Post your B&W Film shots

**arnold** · 12-05-2014, 11:28 PM - **2 Likes**

Pentax MX, M50/1.7 1987

Last edited by arnold; 01-25-2015 at 09:58 PM. Reason: Added camera information

Jonathan Mac · 12-06-2014, 01:45 AM

I used an extension tube for this first one, and the M 50/1.4.

IMGP1229a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

M 50/1.4

IMGP1199a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

IMGP1184a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

M 85/2

IMGP1208a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

Vendee · 12-06-2014, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Mac

I used an extension tube for this first one, and the M 50/1.4.

IMGP1184a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

In the third shot, is that your reflection in the heel of the girl to the left?

vinceloc · 12-06-2014, 06:47 PM - **1 Like**

KX+Voigt 58/1.4 SLII+Acros100

---------- Post added 12-07-2014 at 09:50 AM ----------

Guys, maybe someone here can help me.

I've been trying to upload/submit some of my film shots to my PPG gallery but they are being rejected stating that the camera used is not a Pentax. Checking my EXIF, I realized my developer lab scanned them using a Fujifilm scanner. Any ideas on how to remedy this issue?

tuco · 12-06-2014, 07:32 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by vinceloc

...
I've been trying to upload/submit some of my film shots to my PPG gallery but they are being rejected stating that the camera used is not a Pentax. Checking my EXIF, I realized my developer lab scanned them using a Fujifilm scanner. Any ideas on how to remedy this issue?

Maybe if you add/change the lens and camera metadata in the JPG file it will get past their brand check. There are many EXIF editors you can find for this task. I only know and use the less friendly command line version of exiftool. But at the bottom of the page are options for GUI front-ends to exiftool.

Download, install and open a shell (UNIX)/DOS Box (Windows) and type the following:

Code:

exiftool -Make='PENTAX' -Model='PENTAX 67' -Lens='SMC 67 55mm f4' FILE_NAME.JPG

Of course you want to use different text for your model and an actual a real file name. I'd recommend viewing the EXIF info of a digital file from a Pentax camera and use the exact wording and upper/lower case of the text for your Make and Model. You can also easily copy the whole EXIF part of one file to another in the event more than Make and Model are being checked.

vinceloc · 12-06-2014, 08:45 PM

Thanks

45 Mike · 12-06-2014, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by tuco

I only know and use the less friendly command line version of exiftool.

Gotta love the command line tools, LOL.

mmpeg is cool also!

Jonathan Mac · 12-07-2014, 02:01 AM

Originally posted by Vendee

In the third shot, is that your reflection in the heel of the girl to the left?

I hadn't even noticed that - it could be, or it could be the reflection of one of the other photographers (this was taken on a group photo-walk). I think it's probably someone else as I think this photo was taken with my Tokina 135/2.8 from quite far away, while other people were using shorter focal lengths and standing closer.

stevebrot · 12-07-2014, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by tuco

Maybe if you add/change the lens and camera metadata in the JPG file it will get past their brand check. There are many EXIF editors you can find for this task. I only know and use the less friendly command line version of exiftool. But at the bottom of the page are options for GUI front-ends to exiftool.

I have several film shots on the PPG and IIRC, they asked which camera was used. I also use ExifTool along with ExifToolGUI to edit the camera and lens fields.

Steve

dracluff · 12-08-2014, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by 45 Mike

Taken with paper negative, Ilford RC #3, 1/4 sec f:8. I shot this with my Grafex 4x5 through a double pane window, focused on the hillside (inset). I used my new Schneider Symmar 135/235 convertible.
scanned @800dpi flatbed

I was not expecting great resolution shooting through two panes of glass. I was actually more interested in the focal length effects of swapping the cells between the 100/175 and the 135/235.
This is 100% crop of inset.

The cell swap experiment was fairly unspectacular. No discernible advantage to swapping cells from one lens set to the other.
One swap gave me about 115mm and the other swap gave me close to 120mm.
On 4x5 the difference would be like changing from a 30mm to a 31mm on a 135 camera.

I like those shots on the paper negatives 45 Mike. I have often thought about trying out a large format camera but trying to get the equipment necessary to process the negatives puts it a little over the top for me at the moment. With paper negatives it would make things a bit easier for sure. Maybe one of these days.
It got a little cold here in Halifax overnight. No snow yet but here are a few from last winter where you did not have to look to hard for snow. Forget the details of camera and lens (the square one is a Bronica SQ-A with the 60 PS lens)

45 Mike · 12-08-2014, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by dracluff

I like those shots on the paper negatives 45 Mike. I have often thought about trying out a large format camera but trying to get the equipment necessary to process the negatives puts it a little over the top for me at the moment. With paper negatives it would make things a bit easier for sure. Maybe one of these days.

I like the second shot!
Yep, the paper negs make the processing easier. Shooting at ISO 6 is somewhat of a pain. Just have to use a tripod and find unmoving subjects worth an image. Moving subjects presents some artistic potentials as well, I dunno.

For my 4x5 film negatives I just use a paterson tank and normal color or b/w chems like MF and 135 films. If I just have one film, it just goes in the tank, for two or more, I use taco method.
The papers of course can just go in a tray for processing.
I just processed this 4x5 shot on expired Vericolor III short. It's color. My scanner will only do 2.7" wide, so it gets cropped.

dracluff · 12-09-2014, 06:16 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by 45 Mike

I like the second shot!
Yep, the paper negs make the processing easier. Shooting at ISO 6 is somewhat of a pain. Just have to use a tripod and find unmoving subjects worth an image. Moving subjects presents some artistic potentials as well, I dunno.

For my 4x5 film negatives I just use a paterson tank and normal color or b/w chems like MF and 135 films. If I just have one film, it just goes in the tank, for two or more, I use taco method.
The papers of course can just go in a tray for processing.
I just processed this 4x5 shot on expired Vericolor III short. It's color. My scanner will only do 2.7" wide, so it gets cropped.

Thanks Mike. The second shot is one I really like as well. The tree, wall and bike rack on the wall are a subjuct I find myself shooting a lot of. I want to print it big but my wife is not a huge fan of winter shots. They make her feel cold when she looks at them. I will probably still print one and put it up somewhere she does not spend much time.
Here are a few of another subject I shoot alot of. They are of the Macdonald Bridge that crosses over the harbour between Dartmouth and Halifax. I ride over on my bicycle to work everyday. The shadows that are cast on the lane are typically fantastic to look at. I am still trying to do them justice.

I have way too many of these. I will add one more however. One of the coolest things is when ships pass underneath be it military or container ships.

Dan

Cuthbert · 12-09-2014, 06:52 PM

Canon F-1, FD50 mm f1.2, Delta 400

45 Mike · 12-09-2014, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by dracluff

Thanks Mike. The second shot is one I really like as well. The tree, wall and bike rack on the wall are a subjuct I find myself shooting a lot of. I want to print it big but my wife is not a huge fan of winter shots. They make her feel cold when she looks at them. I will probably still print one and put it up somewhere she does not spend much time.
Here are a few of another subject I shoot alot of. They are of the Macdonald Bridge that crosses over the harbour between Dartmouth and Halifax. I ride over on my bicycle to work everyday. The shadows that are cast on the lane are typically fantastic to look at. I am still trying to do them justice.
I have way too many of these. I will add one more however. One of the coolest things is when ships pass underneath be it military or container ships.
Dan

The moving bicycle shot is a winner dude!!
Good job!

dracluff · 12-10-2014, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by 45 Mike

The moving bicycle shot is a winner dude!!
Good job!

Thanks. I really love riding over that bridge. They are about to change it for easier maintenance but I think it will lose a lot character. Those trusses providing the shadows I like so much (and protection from splashes from the cars) will be moved underneath the bridge and only a railing will seperate the bike and car lanes.

12-06-2014, 07:32 PM - 1 Like	#3590
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by vinceloc ... I've been trying to upload/submit some of my film shots to my PPG gallery but they are being rejected stating that the camera used is not a Pentax. Checking my EXIF, I realized my developer lab scanned them using a Fujifilm scanner. Any ideas on how to remedy this issue? Maybe if you add/change the lens and camera metadata in the JPG file it will get past their brand check. There are many EXIF editors you can find for this task. I only know and use the less friendly command line version of exiftool. But at the bottom of the page are options for GUI front-ends to exiftool. Download, install and open a shell (UNIX)/DOS Box (Windows) and type the following: *Code:* exiftool -Make='PENTAX' -Model='PENTAX 67' -Lens='SMC 67 55mm f4' FILE_NAME.JPG Of course you want to use different text for your model and an actual a real file name. I'd recommend viewing the EXIF info of a digital file from a Pentax camera and use the exact wording and upper/lower case of the text for your Make and Model. You can also easily copy the whole EXIF part of one file to another in the event more than Make and Model are being checked. Last edited by tuco; 12-06-2014 at 08:12 PM. Reason: Fix exif case

12-09-2014, 06:16 PM - 2 Likes	#3597
dracluff Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Dartmouth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 202	Originally posted by 45 Mike I like the second shot! Yep, the paper negs make the processing easier. Shooting at ISO 6 is somewhat of a pain. Just have to use a tripod and find unmoving subjects worth an image. Moving subjects presents some artistic potentials as well, I dunno. For my 4x5 film negatives I just use a paterson tank and normal color or b/w chems like MF and 135 films. If I just have one film, it just goes in the tank, for two or more, I use taco method. The papers of course can just go in a tray for processing. I just processed this 4x5 shot on expired Vericolor III short. It's color. My scanner will only do 2.7" wide, so it gets cropped. Thanks Mike. The second shot is one I really like as well. The tree, wall and bike rack on the wall are a subjuct I find myself shooting a lot of. I want to print it big but my wife is not a huge fan of winter shots. They make her feel cold when she looks at them. I will probably still print one and put it up somewhere she does not spend much time. Here are a few of another subject I shoot alot of. They are of the Macdonald Bridge that crosses over the harbour between Dartmouth and Halifax. I ride over on my bicycle to work everyday. The shadows that are cast on the lane are typically fantastic to look at. I am still trying to do them justice. I have way too many of these. I will add one more however. One of the coolest things is when ships pass underneath be it military or container ships. Dan Last edited by dracluff; 12-09-2014 at 06:25 PM. Reason: Pictures did not show

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
58mm Lens Club - Bring your Biotar, your Helios, your Tak 58mm... bring 'em all!	pepperberry farm	Lens Clubs	310	4 Days Ago 06:43 AM
Post-Processing The Film Emulation Challenge - Post your Digital Pictures with that Film look	ChristianRock	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	22	07-14-2023 10:20 AM
I'd Print and Hang This - Your Best Film Shots	Eyewanders	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	102	01-09-2020 01:36 PM
Old tech shootout: your MX-1 vs your phone. Is your MX-1 still holding it's own?	MD Optofonik	Pentax Compact Cameras	7	05-16-2019 07:40 PM
Photo Story Time documents: Show me your genre study, your reportage, your photo story... etc.	christophleipzig	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	11	10-15-2011 06:26 AM

12-05-2014, 11:28 PM - 2 Likes	#3586
arnold Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,294	Pentax MX, M50/1.7 1987 Last edited by arnold; 01-25-2015 at 09:58 PM. Reason: Added camera information

12-06-2014, 01:45 AM	#3587
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,894	I used an extension tube for this first one, and the M 50/1.4. IMGP1229a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr M 50/1.4 IMGP1199a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr IMGP1184a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr M 85/2 IMGP1208a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

12-06-2014, 10:09 AM	#3588
Vendee Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norfolk, UK Posts: 1,134	Originally posted by Jonathan Mac I used an extension tube for this first one, and the M 50/1.4. IMGP1184a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr In the third shot, is that your reflection in the heel of the girl to the left?

12-06-2014, 06:47 PM - 1 Like	#3589
vinceloc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 367	KX+Voigt 58/1.4 SLII+Acros100 ---------- Post added 12-07-2014 at 09:50 AM ---------- Guys, maybe someone here can help me. I've been trying to upload/submit some of my film shots to my PPG gallery but they are being rejected stating that the camera used is not a Pentax. Checking my EXIF, I realized my developer lab scanned them using a Fujifilm scanner. Any ideas on how to remedy this issue?

12-06-2014, 08:45 PM	#3591
vinceloc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 367	Thanks

12-06-2014, 10:01 PM	#3592
45 Mike Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,350	Originally posted by tuco I only know and use the less friendly command line version of exiftool. Gotta love the command line tools, LOL. mmpeg is cool also!

12-07-2014, 02:01 AM	#3593
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,894	Originally posted by Vendee In the third shot, is that your reflection in the heel of the girl to the left? I hadn't even noticed that - it could be, or it could be the reflection of one of the other photographers (this was taken on a group photo-walk). I think it's probably someone else as I think this photo was taken with my Tokina 135/2.8 from quite far away, while other people were using shorter focal lengths and standing closer.

12-07-2014, 02:24 PM	#3594
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by tuco Maybe if you add/change the lens and camera metadata in the JPG file it will get past their brand check. There are many EXIF editors you can find for this task. I only know and use the less friendly command line version of exiftool. But at the bottom of the page are options for GUI front-ends to exiftool. I have several film shots on the PPG and IIRC, they asked which camera was used. I also use ExifTool along with ExifToolGUI to edit the camera and lens fields. Steve

12-08-2014, 11:56 AM	#3595
dracluff Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Dartmouth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 202	Originally posted by 45 Mike Taken with paper negative, Ilford RC #3, 1/4 sec f:8. I shot this with my Grafex 4x5 through a double pane window, focused on the hillside (inset). I used my new Schneider Symmar 135/235 convertible. scanned @800dpi flatbed I was not expecting great resolution shooting through two panes of glass. I was actually more interested in the focal length effects of swapping the cells between the 100/175 and the 135/235. This is 100% crop of inset. The cell swap experiment was fairly unspectacular. No discernible advantage to swapping cells from one lens set to the other. One swap gave me about 115mm and the other swap gave me close to 120mm. On 4x5 the difference would be like changing from a 30mm to a 31mm on a 135 camera. I like those shots on the paper negatives 45 Mike. I have often thought about trying out a large format camera but trying to get the equipment necessary to process the negatives puts it a little over the top for me at the moment. With paper negatives it would make things a bit easier for sure. Maybe one of these days. It got a little cold here in Halifax overnight. No snow yet but here are a few from last winter where you did not have to look to hard for snow. Forget the details of camera and lens (the square one is a Bronica SQ-A with the 60 PS lens)

12-08-2014, 12:22 PM	#3596
45 Mike Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,350	Originally posted by dracluff I like those shots on the paper negatives 45 Mike. I have often thought about trying out a large format camera but trying to get the equipment necessary to process the negatives puts it a little over the top for me at the moment. With paper negatives it would make things a bit easier for sure. Maybe one of these days. I like the second shot! Yep, the paper negs make the processing easier. Shooting at ISO 6 is somewhat of a pain. Just have to use a tripod and find unmoving subjects worth an image. Moving subjects presents some artistic potentials as well, I dunno. For my 4x5 film negatives I just use a paterson tank and normal color or b/w chems like MF and 135 films. If I just have one film, it just goes in the tank, for two or more, I use taco method. The papers of course can just go in a tray for processing. I just processed this 4x5 shot on expired Vericolor III short. It's color. My scanner will only do 2.7" wide, so it gets cropped.

12-09-2014, 06:52 PM	#3598
Cuthbert Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,740	Canon F-1, FD50 mm f1.2, Delta 400

12-09-2014, 11:47 PM	#3599
45 Mike Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,350	Originally posted by dracluff Thanks Mike. The second shot is one I really like as well. The tree, wall and bike rack on the wall are a subjuct I find myself shooting a lot of. I want to print it big but my wife is not a huge fan of winter shots. They make her feel cold when she looks at them. I will probably still print one and put it up somewhere she does not spend much time. Here are a few of another subject I shoot alot of. They are of the Macdonald Bridge that crosses over the harbour between Dartmouth and Halifax. I ride over on my bicycle to work everyday. The shadows that are cast on the lane are typically fantastic to look at. I am still trying to do them justice. I have way too many of these. I will add one more however. One of the coolest things is when ships pass underneath be it military or container ships. Dan The moving bicycle shot is a winner dude!! Good job!

12-10-2014, 07:15 AM	#3600
dracluff Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Dartmouth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 202	Originally posted by 45 Mike The moving bicycle shot is a winner dude!! Good job! Thanks. I really love riding over that bridge. They are about to change it for easier maintenance but I think it will lose a lot character. Those trusses providing the shadows I like so much (and protection from splashes from the cars) will be moved underneath the bridge and only a railing will seperate the bike and car lanes.