Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,592   Posts: 1,546,018   Online: 982
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 45 of 45
  1. #41
    RJS
    RJS is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Southern Cal
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    246

    Polaroid vs Panatomic-X

    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    Panatomic X was easily its equal (and most likely the same emulsion).
    To the best of my memory Panatomic-X was never available in sheet film. Murals from roll film Panatomic were fine, but I don't think they equalled the Type 52 Polaroid; though you well may be correct that it was actually Panatomic.

  2. #42
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,780
    Quote Originally Posted by RJS View Post
    To the best of my memory Panatomic-X was never available in sheet film. Murals from roll film Panatomic were fine, but I don't think they equalled the Type 52 Polaroid; though you well may be correct that it was actually Panatomic.
    It wasn't produced as sheet film to my knowledge, but it is produced in large sized rolls (5.5 &9" wide) for aerial reconnaissance purposes, and you can cut 4x5 or 8x10 sheets from the respective roll. The rolls appear on that auction site from time to time.

    There is (or was) an effort underway for a special order here:

    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/5...available.html

  3. #43
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,874
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    A bit more confidence in your own skills, and/or perhaps a bit more time taken to ponder the scene you are trying to capture, and you do not need Polaroids.

    They only were usefull anyway to show other people who were not sure about your skills that you did indeed know what you are doing.

    But seriously!
    Reminds me of a talk given by a german photographer and advertising man (i wasn't there, but have seen it as MP3), mainly about art directors (the Alfa Romeo bunch). My memory of it is not perfect, but the gist of it is very clear.
    Broaching the subject of Polaroids, and the inane demand to see (preferably many) Polaroids, he folded a bit of paper, tore it so that when unfolded again it formed a frame, held it up, and shouted (to the art directors) "there is your f***ing Polaroid!".
    Very right he was.
    Can you please post this mp3?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  4. #44
    DanielStone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,976
    Images
    1
    the rule of thumb that I've always come across when working on jobs as and assistant, as well as my own shoots, is: NEVER USE A POLAROID TO JUDGE EXPOSURE!!!

    this is even with the newer fuji instant films, which IMO are much more accurate than the Polaroid equivalents of days past....

    when I first started assisting, the first photographer I worked for told me this: "Use a polaroid to judge where your light will and or will not fall, NEVER to judge density or contrast because you'll always be wrong".

    Now its been a year or two since this first job I worked on, but it still stays true: Find your personal rated speed for the film you're using (say a 100 box speed E6 film rated at 80).

    I've always found and have learned with much success to back it up, that ALL color films (E6 and color-neg) should be exposed(the lighting ratios) within 1/2 - 1 full stop of each other. I have found this a terrific way of shooting, and even though this rule was developed back in the day when everyone was shooting transparencies where film had to go to pre-press, where you have a much shorter gamut of color and latitude than the film can actually handle. Its the same these days, even though the technology has improved. Film scanners that are available to the ~$1000 dollar mark crowd have much better capabilities to scan than the hi-end pre-press drum scanners of the 80's and early 90's.

    My basic rule is: if you're using a studio flash, or even outdoor lighting, exposing that negative(color only in this case) or transparency right so that when you sc@n or print it, you have that 1 stop or less range.

    If you have the chance, watch the Dean Collins dvd's on lighting, I have them and they are tremendous! He goes into "chroma-zones", or zone system for color photography. BEWARE: These films were done in the 80's so the long hair and funky clothing will bring back some memories . But the lighting is the same today as it was back then, albeit with some changes to style, etc... He shoots transparencies for most of the segments, being that they are all intended for print and reproduction(pre-press).

    Also, on youtube, here's a video of him during a talk at Brooks back in the early 90's.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OfzlIxzU7A

    this is part 1, there are more if you care to watch.

    he reccomends here to rate Ektachrome EPP(EI 100 BOX-SPEED) at 80, for a "hotter" transparency. This way shadow detail doesn't got to sh!+.

    obviously, you have to test your films you use on a regular basis, and see where you want to place your exposure, and etc...

    Personally for transparencies I usually use Fuji Provia 100f at asa80, or E100G at asa80 as well. This is in all formats 35mm-4x5(some 8x10 for personal work).

    Color neg I use Portra 160vc(asa 100) and 400vc(asa 200) and portra 800(asa 400). I almost never blow out highlights, mainly due to using a split-nd filter when I can.

    B&W is a completely different story altogether, and rarely its used on paying jobs, just personal work for me. Since most jobs don't want black and white files(no one really requires raw film anymore, just scans, mostly because of the "i'm giving you something tangible therefore I have to charge you sales tax on the entire job", therefore its easier to copy all the final files to THEIR hard drive, and you can pretty much bypass the sales-tax man <check your local tax laws though!!!!!>). that's the way it is here in So Cal.

    Heck, just because I'm 21 doesn't mean I like spending time behind a computer fixing my scans(i hate that part personally).

    I just like to do it right in the first place. D!gi+@1 is the same way, do it right in the first place, and you have less to worry about.

    I shoot both, d!gi+@1 and film. Clients for the jobs I shoot(3 small editorial jobs so far, heck I'm in school right now ) don't care if I shoot film or d!gi+@1, just as long as they can get files withing 48hrs to choose their selects. I just take the film to the lab, they do some proof-scans and develop, etc, and I do my basic edits, and send it to them via fedex overnight.


    But this if for a different thread.


    Any questions anyone PM me and i'll do my best.


  5. #45
    Ektagraphic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southeastern Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,720
    Images
    23
    Many use that method but I say go Polaroid!
    Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin