Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can we talk about film?
- Thread starter mollyc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you're using a Nikon FM, you should be able to focus manually without futzing. Just use the viewfinder, and you will be able to see what's sharp on the focusing screen.
If you've never manually focused a lens, it may take some getting used to. But if you're using that 50mm f/1.8 lens, then you're focusing with it wide open, at your shallowest depth of field. That is helpful as things pop into and out of focus as you move the focusing ring.
The hyperfocal distance guide on the lens that you asked about is helpful for landscapes and such, and if you wanted to pre-set a general focus range if you're going to be shooting more distant objects outdoors with smaller apertures, but for the most part you'll want to precisely focus manually even for "snapshots."
I've had decent luck manually focusing (I am just slow at it), but lately I've been trying to take more rapid, candid shots as I walk around, so I've been reading up on street photography techniques and zone focusing.
I'm self taught and blundering my way through learning this stuff but it has been fun.
It's a small thing, but the whole colored line thing to me is one of the big charms of manual focus Nikon lenses.
That's how they did it from the very earliest lens on up to the ones that are still in production(or at least were a year or two ago-not sure if they went away with the Japan manufacturing shake-up).
They make for a clean, uncluttered look on the lens barrel.
BTW, as the focal length gets wider, you tend to get more and more DOF lines up to a point as there's more space to show them. Longer lenses, especially the faster ones, don't always give you as many.
That's how they did it from the very earliest lens on up to the ones that are still in production(or at least were a year or two ago-not sure if they went away with the Japan manufacturing shake-up).
They make for a clean, uncluttered look on the lens barrel.
BTW, as the focal length gets wider, you tend to get more and more DOF lines up to a point as there's more space to show them. Longer lenses, especially the faster ones, don't always give you as many.
this thread isn’t about movies, it’s about analogue photography. using a film camera instead of digital.
Just to follow up on this - I have developed several rolls of HP5+ and Kentmere Pan 400 since this post, and got better results with less agitation, following a process more similar to the one you linked to. I'm not sure what I did before to get the streaks, but it hasn't happened since like that.
Of the films I have been using (TX-400, HP5+, Kentmere Pan 400), the Pan 400 seems to produce a 'flatter' negative than the other two. So I think I need to bump my time in the developer over the recommended 6 minutes to try and rectify that.
As an aside, I just got a roll back from The Darkroom that I shot with CineStill 800T. I absolutely love the dreamy, cinematic look, especially for shooting outdoors at night. I will certainly be shooting this film again.
I joined a "Month of Film" challenge for May where we will be given prompts to shoot a roll of film over the month. I haven't done any film since Christmas, so I think this will be a good segue back into summer shooting. If we had had any snow this winter, I was going to do some BW rolls, but our weather was just gray and bleak all winter (although relatively mild) so I didn't want to waste film for boring stuff.
But I love shooting spring/summer/fall on film and am excited to get back at it.
But I love shooting spring/summer/fall on film and am excited to get back at it.
It never occurred to me before, but winter (we have very snowy winters) really limits the advantages of color film but also provides stark contrasts that can look good in B&W - thinks like icicles and snowy forests. Came to that (I know, obvious
) realization on my own after shooting some color in the winter...most of the shots looked blah except for a couple that included people in super colorful clothing outdoors.
oops.. guess i need some new developer. and also apparently a new batch of fixer.
Has anyone here tried developing in caffenol? I ordered new developer, but I misread the delivery and it won't be here until Friday, which seems like an eternity away. Was thinking of just getting the ingredients for caffenol from the grocery store today and trying that. I figure I don't have much to lose but wondered if any of you have real life experience with it.
I’ve made it before and tried it.
Maybe it’s the chemist coming out in me, but I disliked some of the imprecision in it(especially given the variability of things like different brands and that much is measured volumetrically).
