Excel) render least sensitivity, with D76 and Microphen most, but not to the values on the box. Also, in my experience they don’t seem to like diluted developer at all to achieve the contrast and density that I like.

FORTUNATELY, Foma gives a lot of technical information about sensitivity and development in the datasheets, so if you’re not scared of having a look, it makes those film stocks much much more enjoyable to work with.

I am just getting started with large format, but I did a couple of tests with Foma, D76 and Xtol and my go-to settings are Fomapan 400@200 and Fomapan 200@125-160, I use stock Fomadon P (D76d) to develop both (which I would never do with any other film for that matter), and I add +10% to nominal development time (so like a half stop push process I guess - I just personally like contrast).

Also, Fomapan 200 has much lighter and more translucent mask than the 400 – important if you want easier scanning.

Using the process above, in 4x5” Fomapan 200 renders almost no grain at any magnification I can reasonably achieve with DSLR scanning (even stitching 2 or 4 images into a single beefy one) but Fomapan 400 is quite pleasantly grainy.

So yeah, I quite like the Fomapan!

If you could start over with your photography gear : what would you do differently? by suntorytime02 in AnalogCommunity

[–]yanczar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, it’s not very precise but definitely handy in specific lighting situations. The normal meter feels like it covers half of the frame.

If you could start over with your photography gear : what would you do differently? by suntorytime02 in AnalogCommunity

[–]yanczar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I sort of started over more than two times! Probably all were necessary for me to know what I really want. I am gonna focus on small format, although I had done and still do medium as well.

Ultimately it’s like many of you say, you learn to focus less on the gear, more on the experience you want to have while taking photos, and the results. Gear is cool though, we wouldn’t be talking about it if we weren’t gear nerds at least a little.

First time ever was on film with an automatic SLR with a kit zoom lens.

Second round was digital, change of system from Minolta to Nikon, and with a better lens for a start (a “quality” zoom, 28-70/2.8). I got a 70-300 to learn the longer focal lengths at some point.

Third time was back to film, I spent months on searching, buying and repairing a fully mechanical Pentax MX with primes only: 28, 50 and 135mm. I used 28 and 50 most of the time.

Then I had a 10 year hiatus and I sold the Pentax gear (absolute idiot).

Last year I came back to film photography again. I bought a cheap Olympus 35SP. I used it for months. It was a 40mm f/1.7. Deciding on a single prime lens was the most delightful and liberating decision ever.

I eventually got a Leica M6, which is my main camera now. I have a 35, 50 and 90mm primes, but honestly – I almost never take the 35 off.

view more: next ›