(Part 2) Best products from r/analog

Here's my take on it:

• No. I think it's actually starting to see a small resurgence. And even if it wasn't, I think there's enough of an interest in the medium to keep it going for quite some time.
  
• Well, this is true -- you can get yourself a good starter SLR with a lens for $20, but the film is a recurring cost. You can minimize this, of course, by choosing your film carefully. Agfa Vista+ 200 comes in a 3-pack of 36-exposure rolls for $8.99. A 10-pack of 36-exposure rolls of Fuji Superia 400 averages out to $4.00 per roll. If you want to bulk load your film, 100 feet of Ilford HP5+ averages out to somewhere around $3.20 per 36-exposure roll. For developing, it depends on where you live. My local lab will just process the negatives (C-41 rolls) for $2.99, and I scan them at home. They charge $4.99 for B&W rolls. If you're interested in developing at home, these can be much cheaper. After ~$150 investment in equipment and chemicals, you can be developing your own B&W film (it's really not hard at all and does not require a darkroom) for around 30 cents per roll, or even less. Color film can also be developed at home, but it's a little more costly. Maybe around $2.00 per roll or less, depending on how much you reuse the chemicals.
  
• Shooting film is a great way to learn the basics of photography, because it's not doing everything for you! Digital cameras do so much of the heavy lifting, and there's so little drawback to the "spray & pray" mentality, that it's easy to get lazy. Shooting film makes you want to slow down and get it right the first time. That, in my opinion, is the best way to learn.
  
  Edit to add: Also keep in mind that the cost of process-only at the lab (or home development) requires that you have access to a scanner. It can't really be a standard scanner, it needs to be capable of transparencies. Cheap ones can be had on Amazon and the like, but good ones start at about $200. Some flatbeds support transparencies, but the lower end models (Epson v550, v600, Canon CanoScan 9000F mk II, etc) are not going to provide great results (though they will be good enough for web use and small prints). Of course, the labs will do the scanning for you, but this makes it more expensive.

Light meter: just my .02, but eventually get past phone meters and get an incident meter - for portraits, incident has always worked best for me. Sekonic 308 ($200ish) or a used Minolta Autometer III or IV - those were the pro standard for fashion and portraits when new.

If you use a phone meter but want incident readings, try a popup gray card and have the subject hold it in front of their face for a reading. At least you know you're getting an accurate reading vs. thinking what zone you want to put the skin on.

The RZ for portraits - 110 is nice, but get a 180mm as soon as possible - simply a glorious portrait lens. I used it for years as my primary fashion/people lens, lots of handheld with the RB - the RZ lens is very similar in rendering and mojo. The 250mm is also pretty glorious and man - compression, DOF... sexy mojo machine and often really cheap for the ass-kicking it can deliver (RB 250's go as low as $80-$100). You can also use RB lenses on the RZ if you want to get some good glass and find a deal.

I might try to do this, too. I'm just a photo student, but I have a decent amount of experience critiquing photos and being critiqued. (The photo program I'm in is small, the classes are smaller, and we're all essentially friends honestly critiquing each other so I like to think I've gotten good at critiques.)

And, you know, you're totally right about the lackluster bodies of work. I actually downvoted a couple people in here who are now kinda complaining about downvotes (but not whining, so respect to them). I went through. And one of the people I downloaded posted… an unedited contact sheet. But like, just that. Didn't ask for help editing. Didn't point out the photos they liked.

Just posted the contact sheet.

That's… lazy. Contact sheets are generally, just, they aren't 24 or 36 super amazing photos. Even in Magnum Contact Sheets, you generally only see a keeper or two per sheet. And these are largely super famous sheets.

Do you know that photo of the cloud of white butterflies engulfing a downed satellite? Pretty fucking amazing. Now look at (part of) the contact sheet.

It isn't enough to just… shoot film. I actually like this subreddit a lot. I haunt it more than daily. I plan to post more to it as I gain access to a scanner again. But, you know, just 'cause you're doing something uniquely analog, or just shooting film, doesn't mean what you're doing is all that interesting. Shit. I don't know. I want people to post! I do, I really do. But we don't have a community and there's just a bit too much saturated/unsaturated tumblr.com or 500px.com trendy trite. :/

can't really go wrong with new lenses, especially if they wont add too much extra bulk to all your gear, like the 35, but you could also spend that money on extra film and/or processing. also good to maybe have a small flash handy, you never know.

i travel pretty often, usually with a ton of gear and film, i would say carrying cases and bags are most important when traveling to protect your gear, and to stay organized so you dont accidentally leave stuff behind. try not to over pack though, could just get in the way of things.

as far as protecting your film, they say as long as its slower than 800, it should be fine in the carryon xray machines. never put undeveloped film in your checkins, the xrays used for checked luggage are much stronger, and will def ruin your film. i've never really had a problem with running film through a carry on xray screening, but if you really really want to, you can ask for handscreening of your film, most tsa will oblige actually, especially if you ask nicely, not so much in other countries outside the US. as an extra precaution, i usually travel with my film in a lead lined film bag, just in case, it's also handy for making sure i have all my rolls in one place. i use this one: http://www.amazon.com/Domke-711-15B-Large-Filmguard-Black/dp/B00009USZ5/ also comes in other sizes. hope that helped somewhat.

safe travels, and happy shooting.

Bostick and Sullivan is a good resource for chemistry.

For learning technique, it really depends on what processes you are interested in. I would recommend this book for learning about a lot of different processes.

Most processes are contact-printing processes, so a lot of your results will also be 4x5. There are some exceptions, such as Bromoil and Mordançage, however, that work on enlarged silver gelatin prints. Most of the contact-printing processes require ultraviolet light sources.

Edit: For something like wet plate collodion, you're looking at a very particular set of esoteric practices and variables that will affect your success rate. Since the materials themselves are expensive, you may find it very beneficial to attend a workshop hosted by a professional wet plate shooter if you wish to be successful.

Yes! I forgot to add this. I bought the V600. It's $200, but it's pretty nice. You can get nice, cheap, compact ones too, but I had used this before, so I was more comfortable shelling out the extra cash for it.

I just recently got into DSLR scanning, so maybe take my advice with a grain of salt, but I absolutely love this light pad I got: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B072ND9W9V

I'm sure it's not super well color balanced or anything, but color balance is easy to correct in photoshop. I love this thing so much because it is perfectly diffused. No idea how it works and how it's so small, but I can't spot any vignetting of any sort, any hot spots, and unlike a simple iPad or something like that, you can focus on this thing and it will be pure white with no detectable grain or other features that will mess up a scan. I'm able to put my negative flat directly on it, and aside from some a very small number (ie, maybe 2 out of every 36 scans) I have absolutely no problems with it. I do recommend lifting the film off of it a tiny bit to avoid the newton ring problem, but really it's a great light source, and it gets BRIGHT. I usually use it on the second highest setting because the highest setting can sometimes wash out the shadows.

just as a sweet little biz case to see how far home development gets you.

let's say you want to keep it at colour. right now 36 shots cost you $11. with the little upfront investment you need to go home development (about $100) you can go quite far.

two minutes of an amazon search gets you to $2.80 per roll of 36. this 2L C41 kit costs $50 and should be yielding you at least 30 films if done correctly. assuming you have any kind of digital camera and a computer screen you can scan for internet size publishing just fine.

so that means you are now at $4.47 per roll (and that's not even pushing it with bulk loading and larger liquid developing kits), which would mean you'd have paid off your $100 startup investment after 15 films.

on top of that, it's really really easy to develop film at home, as long as you take care of yourself and the people you live with by NOT doing this in the kitchen and making sure you work cleanly.

A light pad works best. They can be had for pretty cheap. This is the one I have. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00J3NRAV2/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1415550650&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40
It distributes the light perfectly. I find dslr scans so much clearer and actually prefer it over a devoted scanner! Just take your time and get a system down.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM is a much better lens than the 1.4.

Personally if you're looking for just primes and not a zoom lens, I'd snag a 40mm STM for street photography/general walk around and a 85mm f/1.8 for portrait work and skip the 50. You can buy them used for cheaper with warranties from places like BH Photo or Adorama. If you need anything specialized like a 600mm for a project, just rent it from any lens rental company.

If you want an off camera flash for portrait work, these work great. Fully ETTL II compatible, it does all the flash power calculations for you automagically, even wirelessly. You can have up to like 24 of them or something crazy, all controlled by the camera.

Easiest option is to ziplock bag all your film, which is probably what you should do if storing it in a fridge anyway. But honestly, unless you're putting your film through particularly adverse conditions it'll probably be fine just kept away from direct sun in a camera bag or something similar.

I've got one of these manfrottos that I quite like, it's nice and compact and pretty lightweight. Slightly out of your budget. I can't remember the name, but there are a couple of cheaper alternatives that would be fine too. Be warned though, stability is definitely not what you get compared to a full size tripod, especially when fully extended.

If you have an inkjet printer you can print your own enlarged negatives for contact printing. Get your negatives scanned, adjust the tone curves in the scans for cyanotype printing, invert the positive scans to negatives again, then print the adjusted negatives onto transparency film.

GIMP is a great free image manipulation tool. Here is how to create a digital negative in GIMP, with wild-guess contrast adjustments.

Here are concise instructions specifically for cyanotype with better info on tweaking contrast.

Freestyle has more comprehensive instructions for developing a custom contrast curve for your setup.

Coming into Focus, edited by John Barnier, is a guide to many alternative printing processes and has a couple of chapters on making digital negatives for alternative processes.

If you want to dive deep, there is Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing by Dan Burkholder and his newer eBook Inkjet Negative Companion

EDIT: Forgot a link

I've been looking at prices for developing and it seems like it's going to be too much for me. I decided to just start developing on my own but I'm not sure where to start with the chemicals. Right now I'm shooting with Kodak Good 200 and after some googling I know i need some c-41. Would this be the only thing i need? Also after looking at some YouTube videos, it seems like there using more than just one chemical. What are the other ones?

I love contact sheets! Looking through mine really brings me back to the time I took the pictures.

Also, check this book out. It's massive, probably the highest density of photography-per-page and by far my favorite photo-related book.

what are your choices for compact + lightweight for backpacking/hikes and a tripod for road trips, where size/weight doesn't matter.

Seems like price jumps quite a lot from aluminum to carbon.

If I'm just getting into incorporating a tripod to my workflow, should I get a cheap amazon basic tripod or manfrotto befree/mefoto roadtrip or gitzo traveler.

Gitzo seems to be an overkill for me, but just wanted to see your perspective. I rather invest than buy a cheap one that'll break on me and be wasteful. Mamiya 7 + 65 isn't too heavy- does that mean it'll do just fine with sub-range tripods rather than heavy duty built ones like gitzo?

The only thing I have experience with and can recommend is either scanning with your dslr or getting a flatbed scanner like this one. Go for either Canon or Epson ones. You may find some used or refurbished ones for less if you're okay with buying used stuff.

I bought one of these and I'm quite happy with it: http://smile.amazon.com/Huion-L4S-Tracing-Powered-Active/dp/B00J3NRAV2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1464504055&sr=8-4&keywords=light+table

Scanning is costly, yeah. If you shoot a roll a week or more, it's a no-brainer, cause you'll make back your costs on what you save in paying for lab scans pretty quick. If you shoot less than that, "it depends".

If you're just shooting 35mm, a used Plustek is a great way to go, or even a new one if you want a warranty. If you also shoot medium format, I'd look for a used Epson V700 or higher; I wouldn't bother with the lower number Epson flatbeds; the resolution just isn't enough for me to make it worth the hassle of scanning.

If you already have a DSLR or other interchangeable lens camera, and especially if you already have a macro lens for it, you can also try DSLR scanning. Even if you don't have a camera, you can get set up for around $500-700 depending on what you need to buy. If I had to do it from scratch here's what I'd get.

