Author Topic: Hello! (Read 9181 times)

Emma · « **on:** November 10, 2012, 01:11:07 PM »

Hi there,

I'm new here, after Ed kindly sorted my account! I was wondering if anyone had much advice on the Coronet Commander. I picked one up for £10 in a flea market, just for the fun of it. I've actually never used a film camera before, having grown up with digital, so its all a bit new... I've got as far as taking one roll of film (400 IS0, if that means anything?) but most came out underexposed.

I've also seen a thread about cutting up the inside of the camera. Is this necessary, or just for fun?

Looking forward to finding out more!

Emma

calbisu · « **Reply #1 on:** November 10, 2012, 02:00:06 PM »

Hi Emma!

Welcome to the filmwasters family

I cannot offer you much help with the Coronet Commander but I am sure somebody will do.

Carlos.

Emma · « **Reply #2 on:** November 10, 2012, 02:03:09 PM »

Thanks

I've been reading some of the other threads, and feeling like even more of a novice! Should have taken photography rather than art last year...

calbisu · « **Reply #3 on:** November 10, 2012, 02:04:55 PM »

Quote from: Emma on November 10, 2012, 02:03:09 PM

Thanks I've been reading some of the other threads, and feeling like even more of a novice! Should have taken photography rather than art last year...

Never too late...

Emma · « **Reply #4 on:** November 10, 2012, 02:21:05 PM »

You're right! I'll have to find a photography course (or just teach myself from what you guys say on here...)

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #5 on:** November 10, 2012, 02:46:04 PM »

Welcome Emma! Actually cutting out the mask of the Coronet Commander is just for fun. This way you get a squarish image (but only 12 of them):

Creperie de Gordes, Grenoble by Urban Hafner, on Flickr

About the film. ISO 400 seems good enough for me. I mean I have had luck even with ISO 100 film. But then I live in France where we might have more sun

You didn't tell us where you actually shot the roll of film. I assume it was outside? If so, did you use the 1/50s shutter speed and the "color" aperture setting? This should let the most light in ...

Francois · « **Reply #6 on:** November 10, 2012, 03:15:22 PM »

Welcome Emma!

We are the official film photography course

So if you have any questions, just ask them. There's bound to be someone here who can answer them

moominsean · « **Reply #7 on:** November 10, 2012, 03:18:10 PM »

As far as underexposed goes, a lot of those simple type of cameras work best outside on sunny or at least mid-day bright cloudy days. The shutter usually slows down over time so though i don't know when and where you were shooting, it was probably user as opposed to camera reasons!

Maybe post an example...

Francois · « **Reply #8 on:** November 10, 2012, 03:27:12 PM »

Don't forget that when the Coronet Commander was manufactured, 400 ISO was considered fast film (very sensitive).
Now, most color negative films have a lot of tolerance to over and under exposure (these are the C-41 process films). This is not the case for slide film (E-6 process). With traditional B&W film, it's pretty easy to cheat when processing the film in order to get some type of result.

Usually, indoor shots are next to impossible with such primitive cameras unless you use a very sensitive film (there isn't a ton of choice above 400 ISO).

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #9 on:** November 10, 2012, 03:43:34 PM »

Welcome Emma! You have certainly found the right place for your adventures with film and cameras..These guys know everything you could ever ask about photography! And they are all wonderful people. Be sure and post something in the weekly "show & tell", usually rears its head close to the weekend..Take a look at some of the past threads..
again ,welcome..
Diane

sapata · « **Reply #10 on:** November 10, 2012, 03:46:43 PM »

Welcome to the forum Emma

I remember a few time ago a very long thread about the Coronet so I'm pretty sure all your questions about this camera will be sorted!
See you around!...

Emma · « **Reply #11 on:** November 10, 2012, 04:14:54 PM »

Quote from: Urban Hafner on November 10, 2012, 02:46:04 PM

Welcome Emma! Actually cutting out the mask of the Coronet Commander is just for fun. This way you get a squarish image (but only 12 of them):

About the film. ISO 400 seems good enough for me. I mean I have had luck even with ISO 100 film. But then I live in France where we might have more sun You didn't tell us where you actually shot the roll of film. I assume it was outside? If so, did you use the 1/50s shutter speed and the "color" aperture setting? This should let the most light in ...

I had set the camera on Black and White, but I'll try on colour for the next roll. It was outside, and some came out nicely, but a few, especially the ones taken in the late afternoon, were underexposed. Was that really taken on a Coronet Commander? It's lovely! I'll try and upload some of the test shots, although most were me trying to fill a roll of film to see if the camera works...

