Can we talk about film?

[bunnspecial]

On film cleaning-

If you hang around old camera shops(good gosh how I miss living close to Chuck Rubin's) see if you can snag a bottle of Kodak Film Cleaner. It's potent stuff but I think it works better than Pec cleaner, but of course hasn't been made in a while(IIRC, it's N-heptane or another light fairly pure hydrocarbon with a largish chlorofluorcarbon, so it's both ozone depleting and a greenhouse gas, but darn does it work well). I use Kimwipes, but TBH Pec Pads are probably the best thing around for it.

Still, dust is a never-ending enemy. It's why I bother with making sure I run my Nikon Scanners on Nikon Scan(which need 10.6.8 at the absolute newest) and don't use Vuescan because real Digital ICE is SO much better than Vuescan's algorithms(yes I will back that statement up if anyone wants to see it).

Just a thought on scanning colour negs. The light source must be full spectrum. Many light sources have portions of the visible spectrum which drop out to some degree or another.

This is what I was saying.

You need a true full spectrum source. For viewing slides, something that is close enough that our eyes perceive it as full spectrum is fine. For scanning(or printing), though, if there are "notches" it's never going to be right. Incandecent is actually good since even though the intensity is a function of wavelength(and that distribution is Gaussian and directly correlates to the filament temperature) all of the wavelengths are there.

All of my enlargers are incandescent as well. Even with B&W, you can get into trouble with throwing off the contrast of your multigrade paper if the spectrum is bad in the wrong places.

 

[OldMacs4Me]

The 13 litre C-41 film kits I used to get, came with a final post rinse bath. It was called stabilizer. It was mainly intended to assure there was not any water spotting during the drying process.

I would use it in a tray running the film up and down in the tray then the squeegee and into the drying cabinet. With short strips I would just set the strip in the tray, agitate for a few seconds, then use 2 fingers as a squeegee. If dust was stuck to the emulsion I found this to be the safest and most effective way to get rid of it. Unfortunately without a filtered drying cabinet dust can easily settle back onto the film while it dries. Unlike Kodak film cleaner it is not toxic.

Used the tray method instead of dunking the reels as my reels stayed much much cleaner that way.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Relative film newbie here with a film choice question. After years of being digital-only I've gone back to film, having recently acquired a few old Canon film cameras (F-1n, F-1 New, AE-1, EOS-1n). I've started with just the F-1n and shot a few rolls of Tri-X 400 and Fuji Superia X-TRA 400 color. I had them developed by TheDarkroom.com and am very happy with the results in spite of my own limitations in skill.The F-1n really forces me to think about what I am doing and I love that slower approach.

I am shooting without a flash and relying on the in-camera meter, recognizing that my film is tolerant of over-exposure. I am interested in finding a good film for indoor handheld shooting. I was able to get some good results with the Tri-X and Superia (processed at box speed), with carefully chosen shots, but would like to try something more suited to this situation. For example CineStill 800 - tungsten balanced and ISO 800, it sounds like I might find it easier to shoot indoors? Or should I just try shooting the Tri-X with a higher ISO setting like 1600 and have it push-processed?

I have the luxury of loading one of the F-1s with color and another with B&W, so I can pick my poison.

 

[mollyc]

I haven't tried this experiment yet, still mostly shooting outdoors with film. But I would probably try Portra 800.

Kodak Portra 800 Review - and some Thoughts on Shooting it Within my Workflow

Kodak Portra 800 is quite possibly my favourite colour negative film. I say that as someone who’s just committed to shooting only P3200 and Ektachrome E100 for at least 6 months in a bid to learn these two returned-to-market films from Kodak properly. But when making that decision, the first...

www.35mmc.com

I think others here will probably give you some better advice.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I haven't tried this experiment yet, still mostly shooting outdoors with film. But I would probably try Portra 800.

Kodak Portra 800 Review - and some Thoughts on Shooting it Within my Workflow

Kodak Portra 800 is quite possibly my favourite colour negative film. I say that as someone who’s just committed to shooting only P3200 and Ektachrome E100 for at least 6 months in a bid to learn these two returned-to-market films from Kodak properly. But when making that decision, the first...

www.35mmc.com

I think others here will probably give you some better advice.

I was given a roll of Portra 400 lately but just stuck it in the freezer for later. I never looked into Portra, and I didn't know there was an ISO 800 version.

 

[mollyc]

I was given a roll of Portra 400 lately but just stuck it in the freezer for later. I never looked into Portra, and I didn't know there was an ISO 800 version.

i love portra 400 rated at 200.