• Nikon D3200 (24mp) and 40mm f/2.8 macro (really sharp lens) -- used $300
  
• For 35mm scanning: Nikon ES-2 film holder -- new $140
  
• For 120 scanning: Lomography Digitaliza film holder -- new $35
  
• LED tracing pad for backlighting -- new $23
  
• Cheap tripod and ballhead (tons of these on amazon) -- new $66
  
• Rocket blower -- new $10
  
• Cotton gloves 25pk -- new $24
  
• Adobe Lightroom + Photoshop package -- $10/month
  
• Negative Lab Pro lightroom plugin license -- $99 one-time
  
  So all in that's everything you need for DLSR scanning, and it comes to $707 plus the ongoing LR subscription. You could cut the cost a lot if you already own some of those things, or by using a cheaper 35mm holder than the Nikon ES-2, such as a 35mm-sized Digitaliza, or rigging up an older Nikon ES-1. You also don't need NLP and Lightroom; you could get away with free software like the GIMP. You might also be able to find a cheaper tripod at a yardsale or thrift store that will work fine, but they can be clunkier than modern ones.
  
  All that is why people say "if you already have a camera" with DSLR scanning. Otherwise, why not just get a brand new Plustek 8100i AI for $490 and get about the same level of image quality for less money, or even less with a used model. So, it kind of depends on your personal situation.

I don't suppose that it's possible to use a different software instead of Silverfast? Or do all scanned images have to go through the Silverfast software first?

Edit: Also, how would you say a scanner like that compares to one such as this?

https://www.amazon.com/Tracing-AGPtek%C2%AE-Artcraft-Sketching-Animation/dp/B00YA9GP0G

Yeah, I had ordered a V600. I did some research and decided to cancel the order and buy the light table and a tripod for it. The scans are a pain to learn, but once it's learned, they are 100% better looking.

I have an older version of this:

https://www.amazon.com/Epson-Perfection-Negative-Document-Scanner/dp/B002OEBMRU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1494538591&sr=8-1&keywords=epson+film+scanner

You need to get a film holder as well (if it doesn't come with it):
https://www.amazon.com/Epson-Perfection-V600-Negative-Positive/dp/B011Z47MCI/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1494538591&sr=8-7&keywords=epson+film+scanner


Basically - they're a regular flatbed scanner, but instead of having the light shine from below (for documents), they also have another light above that shines down through the film to illuminate it.

I've heard that Magnum's Contact Sheets is really incredible.

I'm gonna start developing for the first time in a couple of weeks, any tips for first timers? Also, I've been looking at this V600 for my scanning needs, so any thoughts?

The Epson V600 is a go to for home scanning. I'm going to be picking up one myself in the near future.

I have a cheap lightbox from Amazon, which I setup on a table. I use a large Vanguard tripod which has a tilt-head so I can hang the camera directly over the lightbox. I level both the lightbox and the camera with a small bubble level.

I'm using an OMD EM5 (mk 1), with the Olympus 60mm macro lens. I turn off IS, switch to manual focus, manual exposure, f8.0. I use the 2 second self timer to avoid camera shake.

I've been laying the negatives down with a piece of glass to hold them flat, but it is causing me some issues, and I've been advised to ditch the glass and rig up another way to keep the negatives flat. Sounds reasonable, but I don't have a good solution in place yet.

While shooting I use the MF magnification option to set focus, and check it every few negatives in case I bumped something. Using f8 gives you a little latitude there. I turn the histogram on and make sure that my exposure is right in the middle - this gives you density correction because you can just keep making the shutter speed longer to let as much light through the dense negative as you want.

In processing, I crop in photoshop to the image boundaries, then use the photoshop actions from this blog post, which work very nicely. I then export a TIFF (LZW compression, no layers), and import into Lightroom for final cleanup, exposure tweaking, and dust removal.

Then, put that shit on instagram.

I'm new to the film scanning side of it, but I've been doing macro capture for other scenarios for a long time, and this method is quick and easy to setup. Took about 30 minutes including fiddling-around time and setup to scan through two rolls of 120 film the other day.