Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Ordinal M.
About
Posts

I also made a Google+ post for the first time in a million years. I see it's gone full algorithmic round here and everything is in a stupid order.

There are a lot of things that annoy me about web developers but the idea that they know better than I do what I want to read is definitely near the top. Oh but I expect it's algorithms. Well that changes everything; if it's algorithms I must just be wrong about what I want to read and in what order.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I made a blog post for the first time in a million years, with some digital samples from the Polaroid SNAP and a few thoughts about how it's better for journalling than the Instax, though I generally prefer Instax.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
(something I posted on a Flickr group but thought I'd post here as well, about the new Instax Square, which has turned out to be a digital camera linked to an Instax printer)

I have a couple of the Polaroid Zink cameras - one the Snap (no preview or screen, saves pics to a Micro SD card if you want, prints a pic every time, choice of three colour filters) and a Z2300 that has a screen and you can select which ones to print and do some basic editing.

Both of them have really poor print quality compared to Instax, but that aside, the Snap gets way more use, even though the prints are worse. The ability to view pics after you've taken them just makes it feel like any other digital camera, just with a printer attached - and it's quite old and basic so it's a bad digital camera with a printer attached (and relatively bulky). It makes better prints than the Snap but I never use it; I've lost the charger now but I can't be bothered to look for it. I thought the preview and edit functions would be good but in practice I didn't find that at all.

So I'm not particularly impressed by this announcement. I can understand that it keeps bulk down and I like the idea of square instax but if I get one I'm putting it on immediate auto print mode, assuming there is one.

Incidentally, when I've talked about the two cameras with non-photography friends they've always said they thought the Snap was a better concept. They appreciate that if you're going to take a picture and then have to specifically print it, that's much closer to using your phone. It's not just having a print that's valuable, it's the immediacy of the whole process, and part of that is not being able to edit.

(BTW I got the Snap in the first place because Zink paper is way better than Instax for journalling. I keep a paper journal and not only is Zink much thinner, it's also sticky-backed, like those old tiny Polaroid i-Zone ones - anyone else remember those? they were great, I was really sad when I found they'd stopped making the film.)
Add a comment...

Post has shared content
How strange. I must have been developing those 600-odd rolls wrong, as I've never been in a darkroom when doing so.

It's one thing to say "no you don't need a darkroom to develop film" to a non-film-photographer—they may well have only ever seen the printing process in films (which is in a darkroom, and makes better cinema). You shouldn't expect to have to say it to a photography blog.
Add a comment...

Post has shared content
Muslim Americans returning to the U.S. are reporting CBP officers have demanded access to social media information. All foreign visitors may face the same social media demands under a new proposed CBP policy.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Chinese New Gear*. I took the Dynax 9 out with a Minolta 50mm/f1.4 lens to shoot dragons with**, as well as a random assortment of film. In the end I shot a roll of Ektachrome 64 (which I shall cross process) and one of Rollei Retro 80S.

The Dynax 9 is a late model steel-framed pro SLR with auto everything. It eats film and spits it out with great speed. It also records exposure and focal length data; the second shot is from me copying it over to my phone. (No digital export here.)

Note the old-school depth-of-field markings on the lens.

* this is not actually new gear, it is just a pun

** actually the Dynax 9 is such a brick you could probably use it to bludgeon real dragons
PhotoPhotoPhoto
29/01/2017
3 Photos - View album
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I went to the B&W darkroom today with the intention of doing some normal prints of protest stuff from half frame shots—enlarging the half frame to 8x10", which it should be able to deal with, I was using a good lens—but I thought I'd play with a few diptychs first. Four hours later I was still doing them, playing with using high and low contrast. Luckily I bought a big box of paper just before Christmas.

It's just loads of fun. I'm not sure how artistically amazing they are but I enjoyed it so pooh. Sometimes darkroom printing can feel like a bit of a chore, rather than anything creative.
Photo
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
I wrote some stuff about my Olympus Pen FV.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Olympus Pen F kit in a shoe. Poor quality image, sorry, but it was the best I could find.
Photo
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Given that I got some money unexpectedly, I have obviously wasted it on cameras. Specifically an Olympus Pen FV, as seen advertised here by a cool and moody W. Eugene Smith (well, the Pen system anyway).

Note that it says "famed photographers like W. Eugene Smith". There's no particular evidence I can see that he used one, and plenty to suggest that he didn't care much about gear, was consistently skint, and would definitely have taken the money to pose for an advert.

It's definitely compact though. There's another ad which shows the camera and a few lenses packed into a shoe. No meter, but I can judge exposure for negative film pretty well nowadays.
Photo
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded