Please Ignore

Originally posted by Snapper
Grammar not grammer, use not used, gain not gan, clearly not clear,

Pedantic not pedantick…;)

Flood.

Grammar not grammer, use not used, gain not gan, clearly not clear,

Originally posted by Nermal
Its generation text! Its a real hassle trying to get punctuation on a phone, so he doesn’t apply it on new technology in general (is a biro and paper new technology to Adam?). – Nermal

Your hypothesis seems correct Nermal. If you check some of Adam’s other posts, you will see that he doesn’t care for grammer and punctuation. We need to remind him that this isn’t MSN, where you can used txt language, this is a forum. If you want to gan people’s respect Adam you are going to have to write clear enough so that people can understand you. I’ve said before, check the post quickly before you send it and that way you will gradually improve your grammer, O.K?

Originally posted by HURRICANE 477
Ever heard about using punctuation adam? That paragraph is a complete muffle!!!

Its generation text! Its a real hassle trying to get punctuation on a phone, so he doesn’t apply it on new technology in general (is a biro and paper new technology to Adam?). – Nermal

Originally posted by Handly-Page
No I wasn’t trying to grab attention like some people do (points finger at flood) I was just trying to get something to work which I have now worked out that I can’t do what I want so seeing as that is finished this post should now be able to go to the archives.

Ever heard about using punctuation adam? That paragraph is a complete muffle!!!

The way it should be done.:rolleyes:

Flood.

On glass…

Don’t forget my former tutors – probably still insisting that the only way to do it is to coat a film base yourself just before the exposure…:rolleyes:

Flood.

Oh, there are 5 manufacturers. Only one doesn’t make film for anyone else. If you want to add in Seattle Film Works as colour neg (different process though) that’d make 6. Say Ilford for black and white and you have a total of 7 film manufacturers..

You know, the other night when I went to help a mate who’s run the local studio for 40-odd years I burst out laughing at the college route. His brother did that, Ray was a chippy. He did the shoprontage, then his brother decided he didn’t want to do it, so Ray picked up the hasselblad and off he went into a new career. That’s ot the point. Anyway, driving along, chatting away about the lights (I brought mine) I said “Ah, but don’t forget the inverse square laws and how they’ll affect the shot (50 people, interior group shot, no room, loads of depth etc). “The what?” says he. “The inverse square laws”. “What the F… are they?” So I explain. “Oh well, I’ve got my Metz”.

In the end, we bounced one light.

Oh, and I asked if he had a flashmeter (leant mine to someone). “What for?” “to get the exposure right” “1/30 at F5.6” says Ray “I always do that”.

Originally posted by Handly-Page
Any one else wanna disect my website? And most of the stuff is just edjucated guess which I though were right at the time of editing. Oh and can I disect someone elses site seeming as everyone is doing that to my site?

If that don’t stop you disecting my site I have no idea what will!

I’m not dissecting your site – I am dissecting what Snapper threw up.
And I will agree (if that is what you meant) that whilst there should be a wealth of information out there it has to be gleaned from many sources. I sent many years as a technician learning the trade – when I went to college (day release, if you wish to make a joke of it) the tutors were still in the “medium format upwards is best” frame of mind and looked down on 35mm SLRs (one chap brought along his Leica rangefinder – an old but well loved M3 or something, I think – which was dismissed as a compact!). The only tutor still earning a crust as a phot did a little advertising and some record album covers (for bands none of us had heard of) and even he was disparaging of 35mm – and this was 1994. We learnt from the Longford photographic books – almost by rote – all the those foreign terms like contra jour with no real practical demonstration, all the chemicals needed to make up devs and fixes for film-types that were near extinct (HP3 – I think – anybody?) and when we said can we not use it straight from the container we got frowned at – we had to know that 1L of this contained 0.25cl of that… After all that fun and games with mono it was a bit of a let down when all our colour films were actually taken down to Boots to be processed! Never learnt anything practical about transparency (E6).
They never really went in to camera types, flash technique was left to the back of the flashgun with a casual mention that to fill-in we should probably knock the power down by a stop or two – but just bracket anyway, and the inverse square law (rule?) was stubbornly demonstrated in FEET and INCHES!
Everything I learned was on the job. If you want a job in the industry – any industry – then get some work experience and see if they will let you work for the experience in your holidays, weekends, etc. You might get expenses but don’t embarrass yourself by asking for pay – there are many more out there who would be happy to get such a foot in the door. Show willing and they will remember you – whinging will end with you being requested not to return (and I have done that twice: once when we ended up being a babysitting service for some sort of charisma trap son of the head of another department who just sat and stared and didn’t want to do anything, and once when wouldn’t one learn about focusing enlargers, refused to believe that he had printed a batch of (out of focus) prints back to front, and threw two months of negatives on the floor out of pique (his father then insisted we take his son back because we hadn’t given him a chance – my boss enjoyed informing him that nobody would work with him even if he did go to his ‘old friend’ our MD!).
Unfortunately there are too many people out there who think they can do the job (and most can) without following the usual routes and are happy to cheese people off on the way.
Good luck.

Flood.

So, you’ve put it back ‘under construction’ – although at time of writing you couldn’t even manage to get the under construction image working!!!

You can dissect mine if you like, i’d be pleased to have errors pointed out in order to correct them.

Any one else wanna disect my website? And most of the stuff is just edjucated guess which I though were right at the time of editing. Oh and can I disect someone elses site seeming as everyone is doing that to my site?

If that don’t stop you disecting my site I have no idea what will!

110 is still available. Disc and 126 have seized now (but i’m certain someone somewhere will respool for you!)

Are you serious about the 14-400? That’s just nuts!

Imagine, an 8-800mm F1.4 straight-through, the size of a Coke can and with rear filrer holder…..digital sensor size equivalent of course. Especially with no pincushion / barrel distortion, minimum of chromatic aberration, and a 3-stop stabiliser, sealed from dust. For a hundred quid!

C41 manufacturers… Fewer than the different people who have answered so far – much fewer.
Compacts? Other than 35mm and (the failing miserably) APS have you tried to buy any of the other film types?
I saw a Pentax 110 system (camera, 4 lenses, flash, drive, hoods, dedicated case, all caps and Pentax filters) for £65 A1+ condition last week; I was sorely tempted just for the curio value.
SLRs – what is the cheapest (new) now? Used to be the Zenit – a lovely old paper-weight – at £28 when I first took notice. Second hand is now being practically given away. Shame.
No mention of prime lenses, or how the aperature changes on the cheaper zooms as the barrel is racked out I suppose? Or about auto/manual focus?
How about metering?
Or film speeds?
Exposure compensation?
Shutter speeds and f.stops then?
I have a 14-400mm – it isn’t all it wascracked up to be; f3.5 is fine at the wide end but f108 (I think!) wide open ain’t much cop at the narrow end!
Medium format? Large format? Expensive! Thats all you need to know if you don’t have one.;)

I also haven’t got a clue as to what his digital camera statement means – but it sounds impressive(!).

Flood.

A quick two-minute read:

Disposable
“and even some supermarkets have ventured into the world of the disposable” They sell them, with branded packaging – they do not make them. In fact, a question for you, how many companies make C41 Colour negative film? Have a rough guess.

Compact
“One is the normal fixed lens compact and the other is a zoom where you can get closer to your subject but at the same time you are also in the same place. These cameras use the standard 35 mm film.”
You also have a twin lens, which shifts between a wide and a telephoto setting. They can use 35mm, APS, disc, 110, 126, digital media of all types…..

SLR
“hese can cost and thing from £200+ for the whole kit (lens and body) and sometimes £400+ just for the body of the camera.”

You can multiply that by at least 4 or 5 to get a top end figure.

“you can buy different lenses for different uses. These can range from a 14mm lens (also called a fish eye) to 400mm (telephoto). “

Not heard of 6mm and 8mm fisheyes? Or 500, 600, 800, 1000mm lenses? How about a nice 1200-1700mm zoom?

“It is possible to get a lens that fits all these different focal lengths which is the zoom lens.”

A 14-400mm zoom lens? Where can I get one of those please? Sounds very useful.

MEDIUM FORMAT

We’ve already been down that road.

Digital SLR
“many professionals who change to digital pick this type of camera because they have not lost lens focal points.”

What?

Now, how about large-format – ie 5×4, 7×5, 8×10, 11×14 cameras? THEY are studio cameras. You missed those.

“I have only so far put down what I know which is what I have been taught and if you don’t like it well it’s up to you”

In which case there are two scenarios:

1. You haven’t paid attention.
2. You have paid attention to idiots.

Plus of course I have given you the extra, missing information (taught) since you posted that – like it? Don’t like it? I’m completely ambivalent.

“This website will tell you about almost all the things you could know about photography”

“This website will also tell you about the pros and cons of each camera which includes digital media.”

Come on Adam. It tells us nothing of the sort. It gives false and incomplete information. Perhaps it would be an idea to research and verify a bit before bunging this kind of thing on the net – all it does is make you look stupid.

35mm and 120 film do indeed have advantages and disadvantages over each other, as do the cameras (as I well know, having worked professionally with both for over half of your lifetime) . That doesn’t change the fact that your brief description of 120 is pure fantasy.

Nermal is right. 35mm and 120 in the UK/Western Europe/First World are dying. They will be dead in the not too distant future. That leaves Third World and Developing World (plus reactionaries) as the only customers. I went digital last year, and have not once used 35mm OR my 6×9 camera since. That old fart will change when he can’t buy film without ordering from China. He’ll still say that his film is better than digital, even when it’s being printed on a non-optical lab (who is still making optical labs?)

120 and 35mm are on their way out. Fact of life.
A colleagues g/f works for a camera shop and says that the last 35mm cameras they sold were all disposibles – last time they sold a non disposible was October. Last medium format anything was actually some digital adaption on special order before the summer. Digitals have been flowing out the shop like its going out of fashion. – Nermal

120 and 35 films have advantages and disadvantages. Oh and snapper I have only so far put down what I know which is what I have been taught and if you don’t like it well it’s up to you.