My Photographic Observations…and AWESOMENESS
19.02.2012
Canon Rebel 2000: A Pleasant Surprise
categories: camera equipment, film photography, shop-talk
tags: , , , ,

I thought it was about time I profiled a camera that I’ve been using for nearly four years and which has become an unexpected favorite in my camera arsenal: the Canon Rebel 2000.

In June 2008, I purchased a Canon Rebel Ti from a charity shop for $25. It didn’t come with a lens, so I had to lay hands on one in order to test the camera. I had a flash of inspiration: My friend Adam used to have a Canon Rebel, and I was pretty sure he said it had stopped working. I hoped he might be up for selling the lens off his Rebel, since he couldn’t get any use out of the camera body at that point. As hoped, Adam agreed to sell the lens to me. Hooray! When I picked up the lens from him, he said, “You can just take the camera, too. I think it might be working again.” I attached said lens to the Rebel Ti body I’d purchased and found that the Ti’s film door was broken. Boo! I put batteries in the 2000, and to my delight, it was working again!

Thanks for the killer camera, Adam!
It’s in good hands, I promise!

Product of my first roll through the Rebel 2000

This was right before I was going on a church youth group trip to Waco, TX, so I broke the Rebel 2k in by taking it on the road with me. The Rebel was just PERFECT for toting around with me down there. I could use it like an over-grown point-and-shoot if I wanted, or I could have complete control over exposure and focus settings. That trip to Waco with the Rebel had me hooked. It’s been one of those cameras I can throw into my purse and be ready to go at a moment’s notice! I remember one of my photo buddies, Dirk, at Memphis Photo Supply giving me a hard time when he saw me with this camera. He gave me a “you could do better” sideways glance. Then, when complimenting a photo he thought was fantastic and wanting to know which camera I’d used, I’m pretty sure I rocked his world by replying, “My Canon Rebel 2000!” Burn!

Waco, Tx

mewithoutYou in Nashville, July 2008

I did a search for photos in my Flickr photostream that are tagged with “Canon Rebel 2000.” There are about 450 photos there from my Rebel! That number is pretty high, considering how many other cameras I have and divide my film between. I’ve actually featured a lot of Rebel 2000 photos on the blog and in my photo galleries, but here are a sampling of my favorites from over the years.

(Click the thumbnails to view the full-sized image)

 

(And, I’ve obviously loved shooting people with the Rebel 2K!)

All photos taken with the Canon Rebel 2000 and the 35-80mm/4-5.6 “kit lens.” Except the photo of the Rebel at the top of this post, which was taken with my Canon Powershot SX230HS.

07.02.2012
{Redscale}
categories: film photography, informational, shop-talk
tags: , , , ,

I redscaled some film, y’all.

What’s “redscale” film?

Yet another question that I’m glad you asked!

I didn’t know what redscale film was when I first saw it either. I saw some film labeled as redscale at Urban Outfitters last summer and was puzzled. I thought, “Surely Lomography hasn’t produced a new type of film…” They hadn’t. And I was so shocked that I’d never heard of this before, seeing as I’m an “experimental photography” enthusiast. You load film into a canister with the wrong way facing the shutter – this exposes a different part of the film’s emulsion, which is what causes the shift in the colors. Shooting the film upside down also causes your images appear reversed, as they would in a mirror. My research uncovered a tutorial on how to redscale your film, and it seemed simple enough. I decided to give it a go!

I took a roll of Fuji Superia 400 X-tra and transferred it into a canister for Fujicolor 200 film – backwards, like ya do. I loaded it into my trusty Canon Rebel 2000 and began incorporating this film/camera combo into my life over the course of the next few days. Here are some of the results! Backwards results, of course.

 

What do I think about shooting redscale film?

