Nikon EM 1979

l pearse

Had these on my Flickr for ages B/W film. (Using my €5 Nikon FM)
Found it a little off putting using Manual, l'm so used to Auto Focus & did l mention l'm as blind as a bat....:rolleyes:
All taken in Dublin,
Government Buildings...Trinity.....Shelbourne Hotel
Stephens Green.



.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/29172058@N07/

Mycroft H

I like the first one, and the last. Not bad for a fiver!

At least you have a matchstick light meter, i have a zenit with no meter at all, you need a external one!

Mr. Grieves

The last one is very nice. What film are you using? Sure looks grainy, or have you cropped the bike one very tightly?

Thirdfox

Nice going for a fiver! I bought my FE for 50 euro off ebay...

melekalikimaka

really nice stuff... i like alot... what film was used?

l pearse

Thanks for input people, used 36mm film, cheap and cheerful

CabanSail

To me they all look quite muddy & lacking in contrast.

Fajitas!

It's an aesthetic

used 36mm film

You mean 35mm film

Morrisseeee

Is it the Nikon EM like this one, or is it an FM, the wiki says the EM is a girlie camera !! eeek, how sexist

Mr. Grieves

It's a 35mm camera, so I guessed that part. I was more interested in the speed/brand/process of the film.

mike65

What speed of film?

Buzz Lightyear

Nice shots Linda. The bike is wonderful as is the band stand in the Green.

Have you scanned these in or what method did you use ?

l pearse

Fajitas! wrote: »

It's an aesthetic


You mean 35mm film

Sorry typo!

The brand l got from Birminghams ILFORD HP5 plus 400 B/W
Dropped the roll into 'Photocare Sales Ltd. Abbey st.' they put the film onto disc. (€10) & uploaded onto flickr.


Morrisseeee,this is the Camera bought.


Thanks again for all your comments.

joanbrent

Good shots, loved them.

PoleStar

I just got a Nikkormat FTN!

So I am itching to join you guys!

Im just waiting for my lens to arrive.

Mr. Grieves

Did you do anything with these in photoshop? They look very grainy indeed for HP5 at 400.

DaireQuinlan

Mr. Grieves wrote: »

Did you do anything with these in photoshop? They look very grainy indeed for HP5 at 400.

I was thinking the same thing. Actually I was thinking they look pretty grainy for 3200 film :-)

Unless thats actually what you were going for i'd have the metering or shutter speeds checked out. That bike pic looks about 3 or 4 stops under exposed.

l pearse

Mr. Grieves wrote: »

Did you do anything with these in photoshop? They look very grainy indeed for HP5 at 400.

l went for a grainy look in 2 and the Bandstand to age them more, maybe went too far.... used Picnik to edit.

DaireQuinlan

l pearse wrote: »

l went for a grainy look in 2 and the Bandstand to age them more, maybe went too far.... used Picnik to edit.

I'm going to succumb to a bit of film snobbery here and suggest that you're thinking digitally too much. If I want a grainy look to a shot I'll shoot with grainy film, underexpose, and develop in rodinal or something. I'd rarely consider taking a shot and post-processing it so that it's altered to that degree.

There are a couple of aspects to picking what you're going to shoot/develop with. Sometimes it's necessity, often however you're making a choice about what you want the final result to look like. If you're going to post process for a particular 'look' then you may as well be shooting digital.

l pearse

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

. If you're going to post process for a particular 'look' then you may as well be shooting digital.

l agree..Overkill.
lt was my first roll that l shot on the EM and l treated the result like digital.

l kept the pictures off boards because l didn't really know what l thought of them myself..Now when l go again l'll be more gentle with any editing..lf any @ all!
The places & objects that l photographed was purpose 'old Dublin' & l'll possibly stick with the same.
You definitley get a differant feeling when you use an old camera.
Feels like you have been brought back in time & thats what l was trying to portray in the shots.

Thanks for the advice DaireQuinlan.

FoxT

I havent shot film in years but HP5 I know is not this grainy unless underexposed. I'm not sure I agree with the advice to go with graininess in the film/processing, if I was shooting film my approach would be to create the very best negative I could, then scan & modify the image at that stage. That way if you change your mind or want to go for say a Lith film look you know you have a good 'master scan' to work from. This is a personal preference though.

I'd also suggest you take a cut at developing the film yourself. It is easy, cheap, and very satisfying.

Best of luck with it, FoxT