So what's been going on... let's see, I turned off my internet to save a boatload of money and I've started carrying my camera with me some more. It's great! I'm actually playing gamecube games and cleaning my apartment, just like a responsible adult might if they liked Zelda games.
I don't know. Not much is happening, it's been a kind of slow time in my life. Sorry about that... Soon, it should cool down and I ought to be able to post more because I'll have to go outside to entertain myself.
it's yellow
ReplyDeleteon green
with dew
and blown-out highlights
turned off your internet? that doesn't sound fun. i'm hunting more bandwidth, but it's about time based on the 1.5m/768k that i've had for most of a decade. what was the occasion/motivation?
i've been cleaning out the computer and camera junk collection - and adding 1 item to each. few more of each to go and i'll hit break-even on $$ and have fewer but nicer toys. i'm REALLY trying to do the 2-camera thing, but i can't seem to get past the 3-camera thing on the way down. oops. effectively trading one big/loud one for a bigger/louder one tho - shutter/mirror has been described as sounding 'like someone falling down a flight of stairs'. how can you not love that?
-GMT
I'm in the same boat as GMT, I need a faster connection than my 1.5 down dsl. Unfortunately, despite being in a populated area, ATT/Bellsouth can get me more, and I'm sure as heck not going back to the tragedy of the commons on cable after my 10% uptime in Birmingham.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to try and shoot five whole rolls of Koadchrome this weekend, since I want to get them in before the December no more processing cluster f that is impending.
Josh
what josh said about kodachrome - i've got one last roll sitting around, waiting. if i keep with the master plan for cleaning out spare toys, i'll be down to ONE 35mm camera to use it in in about a week even! anyone want a konica hexar af silver with silent mode enabled? wicked little toy, but the lens just isn't my thing, sadly enuff. common sense says i should keep it, but other than the occasional wedding or museum or such it never gets used. the leica shutter is louder, but i can prob get away with it most anywhere, and i really like the look of the 50 i've got for it.
ReplyDeleteas for bandwidth, i've got a few needs for fixed IP, so it makes it a bitch to shop for. i'm thinking FIOS entry level business service, something like 15 down, 5 up, but only 1 address.
-GMT
I was really happy with the quality of service on fios, but when I considered having an internet phone and needing the extra 55 dollars a month, the choice was clear. A little unfortunate, to be sure, but I'm hopeful cyanogenmod (android 2.2) has a working camera soon so I can run that and compose text on my phone with a bluetooth keyboard.
ReplyDeleteStraight nerd thuggin'.
I still need to bleed off my one roll of kodachrome. I should do that this month.
I do have to say this yellow-on-green isn't as good as the one from early last year, but I do still like it despite that. Plus like I said, at least I used my camera!
I think you'd be happy with fios; in a year with it, it let me down one time, and that was because the shared interface box in the basement was bad and they fixed that within two weeks of my install date.
ReplyDeleteyeah, pretty sure it's gonna be FIOS, still have the issue of living with 1 fixed IP instead of 2, and what to do about the home phone number. can't afford their service for it, so i'm gonna see if there's a cheapish VOIP provider i can port a verizon residential number to. any ideas?
ReplyDelete-GMT
Last five rolls of Kodachrome went to Dwayne's yesterday. Used it all on a family vacation, excepting a few slides of my Mexipedium xerophyticum in bloom. Good thing it was sunny, since 25 and 64 speed film is a bear to work with without a tripod otherwise.
ReplyDeleteIf you've got some kodachrome, shoot it now, because processing stops in December.
I'm hoping to get the pacemaker out some this fall with some color film, now that I know the lens isn't totally uncoated for color use, or at least, it works with color acceptably.
josh -
ReplyDeleteuncoated lenses work for color, they're just... different? as i recall, kodachrome itself predates the practice of coating lenses becoming common. you should see the after-the-fact coating job on my '31 vintage Leica 73mm, it's pretty craptastic looking (nice bloom to it in the center) but works great for what it is.
understood on both lower speed film and kodachrome needing done soon. i've got one roll left, and it's probably next-up in the old Leica. if all goes well, that'll be my only 35mm camera soon - know anyone who wants a wicked-nice-condition Hexar AF? on the slower-film-is-a-pain front, i'm on frame 11 of a roll of ektachrome 100 220 - in a pentax 6x7! let's just say the vibration makes the hasselblad seem smooth and subtle, so higher shutter speeds are a must. that said, it's definitely my happy new medium format rig, with the Hassy and possibly the Yashica 124g up for sale.
funny thing how this 'cutting down the collection' tends to involve quite the resort in the process.... that said, the IIIf and 67II make quite the 'little camera, big camera' pair.
family vacation.... i think i need a non-family vacation, as we never get those. not that family vacations are bad, but you know how it goes.
