every machine is a smoke machine if you use it wrong enough
in front of an 80s panasonic video camera, turned to portrait orientation. i’m not sure whether i like the rendering more or the fact that i can choose out of 7000 frames with it. that would get rather expensive on medium format film.
it handles backlight very badly, i.e. very well
the abuse of video cameras to take still pictures will continue until morale improves, or until i get bored of it. It’s all a bit inconsistent because the camera had auto exposure on and it seems to change color rendering once it warms up. Also, the chip i use for capturing does some automatic level […]
steady hands are hard to come by 🙂 with a ~1930s Zeiss Ikon Ikonta, 6×4.5 medium format, on foma 200
with a 1940s Mimosa II, on Foma 200. Which the camera ripped apart after the tenth picture unfortunately
576 lines should be enough for anyone. With a Panasonic A2 video camera (not camcorder, it’s from the days where the VCR was still separate), with a sort of home-made capture system that actually gets the full resolution out of it. It could also do videos of course, but it’s surprisingly usable for stills? I […]
Large-format self portraits are actually quite difficult to do, so the concerned look in the second picture is real but also unfortunate. 🙂 I think the worst part is that between focusing and actually taking the picture, there’s so much stuff to do during which I completely forgot what will be in frame or what […]
I have not yet managed to take this camera out without having multiple conversations about it with passers-by. Which is unexpected – I’m in Berlin after all – but it is a lot of fun. People like it, is the verdict. Someone estimated it at 3000+€, which is about 2500€ too much, but I gather […]
These are (18×24 cm) reversals on paper, i.e. they’re actually positives in Real Life! Unfortunately it wasn’t quite enough light for this all to work. First one is ISO 0.4 (or 1.6 + 2 stops), and aaaaalmost enough but i also yanked it out of second development before it was done. That’s why the sky […]
with a Rodenstock Bistigmat (symmetric doublet), this time wide-open at f18. Yes 18, not 16 – its 1895 or so, and the industry standards aren’t that much of a standard yet. i kept telling myself to get closer, but this is probably not quite close enough yet. this lens is a 30 cm or so, […]
slightly overexposed, but such is life with paper negatives. IIRC this with an exposure time of 5 seconds, which is always fun with people around. 18×24 field camera, with a Rodenstock Bistigmat at f/51, on Ilford MGRC paper @ ISO 3 (which was a bit much light here)
i really like the mood of this one. it also has a few more light leaks as that was with a different film holder than the last one, but that kinda adds to it. this looks nothing like it did in real life, it looks better 🙂 18×24 field camera, Rodenstock Bistigmat at f/51, on […]
this isn’t the world’s best photo (that would’ve been a surprise) but on technical terms I see no major issues, which is a lot to say for a combination of 1880s camera and film holders, 1890s lens, and modern paper negatives. I need more(and better) film holders, and I also want to try a couple […]
(digital, olympus om-d em-10 mark II, meike 25 mm f1.8)
the irony is that this is digital and so i did in fact reverse it – to make it look like a negative. i need too many tries for self-portraits to do them on film 🙂 This is also infrared-only but that doesn’t really make much of a difference here I don’t think.
All 340 megapixels of him. First picture with my new camera. Not entirely unsuccessful but also a bit over exposed and not focused correctly. But als no light leaks so that’s something! Especially given that the camera and the film holder are 150 year old pieces of solid-mahagoni furniture. This was shot on 18×24 cm […]
with an olympus om-d e-10 ford cortina mark two, with the long name and removed IR filter, plus an IR-pass filter in front of the lens
with a 30s Kochmann Reflex-Korelle with half-broken shutter and a 35 cm f4.5 Tele-Xenar, which could have used a tripod. And an 8 cm f2.8 Tessar which could have used a sun hood. On Foma 200
with a 1932 Rolleiflex “Old Standard”, on underexposed Foma 400
still with the Contax D except this time held a bit more stable. at 1/20s, so not totally devoid of camera shake but such is life in near total darkness