File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
good evening /p/eople,
i recently got my granddad's old analog camera and found out that all my lenses work on that one.

also, i'm going to chernobyl in a couple of weeks and thought i'd bring his old analog one as well as my digital. but i need some film for it.
do you have any tips on what film i should get? is there any cheap film that would give a nice effect to the photos?
should i get b/w film?
>> Liska !!LIVFOETqL8j
>>165653

i love ilford xp because it gives a fun pinkish tint to everything :-)
>> Even_Steven !!rUmVORA7JiP
Kodak Tri-X 400 for B&W
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
...how cliched is b&w for chernobyl? Then again, depending on the weather, it may be better than color.
>> Anonymous
Are you talking about Chernobyl, as in the radioactive cesspool next to the Ukraine. I wouldn't recommend shooting film, because the radioactivity will damage your pictures, especially at an ISO higher than 200. Oh, and stay away from any local produce, especially the mushrooms, which tend to collect abnormal amounts of radioactivity from the soil. Oh, and good luck on your new tail, third eye, and terminal leukemia.
>> Anonymous
Film is subjective, just like lenses, etc. Get a bunch and try them out, or start punching names of films into Flickr. Ones not mentioned yet here include Fomapan, Velvia, Ektachrome, Kodachrome, Efke, T-Max, Porta. There are, of course, others, but those are just off the top of my head. Google for information, Flickr for samples.
>> Anonymous
>>165880
Hey smart guy,
Chernobyll is not safe for people or film.
"Twenty-two years after the world's worst nuclear accident, radiation danger at Chernobyl is still so severe that a 16-mile area remains sealed - reached only through two checkpoints"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/31/eveningnews/main3984592.shtml
>> Anonymous
>>165888
I think he means that in the places where it's safe for humans it's also safe for film.
>> Anonymous
>>165890
Read the God-Damned article you moron. I posted it for your education and convenience.
Chernobyl is not safe for people, not anywhere. I
>> Even_Steven !!rUmVORA7JiP
>>165893

Did you read it?

>CBS News correspondent Bill Plante was allowed inside with a camera crew.

Its too dangerous to stay there for any length of time, but a short visit is "safe"
>> Anonymous
don't go for any colour film you can't get processed easily (kodachrome)

get some hp5 and some portra nc. done deal.
>> Anonymous
Film cameras are analog cameras, the photo on film is an "analog" of the scene, much like the grooves on a record. What I'm pissed at though is kids referring to film as analog simply because it's not digital.

Newsflash, digital photos were analog as the sensor read them but are converted to digital when made RAW and of course JPEG. The only completely digital camera is printscreen.
>> Anonymous
>>166469
Because mailing a package to Kansas is so hard?

Kodachrome is no harder to mail off and get developed than any other slide film. More expensive, but not more difficult.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>166480
Er. Mailing film *is* more difficult than taking it to a local place. I'm not saying it's an insurmountable hurdle requiring herculean effort, but getting an appropriate mailer, filling out the form for Dwayne's, addressing the envelope and taking it to the post office (or figuring out how many stamps you need to mail something that's not just a flat envelope) isn't as easy as handing it to a lab tech and saying "E6 plz kthx"

(Assuming you've got a lab that'll do slides in your area, of course)
>> Anonymous
E6 is not archival. After about 3-5 years the color layers degrade (and fixing it in Photoshop is not fun). Kodachrome is forever.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>166499
Scans of E6 are forever, though.

Also: Kodachrome isn't forever either. It fades, too. Just on a much, much larger time scale.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>166501
(Caveat: Scans of E6 only guaranteed while Society hasn't fallen. Kodachrome has a definite advantage if human civilization collapses)
>> Anonymous
>>166499
Where on earth did you get 3-5 years? The archival life of most E-6 films is 20-50 years. I personally have Ektachrome and Velvia slides that are ten years old and look as good as the day they were processed.

>>166477Film cameras are analog cameras, the photo on film is an "analog" of the scene, much like the grooves on a record.
No, it isn't. Film records discrete elements, just like pixels on a digital sensor. The word analog, with respect to engineering, refers to something that measures or records a continuous spectrum of data. Film does not, a grain is either silver halide or atomic silver, just like a pixel is either on or off.
>> Anonymous
>>165653
From what ive heard you need to ask in advance if you want to visit the reactor building or any area near the reactor. Otherwise youll just get to see the Prypiat. Also ask them to take you to the site where most of the rescue vehicles are located. Insane sight helicopters trucks etc side by side.

For the film id take Tri-X 400 and Superia 400 & 1600. Tri-X can easily be pushed if and when you need to shoot inside.

Search flickr for photos of the places they take tourist since it will be guided tour. They wont allow any visitors to just wonder around the city.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>166550
>Film does not, a grain is either silver halide or atomic silver, just like a pixel is either on or off.
Once you've developed the film, maybe, but which grains flip to exposed and which go to unexposed is still fungible up until the point when you pour in the fixer--if you leave the developer in for longer, it'll change the cutoff point.

Your argument is like saying that live music isn't analog because it's all just ones and zeros once it's recorded and pressed onto a CD.
>> Anonymous
>>165904
The article said the film crew had to leave after 10 minutes of exposure. That doesnt sound like a long time to me either. Ive heard that he rivers in the Ukraine glow at night.
>> Anonymous
>>167834Ive heard that he rivers in the Ukraine glow at night.

That is highly unlikely. Not all radioactive things glow in the visible spectrum, and most of the ones that do only do it under water. Even then, it takes a whole lot of radiation and the light is pretty dim. Unless Ukraine's rivers are rich in phosphorous in addition to the radioactive dust floating in the water, it's likely that you've heard a wives tale.
>> Anonymous
http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chernobyl%2Drevisited/