Gary Clennan wrote:
Haha - appreciate the info Edward. I will have to look at some other negs to compare. I always thought (could be wrong) that the film lettering I have seen was always good regardless of severe overexposure or underexposure. I remember metering carefully off of a grey-ish colored window to try and get an accurate reading. I didn't want the bright snow and sky to mess with things. I should have bracketed another exposure I guess. Oh well, the joys of film!
Well, not to make things even more complicated, but it could also be your camera shutter that is slower than the actual speed you set.
As a rule of thumb, slide film has 2 1/3 stops latitude above middle grey and 2 2/3 under. I would take a spot reading off the snow and overexpose by no more than 1 1/2 stops in order to preserve detail.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Gary, there’s a reason why the wrapper is totally sealed. Condensation and humidity are the enemies of film. I would think 120 film with its paper backing is very sensitive to humidity. I personally always freeze my film in zip locked plastic bags for extra security. I would certainly not discard the remaining film, but probably wouldn’t shoot anything too important with it. Please keep in mind that it could be a lab mistake too. Normally affected film should come out darker and grainier.
The only time I've had serious issues with expired 120 film is if it has had the wrapper removed. The paper absorbs moisture etc.
I wouldn't throw it away though, just use it for 'experimental/artistic' purposes.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Well, not to make things even more complicated, but it could also be your camera shutter that is slower than the actual speed you set.
As a rule of thumb, slide film has 2 1/3 stops latitude above middle grey and 2 2/3 under. I would take a spot reading off the snow and overexpose by no more than 1 1/2 stops in order to preserve detail.
My camera shutter did in fact sound slow. It was super cold that morning....
Desmolicious wrote:
The only time I've had serious issues with expired 120 film is if it has had the wrapper removed. The paper absorbs moisture etc.
I wouldn't throw it away though, just use it for 'experimental/artistic' purposes.
I hear ya. It is very hard for me to throw away 220 film...
Very nice, Tom! How long you had that tx1? I also see you shooting your favorite film, in 35mm (as opposed to 120 with all the backing paper problems )
Jon Buffington wrote:
Very nice, Tom! How long you had that tx1? I also see you shooting your favorite film, in 35mm (as opposed to 120 with all the backing paper problems )
Thanks. I've had the TX-1 for a couple of months (bought it from FM user Desmolicious!), and recently completed the lens collection by adding on the 30mm f/5.6 lens. I've got all three lenses for this camera, 30mm, 45mm, and 90mm. It's an amazing camera, with incredibly sharp lenses. While it shoots 35mm film, it's really a medium format camera; just clipped from the top.
Very nice! I should have picked one up in years past when they were cheaper. Prices are going up faster than the stock market. That is a fine kit and will serve you well for years to come.
same roll of Velvia as my last few uploads. Was in my camera for 4 years haha. Taken right off the Burr Trail Road. If you are ever here in Utah, PLEASE PLEASE drive this road. It is paved even. SO MUCH GOOD STUFF down here!
rattymouse wrote:
Thanks. I've had the TX-1 for a couple of months (bought it from FM user Desmolicious!), and recently completed the lens collection by adding on the 30mm f/5.6 lens. I've got all three lenses for this camera, 30mm, 45mm, and 90mm. It's an amazing camera, with incredibly sharp lenses. While it shoots 35mm film, it's really a medium format camera; just clipped from the top.
Desmolicious wrote:
Sweet camera! I hear nothing but good things about that seller...
Actually, he's horrible. He sold me a VERY expensive camera, and I liked it so much I had to buy the 30mm lens, which cost more than the camera itself!!
rattymouse wrote:
Actually, he's horrible. He sold me a VERY expensive camera, and I liked it so much I had to buy the 30mm lens, which cost more than the camera itself!!
Dustin Gent wrote:
same roll of Velvia as my last few uploads. Was in my camera for 4 years haha. Taken right off the Burr Trail Road. If you are ever here in Utah, PLEASE PLEASE drive this road. It is paved even. SO MUCH GOOD STUFF down here!
I will have to look at some other negs to compare. I always thought (could be wrong) that the film lettering I have seen was always good regardless of severe overexposure or underexposure. I remember metering carefully off of a grey-ish colored window to try and get an accurate reading. I didn't want the bright snow and sky to mess with things. I should have bracketed another exposure I guess. Oh well, the joys of film!
