Camera Advice For Shooting Slides

Curved Wall

A
Curved Wall

  • 3
  • 0
  • 58
Crossing beams

A
Crossing beams

  • 8
  • 1
  • 76
Shadow 2

A
Shadow 2

  • 3
  • 0
  • 57
Shadow 1

A
Shadow 1

  • 3
  • 0
  • 55
Darkroom c1972

A
Darkroom c1972

  • 3
  • 2
  • 101

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,837
Messages
2,781,612
Members
99,722
Latest member
Backfocus
Recent bookmarks
0
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
1,273
Location
Calexico, CA
Format
Multi Format
You cant' fix a badly exposed slide. So yeah, sunny 16 will work if you know what you are doing and if the shot isnt that important, because sunny 16, even if correctly has the risk to go bad. I use sunny 16 all the time with b/w, just make slight adjustment on the final print.


...

Sometimes Sunny 16 works even better than the camera, if you don't know how to prevent your camera meter from being fooled by things such as the sky in the frame, a bright light within the frame, too light/too dark subjects, etc.


Highly agree with you. Most of the times I use a lightmeter, I made some slight adjustments for the final shoot.


So, suggestion for a slide film would be a camera with a buildon light meter, but manual setting, you pick :smile:

I Will use any of the following once Ektachrome is released:

Oympus OM-1
Pentax K1000
Leica M5 or M6

Regards.
 

Agulliver

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
3,566
Location
Luton, United Kingdom
Format
Multi Format
Only for those who have bad gear or don't know how to use them or not familiar with the exposure characteristics of the film in use or a combination of these. For all others, slide film is not a problem at all.

This!

I learned photography on a medium format folder that had no meter, no battery, no automation at all...I even had to cock the shutter. I was all of four years old, though admittedly using negative film....Kodacolor II at 80ASA. Still, by today's standards not forgiving. If I could use that, then the average adult ought to be able to use slide film without a meter.

I kind of like the idea of thinking you're shooting digital, purely in that erring on the side of under exposing is better. Get a feel for the film before doing anything really important with it.

With more modern gear and meters, learn which meter mode works best. Watch the highlights.
 
OP
OP
Cholentpot

Cholentpot

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
6,743
Format
35mm
This!

I learned photography on a medium format folder that had no meter, no battery, no automation at all...I even had to cock the shutter. I was all of four years old, though admittedly using negative film....Kodacolor II at 80ASA. Still, by today's standards not forgiving. If I could use that, then the average adult ought to be able to use slide film without a meter.

I kind of like the idea of thinking you're shooting digital, purely in that erring on the side of under exposing is better. Get a feel for the film before doing anything really important with it.

With more modern gear and meters, learn which meter mode works best. Watch the highlights.

Looks like I need to get hold of 100 feet in bulk, load up and shoot away for a season. Where's my Ferrania Chrome in bluk?
 

etn

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
1,113
Location
Munich, Germany
Format
Medium Format
Earlier in this post, someone said that sunny 16 would not work with slide/reversal films.

I confirm it works with slide film. I never realized it before I started using the EV system when I got my Hasselblad, as I never could remember 2 numbers (shutter speed and f/stop) at once. Having only one (EV) to remember changed the deal. EV13 proved to work very well with daylight, sunny scenes and Velvia 50. So now, I use my own version of the "Sunny 16" called "Sunny 13" and don't bother metering. (Well, I guess it would become Sunny 16 if I were using 400 ISO film ha ha). I believe the key here is really to be able to recognize whenever that rule will provide good results, and use a different technique otherwise (e.g. incident or spot metering).

Coming back to the original question, any camera with a good internal meter, preferably spot, and/or with manual controls to allow using an external meter will be good for slides. A lot of ink is wasted on multi-coating, etc. I made terrific slides with older, single-coated (or not even coated) lenses. Depends on the looks you are after. Film type and size has probably more of an influence than lens coating anyway.

My 2 cents,
etn
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,939
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
When I started using slide film in reasonable quantity, I was using a Retina S1.
No rangefinder or meter. Instead, it had a built in "Sunny 16" indicator attached to the film speed, aperture and shutter speed settings, as well as a built in guide number system attached to the zone focusing dials.
It also worked with either flashcubes or electronic flash!
I used a fair amount of Kodachrome 64 in it (process paid) and I had a lot of success with it.
The S1 (and similar S2) was in many ways a sad, final chapter for the Retina line, but it was a great camera for a young photographer.
Here is some info: http://www.3106.net/photo/cam1066.htm
and a photo of the camera (note the "Sunny 16" graphics):

retinas1.jpg
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
1,273
Location
Calexico, CA
Format
Multi Format
This!

I learned photography on a medium format folder that had no meter, no battery, no automation at all...I even had to cock the shutter. I was all of four years old, though admittedly using negative film....Kodacolor II at 80ASA. Still, by today's standards not forgiving. If I could use that, then the average adult ought to be able to use slide film without a meter.

I kind of like the idea of thinking you're shooting digital, purely in that erring on the side of under exposing is better. Get a feel for the film before doing anything really important with it.

With more modern gear and meters, learn which meter mode works best. Watch the highlights.

Only difference is that color film could be corrected at printing time and slide don't. Whatever exposure you gave it, it stay like that, no way to correct it. Thats why they created the light meters to begin with. There were no light meters before because they werent needed. If you over or under exposed your film, you corrected at the printing time (or film developing time). You couldnt do that with slide, because the developing process isnt particularly suited for push/pulling.



If you got the hang on sunny 16 and can judge on lighting variation, then yes it could be used with no problem.
 

GRHazelton

Subscriber
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
2,248
Location
Jonesboro, G
Format
Multi Format
Interesting thread! I shot 'chrome in the late 50s with a Beauty 35mm - yes that was its name and it was a good camera til the shutter blew - and with a Komaflex S. IIRC I would rate Ektachrome 64 at about ASA 80 and blaze away. I also processed a number of rolls, back when the reversal was accomplished with a photoflood bulb. I NEVER shot negative color since I was unimpressed with its quality, and its lack of longevity. With those cameras I was using a hand-held meters, selenium cell jobs, and later the Sekonic MicroLite, one of the first CdS meters. (Negative color has changed, and much for the better! IIRC during the late 60s Kodak predicted un-correctable color shifts in seven years or so....)

Later I used a Praktica LTL again with the intentional slight underexposure. The LTL had a somewhat center weighted meter which allowed me to avoid metering the sky. I shot and processed 100 feet of Ektachrome on a trip to London and Paris in April of 1976. Home loaded cassettes, home processed. Some shots were failures, but rarely because of improper exposure. BTW, the slides have held up very well.

I used the Kodak kits for Ektachrome. What experiences can you folks cite with the currently available kits? How about longevity?

Maybe Kodak will bring back the processing kits....
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,364
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Slightly increasing the ISO for slide film will intensify the saturation without taking the exposure out of the narrow light latitude of the slide. I used to do that occasionally.
 

moto-uno

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
585
Location
Burnaby, B.C
Format
Medium Format
I truly envy those with eyes that can reasonably judge lighting for a good E-6 exposure .
If I don't have a meter (in camera or in hand) then I simply don't shoot chromes ! Peter
 

Chan Tran

Subscriber
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
6,816
Location
Sachse, TX
Format
35mm
I truly envy those with eyes that can reasonably judge lighting for a good E-6 exposure .
If I don't have a meter (in camera or in hand) then I simply don't shoot chromes ! Peter

People who can judge lighting condition really didn't judge with their eyes for brightness. Their judgement is based on known light levels of various things.
 
OP
OP
Cholentpot

Cholentpot

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
6,743
Format
35mm
Interesting thread! I shot 'chrome in the late 50s with a Beauty 35mm - yes that was its name and it was a good camera til the shutter blew - and with a Komaflex S. IIRC I would rate Ektachrome 64 at about ASA 80 and blaze away. I also processed a number of rolls, back when the reversal was accomplished with a photoflood bulb. I NEVER shot negative color since I was unimpressed with its quality, and its lack of longevity. With those cameras I was using a hand-held meters, selenium cell jobs, and later the Sekonic MicroLite, one of the first CdS meters. (Negative color has changed, and much for the better! IIRC during the late 60s Kodak predicted un-correctable color shifts in seven years or so....)