 

[bunnspecial]

First of all, for as much as I babble about Nikon F2s now, using them makes me miss a lot about the F-1n and New F-1(I do still have one of each).

I learned manual exposure on Canon's match-needle meter, and still consider it superior to most anything else I've used on a manual camera. The New F-1 is the ultimate design of manual meter, IMO, and shows far more information than any center-the-needle meter I've used. Since Canon built a light into the New F-1 that you can set to activate with a tap of the shutter button, legibility is MUCH better in lower light than the F3(with which it directly competed) with its awkward 2-hand, hold the tiny little button for a dim light meter. The 3 LEDs used on the Nikon F2SB/AS and FM/FM2/FM10 still win for low legibility, but the New F-1 is close.

Fun little fact too on the New F-1 if you weren't aware of it-if you only have the plain prism and not the AE Prism FN, the camera is still 100% operational in aperture priority mode(just set the shutter speed dial to A). The communication between the prism and the camera body is one-way and all the AE smarts are in the camera-the AE prism just lets you see what shutter speed the camera is choosing(which is important, but you can still use the camera without it). Also, don't forget that if the battery dies, you have to physically remove it to get the camera to work.

All of that aside, high speed color film, or B&W for that matter, has never been great. Portra 800 is your best bet, and you can squeeze out a useable if not great image shooting it at 1600. I've always preferred Tri-X pushed to 1600 or 3200 over TMAX P3200, although TMAX is a bit cleaner. Fuji use to make a 1600 speed as part of the Superia line, but it was terrible.

Really, your best bet with film is fast prime glass. My F2SB has a 35mm f/1.4 almost permanently glued to it, and back in my Canon FD days I almost always used either a 50mm f/1.4 or 24mm f/2 indoors. One thing I do appreciate about modern film Nikons like my F6 and Molly's F100(plus the F5 and N80) is that they work with VR so you can squeeze a few extra stops out of an f/2.8 zoom, although the 24-70 f/2.8E VR can only be used at full aperture on film Nikons.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

First of all, for as much as I babble about Nikon F2s now, using them makes me miss a lot about the F-1n and New F-1(I do still have one of each).

Thanks for the info! Very helpful.

I haven't shot anything with the New F-1 yet, but I have been playing around with it before loading my first roll and have discovered a couple of the things you mentioned - it won't work with a dead battery, but WILL work with a good battery or NO battery!. I wasn't aware that the aperture priority mode is possible without the AE prism...VERY good to know because I don't have that prism and they seem a bit spendy on eBay etc (although just about every one of those New F-1s on eBay coming from Japan seem to be equipped with an AE prism).

I do agree that the New F-1s meter seems like a real improvement on the F-1n's, though I am pretty used to the latter. As for glass, I have been using the FD 50mm f/1.4 S.S.C. for 90% of my shooting. I also have a 70-210mm f/4.0 zoom, an FD 28mm f/2.8, and a 50mm f/3.5 S.S.C. Macro, and they all seem like perfectly good lenses despite their age - certainly good enough for my limited capabilities.

I'll have to give the Portra 800 a try, it's more expensive than what I've been shooting but not by miles. And I'll probably take my first stab at pushing film with the Tri-X. Seems like you really can't go wrong with Tri-X in most situations. I was really happy with my first couple rolls of Tri-X.

One day I forgot to put the battery in the F-1n and went out without it - I took some shots using the Tri-X and Sunny 16 and was surprised how well they came out. What do you know....rules of thumb actually work!

 

[bunnspecial]

Like I said, I'm a huge fan of the New F-1 and I think Canon really knocked it out of the park especially compared to the F3. One small quibble in comparison is that the F-1/F-1n had smoother film advance than the F2, and while Canon dropped some of the finish that made the F-1/F-1n so smooth on the New F-1, the F3 went to a ball bearing mechanism that's often cited(alongside the Minolta X700-I have both and it's a toss-up) as the smoothest ever fitted to a manual advance 35mm camera.

That aside, note that the no battery trick only works with shutter speeds above 1/90(and B). Ones slower than that are electronically timed. It's still useful, though, and IMO is much more versatile than Nikon's "emergency" 1/80(only) on the F3.

It's honestly a camera that fascinates me to just sit and play with. Notice how little effort the shutter release requires with a battery installed, and then compare it to no battery installed. That's actually tied into why you have to remove a dead battery to get it to work-if you notice when you insert and remove the battery one of the contacts(top IIRC) moves quite a bit. With a battery, the shutter release mechanism is similar to the A-1 with magnets, etc. Removing the battery causes a mechanical connection to the shutter release to move into place.