Andrea. · « **Reply #12 on:** November 10, 2012, 04:15:29 PM »

Hello.

astrobeck · « **Reply #13 on:** November 10, 2012, 04:31:59 PM »

Greetings!
Glad you found us and am sure you will feel right at home here.
We're a mixed lot that shoot all types of film cameras and live all around the globe.

As others have mentioned show us an example of the result and I'm certain someone here can help you sort it out.

Again, welcome!

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #14 on:** November 10, 2012, 04:43:45 PM »

Thanks Emma. Yes, this shot was taking with a hacked Coronet Commander.

Emma · « **Reply #15 on:** November 10, 2012, 04:50:09 PM »

Quote from: Urban Hafner on November 10, 2012, 04:43:45 PM

Thanks Emma. Yes, this shot was taking with a hacked Coronet Commander.

Does hacking the back make it easier to have photos enlarged (if I'm using the right word O_o)? I can't figure out what size prints should/would be!

If I'm calling EVERYTHING by the wrong name, please correct, don't feel you need to be polite! I genuinley have no idea what I'm on about...

Urban Hafner · « **Reply #16 on:** November 10, 2012, 04:57:22 PM »

No, it's just a different format. With the original you get 6x4.5cm negatives. When you open up the back the negatives get bigger. It's closer to 6x6 but the negatives aren't real squares. I have no idea what a lab would even do with such a weird size ( I scan my own negs).

Emma · « **Reply #17 on:** November 10, 2012, 05:06:08 PM »

Quote from: Urban Hafner on November 10, 2012, 04:57:22 PM

No, it's just a different format. With the original you get 6x4.5cm negatives. When you open up the back the negatives get bigger. It's closer to 6x6 but the negatives aren't real squares. I have no idea what a lab would even do with such a weird size ( I scan my own negs).

Oh! That makes a lot of sense! I tried measuring the back with a ruler (feel free to laugh) and I couldn't work out what size negatives they were... :L

Francois · « **Reply #18 on:** November 10, 2012, 09:05:46 PM »

No laughing there. I think we've all done it at some point. Thing is that the film mask can be slightly different from camera to camera. Some are metric (6cm x 6cm or 6cm x 4.5cm) others are imperial (like 2½" x 2¼" which turns out to be 5.72mm)...

But mostly, if the image is rectangular on 120 film, it most likely will be 6x4.5 (or 645 in local talk). Somehow, for this format is never called 2¼ x 1¾.

There are bigger formats. But not on the Commander.

Emma · « **Reply #19 on:** November 10, 2012, 09:47:01 PM »

Big moment, I've just scanned my film so I have my first ever film pictures

Can't figure out how to put them in a post though as I don't have an account on anything like Flickr, so short of adding them as an attachment...? But they are better than I expected some a little overexposed, some COMPLETELY underexposed.

Francois · « **Reply #20 on:** November 10, 2012, 11:01:10 PM »

No problem, the site supports attachments.
But just make sure you make the images not too big. Usually between 600 and 800 pixel wide works well.

You just click on "Attachments and other options" under the text box. You'll see an attach field with a browse button. Just select the file. You can click on more attachments to add up to 5 images

Rafael Morales · « **Reply #21 on:** November 10, 2012, 11:23:37 PM »

Hello!

Volker · « **Reply #22 on:** November 10, 2012, 11:28:12 PM »

Hi Emma!

Emma · « **Reply #23 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:05:23 AM »

Thanks everyone

Posted a couple of pictures in the weekends come early thread.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #24 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:29:23 AM »

Hi Emma....who let you on here then?

Glad we finally got you access and apologies again for the delays and the problems.

Anyway, as usual time is my enemy as I have serious amounts of love for the Coronet Commander and can bore for England on the subject, but my daughter won't learn her 23 'very hard words' for tomorrow's spelling test all by herself, so I'll have to leave you with some example photos and a couple of links and come back to this later.

It looks like you found the recent discussion about Commanders and whether to cut the mask or not. My view is 'yes', do it, but it depends on whether you like your photos long and thin or a more standard size. When I bought my first Commander it had a roll in it. I finished off the roll and got it processed. The pictures come out like this:

Found Photo #1 by Ed Wenn, on Flickr

I decided that frame size wasn't for me and decided to cut away the frame mask at the back, smooth it off and see what results it gave. I was very happy with the distortion at the edges, the vignetting and the larger frame size. It got me excited about toycameras again too which was great because I'd kind of become a bit bored with using Holgas and Dianas.

Essentially, once you decide whether to open up the frame size or not, (and assuming you live in the UK) you should use 400ASA film at the slowest shutter speed and the widest aperture (I don't have a Commander to hand and can't remember the controls available). This will give you a feel for what the camera can do for you and as the light gets better after Christmas you could adjust your film accordingly. I found that with all toycams, starting out with 400ASA film is best.....but people here will help with that. The Commander is no different in this regard to a Holga, a Diana, an Agfa Clack etc. etc.

Here's a little Commander discussion from 2007: http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=533

....and here are some photos that I've taken with various Commanders over the years (more can be seen on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=73515369@N00&q=commander):

Kruja Castle Wall by Ed Wenn, on Flickr

Cheese Eating Surrender Monkey by Ed Wenn, on Flickr

Coco Rosie by Ed Wenn, on Flickr

.....and finally, a bit of Commander porn (seen here on many previous occasions, but I can't help getting it out again!). I don't have all of these any more as I gave most of them away, but I still have one of the Mark IIs.

Commanders by Coronet by Ed Wenn, on Flickr

Emma · « **Reply #25 on:** November 11, 2012, 12:12:53 PM »

Ed, thanks again! I think it may be my new internet addiction... certainly a lot more fun than facebook!

Those are great shots. Interestingly yours are a lot crisper than mine, although that may be down to a dirty lens. I'll try 400ASA next, should be able to pick some up on tuesday. That is a seriously impressive collection! I don't know how you can give them away though, I think I've bonded with mine already

Britt Aximon · « **Reply #26 on:** November 11, 2012, 01:31:50 PM »

Welcome Emma!

This is the nicest bunch of people I have ever met, I am sure you will get answers to all your questions. I'm quite new at this film thing too, but enjoy it more and more for every roll of film I shoot.

/Britt

Francois · « **Reply #27 on:** November 11, 2012, 01:37:54 PM »

Toy cameras are just like that. Once you find the right one for you, you just can't get rid of them

LT · « **Reply #28 on:** November 11, 2012, 01:44:45 PM »

HI Emma - welcome to Filmwasters. And I cant think of a better toycamera to own than the Coronet Commander! I took a look at your pics in the weekend thread, they look great. Lewes? (Love the Harvey's Beer)

ISO (International Standards Org) and ASA (American Standards Association) film ratings are the same, so your 400 iso is a 400 asa film.

I used to have a commander, which is now owned by a German man living in France (see Urban above) ... I woudl recommend opening out the mask, but only if you are looking for the toycamera look (which I think is a bonus on the Commander). As for your sharpness - your shots look a little low on contrast, which with the lack of sharpness might be due to a dirty lens, or you scanning technique .... etc etc etc. So many variables. below are a couple of my Commander shots before I shipped it off to Herr Hafner.

sapata · « **Reply #29 on:** November 11, 2012, 02:31:11 PM »

Ed ... you should've done the latest Coco Rosie album cover!

Emma · « **Reply #30 on:** November 11, 2012, 04:58:46 PM »

Thank you for all your help! Leon; yeah, I took them all in Lewes (where I live) on my way to a violin lesson. Harvey's depot near the station, I used to walk past it on my way to school every day. I'll get some more of the same film, and try another roll. I hadn't thought about the scanning. It's not that great a scanner, so maybe I'll try having a couple enlarged properly.

If I hack out the back, what size would I enlarge them too? Urban Hafner suggested that it might be difficult for a lab, but I don't know how or have the resources/time/money to develop and scan my own!

Francois · « **Reply #31 on:** November 11, 2012, 05:25:19 PM »

The scanner is probably not at fault that much. We all have some type of Epson flatbed and get good results from them.

There are tricks to getting the most out of them. Most of us tend to scan the negatives as color and convert after the scan. I found that the scanner doesn't scan all colors on the same focus plane.

But looking at the images you posted on the weekend thread, I figured that all they need is a level adjustment and a bit of sharpening.
I took the liberty of playing around with your image. Since I didn't want to denature them (I don't like playing with other's artwork), I just adjusted the image to use all the available tonal range and did a bit of sharpening... hope you won't mind.
I used Photoshop but there's a host of good free programs that can do it. If you want to know about the best ones, feel free to ask.

Photo_Utopia · « **Reply #32 on:** November 11, 2012, 09:29:42 PM »

Hi Emma welcome. I have seen a few of your shots in the week-end thread and I'm impressed. I hope to see more of your work.
Regards
Mark Antony

Emma · « **Reply #33 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:15:07 PM »

Francois, that looks amazing! I have Paint.net which I've used with digital photos for years now, and I know I can do most of that, so I'll edit a few more and post them.

Francois · « **Reply #34 on:** November 11, 2012, 10:45:37 PM »

Personally, I'm a big fan of The GIMP (I have a Linux netbook so I use it there). There's also the good old Irfanview that can do a lot of stuff. The best viewer is definitely Picasa. For posting on forums and simple resizing of images, there's BD Sizer.

Irfanview and BD Sizer are so small I always have them on my computer. They boot in an instant and work quite fast.

When I looked at the histogram of your image, I noticed that the histogram was shoved all the way to the left. So I dragged the right cursor to the end of the image range. Then I moved the midtones a little bit. Probably what the "I'm feeling lucky" button in Picasa would have done.

So anyways, I'm happy you liked my rendition of your image.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #35 on:** November 12, 2012, 08:49:17 AM »

hi emma! I see you've got all the experts you need already. I'll be looking forward to seeing your shots from your first roll. always glad to see another toycamera user join the bunch

Emma · « **Reply #36 on:** November 12, 2012, 07:56:24 PM »

Thanks

Francois, that makes a lot of sense. Paint.net was close enough, managed to achieve the same effects!

Another couple of random questions about the Commander: Is it possible to remove the lens? Can see a lot of dust etc inside but I can't get at it! Also, I thought the camera came with another lens but closer inspection proves that it fits quite neatly over the lens. Is this some kind of zoom or filter thingamajig?

Francois · « **Reply #37 on:** November 12, 2012, 10:19:02 PM »

I really doubt it would be for a zoom (LOL). These things were probably made before the idea of a zoom lens even came out!

Usually, on most cameras, you can put a filter. It can be very handy in B&W as it helps control the contrast and overall rendition of the scene.

tkmedia · « **Reply #38 on:** November 13, 2012, 12:51:19 AM »

I use paint.net too, sometimes sumopaint also works well.

Emma · « **Reply #39 on:** November 13, 2012, 03:41:36 PM »

Aha right... Oops! Well, I'll try it on a few shots next roll, see what happens. I bought colour and b/w this time so plenty of room for experimentation!

I haven't heard of sumopaint, I'll check it out.

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #40 on:** November 14, 2012, 09:57:38 PM »

Emma, the Commander's lens doesn't screw off or anything to the best of my knowledge. I've also never heard of it being sold with an additional lens or similar attachment...but of course, now I'm intrigued

Any chance you could take a photo and post it here?

Emma · « **Reply #41 on:** November 16, 2012, 01:17:00 PM »

It may have to be a digital photo... unless you can wait for about a week for me to finish the two rolls I have now and have them developed! It came in a brown plastic case with a box attached to the strap, a filter/lens/something-that-I-don't-know-about inside the box. Happy to find that the box is the perfect size for a few rolls of film

Francois · « **Reply #42 on:** November 16, 2012, 03:23:35 PM »

Digital photos are OK when it comes to playing show and tell.
And if stuck in a bind without a proper scanner, digi pics of film based images are also OK.

All the admins really care about is that the initial capture of the image be done on film.

Terry · « **Reply #43 on:** November 16, 2012, 04:16:33 PM »

Emma,

You should think seriously about developing your own black and white. It's much less daunting than you'd think and you don't need a darkroom to do it. A lot of us are soup-and-scan types. It's a compromise of course, but you still get the rush of unrolling a freshly souped roll of film and seeing the images on it for the first time. There's nothing like it!

Terry

Francois · « **Reply #44 on:** November 16, 2012, 10:00:40 PM »

Like Terry said, it's pretty easy to process B&W. It doesn't require special machines and it's pretty tolerant of temperature and time variations.

Emma · « **Reply #45 on:** November 17, 2012, 11:12:40 AM »

Ok, these are digital pictures of the odd lens attachment.

As for developing my own, not sure that I can afford the chemicals at the moment! I'm going to wait for the next couple of rolls to be processed and see if its worth it first. I'm also looking into using the college darkroom, where someone could teach me to do things properly, but its technically of limits to anyone not doing photography so...

Author Topic: Hello! (Read 9181 times)

astrobeck

Terry