Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 28, 2012 21:35:37 GMT -5
I am not able to answer your question ... but one thing makes me wonder: Didn't you say, it's a digital camera ? A digital camera is using Polaroid film ? That doesn't make sense to me somehow  There are a few tiny portable printers available for getting instant prints out of digital cameras. That might be an alternative to the classic Polaroid cameras but Polaroid film is ... film. So it needs to be exposed. How can the digital camera do that ? Just wondering ... |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 28, 2012 20:39:22 GMT -5
Me too  "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication" Leonardo da Vinci |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 28, 2012 20:32:57 GMT -5
I have been wondering for a long time, if there is a possibility for connecting a modern camera flash to a vintage camera.
From what I noticed, cameras started to have a PC style flash connection from about the middle of the 50s. It is easy to get an adapter for those ones, but what about the older ... I am not sure, how it is called correctly ? Maybe Kodak mount ? Some kind of pin is sticking out in the middle ( like on the attached picture of the Fujica Six flash connection ).
Has anybody ever seen an adapter for this kind of older flash mounts ?
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 28, 2012 20:01:50 GMT -5
Really ? Thanks for that information !!! So, I might get one of those some day and use the lens again.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 28, 2012 19:59:04 GMT -5
Wow  ... and interesting is the reasoning of the judge, that the second image is "copied substantially from the 'intellectual creation' of the first". That is something, what should happen a million times a day, when people are using the same iPhone App for doing postproduction on their pictures or imagine, how many similar pictures are taken of a famous sightseeing spot a day. I personally wouldn't call it a crime ... just a shaming lack of creativity of the second pictures photographer |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 27, 2012 3:47:54 GMT -5
Excellent pictures, sharp and clear. Nice work with the DOF as well. An inspiration for shooting in B/W again. Thanks for sharing !!!
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 27, 2012 3:40:31 GMT -5
Thanks Chris. And yes, mine has a coupled meter and I couldn't find any way for the releasing the lens.
What remains being a mystery ( most likely forever ), why my grandfather owned an exchangeable tele lens for it. He was a passionated hobby photographer but never a camera or lens collector. According to my mother and my own memory, this has been his only camera besides an older Weltaflex and an even older plate camera, which doesn't exist anymore.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 23, 2012 9:42:10 GMT -5
I basically enjoy trying every new camera in my collection ( maybe the main reason, why I collect cameras ), but I noticed, that I always return to my Airesflex, which is most likely my all-time favorite then.
However, different purposes require different needs and tools. So depending on a certain goal or kind of pictures, I need or want to take, a different camera might be my favorite at that time.
But basically ... yes ... my Airesflex ( or any other TLR, because they are quite similar ).
If it needs to be a digital camera, it's getting harder for me to choose an "all-time favorite" among cameras, I don't like ... but if it comes to taking movies or I need to use a digital camera for a paid job, I like my Lumix GH1 ( especially in combination with my Canon FL lens collection ).
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 22, 2012 9:07:37 GMT -5
Congratulations !!! I checked your pics too. Nice work. You have talent. However, take care with your expired films. Wouldn't use them for shooting your "masterpiece"  You might be lucky with them ... or you might be not. Depends mostly on how they have been stored. Have fun in your film class ... and with the rest of this stuff  Cheers, Berndt |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
KODAK
Jan 21, 2012 21:34:39 GMT -5
Post by Berndt on Jan 21, 2012 21:34:39 GMT -5
Yes ... but this market got under pressure as well. I think, it has been the Lumix GH1/GH2 series, which made people notice, that the super high end cameras are actually artificially overpriced. When the firmware hacks came out, many people thought: "Hey, wait ... there is already everything inside such a camera, the makers just don't want to give it to us." Sony will attack with a cheaper Full Frame camera this year and Fuji will follow, I guess. Then, the times of the super expensive "Pro-DSLRs" are gone.
Canon and Nikon are still waiting ... because they don't want to cannibalize themselves. I read two interesting quotes in an article about Kodak recently:
“We developed the world’s first consumer digital camera. Kodak could have launched it in 1992. We could not get approval to launch it because of fear of the cannibalisation of film.”
Former Kodak VP Don Strickland
“If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will.”
Steve Jobs
The unfortunate thing about cannibalization is just, that there is no good end for anyone.
Definitely.
What I personally fear as a consumer is, that globalization always kills diversification ... and many creative possiblities with that. Most digital cameras of today ( at least the cheaper ones ) are already lacking manual settings. You can choose between a hundred of useless modes and have to leave everything up to the "intelligent" camera automatic. Shutter time and aperture just exist virtually but not mechanically anymore and the upcoming "global shutter" will cause exactly, what SidW said ... taking a picture is just "capturing a frame from a movie stream".
The workflow on a digital camera is already "shoot RAW and do postproduction later" ... and it will get worse. Recently invented cameras are just tiny boxes, which capture light from all directions and let you choose even the focus and DOF later.
All these things let me personally already return to film ... because I don't have the time and interest in an excessive postproduction and I like the idea of creative choices BEFORE taking the picture and not afterwards. Photography is more than just "recording the reality as perfect as possible" for me ... it is creating a reality the way, I want to show or express something in a picture.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 21, 2012 11:36:27 GMT -5
Cheers from Tokyo. Looking forward to seeing your pictures too.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
KODAK
Jan 21, 2012 6:22:54 GMT -5
Post by Berndt on Jan 21, 2012 6:22:54 GMT -5
It is probably not a popular opinion and I actually don't like it myself ... but I seriously think, that cameras as "stand alone operating devices" will be gone soon anyway. If I see, how many pictures, shared by friends on Facebook are still taken with a camera as we know it ... none. The difference in quality between a "real camera" and a cellphone became so small, that it already satisfies the needs of most of the people.
Sad, but a camera might be just a part of another multimedia device in the future. That's the tendency and I am afraid, that it will not only be Kodak, who will kiss the dust, Nikon and Canon will follow soon. The other camera makers, Panasonic, Sony and Fujifilm might survive, but just because cameras are just a small section of their business.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 20, 2012 22:41:23 GMT -5
Wayne, I am very sorry vor your loss. The picture actually looks as if it would have been taken yesterday. 66 is indeed too early to go  |
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 20, 2012 9:20:11 GMT -5
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Jan 20, 2012 7:46:26 GMT -5
I finally found the "perfect camera repair skin" Have been searching for it for a while. Everybody certainly knows the problem, when parts of the camera skin are missing sometimes ... or broken. So hard to find a material, which looks exactly the same and we mostly have to live with the missing parts ... or decide to renew everything. I am not an expert and still experimenting, but what I already noticed is, that real leather is mostly to thick, especially if parts like shutter or aperture lever need to stay movable as it is the case at fronts of TLRs for example. However, today I found the perfect stuff in a stationary shop and I think, it has been originally a folder for storing documents or so. It's very flexible plastic, like a thick foil ... but the structure of the surface does exactly look like "camera skin". What do you think ? I attached a picture. The part in the middle is the original TLR front skin ... a little bit dirty and broken though ( but that's the reason, why it needed to be replaced ). |
|
... and interesting is the reasoning of the judge, that the second image is "copied substantially from the 'intellectual creation' of the first".
You might be lucky with them ... or you might be not. Depends mostly on how they have been stored.