FD glass, IMO, is almost universally excellent and quite inexpensive. When I was still using it regularly, I actually slightly preferred the rendering of the 50mm f/1.4 S.S.C. to the FDn 50mm f/1.4. I cashed in on rising prices and sold my FDn version a few years ago, but kept the S.S.C.

Also, just as a side note on something I've preached for years-if you're doing true macro work(lifesize or greater) older macro lenses are almost always better than their modern equivalent. Older unit focusing lenses are true flat field lenses just like modern ones, but first of all tend to give up macro performance at the cost of better performance near infinity(where older designs often are slightly inferior to something like a 50mm f/1.8 or f/2 of the same age from the same maker at ~f/5.6). Second, modern floating element lenses really start to fall part when you move the entire lens away from the film plane/sensor such as with extension tubes or bellows as they are designed to work at exactly that distance. Unit focusing lenses basically just continue to work exactly like they do at closer distances as you crank them further and further away from the camera.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Interesting stuff!!! I tried a couple of macro shots with the F-1n, 50mm f/3.5 Macro, and the Fuji Superia, so I'll have to see how that comes out when I get it developed.

 

[bunnspecial]

One of the fun things too about the F-1 is they are both system cameras with a huge choice of focusing screens for your particular situation. I like just the plain split prism(B) and matte screens(C), although there are some specialized ones. For general photography, a lot of people like the E screen, which is the "standard" split prism surrounded by a microprism ring.

If you are serious about macro/micro photography at high magnification(think 2x and higher) you want an L screen for the original F-1 or a P screen for the New F-1. I've never used them in the F-1, but have the equivalent Nikon F/F2 screens. They really need to be used with something like a 6x magnifier viewfinder(Waist Level FN-6x for the New F-1, just the plain Waist Level for the original will work although there's also a 6x add-on for it) and aren't conventionally focused. These screens give a very bright "aerial" image that will always appear more or less in focus(unless you're way off) but have a reticle etched into the center of them. You can use a technique called parallax focusing with them-basically you move your eye around the viewfinder and if the reticle appears to stay in the same spot, the image is in focus at least in the area under the reticle.

Back in the dark old days before magnified live view was a thing, this kind of stuff was a big reason to plug into the pro camera systems(F-1 or the single digit Nikons). At high magnification, a conventional focusing screen is so dark as to be unusable, and that includes the laser etched screens from both Canon and Nikon. An aerial screen with a reticle allows for the trade-off between visibility and still being able to accurately focus(incidentally, as a general rule AF era focusing screens are not suitable for manual focus unless you're putting a screen designed for manual focus in the camera). Canon cut their ties with interchangeable viewfinders in the EOS system, but Nikon kept them around in the F4 and F5, albeit with a much smaller selection of both screens and finders than in the F3 and earlier. The F5 was made up to 2006, and funny enough the F3 was actually cataloged until around 2000.

One last thing I meant to mention earlier-I don't know if he's still in business or even still alive, but Ken Oikawa in California use to be THE master on the F-1s. He is a Japanese gentleman who was head of Canon's west coast service facility, and retired to service F-1s. If you wanted to send him your camera, you would call and leave a message(he never answered the phone) and he would call you back. His English was always a bit...rough...and he wasn't the easiest to understand over the phone, but he'd tell you to send him your camera. Once it was finished, he'd call you and tell you the total, then you'd mail him a check and he would send your camera back in perfect condition. He serviced all of my F-1s over the years.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

All good info, thanks! I have a basic setup: Eye-Level Finder FN + PE screen. Seems to work well for what I'm doing.

 

[bunnspecial]

Even though I haven't used the cameras in years, so much of this is coming back to me. If you can't tell I love the F-1 in all forms, and still consider it among the greats of all time. Nikon still wins on the F/F2/F3 series in sheer versatility both of glass and of accessories like finders and especially focusing screens(there are about 15 different designs for the New F-1, and Nikon gets it up to 30 or so for the F/F2 including a bunch of oddball special purpose ones). I have to stop and think because in Nikon "land" an E screen is a matte/grid screen.

Interestingly enough, Canon shipped cameras supplied from the factory with plain prisms with PE screens, and AE Finder FNs came with AE screens. Partial metering was the only option on the Original F-1 as well as other similar all manual cameras like the FTb. I guess they were assuming that the buyer of an auto exposure camera would want an averaging meter. I had, at least at one time, one or two spot screens for F-1s including the SJ for use with my 400mm f/4.5.