I had a bunch of back channel communication and note sharing with someone on Pnet a few years ago. He theorized that the active reducing agent was actually caffeic acid, and I did some quick experiments that told me he was correct and actually couldn’t find that caffeine made any meaningful difference. I started working on a formula of mostly sodium carbonate and caffeic acid, but never got it to where I was totally happy. It probably could work, but life happened and I haven’t revisited it.
Short answer though is that I personally wouldn’t bother with the standard instant coffee formula but if you want to experiment it’s worth a shot.
There is a home brew formula out there to make Rodinol from Tylenol and sodium hydroxide(lye). I’ve used it and been very happy-to the point that I found it interchangeable with commercial Rodinol. That’s a great developer in and of itself with much higher acuity(at the expense of contrast-which can be tamed with dilution) and apparent grain. It’s not a developer I’d use all the time, although some people use it exclusively to great effect. You can also do stand development with it. It has seemingly unlimited shelf life too.
Maybe it’s the chemist coming out in me, but I disliked some of the imprecision in it(especially given the variability of things like different brands and that much is measured volumetrically).
I had a bunch of back channel communication and note sharing with someone on Pnet a few years ago. He theorized that the active reducing agent was actually caffeic acid, and I did some quick experiments that told me he was correct and actually couldn’t find that caffeine made any meaningful difference. I started working on a formula of mostly sodium carbonate and caffeic acid, but never got it to where I was totally happy. It probably could work, but life happened and I haven’t revisited it.
Short answer though is that I personally wouldn’t bother with the standard instant coffee formula but if you want to experiment it’s worth a shot.
There is a home brew formula out there to make Rodinol from Tylenol and sodium hydroxide(lye). I’ve used it and been very happy-to the point that I found it interchangeable with commercial Rodinol. That’s a great developer in and of itself with much higher acuity(at the expense of contrast-which can be tamed with dilution) and apparent grain. It’s not a developer I’d use all the time, although some people use it exclusively to great effect. You can also do stand development with it. It has seemingly unlimited shelf life too.
Well, you know, I'm not overly precise in most of my photography, and this roll is going through a Holga, so not looking for fine art quality (although Holga can be a fine art in its own way).
I graduated second in my class at high school and the only reason I wasn't first is because of stupid chemistry.* I am really glad there are people like you out there who actually enjoy it and figure that kind of stuff out for the people like me!
I could probably just run to the film store and buy developer there, but I swear Amazon told me it was next day delivery, but when I checked my order this morning, it's showing as Friday delivery. I don't want two bottles of chemistry to go bad if I get a bottle locally today, so I have to decide if I want to wait or experiment.
*I say this with much fondness for you and your chosen profession.
It worked!!!! I made photos from COFFEEEEEEE!!!
I haven't been paying close attention, but I went shopping today for a bottle of HC-110 developer and learned, to my consternation, that production of HC-110 has been 'paused' or potentially even stopped indefinitely...I can't find definitive information but in any case it is not readily available anymore except at an inflated price. I have learned to develop using HC-110 exclusively and was just getting the hang of it, which makes this especially vexing for me.
Question: have any of you used the various HC-110 'clones' like FPP-110 or LC110 ? most reviews seem positive.
If I were more adventurous I'd follow @mollyc 's lead and use coffee, but I'm not at that level yet. If HC-110 is being permanently phased out I suppose I may simply end up switching to Ilford chemistry and re-learn a new process. Though I recognize there are a number of other B&W developers out there.
EDIT: Also, does anyone have experience with CineStill's DF96 monobath chemistry? It seems very convenient and economical, and works well with the Tri-X and HP5, which I have been shooting often.
Question: have any of you used the various HC-110 'clones' like FPP-110 or LC110 ? most reviews seem positive.
If I were more adventurous I'd follow @mollyc 's lead and use coffee, but I'm not at that level yet.
