Recent content by Crimeo

Formats in themselves have no graininess or lack of graininess inherently. If shooting the equivalent photo as in another format, it doesn't appear any more or less grainy ("Equivalent" = multiply focal length and aperture by crop factor, and divide ISO by the square of the crop factor: the...

yes

It MIGHT work! I just took a photo of my cube oriented so that the red side is facing me from the light in the bright window to the side out of frame. And then photographed it with my dedicated infrared only Rebel t2i. Looks like infrared is passing just fine through the red side. Probably way...

No this is definitely not the case. Glass filters are a lot more precise and effective. They can use a lot better materials and tolerances due to the low volume you have to pay for and the less demanding requirements (don't have to be flexible for example). And they are a lot thicker to brute...

Yes, sure, but there is some film which is finest, and whatever that is (probably Agfa Copex Rapid microfilm), I can get 3x more grains than you can using that exact same film, because I have 3 sheets being blended together. So long as I give it 3x more light overall. I actually like grain...

The proposal here is for a SLR camera. Normally you wouldn't need a mirror for a mirrorless camera with EVF, but you would here, because like in other SLRs, we want to send the image to two different locations. 1) a sensor in the roof, and 2) the film in the back. So you need a mirror (either a...

I get mine from an actual medical supplier, zzmedical. They don't seem to care one bit if I'm an actual hospital or whatever, they just send it anyway. Never had any quality problems at all and it's fresh and in date because it's from an actual supplier meant for real use on delivery.

It is definitely way too thick, but that's a neat idea for a homemade 3d printed camera made for that or something perhaps.

Because each and every one of those was irrelevant for ilford paper. So none of them can possibly be an independent cause. They can form part of an interaction effect, but any interaction effect here by necessity must also be reliant on something unique to kodak paper that ilford doesn't use...

I would have agreed with you several years ago, but the Pentax 17 blew this assumption out of the water I think quite plainly. Which is what made me think along these lines and others. And that was for a camera with almost no distinguishing advantages vs cheap ebay vintage stuff, let alone...

Mostly just because it's a thing nobody seems to have made in decades or almost 100 years (I think? Lots of sequential trichromes but no simultaneous ones i've seen). That said, it can theoretically have numerous technical benefits anyway. Higher maximum resolution for example since B&W films...

🤨 You think... "measuring things" is a hoax? Wat

Great, so it wouldn't even matter if this was a good product or not by this logic, "people just like to buy crap" and will buy it whether it is or isn't... right? Or do you actually think people prefer good products, not any random object? If so, that brings us back to an actual answer why you...

I didn't post a poll, I asked why. "I don't wanna for my own reasons" isn't really a why answer. And "I don't want it, and my reason is [thing that is objectively not true, like "OVFs preview the image better"]" is not very compelling either.

Same question to you as others saying something similar: If previews of exposure, color, histograms, etc. are of little to no value, why did EVFs and mirrorless utterly sweep the industry 100%? Mirrorless cameras save maybe like 100-150g of weight, most people don't adapt vintage lenses, and...