Later I used a Praktica LTL again with the intentional slight underexposure. The LTL had a somewhat center weighted meter which allowed me to avoid metering the sky. I shot and processed 100 feet of Ektachrome on a trip to London and Paris in April of 1976. Home loaded cassettes, home processed. Some shots were failures, but rarely because of improper exposure. BTW, the slides have held up very well.

I used the Kodak kits for Ektachrome. What experiences can you folks cite with the currently available kits? How about longevity?

Maybe Kodak will bring back the processing kits....

I've processed nearly 100 C-41 rolls at home. No sweat, if I can find a cheap bulk roll of E-6 I would do that too. When I started in film in '13 things were the lowest they are ever going to be for film it's amazing what 3-4 years have done. I was picking up great classic cameras for $10-$20 on ebay that are now going to $150+ I was able to find bulk rolls of freshly expired film (1-3 years) People where giving me their stuff, their parents stuff and their grandparents stuff. I got my hands a handful of E-6 but not enough to justify shooting and developing on my own. I still keep an eye out for rolls of the stuff so I can hoard enough to shoot and develop.

I'm a hobbyist, I'm not looking for the nittygritty bestist looking photo. I want my photos to look nice and have some character. It's a bit of a bonus for me when I get that perfect shot, although it's happening more and more these days.

I love hearing the stories from the days when photography was not as accessible.
 

GRHazelton

Subscriber
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
2,248
Location
Jonesboro, G
Format
Multi Format
People who can judge lighting condition really didn't judge with their eyes for brightness. Their judgement is based on known light levels of various things.
Back in the day Kodak furnished a generally reliable guide to exposing Kodachrome with each cassette. My Father shot many cassettes following the Great Yellow Father's recommendations, with a pretty good average.
 

blockend

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
5,049
Location
northern eng
Format
35mm
Rules of thumb for slide film:
Flat lighting is best, and easiest to meter for
If the lighting shows contrast, always meter for the highlights. There's no "burning in" after the fact
Slight under exposure is better than overexposure, correct exposure is better still
A spot meter is not essential, but very useful
 

cooltouch

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
1,677
Location
Houston, Tex
Format
Multi Format
Well, with almost three pages of comments, I don't know how much I can add, but I felt like it anyway, mostly because I've spent most of my active photographic life shooting slides, and I've learned a few things about exposure.

I can understand you're not wanting to sideline your two most capable cameras with slide film. But my recommendation is that you do just that. Sideline one of them. You don't use both cameras in a photo shoot do you? If not, then load one of them up with slide film. I'm not familiar with the EOS A2, but I am familiar with the Nikon F3. And one of the things I like best about the F3, when it comes to shooting with slides, is it has a very tight metering configuration. Prior to all the multi-segment hooey, most Nikons used a 60/40 metering system. Within these Nikons' viewfinders, you'll see a largish circle. 60% of the metering weight occurs within this circle, and 40% of the weight occurs outside of the circle. This has been a tried and true system that has worked very well for many years. But because the F3 had an "A" auto-exposure mode, and because Nikon knew that this camera would be used in fast-paced pro environments, Nikon elected to tighten up their metering with the F3. It has an 80/20 system.

So, I felt comfortable using the F3 with its heavier center weighting. It made it easier to place the circle and move it around and evaluate exposure. But that was with me shooting the F3 in manual mode. I finally decided to suck it up, though, and give the F3 a try using its "A" setting and slide film. I can still recall that I took the camera to an air show for that first event. This worked out well because all I had to do was set the aperture and focus. I'll admit that when I got the slides back, I was amazed to find that not one single slide was off even a bit. They were all perfectly exposed. Well, this pretty much sold me on using the F3 with its "A" setting. Sure, I still shot in manual mode, but I felt comfortable when I set it to "A".