If HC-110 is being permanently phased out I suppose I may simply end up switching to Ilford chemistry and re-learn a new process. Though I recognize there are a number of other B&W developers out there.EDIT: Also, does anyone have experience with CineStill's DF96 monobath chemistry? It seems very convenient and economical, and works well with the Tri-X and HP5, which I have been shooting often.
Last edited:
Freestyle has HC-110 for $44. Sounds expensive but it makes 32 liters of working developer. So it cost like 60 cents per roll. l110 seems cheaper but a $16 bottle only makes 8 liters.I haven't been paying close attention, but I went shopping today for a bottle of HC-110 developer and learned, to my consternation, that production of HC-110 has been 'paused' or potentially even stopped indefinitely...I can't find definitive information but in any case it is not readily available anymore except at an inflated price. I have learned to develop using HC-110 exclusively and was just getting the hang of it, which makes this especially vexing for me.
Question: have any of you used the various HC-110 'clones' like FPP-110 or LC110 ? most reviews seem positive.
If I were more adventurous I'd follow @mollyc 's lead and use coffee, but I'm not at that level yet.
EDIT: Also, does anyone have experience with CineStill's DF96 monobath chemistry? It seems very convenient and economical, and works well with the Tri-X and HP5, which I have been shooting often.
Oh, wild. I just bought HC-110 when I did my caffenol experiment; I was too anxious to wait an extra day for the HC110 so did caffenol while I waited for delivery. I honestly couldn't really tell a big difference in negatives between the two.I haven't been paying close attention, but I went shopping today for a bottle of HC-110 developer and learned, to my consternation, that production of HC-110 has been 'paused' or potentially even stopped indefinitely...I can't find definitive information but in any case it is not readily available anymore except at an inflated price. I have learned to develop using HC-110 exclusively and was just getting the hang of it, which makes this especially vexing for me.
Question: have any of you used the various HC-110 'clones' like FPP-110 or LC110 ? most reviews seem positive.
If I were more adventurous I'd follow @mollyc 's lead and use coffee, but I'm not at that level yet.
EDIT: Also, does anyone have experience with CineStill's DF96 monobath chemistry? It seems very convenient and economical, and works well with the Tri-X and HP5, which I have been shooting often.
I started with the monobath; it's okay. My negatives came out kind of thin from it and it was worthwhile for me to switch to regular developer. @bunnspecial is a chemist by trade and really dislikes the monobath.
Honestly doing caffenol is not that hard if you've developed any bw before. The hardest part was finding vitamin-c; I think I ended up buying tablets and then crushing them because I couldn't find any powdered.
I find the end result from D76 to be similar to HC110, and I'd suggest that as a good alternative if you like HC110. Both are Metol-Hydroquinone combination solvent-type developers. I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between a negative developed in HC110(B) and straight D76, and in fact when I pull archive photos if I didn't bother to note it's usually relying on my memory of which "mood" I'd have been in when I developed that roll. I also find HC110(H)(unnoficial but half the concentration of B) to be similar to D76 1:1.
The advantages as I see it of HC110 are its convenience as a liquid, especially to make to working dilution right before use, its nearly indefinite shelf life, and much greater range of possible dilutions.
D76 is sold as a powder in a plastic pouch. Normally in the US a pouch is to make 1 gallon. I haven't bought any recently so couldn't tell you the current price-the ones I bought in 2019 or so were $8. The pouches have quite a long shelf life. Officially Kodak says 6 months once mixed for a full bottle and 2 months for a half full bottle(put marbles in the bottle to get rid of air space and keep it longer). In reality I tried some the other day from a 3/4 full bottle I note as mixed in March of 2019 and it still had some activity, although I wouldn't want to use it on anything important.
Typically to prepare D76 I fill a 1 gallon Datatainer half full of water, add the powder with a funnel, shake vigorously, add more water, shake, and so on until the bottle is full. I use warm water, then let stand overnight-if any undissolved solid settles you leave it.
It can be used undiluted("straight") as prepped or diluted 1:1. A 1:1 dilution reduces contrast, or at least it will with intermittent agitation, since local exhaustion happens faster. Dilution also reduces the solvent action, which makes the grain more apparent but increases sharpness. I prefer the results from a 1:1 dilution, BUT you have to be very careful with developer capacity when doing it. It officially takes 8 oz. of D76 stock solution to develop one "unit" of film. What I'm calling a "unit" is one roll of 35mm-36ex, one roll of 120, 4 sheets of 4x5, or a single sheet of 8x10. All of those have roughly the same area. I mention this because a typical tank for 2 rolls of 35mm film holds 16 oz, so you can end up with less developer than you need if you try to develop two rolls at 1:1 in a 16 oz tank. People will use more dilute solutions(I've heard of 1:3) but it be very unpredictable. Developers roughly follow 1st order kinetics, which means that half the concentration cuts the rate in half, but this can get really hard to predict at really low concentrations especially because local exhaustion happens so fast.
Long story short, though, I highly recommend looking at D76. One of the beauties of it is there are equivalent offerings from half a dozen different makers, and the formula is widely available and simple enough that if you're so inclined you can prep it yourself.
The advantages as I see it of HC110 are its convenience as a liquid, especially to make to working dilution right before use, its nearly indefinite shelf life, and much greater range of possible dilutions.
D76 is sold as a powder in a plastic pouch. Normally in the US a pouch is to make 1 gallon. I haven't bought any recently so couldn't tell you the current price-the ones I bought in 2019 or so were $8. The pouches have quite a long shelf life. Officially Kodak says 6 months once mixed for a full bottle and 2 months for a half full bottle(put marbles in the bottle to get rid of air space and keep it longer). In reality I tried some the other day from a 3/4 full bottle I note as mixed in March of 2019 and it still had some activity, although I wouldn't want to use it on anything important.
Typically to prepare D76 I fill a 1 gallon Datatainer half full of water, add the powder with a funnel, shake vigorously, add more water, shake, and so on until the bottle is full. I use warm water, then let stand overnight-if any undissolved solid settles you leave it.
It can be used undiluted("straight") as prepped or diluted 1:1. A 1:1 dilution reduces contrast, or at least it will with intermittent agitation, since local exhaustion happens faster. Dilution also reduces the solvent action, which makes the grain more apparent but increases sharpness. I prefer the results from a 1:1 dilution, BUT you have to be very careful with developer capacity when doing it. It officially takes 8 oz. of D76 stock solution to develop one "unit" of film. What I'm calling a "unit" is one roll of 35mm-36ex, one roll of 120, 4 sheets of 4x5, or a single sheet of 8x10. All of those have roughly the same area. I mention this because a typical tank for 2 rolls of 35mm film holds 16 oz, so you can end up with less developer than you need if you try to develop two rolls at 1:1 in a 16 oz tank. People will use more dilute solutions(I've heard of 1:3) but it be very unpredictable. Developers roughly follow 1st order kinetics, which means that half the concentration cuts the rate in half, but this can get really hard to predict at really low concentrations especially because local exhaustion happens so fast.
Long story short, though, I highly recommend looking at D76. One of the beauties of it is there are equivalent offerings from half a dozen different makers, and the formula is widely available and simple enough that if you're so inclined you can prep it yourself.
Very helpful! Thanks both of you for the tips. I'll have to look into D76, and at some point I want to try caffenol just for fun (still a wild idea...developing film with coffee).
a different kind of film, but polaroid released a brand new camera yesterday. i already have an instax so not sure if i want one of these but it may well end up on my christmas list.
i2-camera.polaroid.com
it’s so exciting that film is coming back to life.
Discover the Polaroid I-2 Instant Camera
Designed for craft, the Polaroid I-2 is the first analog instant camera with built-in manual controls and is equipped with the sharpest-ever Polaroid lens.
it’s so exciting that film is coming back to life.