hertz

Lives in United States San Francisco, CA, United States
Works as a IT
Joined on Apr 13, 2005

Comments

Total: 21, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Buying Trash helps creativity, says VSCO (18 comments in total)

I liked their film simulation plug-ins for Lightroom. Bought some. Who would have thought VSCO will turn them into trash.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2020 at 22:33 UTC as 9th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

marc petzold: Since Acros (II) is way over the top expensive, at least into Germany, here are my Film 135mm Tips:

1) Agfa APX 100 (best Price-to-Performance Ratio) i use it pushed @ASA 200
2) the iconic Kodak TX-400/Tri-X 400 - need i to say more? my fave #1 B&W Film
3) Ilford XP2 Super - still great, cheap C41 Process
4) Ilford HP5, or Delta 100 - also Iconic Films, great.
5) Formapan - Pan-F 50/100 enough said. :)

Good Light, and a fine Weekend !

Fuji Acros is a tabular grain film and directly comparable to Kodak T-Max and Ilford Delta only in grain/sharpness/tonality. They are all good, but imho Acros holds an edge. The rest are traditional films with very different image. xp2 is low contrast good for scanning on chip scanners and challenging for dark room prints.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2020 at 16:20 UTC

Because of this adapter announcement, I'm upgrading from A99 to A7R4. My journey from Minolta film days continues. I can't remember now how many times A mount was pronounced dead in past 20 years.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2020 at 18:18 UTC as 24th comment
In reply to:

hertz: Is it possible to have just one level of magnification for focus assist with Sony cameras? So to be it like when an assigned button pressed once - magnified view, pressed again - back to normal view (not to the next level of magnification).

@Brendan R Thank you! Indeed "AF in magnification" does it.

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2020 at 16:14 UTC
In reply to:

hertz: Is it possible to have just one level of magnification for focus assist with Sony cameras? So to be it like when an assigned button pressed once - magnified view, pressed again - back to normal view (not to the next level of magnification).

@Thoughts, half press shutter goes back to normal view using native lens, but does not with adopted manual lenses I have. Is there a specific setting for that?

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2020 at 16:03 UTC

Is it possible to have just one level of magnification for focus assist with Sony cameras? So to be it like when an assigned button pressed once - magnified view, pressed again - back to normal view (not to the next level of magnification).

Link | Posted on Oct 1, 2020 at 15:28 UTC as 41st comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

FujifilmXT3: Just goes to show you how bad film is compared to digital. Pretty horrible images

I have to agree. Not an example of good film handling. Could be a result of taking it through multiple airport scanners. Traveling? take a digital cam.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2020 at 05:32 UTC
In reply to:

Peter CS: I think this challenge is interesting, but makes little sense. With the current high cost of film, processing, scanning and/or printing, shooting one roll of film usually surpasses this low budget. While some may get lucky on occasion, I think a decent, semi-reliable camera with a o.k. lens below $100 is much more realistic. I will list a few I have successfully purchased within that budget not too long ago: Pentax zx-6 with 28-90mm Pentax zoom, Nikkormat FT-N with 50mm f2 Nikon lens. Olympus XA, Minolta Hi-Matic with 38mm f2.8, and Olympus OM-G with 50mm f1.8 Zuiko MC., Olympus OM20 with 35mm f2.8 Zuiko. There have been a few others, but these are the ones that are still working today. My final thought is, film photography is no longer a budget pursuit, so while it might be fun to find a super deal, your chances of finding one may be a frustrating endeavor and - based on my significant experience - more likely to be a camera with issues, especially if it is a plastic build.

Film doesn't have to be expensive. Specifically b/w. It is still sold in bulk - 100' rolls. DYI B/W is cheap and straightforward too. Resulting in cost of about 8c per shot.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 17:04 UTC

This was my first "serious" camera back in a day. I've owned plenty of Minolta film/dslrs and Sonys later. Still A-mount user. Minolta AF lens line has plenty of gems. Rebought two Maxxum 5s two years back for redundancy $5 each. Fun fact - you can use modern Sony SSM lenses on it with full AF support.

Link | Posted on Sep 18, 2020 at 16:24 UTC as 42nd comment | 4 replies

Nice photography and work with light on first frames in the gallery.