As for the other cameras you mention -- the Canon AE-1 and the Pentaxes -- these cameras all share one trait. They use a moderately centerweighted metering system. My first 35mm camera was an AE-1 and I have more than a littlle experience with shooting slide film with it. The biggest problem I had with it was believing the meter. It was much too sensitive to any bright light sources in the frame and woulld stop the lens way down for them. The result was my slides would come back severely underexposed. This was quite infuriating until I understood what was happening. Once I knew what to look out for, my number of keepers improved. But I still didn't like the idea of using a camera that would fool me that bad. So, I switched to an FTb, and later an original F-1, both of which use a selective area metering system, which uses a central rectangle that occupies only 12% of the image area. I got very used to using this rectangle with slide film and, since metering occured only within that rectangle, I could move it around the scene and get very accurate measurements for my exposures. It was an excellent system. Much better than that used on any of Canon's A-series cameras. Canon finally addressed this problem with the introduction of the T70 and its partial area metering option.

Now, I've spent all this time typing all the above because of the school of hard knocks I attended as a photographer who shot almost 100% slides. I got to where I was pretty good at it, too, and not by relying on any multi-segmented metering gizmos either. What I learned was that slide film can handle quite a bit of under exposure -- sometimes as much as two stops -- but it can't tolerate more than about 1/2 stop overexposure. Tops. Any more than that and your slides will have burn through in the white areas. So because of this I would try to expose for the highlights, if they weren't too severe, else I'd expose for a middle ground and let the highlights fall where they may. Sometimes this can result in some pretty dark shadows, in which case I liked to have a flash handy for fill-flash. Fill-flash with slides works great. I was most often using a Vivitar 285 back then, which is a non-dedicated flash with ranges of exposure that can be selected based on lens aperture and ISO. So I'd set it for the right range and I'd let the flash handle the duration. I came to trust its exposure instincts.

There's one exception to the above exposure methods I followed and that was sunsets. The first few times I went out with the goal of shooting sunsets, it bugged me that I wasn't able to get good sunset photos with slide film. I mean, I'd have a perfectly exposed sun, but then everything else would be black. So I got to thinking about it. If everything else was black, but I want to see this everything else with some amount of color in it, then obviously I need to increase exposure. But where do I meter? Well, I got to looking all around me at sunset one evening and I noticed that the sky and the clouds directly overhead were perfect. The sky was a deep blue and the clouds were pinkish from being illuminated by the setting sun. So it dawned on me: meter directly overhead. So that's what I did, and that group of sunset photos I took were some of the best exposed sunset photos I've ever taken. Now, there is a downside to this technique and that is, the sun goes white. But so what, I thought. Everything else had just the colors I wanted, including the sky immediately around the sun. So I figued I could live with it being white. And I've done so ever since.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Cholentpot

Cholentpot

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2015
Messages
6,743
Format
35mm
Well, with almost three pages of comments, I don't know how much I can add, but I felt like it anyway, mostly because I've spent most of my active photographic life shooting slides, and I've learned a few things about exposure.

I can understand you're not wanting to sideline your two most capable cameras with slide film. But my recommendation is that you do just that. Sideline one of them. You don't use both cameras in a photo shoot do you? If not, then load one of them up with slide film. I'm not familiar with the EOS A2, but I am familiar with the Nikon F3. And one of the things I like best about the F3, when it comes to shooting with slides, is it has a very tight metering configuration. Prior to all the multi-segment hooey, most Nikons used a 60/40 metering system. Within these Nikons' viewfinders, you'll see a largish circle. 60% of the metering weight occurs within this circle, and 40% of the weight occurs outside of the circle. This has been a tried and true system that has worked very well for many years. But because the F3 had an "A" auto-exposure mode, and because Nikon knew that this camera would be used in fast-paced pro environments, Nikon elected to tighten up their metering with the F3. It has an 80/20 system.

