Tag Archives: rangefinder

52 Cameras: # 180 — Bolsey B2



I’ll start with an image that’s in the video. I just metered the scene without compensating for the strong back light. This is what I got:
Goober & Jem: un-adjusted

Goober & Jem: un-adjusted


Using the scanner adjustment to compensate. I can see them but the background is brighter (don’t care) and they look hazy (do care). This is the result:
Dragged the scanner software midtone on the histogram to 60 (default 128)

Dragged the scanner software midtone on the histogram to 60 (default 128)


I tried the Photoshop merge, the same wizard that let’s you create a panorama. It did not cover itself in glory. Several manual variations later, I came up with this:
Stacked the images as layers and played with transparency. Then used the levels setting in Preview.

Stacked the images as layers and played with transparency. Then used the levels setting in Preview.


I may be able to get something better using layers with a selective erase (I got better results putting the darker layer one top and varying the transparency, which seems counter-intuitive to me) but I’m not sure it won’t look like modern HDR-that doesn’t look real images.

The film & the lens handle wide contrast ranges if you meter properly

The film & the lens handle wide contrast ranges if you meter properly


I have a scanner-brightened version of this too but I haven't tried exposure stacking.

I have a scanner-brightened version of this too but I haven’t tried exposure stacking.


I was trying to avoid cars in the frame and ended up with "Ladies & Gentlemen, St. Francis has left the building".

I was trying to avoid cars in the frame and ended up with “Ladies & Gentlemen, St. Francis has left the building”.

52 Cameras: # 151 — Petri 7



Scanned at 2400DPI on a Canon Canoscan 9000f.
Frame numbers are as they came off the scanner and not the film frame numbers.
Another from the tail-end of the Canon T50. Is it a double-exposure if the images are from different cameras?

Another from the tail-end of the Canon T50. Is it a double-exposure if the images are from different cameras?


Poor Jem - I caught him mid-sneeze.

Poor Jem – I caught him mid-sneeze.


One of those "oops" that's kind of cool.

One of those “oops” that’s kind of cool.

52 Cameras: Camera 75 part 2 – Contax G1

Expired Kodak VR 200 — quite a bit of grain.

Jem is a handsome fellow. This really shows what the lens can do wide open.

Jem is a handsome fellow. This really shows what the lens can do wide open.

More summer music at La Montañita Co-op in Santa Fe.

More summer music at La Montañita Co-op in Santa Fe.

Albuquerque from the top of Sandia Crest.

Albuquerque from the top of Sandia Crest.

Second roll, less expired Kodak VR 200 and less grain.

Metal flowers in Old Town Albuquerque.

Metal flowers in Old Town Albuquerque.

More will follow after I shoot some slide film.

52 Cameras: Camera 72 part 2 – Agfa Optima IIS

This one is an in-between image -- fuzzy but visually interesting.

This one is an in-between image — fuzzy but visually interesting.

Dad's Diner in Farmington, NM.

Dad’s Diner in Farmington, NM.

Another shot at Dad's Diner.

Another shot at Dad’s Diner.

Foggy morning on the Rio. I left this one uncropped to show the frame marks at the edge. Hasselblad used to do something similar so you knew which magazine was which.

Foggy morning on the Rio. I left this one uncropped to show the frame marks at the edge. Hasselblad used to do something similar so you knew which magazine was which.

Thinking about it, maybe I will shoot another roll through the Agfa after checking the distance scale and rangefinder. The 2nd roll (last shot above) was cheap Kodak film expired by almost 20 years, my chems were getting pretty worn out, and most of the shots were on the same foggy, hazy morning. As it stands, the case is worth more than the camera so I have almost nothing — a roll of film & processing — to lose.

52 Cameras: Camera 71 part 2 – Sears Auto RF|35

Some more images from the first roll (Lomo Earl Grey B&W 100). The light leak caused me to do some imaginative crops.

Buffalo head at Buffalo Thunder.

Buffalo head at Buffalo Thunder.

One of those lucky shots -- Goober's outline fits the contour of my foot perfectly.

One of those lucky shots — Goober’s outline fits the contour of my foot perfectly.

Too long before I posted. I can't remember where we saw this cool bent glass fixture.

Too long before I posted. I can’t remember where we saw this cool bent glass fixture.

Cute toes.

Cute toes.

I’ll post some color after I scan the 2nd roll. I had it processed at the drug store (rhymes with gall spleens) and specified develop-only and don’t cut the negatives. I got prints and mangled negatives. Their machine sliced right through the middle of some of the frames. They didn’t charge me but I think I’m done with them — it’s not cheap, it’s usually more like a day than the advertised hour, the employees know nothing except how to work the machine, and they can’t follow simple instructions. It was just a test roll but it could’ve been Bigfoot riding Nessie to meet Elvis’s space ship.

14 August 2015 Update
Second roll is expired Fuji 200 film. Fewer bad frames but it still leaks a bit. I’ll use it as a test for my new and improved light seal checker.

My sweetie. 1/60 & f/1.8.

My sweetie. 1/60 second & f/1.8.

Our neighbor's horse. 1/500 & f/16. In the bright sun, the leak showed up so it's cropped square.

Our neighbor’s horse. 1/500 & f/16. In the bright sun, the leak showed up so it’s cropped square.

Saw blade target. 1/500 & f/16. Just a hint of a leak at the upper right.

Saw blade target. 1/500 & f/16. Just a hint of a leak at the upper right.

Tree shadows on canvas canopy. F/1.8 but I didn't record the shutter. Cropped square.

Tree shadows on canvas canopy. F/1.8 but I didn’t record the shutter. Cropped square.

Iron gate detail. I missed the focus point a little at f/1.8 and got the stucco sharp.

Iron gate detail. I missed the focus point a little at f/1.8 and got the stucco sharp.