-GMT
Some of the Kodak lenses that were used for Graflex cameras were apparently really awful with color, and some other lenses were okay. My Optar was in a group that spanned the coatings addition, so it was unclear if it was uncoated, coated but not for color, or coated for color use. I tested it with some slide film, and although the response was somewhat muted 1950s Kodachrome indoors on Fuji slide film, it thing that was a lighting incompatibility, and not the lens. I've never used it for color outdoors.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as it cools off and my film holders are sent down from NY, I hope to get it out some with black and white and sunny/16 again, as that was a blast a few years back.
yeah, i've always though a 4x5 press camera would be fun, but i haven't quite justified the expense in my world - relatively cheap cameras, but much more expensive per-shot than even my 6x7, and even tho i could track one down for a reasonable price, i don't have the space for a 4x5 enlarger. i'll 'settle' for the monster pentax and my old beseler 23c and 67s for big prints. enjoy it tho, definitely cool toys, and way more functional than people care to believe when they see you with one.
ReplyDelete-GMT
Why bother with an enlarger? You can make four contact prints at a decent size a piece on one 8x10 sheet. If you need an 8x10, just send it out. You'd probably never justify back the cost of an enlarger, since you just can't shoot that much film that way.
ReplyDeleteThe cost per exposure sucks, unless you stick to self developed cheap black and white film fro the educational market, like Arista or something. But the resolution will practically make you poop a brick.
Plus, even a press camera like a Graflex has limited movements, which open up a whole new perspective. Mine cost around $300 from a reputable reseller. Add a few film holders and you are good to go.
That wouldn't help with culling the collection, however. My gear is trimmed down to just by Canon gear and the pacemaker. My biggest problem is finding something to photograph around here.
josh -
ReplyDeleteyeah, like i said, i've thought about it. enlargers are cheap - i've passed on perfectly decent 4x5 setups for like $100, which would certainly handle my 6x7, 6x6, and 35mm stuff just fine as well. in some cases i can even use the negative carriers i've already got for the 23c, so it HAS been tempting to just pick up a beseler 4x5 to do it all. then again, even though they don't share carriers, i have both condenser and diffusion enlargers right now, in about the same space as one 4x5 setup, so it's all good. understood as well on the film size - that's why i'm switching from the 6x6 hasselblad to the 6x7 pentax. for big 'normal' format enlargements the pentax is much closer to the 4x5 planet than a rectangular crop from 6x6, plus i get a 'normal' handling camera with eye-level viewing and amazingly enough both a meter AND aperature priority AE!
figure a 4x5 field camera of some sort might be in my future, but it'll probably coincide with a larger/dedicated darkroom and a better film budget. oh yeah - and alot more patience for film handling! roll film is just a BIT more convenient that sheet film, yah?
-GMT
I can't believe how hard it is getting to find 4x5 slide film in the varieties I want! You have to search all of the major retailers to find one that carries what you want, in the package and amount you want. Guess I'll settle on Provia 100f, since it is the easiest to source. I'm just glad I don't shoot 8x10, since that is even harder to find and get processed.
ReplyDeleteI'm hoping that some of those folks playing with making their own films and film making machines develop a color film.
Strike that... I can't believe how hard it is to find filters for this camera more so than film! I need a polarizer, but the camera uses either a slip on series vi filter, or a 36mm threaded filter of unknown connectivity. If you've ever tried to deal with series filters, they are stupidly hard to find and make sure are correct.
ReplyDeletejosh -
ReplyDeletei've got a '31 vintage Leica Hektor 7.3cm/f1.9 - don't tell me about oddball filters! i've got a correct hood for it, but a crap non-original lens cap i'd like a proper replacement for. the best bet with series filters is to get an adapter, or get one you can knock the glass out of and either screw or epoxy a 'normal' filter to to make your own.
want stranger than that? it seems the local Penn Camera had a pair of less-than common screwmount Leica bodies this weekend. the IIIg was one thing - perfect working order and it looked close to new. reasonable - for what it is - price even. it's the cheaper of the two that caught my interest. they claim it o be a IIIck 'sharkskin'. well used, obviously sitting for awhile, some crud in the viewfinder, but probably pretty functional. thing is, there newer was a IIIck sharkskin. the shutter release collar isn't right for a IIIc, but they screw off so it's an easy thing to swap. still tho, again, there were no IIIck sharkskins.
so, when was the last time you saw a 1945 vintage, US Army issue, Leica IIIck that has been stripped of it's original grey paint and chromed after-the-fact, with a later sharkskin vulcanite covering on what is likely the original shell? with the original 1945 vintage K-stamped shutter curtain even. yeah, they really knew what they had there. not.
-GMT