madNbad wrote:
Those photos would have been a whole lot better if that little CS 50 had been black paint...
For an actual question, when you're finished with the big bag of expired film are you going to keep over exposing a bit with fresh film? The images from films that should be considered junk have been great but that bag is going to run out eventually.
Depending on the film, I've been overexposing a lot. The only one that only needed one stop was the Kodak Supra 100. It looked fantastic at 50 - better than many modern fresh colour films. Apparently age and poor storage was the thing for that emulsion.
Unfortunately it is all gone now. Edit Monday March 4 - found two more rolls of Supra!
There's still a cr@p tonne of B&W left, and I haven't even started on the assortment of 120/220! some of which is colour.
@madNbad for my fresh film I just shoot at box speed unless it is something like the fake 3200 iso films.
However if I use a camera like the mighty Reto UltraWide n Slim, or Kodak H35 where they only have one fixed exposure setting, I’ll use whatever roll of 200 or 400 film and let the Gods of Emulsion deal with it.
Alpha_Geist wrote:
Thank you! I’ll have to make use of that technique when shooting with my point & shoot. Especially so when certain films perform better at another ISO other than what the box says.
This place sells premade DX code stickers that you can use on your film canisters if that also helps. They have a variety of speeds to choose from. I haven't used them but I'll probably buy some because I want to bulk load some film soon.
Picked up another P&S yesterday at an antique store, the Canon AF35 ML. First roll was mostly to see if there are any light leaks and there are none. The camera tends to under expose but clean up nicely in post. It only goes to ISO 400 and while it has a 40mm f/1.9, there are no controls to shoot wide open or stopped down.
rji2goleez wrote:
Picked up another P&S yesterday at an antique store, the Canon AF35 ML. First roll was mostly to see if there are any light leaks and there are none. The camera tends to under expose but clean up nicely in post. It only goes to ISO 400 and while it has a 40mm f/1.9, there are no controls to shoot wide open or stopped down.
Canon AF35 ML + Kodak Ultramax
Nice! I have a Konica C35 EF3 that underexposes by about a stop - I just set the ISO one stop extra to compensate eg 200 for 400 film. That camera uses AA batteries, so it is not a battery/voltage compatibility issue. I think meter cells just age...
rji2goleez wrote:
Picked up another P&S yesterday at an antique store, the Canon AF35 ML. First roll was mostly to see if there are any light leaks and there are none. The camera tends to under expose but clean up nicely in post. It only goes to ISO 400 and while it has a 40mm f/1.9, there are no controls to shoot wide open or stopped down.
Canon AF35 ML + Kodak Ultramax
Looks like it takes nice, very sharp photos. Good find!
geekcop wrote:
Looks like it takes nice, very sharp photos. Good find!
Thanks. Things sharpen up nicely from post processing. I'm using a very simple process utilizing LR plugins. My lab develops (color only) sends me 6MB scans. I import into LR Classic and mark the keepers. I send the keepers through Topaz Photo AI and have the plugin process all images with Auto Sharpen (lens blur), Auto denoise and Upscale by 2X. This gives me 24MB TIFF files which I then send through a plugin called Radiant Photo. While it has a lot of settings and presets to play with, I simply take their defaults which is kind of like hitting the auto expose button in LR but this is so much better. This results in images that are closer to proper exposure, color balance and more.
I thought I'd highlight my process because I find it simple and only takes computer processing time to get through the roll. It also means I don't have to worry about getting the negatives and do my own scanning.
