File :-(, x, )
Playing with Efke Anonymous
This is a nice film. I tried the iso 25 with my f90x and a Metz hammerhead. Opinions? hemorrhoids?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareACD Systems Digital ImagingImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution4800 dpiVertical Resolution4800 dpiImage Created2007:11:30 23:53:10Image Width1279Image Height1191
>> des
>>96332
oh lawd is that sum FT2
Nicely grained, what developer did you use?
>> Anonymous
>>96338
Yep, It's an FT2 (good eye, there!). D76 full strength for 5mins 30 secs at 70F.
>> des^Woldfag
>>96365
picked it out from the thumb ;P
>> Not for you. Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>96374
Yes, but did you know that there were in all actuality TWO of them?

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareACD Systems Digital ImagingImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution4800 dpiVertical Resolution4800 dpiImage Created2007:12:01 10:26:06Image Width1024Image Height685
>> Anonymous
STOP WASTING NICE FILM
>> Anonymous
>>96572
Troll.
>> Anonymous
>>96580
no, no...its definitely wasting film
>> Anonymous
>>96582
definitely a troll.
>> Anonymous
>>96582
In fact, I'd say as a trollish attempt, you show negative numbers on a positive finite scale. Shit, you're not even a full troll.

You're a troll wannabe.
>> Anonymous
>>96677
no seriously, its wasting film. why would you take pictures of shit on your desk.
>> Anonymous
also, this could be seen as a case against the "film makes you think about what youre taking pictures of" camp
>> Anonymous
>>96679
It's simple. Why should one take a film that they're unfamiliar with and use it for a serious shoot?

A test roll is hardly a waste. Of course if you were anything of a photographer, amateur or otherwise, you'd know that. But since you're a sub-troll wannabe, all you can do is chimp away at anyone else that puts forth an effort to better understand the study of light and darkness.

Go take your pathetic attempts somewhere else.
>> Anonymous
wasting film OP here.
Using Efke to take pictures of a lame anime figure instead of that way more interesting camera is wasting film :P
>> Anonymous
>>96803
doesnt have to be a serious shoot, but could be something other than inside the house so you can see how the film performs in situations you would actually shoot for real.
>> Anonymous
>>96817
My film. My camera. My chemicals. My darkroom. My equipment.

Your funding or contributions: $0.00

Your opinion: $0.00

Anything else?
>> Anonymous
>>97307
Win
>> Anonymous
>>97307
lol wasting film AND time now. woot
>> Anonymous
>>97319
Speaking of getting out of the house sagefiend, do you ever leave the basement? You could be developing a bad case of fungus by now...
>> Anonymous
>>97597
nah, i have a spray bottle of fungicide here with me. also, nothing wrong with saging.
>> Anonymous
you guys are rank amateurs.

98% of making a good picture is wasting tons film just to get to that one good picture. jesus, you guys act like film could cure cancer or something. it's there to be used, to test ideas, etc. i'll freely admit that i waste about 90% of my frames, and that's on a good day. Usually I get one keeper out of every 36, maybe.

go take a photo 101 class, then come back and talk about wasting film.
>> Anonymous
>>97616
theres a difference between wasting film trying to get a shot, and just plain wasting film. and a sage because i love sage. it tastes delicious.
>> Anonymous
>>97618

just plain wasted = developed wrong, opened camera before reeling film, lost somewhere, run through x-ray machine, run over by paver.

wasted with a purpose = exposure, or even just a shutter release (intentional or not). focus, correct exposure, good composition not necessary. as long as you can learn from it, it's wasted towards an end.
>> Anonymous
how can you possibly acheive anything without giving it a try? as long as someone tries something out it will never be a waste! not of film and not of tine! even this thread has something to it!
>> Anonymous
>>97621
how is it with a purpose if its accidental?

>>97624
try it out on something useful!

DELICIOUS SAGE
>> Anonymous
>>97621
yeah, that's exactly what i meant b4.
>> Anonymous
>>97625

because new compositions might come out, focus, etc etc etc.

wasted with a purpose =/= wasted on purpose. it just means that if you can learn from a frame, then it's not wasted. period.
>> Anonymous
if we're just gonna randomly take photos with film to try and learn things from it, why dont we just use digital?
>> Anonymous
>>97633

why not use film?
>> Anonymous
>>97635
because one of the big arguments for film is it makes you "think and compose every shot" unlike digital where you can snap away
>> Anonymous
>>97636

fair enough. but my main argument was that as long as you learn something, you can't actually waste film completely. truth is, i kind of contradicted myself in that first post by saying that you can't waste film, yet that i waste film all the tiems. but don't tell anyone that.

so where you really want to be going is the cost issue. "because it's expensive, and digital is free" is a good start.
>> Anonymous
As long as you have the money there's no harm in using as much film for whatever purpose you want. If you're a little short on cash then that's when it is a problem.