So, I felt comfortable using the F3 with its heavier center weighting. It made it easier to place the circle and move it around and evaluate exposure. But that was with me shooting the F3 in manual mode. I finally decided to suck it up, though, and give the F3 a try using its "A" setting and slide film. I can still recall that I took the camera to an air show for that first event. This worked out well because all I had to do was set the aperture and focus. I'll admit that when I got the slides back, I was amazed to find that not one single slide was off even a bit. They were all perfectly exposed. Well, this pretty much sold me on using the F3 with its "A" setting. Sure, I still shot in manual mode, but I felt comfortable when I set it to "A".

As for the other cameras you mention -- the Canon AE-1 and the Pentaxes -- these cameras all share one trait. They use a moderately centerweighted metering system. My first 35mm camera was an AE-1 and I have more than a littlle experience with shooting slide film with it. The biggest problem I had with it was believing the meter. It was much too sensitive to any bright light sources in the frame and woulld stop the lens way down for them. The result was my slides would come back severely underexposed. This was quite infuriating until I understood what was happening. Once I knew what to look out for, my number of keepers improved. But I still didn't like the idea of using a camera that would fool me that bad. So, I switched to an FTb, and later an original F-1, both of which use a selective area metering system, which uses a central rectangle that occupies only 12% of the image area. I got very used to using this rectangle with slide film and, since metering occured only within that rectangle, I could move it around the scene and get very accurate measurements for my exposures. It was an excellent system. Much better than that used on any of Canon's A-series cameras. Canon finally addressed this problem with the introduction of the T70 and its partial area metering option.

Now, I've spent all this time typing all the above because of the school of hard knocks I attended as a photographer who shot almost 100% slides. I got to where I was pretty good at it, too, and not by relying on any multi-segmented metering gizmos either. What I learned was that slide film can handle quite a bit of under exposure -- sometimes as much as two stops -- but it can't tolerate more than about 1/2 stop overexposure. Tops. Any more than that and your slides will have burn through in the white areas. So because of this I would try to expose for the highlights, if they weren't too severe, else I'd expose for a middle ground and let the highlights fall where they may. Sometimes this can result in some pretty dark shadows, in which case I liked to have a flash handy for fill-flash. Fill-flash with slides works great. I was most often using a Vivitar 285 back then, which is a non-dedicated flash with ranges of exposure that can be selected based on lens aperture and ISO. So I'd set it for the right range and I'd let the flash handle the duration. I came to trust its exposure instincts.

There's one exception to the above exposure methods I followed and that was sunsets. The first few times I went out with the goal of shooting sunsets, it bugged me that I wasn't able to get good sunset photos with slide film. I mean, I'd have a perfectly exposed sun, but then everything else would be black. So I got to thinking about it. If everything else was black, but I want to see this everything else with some amount of color in it, then obviously I need to increase exposure. But where do I meter? Well, I got to looking all around me at sunset one evening and I noticed that the sky and the clouds directly overhead were perfect. The sky was a deep blue and the clouds were pinkish from being illuminated by the setting sun. So it dawned on me: meter directly overhead. So that's what I did, and that group of sunset photos I took were some of the best exposed sunset photos I've ever taken. Now, there is a downside to this technique and that is, the sun goes white. But so what, I thought. Everything else had just the colors I wanted, including the sky immediately around the sun. So I figued I could live with it being white. And I've done so ever since.

I usually keep one camera with color and one with b&w or one with fast one with slow. The issue is as of now I think I only have slow T balanced film. This would lock up the camera to only be used outdoors with a filter more or less. In the summer that's not much of an issue but now it would not get much use.

That said I'm leaning to use the F3 because an F3 with slide film? Not much cooler than that. I've learned quite a bit so far in this thread, I'll be seeing how it goes in practical application.
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,069
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format
Rules of thumb for slide film:
Flat lighting is best, and easiest to meter for
If the lighting shows contrast, always meter for the highlights. There's no "burning in" after the fact
Slight under exposure is better than overexposure, correct exposure is better still
A spot meter is not essential, but very useful

and:

when in doubt, always bracket; if you don't want to waste film, bracket to -1 stop.
 