The same thing I think about shooting cross-processed film: Fun stuff! I normally like the colours in my photos to be as true-to-life as possible, but I enjoy alternative process techniques as a surreal  accompaniment to the look of my usual photos.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Technical notes for my fellow photo nerds: This film was 400 ASA, shot as 200 ASA to help compensate for the fact that the light coming into the camera had to go through wrong side of the film in order to reach the light-sensitive side of the film (aka “the film was loaded upside down.”) The developed negatives look pretty well exposed, perhaps underexposed in some shots. I might experiment with exposure on future rolls of redscale film. I told the one hour mini-lab where these were developed that they shouldn’t try to correct the colour cast in the photos. As such, the negatives weren’t scanned quite right. There was a weird blue-green grain/noise in the areas of the photos that should have been black or shadowed. I didn’t know if this was an actual film exposure issue or an issue with the scans from the photo lab. I normally don’t do much to “fix” film photos in post-processing on the computer, but for these, I used the black color dropper in my software’s levels to click on an area of each photo that should have been black. This made the scans look MUCH better. I hope this does not constitute “photo manipulation.” I’m not really into that.

05.02.2012
Waiting Room
category: film photography
tags: , ,

Olympus XA • Expired Fuji Super HQ 200 film

Waiting room chairs outside my dad’s doctor’s office in Coldwater, MS. One of those oddities I run across and have no choice but to pull out a camera and document it. File this under “what is THIS all about??”

27.01.2012
Behind the Scenes {+ Inspiration}
categories: film photography, personal
tags: , ,

You know me and my documentarian nature. While I’ve been working with the owner of Muddy’s Bake Shop, Kat, in her home to do their menu photos, I’ve been snapping photos of the “process.” I’ve also been taking photos around Kat’s home, because it inspired me both photographically and personally!

If you’ve ever been to Muddy’s, you may know that Kat considers the bake shop to be an extension of her home.  As such, I would describe her home as being “like Muddy’s, on steroids.” If steroids made decor extra cute, whimsical, and with an extra pinch of cheekiness, that is. I announced to Kat, “I’m pretending I’m doing a magazine photo shoot of your home because I love it so much.” Which I promise is far less weird than it sounds when I put it that way. But Kat’s probably pretty used to my being forward with my photography by now (“Hold on while I get my camera so I can take a picture of you in your wig!”)

Before I began my tenure at Muddy’s in 2009, I had people telling me “You have to go to Muddy’s! It’s what your bakery would look like if you had one!” It was totally true. By the same token, Kat’s home decor is in the same vein that I’d want my home to be furnished one of these days. I hope she won’t mind too terribly much that I’m sharing these with you all, as my way of paying homage to her impeccable style.

All photos taken with the lovely Yashica GT on Kodak BW400CN film. One of my favourite camera and film combinations of all time. That camera is going to get a much-deserved blog posting dedicated to it soon.

26.01.2012
Artist, at Work
category: film photography
tags: , ,

Olympus XA • Expired Fuji Super HQ 200 film • Muddy’s Menu Photo Shoot


An artist who works in buttercream and sprinkles.

21.01.2012
Hipster Cam {Volume One}
categories: camera equipment, film photography
tags:

Warning: if you or someone you love is a hipster, the contents of this blog may fly all over your delicate, ironic sensibilities. Also, this was written with tongue firmly in cheek.

Hello there!  Today, I present you with (what I call) “the hipster cam” -  also better known as the Holga 135. If you like it when I you overly verbose stories about cameras and photos, then this is the blog posting for YOU!

A Holga is a cheap, plastic camera from China that originally came only in models that took medium format film (Holga 120.) I’ve been using medium format Holga cameras since 2000. More recently, however, 35mm Holga models have been on the market. I never really wanted one of the 35mm Holgas, for they are distributed by the Lomography people. I have long had a hate/fascination for the things they do. Over-priced, trendy, cleverly marketed products. Bleck! Even worse, you could buy a Holga 135 in the Lomography section of Urban Outfitters. Double bleck! A section of that retail outlet devoted to “analog photography” to make hipsters feel like they’re thumbing their nose at the digital photography establishment (I assume??) Fifty dollars for a plastic camera that looks like you spray-painted it in your garage?! I think not!!

All of those feelings about Holga 135 cameras were true until I went into Urban Outfitters with a friend last summer. When I saw a purple Holga 135 on clearance for $20, I couldn’t get it out of my head (this happens when I see most any camera for $20 or under.) I mulled it over for a few days and ultimately went against my nature buying a Lomography camera at Urban Outfitters. Yes, Hades had frozen over.

Riddled with guilt that I may have turned into a hipster at this point, I decided the only way to make up for this lapse in my usually unfailing devotion to anti-hipsterdom was to do a photo series with the hipster cam. A series of things hipsters like, more specifically. There are soooo many things which fall into this category, so I have only begun to scratch the surface. But here are a few of the shots from two rolls I put through the Hipster Cam mostly last summer:

Things Hipsters Like , Part One

Banjos


Old typewriters

Pho Hoa Bihn

Waffle House

Farmers Markets*

Sriracha*

Gibson’s Donuts

So, a couple of things:

  1. I LOOOOOVE using the Holga 120 cameras I’ve owned. Having owned the 135 since late June, I have only shot two rolls of film with it. That should tell you something. That something being that I’m not in love with it yet.
  2. After those two rolls of film, the rewind knob’s crank lever fell off. Or broke off. Can’t remember which.  Either way, I finally remembered to ask Lomography about a replacement part and was told I could exchange the camera. I sent it back last week. I didn’t like the purple one, so I’m keeping my fingers crossed that it will return to me as a mint green or blush colored Hipster Cam.
  3. Turns out, I like a lot of the same things I would make fun of hipsters for enjoying. See, we’re not so different after all.

*The accuracy of the viewfinder on this thing. Not so much. I did not actually compose those shots that way.

04.01.2012
After Midnight
category: film photography
tags:


January 1, 2012 • Nikon FE • Fujicolor 200 film

Post balloon-drop. Post dead digital camera battery. Film to the rescue.

New Year = ushered in.

30.12.2011
{Forgotten Frames} Close-up
categories: film photography, forgotten frames
tags:

As I predicted would happen, I found yet another roll of film that slipped through the cracks and remained undeveloped until now. This time, there was no photo of my niece during her formative years to help me pinpoint the approximate dates the film was exposed. There were, however, other tell-tale elements in the photos that helped me determine which camera was used and a few other things about the images.

Camera: Yashica TL Electro-X

How do I know this? That camera has a very distinct light leak. I’ll level with you, folks: I don’t enjoy light leak in my photos. So I do everything in my power to correct them when they rear their ugly heads (or, more accurately, ugly splotches and apparitions.) With the Yashica TL Electro-X, my normal light leak combating measures weren’t so successful. I still haven’t figured out exactly where light is getting into this puppy against my wishes!

Time period of origin: Roughly 2006. Possibly 2007.

There is nothing in these photos that tells me precisely when they were taken, but I can approximate a time frame using clues within the photos.

 

As I said, I could tell right away which camera I used for these photos because of the particular light leak in the images. I also know they were taken with macro extension tubes attached. These are very clearly test photos (aka “nothing very interesting…”) Furthermore, both the Yashica and the extension tubes arrived in my hands around the same time in 2006. In fact, one of the extension  tubes makes a guest appearance in one of the photos!

That leads me to believe that these photos were likely taken during the summer of 2006. I do allow for the possibility that the photographs were made the following year when I was trying desperately to get rid of that dadgum light leak!

Conclusion: I wouldn’t say that I unearthed any photographic gem when this roll of film was finally developed. But, it’s always cool seeing images for the first time when such a great length of time has passed between the time the film was exposed and when it’s developed. It’s a very good thing!

18.11.2011
{Forgotten Frames} Waterproof
categories: family, film photography, forgotten frames, personal
tags:

File this under “that’s just crazy!”

I pride myself on being fastidious about getting film developed in a very timely manner, as well as making sure I know what the content of each roll is when I get it developed. Well, I thought I was fastidious about that, until this past year or so. First there was the half 2006, half 2010 roll of film, then there was the mystery Holga roll, next it was this test roll from 2006 I sorta forgot to get developed, and now the subject of today’s post! I think I am going to have to add a new category to my blog called “forgotten frames” since this keeps happening…

Backstory: When I moved this summer, I noticed some rolls of film in my things. I assumed they were blank (that perhaps they had been misloaded in a camera and rewound before actually being exposed, that they’d accidentally been exposed to light, etc.) I thought it would be good to take the film into the photo lab just in case my normally fastidious film record keeping skills had failed me. When I picked up the developed film, I’d found that I was right: some of the film was unexposed, some of it had been fogged by exposure to light, and my record keeping had failed me when it came to one of the rolls. And this failing in my film record keeping is one of the biggest treats I’ve had in some time. I am smiling from ear to ear!

That’s because the forgotten frames of film held some gems of my favorite person, when she was half as old as she is now. Once I looked at the pictures, I knew EXACTLY what was going on here. I remembered this day well.  And fondly.

It was summer of 2007. My aunt was staying in a motel while damage to her house was being repaired. My niece, who was five at the time, and I went swimming at the motel’s pool. I took my Yashica Electro 35 GT into the water with me, which probably wasn’t advisable since I could have completely ruined the camera if I got it wet. I came out with some of my favorite photos of my niece ever (see here).  I also had another camera with me that day. It was an underwater/waterproof camera I’d purchased a couple of years before but hadn’t gotten much use from since, you know, it’s not like I spend my weekends kayaking or snorkeling. But swimming in a motel pool was a good chance to use it!

I don’t know why I didn’t get this film developed at the time it was used. I think it may have been because I wasn’t that keen on this camera. I hadn’t much liked results I’d gotten from it previously. But, as I said, I am so glad that I got the treat of seeing these for the first time four years after they were taken! They’re so precious!


BEST. PICTURE. EVER.

I am pretty delighted right now.

Prologue:

Now, maybe you noticed the colors are kind of weird in these photos. There are also dark curves at the top and bottom of each photo. The weird colors are from years of heat damage to the film – that can make the colors get all whacked out. The dark curves, well, I was surprised at the source of those. I thought that perhaps the film had curled up in the negative scanner at the photo lab because heat damage can also cause film to curl. But, no, the blackened areas are actually ON the negative. I dug out the (now broken and unusable) waterproof camera and found that the the plastic frame inside it was bent. Basically, the weirdness of this roll of film is all due to the sort of happy accidents that happen from time to time when shooting film. I couldn’t reproduce if I wanted to.


17.11.2011
Yard Sale Finds: Canon Sureshot Supreme
categories: camera equipment, film photography, informational, shop-talk
tags: , , ,

I admit: I have too many cameras. But it’s only because I love cameras SO much! I justify the fact that I have so many tools in my photographic arsenal by how little most of my equipment cost. I could probably lay out all my “camera stuff” and I probably didn’t pay more than $20 or $30 for each item. Yes, there’s my digital camera set-up that cost a pretty penny, but other than that, everything else was purchased on the cheap.

Today’s featured “cheap as chips” camera is the Canon Sureshot Supreme.

My mom brought this camera, as well as a Polaroid, home with her from a yard sale last month. She is always on the lookout for cheap camera equipment on my behalf! For the Sureshot Supreme and the Polaroid, she paid $3. Yes. That’s $3 for BOTH! That means the camera I’m showing you today cost $1.50. See, you can’t hate on me for getting new cameras when the deals are that good!