Link | Posted on Dec 7, 2018 at 16:27 UTC as 40th comment
In reply to:

hertz: Computational photography will displace traditional digital photography from consumer space. Very soon. Like the later displaced traditional chemical photography. The process will be accompanied with holly wars online on whats Better and whats True. But the dust will settle and 10 years from now a guy with DSLR would be called hipster.

@Becksvart
There are more interesting things available with computational photography then just simulating whats already available with DSLRs. Likewise simulating film grain or it's color response is not the most interesting part of digital photography. Potentially available things like altering a point of view in order to move those annoying light poles which tend to always grow out of peoples heads. Or altering scenes lighting to a taste direct/soft/morning/etc lightning conditions. It's not necessary a matter of altering things in the picture but the way a scene is represented - composition and lighting or what distinguishes a good picture from a snapshot.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2018 at 21:27 UTC

Computational photography will displace traditional digital photography from consumer space. Very soon. Like the later displaced traditional chemical photography. The process will be accompanied with holly wars online on whats Better and whats True. But the dust will settle and 10 years from now a guy with DSLR would be called hipster.

Link | Posted on Dec 4, 2018 at 16:33 UTC as 132nd comment | 7 replies
On article Video: Shallow depth-of-field is overrated (161 comments in total)

Yes, bokeh is overrated. It looks fascinating on light emitting displays like computer monitors, tablets etc. But printed on paper it is like "what the hell is it?" Even more weird on b&w prints.

Link | Posted on Oct 29, 2018 at 15:21 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies

Film Leica's are still operational and relevant after decades since their release. This one will turn dead brick few years down the road once the current generation of smartphones become obsolete.

Link | Posted on Oct 24, 2018 at 14:47 UTC as 268th comment
In reply to:

hertz: I wish innovation in film came in a form of new emulsions easier for home processing than existing mass volume oriented C-41/RA-4. Or at least in a form of new processors for existing tech.

New film camera? I have 8 already. Nothing appeals in this one really.

All this "new" color films still use the same c41 process developed back in 1972. Consumer color photo paper is in decline. It uses equally old ra-4 process. I believe your are just trolling me here. I will not respond to the same nonsense here anymore.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

hertz: I wish innovation in film came in a form of new emulsions easier for home processing than existing mass volume oriented C-41/RA-4. Or at least in a form of new processors for existing tech.

New film camera? I have 8 already. Nothing appeals in this one really.

I don't understand your point. I'm saying there have being zero effort in analog photo process RnD in the last few decades and your counter argument is about _digital_ printing [ sic ].

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 17:44 UTC
In reply to:

hertz: I wish innovation in film came in a form of new emulsions easier for home processing than existing mass volume oriented C-41/RA-4. Or at least in a form of new processors for existing tech.

New film camera? I have 8 already. Nothing appeals in this one really.

@absquatulate. Nonsense. Name Ilford color FB paper. Ilford does not produce color paper at all for analog photography. Sure they make paper for inkjet digital printers. The problem here is that people shooting color film don't even understand how it's processed. The fact is it is scanned and digitally printed in a lab. Which diminishes the whole purpose of shooting film in a first place.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 07:43 UTC
In reply to:

hertz: I wish innovation in film came in a form of new emulsions easier for home processing than existing mass volume oriented C-41/RA-4. Or at least in a form of new processors for existing tech.

New film camera? I have 8 already. Nothing appeals in this one really.

B&W is all set. I'm talking about color. All what's left available for home development are few brands of press c-41 (film) kits and few ra-4 (paper) kits which are essentially identical and produced by the same company for which it's a side business. There is even no fiber based color paper available. There has being 0 (zero) development in the field of process/chemistry for analog photography in the last few decades. I tend to believe all research and know-how have being lost by now.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 07:26 UTC

I wish innovation in film came in a form of new emulsions easier for home processing than existing mass volume oriented C-41/RA-4. Or at least in a form of new processors for existing tech.

New film camera? I have 8 already. Nothing appeals in this one really.

Link | Posted on Nov 8, 2017 at 00:00 UTC as 87th comment | 12 replies

Each cartridge gives 36 exposures and costs $5.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 14:41 UTC as 311th comment | 3 replies
Total: 21, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »