Topic: Tiny Frames

[jharr]

Here's some Kodachrome Super-8 I wasted back in '97. Those dots in the water are surfers. Let's post some 16mm or 35mm half-frames here!


PB-Sunset by James Harr Photo, on Flickr

[mcduff]

Awesome. I will post. In fact I have some shot super 8 I am thinking about processing myself!

[AJShepherd]

35mm half frame taken on Ilford FP4+ with an Olympus Pen EE2.

The Buccaneer by Antony J  Shepherd, on Flickr

[Verian]

Olympus Pen EE2 - Leamington Spa

[02Pilot]

Here's some from my Yashica Samurai Z on Ektar - the fine grain of the Ektar works really well with half-frame.

[jharr]

Antony, I love the atmosphere.


My dad and my son about 16 years ago.


Dad & Jacob by James Harr Photo, on Flickr

[mcduff]

when is a 'tiny frame' not really a tiny frame? Obviously when you use a crap-load of them together 


Pen EES-2 Test - 002 by dsmccrac, on Flickr

From my first roll I put through I friend's "spare" Pen (he has a bit of a half-frame problem) that I have wound up buying! I am still figuring out this camera but I am having fun. Half frames, make better diptychs, triptychs (or 'quadtych' in this case, haha) than any other format IMHO because of orientation and nice thin borders between frames.

[Francois]

Definitely!

And there's also the good old Pop9... I should take it out again as it's just a bunch of fun!

[jharr]

when is a 'tiny frame' not really a tiny frame? Obviously when you use a crap-load of them together 

...

From my first roll I put through I friend's "spare" Pen (he has a bit of a half-frame problem) that I have wound up buying! I am still figuring out this camera but I am having fun. Half frames, make better diptychs, triptychs (or 'quadtych' in this case, haha) than any other format IMHO because of orientation and nice thin borders between frames.

I have my first half-frame on the way from the Share the Love 3 thread. Can't wait to load it up!

[Francois]

If you want to get the most economical photo experience of your life, just load it with a 36 exposure roll

[SLVR]

Or an Ilford 72 Exposure roll! I have a couple kicking around. Never Shot them though.

[mcduff]

Haha Francois, I shoot 36 (err, it is more like 80 by the time it is done) on it, and it is crazy! If the Filmpocolypse ever happens, little "halfies" will be the way to go. Criminy, TinTin, the 36 last long enough, those 72s would kill me! Shooting that would be like my big card in my DSLR (which with how much its ignored these days never fills up!) TinTin, our pal Mike (who if you are lurking, join this for pete's sake) gave me some sage advice of 'just relax and shoot'. Of course I am being an idiot these days and hopping between halfframe and 120, so I have to remember which I am shooting or I will go broke!

Before I got distracted with halfframe I was hording 110 cameras and film. I will start shooting it again, but here is a shot of Orca 110 on my lovely little pentax auto...


Pentax Auto 110, 6 min Dillution B - 016 by dsmccrac, on Flickr

(and don't worry, that was not Coors lite  )

[jharr]

Holy crap! I have just about enough attention span to put 8 shots on a roll of 120 with my 6x9 folder. I would be out of my mind by the end of 144 shots!! 

[jharr]

(and don't worry, that was not Coors lite  )

I was gonna make a comment on wasting film on inferior beer... Even if it isn't CL, it does look a little 'thin'.

The irony is that everything in the 'half frame' is half full (or half empty). 

[Francois]

Or an Ilford 72 Exposure roll! I have a couple kicking around. Never Shot them though.

These at least give you one guarantee: you'll see some frame counter springs become projectiles! 

[AJShepherd]

Wow! The legendary Ilford HP5 72 exposure roll!!!
I remember reading about those back in the late seventies.
Wasn't the film base a lot thinner than the normal, so as to fit in the cassette?
There were horror stories of the film snapping at the end of the roll, so it couldn't be wound back in.

[jharr]

We need one of these backs for the Pen. 500 frames baby! It would most likely be outlawed here in California. Who needs more than 24 photos?

[mcduff]

I was gonna make a comment on wasting film on inferior beer... Even if it isn't CL, it does look a little 'thin'.

Jeeze, jharr, first you imply my rock god Lou R. did not walk on water, and now you call my beer 'thin'? I am gonna think twice about following you in flickr is this sort of malarkey continues      JK

Contrary to what some people think it gets stinky hot in parts of Canada (where most of us live) in the summer, so there are times for a refreshing pilsner (but I am drinking darker and/or hoppy ales at this point of the year by now). By the patio and glass I can tell it is Mill Street Organic which is not amazing, but it is a nice summer beer and something that is good at a table that everyone can be happy with. Plus it is certified organic, so I am healthier after I have drank it than before!!

But we are way to OT!! I will bring us back by some more 110. Unlike half frames, you have to cheat in photoshop to collage them:

miss me? by dsmccrac, on Flickr

[Hungry Mike]

Hmmm... I thought my ears were burning, McD. If you want to blame me for your recent Half Frame awesomeness McD, then I have to blame you for my OM habit! My Olympus jonesing is all your fault. Well you and Yoshihisa Maitani's.

[oh... Long time lurker, first time poster, I love the forum and yes I am a Half frame-o-philiac but I stay away from 110]

Here's one from me - PEN FT with some badly expired Kodak 800 Max Zoom (bought in a fleabay lot) I redscaled.



Hey Tintin, do those 72 frame HP5 work without an autowinder? I'd leave one in a Pen FT (yes, yes I have more then one but it was the cheapest way to get lenses) and use it for months.

[jharr]

Jeeze, jharr, first you imply my rock god Lou R. did not walk on water, and now you call my beer 'thin'? I am gonna think twice about following you in flickr is this sort of malarkey continues      JK

Aw, you know when I look at your photos though, all those other flaws just melt away! 
Do you develop your own 110? I haven't had one since I was a kid, but I seem to remember those cassettes being nigh indestructible. How do you open one?

Here's one from me - PEN FT with some badly expired Kodak 800 Max Zoom (bought in a fleabay lot) I redscaled.

Mike, that's a nice result on the expired redscale conversion. I may have to give that a try.

~J

[Adam Doe]

A couple of older shots from my Bell and Howell Demi (same as a Canon Demi) half frame camera.


Museum Interior by adoephoto, on Flickr


Power Tower and Tree by adoephoto, on Flickr

This is where bulk loading can come in handy, you can load shorter rolls so you don't have to shoot 72 frames before developing!

[mcduff]

Adam -- nice pic. I have always wanted to play with one of those Demi's they look sweet
Mike -- welcome aboard, I think I have already favorited that pic, hope to see more, and stay hungry, like that is needed to be said ;-p
jharr -- those flaws that have melted away are the least of mine, so I better keep the photos coming  Yes, those 110 cartridges are insane, especially in the dark. I feel a little bit like the australopithecus smacking bones against the Black Obelisk in 2001!!

Or a more lowbrow analogy of my 110 opening experiences is this:



(I am now cowering in the corner hoping I did not unleash a wasting-friday-posting-animated-gifs plague on our beloved site. Ed, I apologize in advance  )

[Adam Doe]

I have had to open up a couple of 110 cartridges. The process was part photography, part dentistry and part brute force. It involved a cartridge of 110, a dark bag, two vice grips and whole lot of twisting. Miraculously the film itself survived the process. I think recall reading something on the web a while ago about opening 110 cartridges gracefully (though it may have been Minox cartridges) so that you could reload them, but after trying to get them open just to retrieve the film I'm not sure if it is actually possible.

[SLVR]

Mike welcome!

I lied a little. I think I have 24 exposures on one of my 72 exposure rolls. But I DO have one that is fresh. You could give it a shot. Though now that I think about it. You remember that crazy cinema guy who was gabbing to me at the expo last week? He was mentioning that shooting color cinema film will mess up the clutch in your film advance because of the thickness of the film.

I bet you could run into the same problem with those 72 exposure rolls. The base is thinner. Which would lead me to believe that you could start overlapping frames at some point or exactly like he said, mess the clutch in the camera. As your sprocket gear would be pushing a frame through but the take up spool wouldn't be turning enough to fully wind as it would be calibrated for a normal thicker film.

Who knows if the thickness of the film would be a factor.

I was thinking if you were to shoot it you could shoot it, then process in a patterson tank with 2 spools in it. Grabbing the film with one hand and measuring all the way out to your other hand across your body works out to around 36 exposures. Cut, lose a frame possibly, and spool both halves of film in seperate spools. Process, scan. If you get anything from it.

[jharr]

I lied a little. I think I have 24 exposures on one of my 72 exposure rolls. But I DO have one that is fresh. You could give it a shot. Though now that I think about it. You remember that crazy cinema guy who was gabbing to me at the expo last week? He was mentioning that shooting color cinema film will mess up the clutch in your film advance because of the thickness of the film.

Wasn't Kodachrome 64 essentially 35mm movie film with a remjet backing and all? Seems like if these old cameras could shoot that, they could handle a 72 frame roll. Also, it seems like a film manufacturer selling those long rolls would have done some testing with regular consumer cameras to make sure they weren't going to 'paper weight' them.

Just a guess, not a professional opinion.

~J

[SLVR]

Only one way to find out!

[mcduff]

From what I have read it uses a polyester base, which some other films use, such as some of the stuff marketed under the Rollei or AGFA names. While the fans of it will talk up its archivability, detractors will state that it is 'too strong' and if there is any binding the camera will give, vs the preferred solution of the film sprocket holes giving. From the wikipedia (therefore it must be correct): "It's [polyester] strength is sometimes also seen as a disadvantage, however, in that polyester-base films are so resistant to breakage that they are often more likely to break the film equipment should a jam or extra tension occur. Movie cameras therefore do not use this base for shooting the original camera negative, as it is vastly preferable and less costly in time and money for the film to break instead."

So I will not fight ya for it HungryMike. Leon, if you are listening, have you got any gossip on that crazy Ilford 72 stuff??

But we are talking too much and not tiny-framing enuff  :

This is from the another Pen I picked up from HungryMike, a trusty (and a bit Crusty, haha, no offense Mike) Old Pen EE. One of the rare shots I have done where I prefer the single frame (IE I likely screwed up the other frame!)

Pen EE Test - 004 by dsmccrac, on Flickr

[Hungry Mike]

Definitely only one way to find out with the 72 rolls! I'm game! Though I think you might be on to something with the film advance and thickness of film.

Re McD - that's from the EES2 correct? Rather than the EES? I forget which was which now but was that the one with some exposure issues?

But yeah more tiny frames -

Pen FT shot with a OM Macro lens (f3.5 one). The Pen F/FT/FV series have a collection of adapters for various lenses for other companies including their own:

Looks like redscale a bit but it is xpro'd slide film.

The recently departed Elephants from the Toronto zoo, shot with Pen FT and Polypan F:


And a boring picture but one shot with one of my favorite Pens that I regretfully rarely use, the EED. Beautiful camera (at least to my eyes). This was mostly to see if I could get some more Xpro'd slide film colour out of expired redscaled Kodak Gold shot at 12ISO:


As maybe those shots indicate, the half frames for me are about experimentation & fun. They are what got me and my wife back into film. We have other cameras, SLRs and the like, but there is something inherently joyful about half frames that keeps us coming back.

And here's a couple of my wife's photos with the EE2, the camera that started our half frame addiction:


That's with the Lomography slide film "Sunset Strip", shot at 200 maybe?


That's expired Portra NC 160, shot at 100.

[mcduff]

Nice shots Mike. Like the shot from the EED and indeed the camera itself.

To answer your question, no that last shot was with an EE (the first of the EE series). The first half-frame shot I posted (the 4 frames) was with the other camera I liberated from your halfframe harem: the EES-2

[Hungry Mike]

Funny you mention harem, as the those EEs were marketed to women apparently in Japan. As opposed to the EED which was "for men"

http://olypedia.de/static/images/1/12/PenEED_01_wallpaper.jpg

[jharr]

One of the first from the Olympus Pen EES-2 I got from Diane on the Share the Love thread.

Ektar 100 half-frame 35mm.


Autumn Sugar Maple by James Harr Photo, on Flickr

[sapata]

Actionsampler...

[Adam Doe]

Really like that Action Sampler shot Mauricio.


Here's some Orca 110


Broken-Factory-Window by adoephoto, on Flickr