Shockingly, the Canon Sureshot Supreme is not a camera I had ever heard of before having it placed in my hands. That meant I had to do a little research on it. Here’s what I found out:

Some technical specifications about the Sureshot Supreme:

  • 38mm/2.8 lens – For a point-and-shoot camera, that’s a FAST lens! Oh, and that lens is glass. Nice!
  • Shutter speed range – 1/8 sec – 1/500 sec. I like that 1/8 end of the range!
  • Auto flash – The flash is automatic, but can be forced to fire or forced to not fire. More on that later though.
  • Close focusing – This camera focuses down to 1.8 feet. Seriously, dude, that is highly unusual for a camera of this ilk. It’s more usual for cameras like this to have a minimum focusing distance of 3 feet or so.
  • Self-timer - Ten second self-timer, which is standard. But there is a really interesting design feature Canon added to go along with the self-timer. I’ll describe that in a second.

Oddities about this Sureshot Supreme:

  • Recessed “cancel flash” button on the bottom - I don’t care for flash photography and use existing light whenever possible, so I always want the ability to turn the flash off when using a point-and-shoot camera. Usually, that is done through a flash menu or a simple on-off switch. On the Sureshot Supreme though, it’s a little more tricky. You have to shove you fingernail or something into a recessed area on the bottom of the camera in order to cancel the flash. That’s not so handy.
  • “Rubber flash cap” – Never have I heard of such a thing in all my days. Just as I mentioned in the above paragraph, you can generally force a camera’s flash to fire through a flash menu or on-off switch. This camera, however, has an accessory that is stored on the camera’s strap which is popped into the sensor below the lens which reads the light and says tells the camera whether or not flash is needed. Basically, you trick the camera into thinking there is not enough light in the scene you’re photographing and the flash needs to brighten things up. Seriously though, why didn’t they just put a switch on the camera so you can turn the flash on and off at will?!
  • The “tilt knob” - This is another first for me. So, what Canon has done here is decided that they want to help you make better self-portraits using the camera’s self timer. You are supposed to put the camera on a flat surface and swivel the tilt knob so the camera is pointing slightly upward at you. I guess so you don’t have to crouch down for the picture? I mean, I didn’t realize that this was a huge problem in the lives of casual photographers. Maybe it was in the 1980s when this camera was made though. Maybe back then, photography consumers needed the ability to tilt the camera “up to 16.5°” (according the the camera’s manual.)

Despite the great detail into which I’ve gone about the Canon Sureshot Supreme’s features and quirks, all that  matters is how the pictures turn out. And chances are, most of you just skipped forward to the photo section of this blog anyway. So here are some shots from the first couple of rolls I ran through the Sureshot. These were all shot on Fuji Superia X-tra 400, for those who like to know that sort of thing.

Best of Roll 1:


My first photo with the Sureshot Supreme. A deceased bird outside of Urban Outfitters. I figured it died from hipster overload. But I was pleased how the camera handled the shot! And is that vignetting I detect at the edges? I sure hope so!


It’s shaaaarp. And I thought the lens rendered the sky beautifully.


Lovely!


The inside of the leather case that came with the Sureshot. I LOVE when I get used camera equipment which has the previous owner’s name written or engraved on it.

Best of Roll 2:


Great old register at a local fabric and notions store in my family’s town.


I mostly wanted the focus to be on the Lego figure, and the camera mostly came through

It even works on snapshots of my niece with a chocolate bar!


Pink chair in the woods


Check out that creamy bokeh!


Srlsy. Nice bokeh, Sureshot!

Conclusion?

The Canon Sureshot Supreme is kind of an odd bird. I honestly haven’t seen any point-and-shoot like it before. Certain design features have left me scratching my head. But I really can’t complain, since the lens on the Sureshot is pretty fantastic, the camera only set me back $1.50, and auto focus point-and-shoot cameras were still in their infancy back in the mid-80s – these weird features of which I speak were probably considered totally rad innovations back then!