A couple of other things when I think about metering patterns-because of the way the meters work on all the F-1s, they must be used with a circular polarizer. It's not a big deal now since almost all polarizers on the market are circular, but in the 70s/80s linear was common and it will throw off the meter in certain orientations of the F-1, New F-1, and actually the FT, FTb, and several others also.

Also, if you want to turn your New F-1 into a shutter priority camera, you can do it with a Power Winder or Motor Drive installed. This isn't a situation where it's a "hidden" feature like with aperture priority if you don't have that part, but the winder/drive actually contains the servo that is responsible for stopping down the lens. It's actually Canon's only multi-mode manual focus camera that's not handicapped in manual mode.

There's a way to turn the original F-1/F-1n into shutter priority also, but you need a big unwieldy prism and an external battery pack. It was simpler, faster and more elegant than Nikon's shutter priority solution for the F2, but still really only meant for unattended photography.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I ran 1 roll of B&W through my Canon New F-1, and just loaded a roll of color. I managed to take 8 frames and then the advance lever stopped working - it wasn't cocking or firing.

After a lot of messing around I tried firing a shot using 1/90th sec with the battery out of the camera and -snap- it fires. So the battery was dead (confirmed this with a multimeter). It had been a brand new Duracell 28L lithium. I had been using the meter in 'normal' mode, where the meter activates when you hold the shutter button down halfway and turns off once you release the button.

This seems like pretty poor battery life for a $7 battery. Granted the New F-1 has the electronic shutter in addition to the meter using the battery but it seems likely to chew through batteries much faster than the F-1n.

I've burned through a few precious frames of film while fiddling trying to figure this out, but lesson learned - I guess I will be religious about taking the battery out of the New F-1 if I'm not actually shooting.

 

[bunnspecial]

Batteries last for 100+ rolls on normal use, and lithiums can have a 10 year shelf life.

The New F-1 shouldn’t draw any power unless the meter is active, which is either only with a half press of the shutter and 10 seconds after if you have the back switch in the hold position.

I seem to remember that there can be a phantom current draw issue in these. If the next battery does it, PM me and I’ll find Mr. Oikawa’s contact info.

Last one-in a bit of a hack since PX28s are always the easiest to find, 4x LR44s(or #76) button cells stacked, taped together, and with some aluminum foil will work. Those are a lot easier to find. One alternate number for the PX28 is actually 4LR44

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Batteries last for 100+ rolls on normal use, and lithiums can have a 10 year shelf life.

The New F-1 shouldn’t draw any power unless the meter is active, which is either only with a half press of the shutter and 10 seconds after if you have the back switch in the hold position.

Update: I got a fresh Duracell 28L battery ('best before' date of 2030, so it wasn't old stock either) for the F-1 New and made it through a roll and a half of film before the battery died again. So something's not right. I was careful this time to remove the battery when not actually shooting, but continued to use 'normal' mode, metering with the shutter button pressed halfway down. The camera seems to be working perfectly apart from this crazy battery consumption.

Very odd. Maybe I'll try another brand of battery some time. I'll have to do some research and see if I can find any references to voltage drain issues with this model. In the meantime, I'll just go back to shooting with the F-1n. Maybe a bit less ergonomic, but also a bit simpler to use and I was getting good results with it anyway.

 

[bunnspecial]

Yeah, that's definitely not normal and there's something going on it it.

At least you can enjoy the smoother film advance on the F-1n

 

[Lord Blackadder]

At least you can enjoy the smoother film advance on the F-1n

Funny you said that - I DO like the feel of the film advance on the F-1n better.

 

[mollyc]

For those of you who have done bw developing....has anyone tried the Cinestill monobath?

I have never developed. My daughter took a second module of darkroom this year (she took her first last year), and her teacher told her she could develop a roll for me. A few days before the end of her module I shot a roll of portraits with her, and as she was ahead on her project, she was going to develop it for me before she was done with class. The day after I shot my roll, she tested positive for covid and did not go back to school for the end of that module.

The teacher does not have any more darkroom classes this year and doesn't have any chemicals open, and it would be really wasteful for her to mix up a big amount for just one roll that isn't even school related. My whole goal of this project was to collaborate with my daughter for me to shoot and her to develop.

For some reason, my local lab charges $8/roll for color development and $16 for bw development. I can buy a kit of Cinestill monobath for $45 and develop 16 rolls at home! And the kit comes with reels and a tank. So I am strongly considering this since my daughter knows how to get the film off the roll and into the developer (which I decidedly do not know how to do). This way I will still be collaborating with her. I would still have to get a changing bag, but obviously that's just a one time cost.

The monobath gets pretty good reviews and I'm not really a huge bw shooter anyway, so I probably wouldn't even know the difference.

I need someone to talk me into this (it won't take much).

 

[dimme]

For those of you who have done bw developing....has anyone tried the Cinestill monobath?

I have never developed. My daughter took a second module of darkroom this year (she took her first last year), and her teacher told her she could develop a roll for me. A few days before the end of her module I shot a roll of portraits with her, and as she was ahead on her project, she was going to develop it for me before she was done with class. The day after I shot my roll, she tested positive for covid and did not go back to school for the end of that module.

The teacher does not have any more darkroom classes this year and doesn't have any chemicals open, and it would be really wasteful for her to mix up a big amount for just one roll that isn't even school related. My whole goal of this project was to collaborate with my daughter for me to shoot and her to develop.

For some reason, my local lab charges $8/roll for color development and $16 for bw development. I can buy a kit of Cinestill monobath for $45 and develop 16 rolls at home! And the kit comes with reels and a tank. So I am strongly considering this since my daughter knows how to get the film off the roll and into the developer (which I decidedly do not know how to do). This way I will still be collaborating with her. I would still have to get a changing bag, but obviously that's just a one time cost.

The monobath gets pretty good reviews and I'm not really a huge bw shooter anyway, so I probably wouldn't even know the difference.

I need someone to talk me into this (it won't take much).

I never tried that particular developer, but as a former "Lab rat"* experimentation is part of the fun and reward of photography. Go for it, it will be fun!

* worked in a photo lab for 25+ years

 

[Lord Blackadder]

For those of you who have done bw developing....has anyone tried the Cinestill monobath?

I know nothing whatever about home film developing, but after Googling this product it sounds so simple I might give it a try myself!

If you were to buy the gear to buy bulk film and load your own film rolls, and develop using this process, B&W photography suddenly becomes positively cheap.

 

[mollyc]

well i ordered it! not sure how long shipping takes, but hopefully i can try to develop next weekend.

i'm not quite up to bulk loading yet because i really prefer color film to bw, but we'll see how the developing goes. ? maybe i'll like bw better on film than digital.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

i'm not quite up to bulk loading yet because i really prefer color film to bw, but we'll see how the developing goes. ? maybe i'll like bw better on film than digital.

I've only just gotten back into film, but from my perspective B&W on film is a whole different animal than on digital - in a good way.

 

[bunnspecial]

@mollyc

Just me, but I'm not at all a fan of monobaths. You are a lot better off if you can control developing and fixing separately, and the 3 minute time also scares me.

The last time I bought some, a packet(enough to make 1 gallon) of D76 was about $8, although I'd not be surprised if this has gone up. Still, D76 can last for ~6 months in a dark bottle. HC110 concentrate can last forever, although I don't remember what the current going rate for a bottle is.

Add in a bottle of a rapid fix concentrate, which also has a really long shelf life, and the working solution will last several months or through several rolls of film(I use to throw mine out every day, but I'd usually do half a dozen rolls before tossing it).

You can get known, repeatable, quality chemicals to develop a lot of film for ~$20 or so, which is enough for me to not want to bother with some of the simple and easy solutions. Back in the 90s when photojournalists were on a schedule, a 3 minute monobath had a lot of value to them, but anyone who needs a rapid turn-around these days is shooting digital...

 

[mollyc]

@mollyc

Just me, but I'm not at all a fan of monobaths. You are a lot better off if you can control developing and fixing separately, and the 3 minute time also scares me.

The last time I bought some, a packet(enough to make 1 gallon) of D76 was about $8, although I'd not be surprised if this has gone up. Still, D76 can last for ~6 months in a dark bottle. HC110 concentrate can last forever, although I don't remember what the current going rate for a bottle is.

Add in a bottle of a rapid fix concentrate, which also has a really long shelf life, and the working solution will last several months or through several rolls of film(I use to throw mine out every day, but I'd usually do half a dozen rolls before tossing it).

You can get known, repeatable, quality chemicals to develop a lot of film for ~$20 or so, which is enough for me to not want to bother with some of the simple and easy solutions. Back in the 90s when photojournalists were on a schedule, a 3 minute monobath had a lot of value to them, but anyone who needs a rapid turn-around these days is shooting digital...

well my monobath solution came today. ? this whole thing is a giant experiment anyway and if it doesn’t work then can retake all the photos. ?