Agulliver

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
3,566
Location
Luton, United Kingdom
Format
Multi Format
I truly envy those with eyes that can reasonably judge lighting for a good E-6 exposure .
If I don't have a meter (in camera or in hand) then I simply don't shoot chromes ! Peter

I'm not sure that it's eyes as much as how the brain works. I guess I was very lucky in being taught the basics very young...I really was little more than a toddler when my dad handed me his Zeiss-Ikon folder and taught me about focus, f-stops and shutter speeds. Luckily all that stuck and though I am wont to mistrtust myself these days and resort to checking my own internal "guestimation" with an electronic meter.

But people really did shoot chrome film without meters. I inherited most of my great aunt's photo gear and all of her slides and negs in the early 2000's. For most of her life she didn't even own a camera with a meter. My dad didn't own a camera with any sort of metering capability nor a handheld meter until 1981...yet he started photography in 1957.
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,069
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format
But people really did shoot chrome film without meters. I inherited most of my great aunt's photo gear and all of her slides and negs in the early 2000's. For most of her life she didn't even own a camera with a meter. My dad didn't own a camera with any sort of metering capability nor a handheld meter until 1981...yet he started photography in 1957.

True. My grandpa had an Exakta Varex without any meter and from what i see, he only shot slides: Agfachrome, Kodachrome.
Yes, many of his shots are overexposed, but more than half are fine.
 

mynewcolour

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
306
Location
Gloucestershire, England
Format
35mm
When I was taught the very basics of photography it was with a Pentax k1000 and match needle metering. We had a confusing and seemingly abstract lecture about exposure and were off on our way. We all stuck the needle in the middle and got on with our lives (shooting b&w and a bit of colour negative). Months later I had to shoot actors in rehearsal, under spotlights and wearing black. I had a complete meltdown. I hit the books but got conflicting information. I never felt as if I solved that problem. In retrospect it was a tough gig.

A revelation came several years later when I first started messing with a friend's Holga and 120 Velvia. It was hugely empowering learning how to hustle to get some results against the odds. For those that aren't familiar: a Holga has one shutter speed (~ 1/100s) and Bulb and two small apertures. If they stayed in one piece they'd be great teaching tools and really ... I could have used that 'lesson' a decade earlier.

When I teach friends now, we turn the camera's meter off before the end of the first session.
 
Last edited:

jimjm

Subscriber
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,226
Location
San Diego CA
Format
Multi Format
When I had to shoot actors in rehearsal, under spotlights and wearing black I had a complete meltdown. I hit the books but got conflicting information. I never felt as if I solved that problem.
Stage and performance lighting is one situation where a spot meter is a huge help, as the intensity and contrast of the lights make it difficult for average or center-weighted meters. Also makes it hard to guesstimate exposure or even base all your exposures on one reading. I've had good luck in the past by spot metering off the subject's face and basing my exposure off of that. For average Caucasian skin tones I will add +1 stop from the meter reading, and for darker skin I would expose at 0, -1 or even -2 stops, based on the darkness of the skin.

Handheld spot meters work fine for this, also many cameras have built-in spot meters that will do the job. I used a Nikon F4 for years, and had good luck getting consistent exposures.
 

cooltouch

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
1,677
Location
Houston, Tex
Format
Multi Format
mynewcolor mentions that the actors were wearing black. In this sort of situation, it is helpful to recall that any camera's meter will attempt to evaluate a scene as 18% gray. Now, obviously, we don't want the actors' black clothing looking gray, so in this case, if we're metering off their clothes, it would help to dial in some minus EV, like bump the shutter speed up by one stop. That should preserve the black values in the stage shots. Either that or, if possible, make one's way onto the the fully lit stage before the performance begins and take an incident reading.
 

mynewcolour

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
306
Location
Gloucestershire, England
Format
35mm
Absolutely. You're both spot-on.

If I'd actually ignored the meter and used what I learnt later (to read shadow strength, the latitude of the film etc) I'd probably have done better.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom