web analytics

film

The Phoblographer Solargraph (2 of 2)

All images by Oli Stevens. Used with permission.

We’ve featured long solargraphs shot with beer cans before, but every time we run across new ones we find something incredibly fascinating. Take this 10 week Solargraph shot by photographer Oli Stevens. Oli is a Biochemistry Masters student, splitting his time between London and Oxford. He’s primarily a 35mm analog photographer who enjoys pushing the technical limits of film photography. What other way to push them than to play with a super long exposure and to work with the most experimental form of the craft: pinhole photography.

To create the image above, Oli created his very own camera from a beer can and used Ilford sheet film to shoot the image. We talked to him more about the setup, the camera, and his photography.

[click to continue…]

The Affordable 4x5 camera

The larger the format is that you’re working with, the more time it will surely take you to get a single image due to all the work that goes into it. And while large format cameras can be expensive, a duo from Europe are Kickstarting a more affordable camera. It’s called the Intrepid 4×5 camera, and it promises to be a light weight camera made from birch ply wood.

The Intrepid will take 75-300mm lens boards, has ground glass for focusing, comes with a choice of bellows colors, and folds down into a very compact size. With it being made from plywood though, I’d personally want it to be finished with a sealant of some sort to prevent moisture from affecting it too much in the long run. For the 125 Euro that they’re apparently charging for the camera though, we can’t really expect much.

It will take standard film cases for the image loading: which means that you can enjoy many of the offerings from Fujifilm, Kodak and Ilford still available for the format.

The intro video is after the jump, but be sure to head over to their Kickstarter page too to see the different rewards offered.

[click to continue…]

Lomochrome Turqouise

Sometimes a product hits the market that makes us literally say “WTF!?” Today, that award goes to Lomography with their brand new Lomochrome Turquoise film. Based off of Lomochrome Purple (which was based off of Kodak Aerochrome) the company describes the film as taking warm colors and rendering them in shades of blue. But that’s not all. According to the company it is responsible for: “turning warm colors into varying shades of blues from aqua to cobalt, transforming greens into deep emerald shades, blue skies into a sunset and a crystal clear sea into a golden hue”

Essentially, it looks like a permanent cross process–which unless done correctly makes us want to cry and rub our eyes with fixer fluid.

The film is a brand new offering, and they’re expecting the first shipments of Lomography Lomochrome Turquoise to come in in April 2015. The film comes in packs of 5, 10, 15 and 20. They also have it available in 120 format and requires C-41 processing.But in our opinion, they’re a bit overpriced.

More images samples are after the jump.

[click to continue…]

Chris Gampat Bronica etrs and film 75mm f2.8 (1 of 1)ISO 2001-160 sec at f - 1.4

Back around the end of last year, PBS decided to do a small segment putting film against digital photography: a debate that’s been going on for years now. The segment put two Canon cameras up to shooting the same scene in many different scenarios. And without looking at the images at 100%, we can see that it’s quite tough to tell the difference between the two unless you have a trained and skilled set of eyes.

The video also brings up a better point that is only realized when you think deeper: real people and clients won’t sit there pixel peeping at your images. Instead, they’ll want to look at it as a whole. It also demonstrates the use of filters to make digital images look like film.

What it ultimately proves though is that telling the differences is really tough to do in some situations though in other situations film will also need much more careful work where digital is more forgiving. Of course, that statement only applies to color film and color digital. It would be interesting to put black and white film and digital up against one another. The video featuring Film vs Digital Photography is after the jump.

[click to continue…]

5 - Step 5 Final image

All images by Kasper Vandermaesen. Used with permission.

Photographer Kasper Vandermaesen ran into an interesting problem after taking his negatives to the lab and getting them back. Unfortunately, the lab forgot to scan one of the images. And as he told Reddit, he decided to get crafty.

“I’ve been shooting digital for the last couple of years, but film photography caught my attention when I saw what great results you could get with even a cheap analog camera. It sparked my motivation to shoot more, or must I say ‘less’, since it makes me visualize the shots in my mind first.” says Kasper. “Since I’m only up to my third roll of film, I haven’t yet invested in a scanner or macro lens to digitize my shots. I don’t even develop my own film (yet).”

As a result, Kasper figured that it would be cool to play with his iPhone 5 a bit. He fully knew it wouldn’t give him the resolution to hang on a wall, but he turned out very surprised by what he got. Mr. Vandermaesen tells us that the biggest loss in quality comes from the fact that he couldn’t focus close enough. “That got me thinking that a clip-on macro lens would boost the quality.”

Editor’s Correction: Kasper tells us that he didn’t actually use a macro lens.

[click to continue…]

Chris-Gampat-The-Phoblographer-Zeiss-21mm-f2.8-review-images-at-night-and-stuff-10-of-11ISO-3200-680x453

Back when I still had my photography training wheels and still mostly shot film, I developed this instinct to always change my aperture and shutter speed based on the environment. In New York, it’s not uncommon to walk from a building’s shadow to bright sunlight within a couple of feet. So instead of constantly relying on my metering then changing the settings, I would remember approximate values. This lead to me actually losing less opportunities to get the shot that I wanted instead of fumbling with my metering.

For a long time, I thought I was the only one who did it and I instilled that value into the rest of the site’s staff. But a video that I found on YouTube seems to reiterate exactly what I learned. A photographer wanted to use an old film camera that didn’t have a light meter. So what we had to do was learn the differences in the shadows and lighting then adapted his settings to the situation and location.

This is the simple concept behind the Sunny 16 rule, but it isn’t as exacting. Instead, you’ll get estimated values and you can then fix all the rest in post-production.

Check out the video after the jump.

[click to continue…]