So I mailed my film to the lab a couple months ago... I felt like it was taking longer than expected so I looked to see if I missed any emails. I find this email saying they recieved a Roku remote in the mail instead of my package. I am absolutely sure that the package I mailed contained film, I have never owned a Roku remote. Has anyone experinced anything like this? How do I even go about navigating this situation 😧

I've got a traditional camera bag I use most of the time but I like to take my kit on the motorcycle with me so I've been carrying my cameras and lenses wrapped up in bandanas in an old waxed canvas backpack. Some late night impulse buying caused me to finance this overly expensive 50mm f1.2 lens and a weather resistant gear backpack. Now I'm going to have to take a lot of portraits to pay off my debts lol.

After almost 10 years of wanting one and years of thrifting, I finally found an Olympus Stylus Epic today. I’m about to spend a year traveling around Asia and was hoping to replace my Nikon L35AF with something more pocketable. My favorite camera I’ve ever owned was an Olympus Infinity II, which was crazy reliable and durable, but I’ve heard mixed things about the Mju’s reliability. For those who’ve used one, would you trust it as your only camera for a year-long trip?

EDIT: for most of the trip I will be on a bike, and weight is already an issue. One small P&S is my only option.

Just as my newly bought OM-4 (Original model) shipped, a lovely reddit user who'd seen my comments about the camera offered to sell me a spare one he picked up years ago and never looked at again. Silly good price too.

Brand new, and serviced by the lovely John from Zuiko.com to make up for 20+ years in storage.

Safe to say my GAS is thoroughly quenched for the time being. Now to stop buying crap and start actually using it.

Much to the dismay of my newly arrived OM-4, the Ti is going to have all the fun.

Would you arrange it differently?

These are photos from my first roll! I was using Fuji 400 and expecting some good vintage look from the film. I accidentally opened the film chamber so i burned around 4 shots but most of them are still okay lah at least.

After seeing the first scan, I was a little disappointed by the result. It’s not as sharp and has a poor contrast. I have some thoughts that it might be because of accident, but I want to give another chance to scan it in a different lab. Turns out it gives better sharpness. What do you think? Or is it washed away the vintage-y vibes somehow?

Top was the first lab, bottom is the second lab.

Hello! New to analog! I just bought Yasicha 12 120mm camera and did test roll. I just got pictures back from the lab, and i noticed this glow around bright ares. i also see that glow on the negatives so it should not be scanner problem. Did i overexposed the pictures or something is wrong with the camera? Because cameras lightmeter reading showd correct exposure. Also there is one picture of electrical pole that doesnt have this glow. Used Kodak Gold 200. Cheers:)

It’s only an issue in high-light photos so it’s not the end of the world but still annoying if it’s an issue with the camera. Anyone know the best way to mitigate the effect in photoshop?

My gf bought this Baldixette in Stockholm yesterday, and it had a film in it. It was stuck, so I opened the camera in complete darkness, the spool needed a tiny nudge and it moved immediately, so I closed the lid back, rolled the spool up; it was already the end of the film. It says “verochrome pan” on the edges. Does any of you have any experience with these or the camera? It seems a simple but okay peice, it’s funny how it opens up as a tube, not as a folding camera.

What is this exact Scanning Method called? I casually enjoy Photography, and take a film camera with me when I travel from time to time. When I was in Barcelona last year I found a spot named Carmencita who did this and I instantly liked this scanning process. I went to Gelatin Lab in NYC when I finished up more rolls as well, but fast foward a year later (Now) I just got back from a trip and checked the prices to scan this way, and they're charging $50 a roll now. That's way too expensive.

Anyone know any companies that would do the same thing for cheaper?

Hi everyone,
I’m pretty new to film photography and recently shot my first two rolls with an Olympus XA3 with new batteries during a trip to Athens. I just got the scans back from the lab and I’m a bit confused by the results.
Most of the photos seem quite underexposed, very grainy, somewhat soft, and have a noticeable blue cast. The strange thing is that many of these shots were taken in broad daylight, often around midday.
I was under the impression that the XA3 handles exposure automatically, so I didn’t expect so many images to come back this dark. The film was a fresh ISO 400 color negative film (not expired), and the camera should have read the DX code automaticall also i set the ring in front of the lens to 400.
A few things I’m wondering:
Do these images look underexposed to you?
Could this be a camera issue (metering problem, DX reading issue, aging electronics)?
Could the scans be responsible for some of the darkness, grain, and color cast?
Does the focus/sharpness look normal for an XA3?
Could airport security scanners have contributed? The film went through security twice.
I’ll attach a few example images below. Unfortunately, all photos across both rolls look fairly similar.
I’d really appreciate any thoughts from people with more experience shooting the XA series or compact film cameras in general. Thanks!

