[arnold]

Pentax MX, M28mm/2.8 Ektachrome. Scanned with Pentax K5 and 35mm Limited macro

[_Ben]

Zenza Bronica ETRSi
Zenzanon MC 40/4
Kodak Ektar 100
Epson V500

The Green Hornet thanks you for finding his car. I love Mopars.

[Colorado CJ]

First home processed slide film.

Velvia 100, Zone VI 4x5 camera, Fujinon W 125mm F5.6 lens and 2-stop Graduated ND.

[gofour3]

First home processed slide film.

Velvia 100, Zone VI 4x5 camera, Fujinon W 125mm F5.6 lens and 2-stop Graduated ND.

Looks good!

Phil.

[g026r]

Indeed. Great colours.

[Jacquot]

First home processed slide film.

Velvia 100, Zone VI 4x5 camera, Fujinon W 125mm F5.6 lens and 2-stop Graduated ND.

Superb photo, I love the colors! I used to process slide film all the time in grad school. I'm thinking about doing it again.

[Eyewanders]

A couple recent ones...

Pentax67, SMC 75mm 4.5, Velvia100, V750 scan
"stormcaster" ... out on Richmond Beach in North Seattle


Pentacon Six TL, Zeiss 80mm 2.8, Provia 100F, V750 scan
... this is where I spend a huge amount of my time lately, at work or at leisure.

[Eyewanders]

I read the chinese sourcing for Lomo800 120 on the net. Can't find now where it was but this one gives a list(wether true or false is up to the reader):
Lomography Rebranded Film Guide - Geek Josh

I just can't believe the bad Quality ( artifacts,spots, strikes,pinholes) is produced by "big" K.

Agreed. My first couple rolls were pure magic - loved the results - and then the two following were all over the place with some bizarre color shift and artifacts as you mention. It's cheap enough that I may well still buy it occasionally but it certainly hasn't (and won't) wound up being a new "regular" for me as I thought it would to begin with.

[cooltouch]

My son-in-law would get a kick out of that old Mopar. He's into the big Mopar gas guzzlers of the 60s and early 70s. Lives in Austria and drives this giant old Chrysler around over there. Must be a real head-turner.

About the shot of the MG -- cross-processed Velvia in C-41. I'm amazed that the colors came out so accurately. Seems that C-41 processing for Velvia -- and perhaps other E-6 emulsions? -- would be a real alternative if E-6 chemicals aren't available. The exposure latitude seems to be pretty good as well. I wonder, would cross-processing extend the notoriously narrow exposure latitude of slides?

[g026r]

About the shot of the MG -- cross-processed Velvia in C-41. I'm amazed that the colors came out so accurately. Seems that C-41 processing for Velvia -- and perhaps other E-6 emulsions? -- would be a real alternative if E-6 chemicals aren't available. The exposure latitude seems to be pretty good as well. I wonder, would cross-processing extend the notoriously narrow exposure latitude of slides?

I'm actually surprised at how well that one turned out, but I wouldn't recommend it as an alternative over just using good C-41 film if E-6 processing isn't available. About half to two thirds of the shots were heavily green in tone, and it was just the occasional shot that was remarkably close to natural. (With no real consistency as to why. That MG photo was one of four shots of that car, all exposed at the same ISO; two of them were noticeably greenish-yellow, and two of them weren't. I'm assuming possibly something to do with the way the lab scanned them.)

My previous attempt at cross-processing was with Velvia 100F, and that one turned out like this:

[cooltouch]

Yow, what a difference! Well, I have about 20 rolls of 220 Velvia that I've been slowly working my way through. But in light of your inconsistent results, I think I'll just stick with E-6. I do my own color processing anymore these days, and when you do it yourself, there isn't a whole lot of difference in procedure between C-41 and E-6. Thanks for cluing me in!

[g026r]

Here's one of the ones with a green tone to it; overall the RVP was better than the RVP100 for sticking closer to the proper colours, though I'm wondering if it's just that I severely over- or under-exposed the 100 as I was using a phone-based meter that I'm not entirely certain on with it.

(Pardon the scanning artifact; I sometimes get them in my scans and the lab will gladly rescan for free when it happens, but I couldn't be bothered in this case.)

[Arvid]

I've got a pile of expired film I was given and have been slowly going through. No idea on how it was stored or how old it is, but I'm guessing at least 15 years.

Kiev-4A.
Helios-103.
Konica Centuria Super 200. Severe colour shifts showing up in this one:

Did you shoot it at box speed? I really like the colours on this one.
I stumbled across two rolls of Konica VX 100 and one roll of Fuji Superia at a flea market recently. The Konicas expired in 1997, no idea about the Fuji. I know it's a different film but after seeing your shot, I think I'll try to pay a little more attention than I initially planned when shooting these rolls. As a general rule, do you think that you should overexpose on old film? Or is it all more or less a matter of luck?

[g026r]

Did you shoot it at box speed? I really like the colours on this one.

The general guideline that gets quoted is one stop extra exposure for every decade past its use by date, but I believe that I shot this one at 160 as I found that a roll of Agfa HDC that I got from the same source came out overexposed when I shot it at 100 instead of 200.

(Then again, I'm fairly certain the shutter on this camera is running a bit slow. So who knows.)

Expired '97, then I'd definitely give it a little bit extra exposure. But when I'm shooting expired film I tend to just guess on what might work and hope for the best.

[Swift1]

Yay! I finally have something from an actual Pentax to post

Asahi Pentax SV
Auto-Takumar 35/3.5
Mitsubishi MXIII 200
Epson V750-M Pro