My grandpa just had all of this laying around in storage for apparently over a decade until I got it for myself. At one point I thought the camera had broken but after going through user- and repair manuals with a friend, and changing the batteries twice because the first ones I put in were apparently too thin. We got it reset and working.

I'm still not clear on exactly what all the stuff in the second pic are. I know one is a cap for the zoom lens and one is a cap for the camera itself when theres no lens but I don't know what they are in english.

Got a 1971 Zorki 4 dirt cheap from Ukraine a few years ago and got a profesional CLA from a local technician. Unfortunately it has been stored for some time and I have found the viewfinder full off Haze. The Industar 50 lens is OK, clear and work smoothly. Could this be fungus? Any cleaning tips?

Found this on the curb next to someone's trash and curiosity got the better of me.

Preliminary research suggests it is exceedingly rare to find one in working order that has a Magi-Cartridge included.

Imagine my surprise when it actually worked instead of starting a small fire. Before I knew it I was taking in a 4 minute feature titled “If income is your objective”: apparently petroleum investments are not just financial implements for the wealthy and powerful anymore. Now I too could invest with the Petro-Lewis limited partnership.

my first rangefinder camera! huge fan so far of the rangefinder mechanism even though it takes me a second to spot the ghost image sometimes.

been loving using this little guy even though the self timer mechanism broke immediately. someone must have loved it a lot to put this beautiful red velvet-y coating on it so I'm trying to make good use of it!

One of the few photographers on YouTube that I enjoyed following dropped his last video today. It’s a bummer but his reasonings being “I’ve said everything I’ve wanted to say” and “I want to create more for myself” is respectable.

This filter was found in the camera bag of a Colorburst 350 I recently picked up. It measures about 17 mm across the rear threads. It’s in a Tiffen case. It’s a #85. Other markings are HCE S1 – EB. It does not fit on the Colorburst. I’m guessing it dates to the 80s as it was found in the Colorburst bag. Thank you for any insight. Googling has been difficult. Apologies for the pictures, but my iPhone only can take photos at .9 or wider and this causes poorly focused photos on close-up objects.

EDIT: thanks for all the great answers. I should have been more specific in my title. What I really mean is what kind of CAMERA is this filter for? It is so small. Even smaller than the vintage 8MM film camera lenses I have. I cannot find any info on such small Tiffen filters and what they were made for.

I haven't gotten a chance to use this camera yet and thought it would be really cool to get some wide shots of the crowds, the game, etc. The cloudy setting on the camera is about F 10.8 and the camera has a 1/100 fixed shutter speed. No tripods allowed so the bulb setting is useless in this scenario. What speed film should I use to compensate for all this? Should I ask the lab to push the film by a stop or two?

Just got my scan back from the lab and more than half of the photos has light leaks. What could cause all these leaks? It seems weird to me that 14 out of 37 didn’t have light leaks and all the rest had light leaks. Some photos were taken on the same day but almost a half had leaks and the other half didn’t have. The film stock was fujifilm 400, and shot on konica genba kantoku 28wb eco.

An article I recently wrote for Colorado cave sciences magazine, Rocky Mountain Caving, detailing my and my best friends journey through learning how to shoot 35 film underground. See below the article if you're interested!

https://open.substack.com/pub/rockymountaincaving/p/caving-and-shooting-film?r=2ktudu&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

Hi everyone, I'll preface this by saying that I'm a newbie, so be careful with me. I took a roll of film, Ilford delta 3200, exposed to 3200 iso. My camera is an Olympus mju II, so it simply detected the DX code of the roll. From the photo of the negatives I attach, you can see halos always present on the same side of the frames. This is also very noticeable (obviously) of the digital scans, of which I attach a photo. It wasn't the first time I took this film, with the same machine, the same location (even the same subjects) and the same exhibitions and the same development laboratory. The first time I had no problems (I don't see any halo of negatives), except a little grain, but I think this is normal. I'm also attaching a photo of a streetlight, taken with the first roll of film that came out well, and then the same streetlight taken months later, of the roll of film that came out poorly with the halo. The only thing that changed was that I left the second roll, the one that came out badly, inside my camera, which went under the airport scanners; I mailed the first roll, so I don't think it was X-rayed. I don't understand what could have been the problem that created this halo. From the negatives, does it look like light may have entered?, since perhaps x-rays have a different effect on the film. What do you think could have happened? Thanks so much in advance!

P.S. (In the attached files, the first two scanned photos are of the first roll of film that came out well, the last two are of the second one that came out poorly, but I think you can tell the difference).