Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > Point-N-Shoot

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

I'm trying to fool my P&S. Help!
Old 06-12-2012   #1
Vics
Registered User
 
Vics's Avatar
 
Vics is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 2,353
I'm trying to fool my P&S. Help!

I really like my newly aquired Canon Sure Shot Supreme, but I'd like to shoot Tri-X at ISO 320. Does anyone know a trick for fooling this automatic camera? Thanks in advance.
__________________
Vic
Leica M3, Contax IIIa, Rollei MX, Nikon F and FM

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #2
Greyscale
Registered User
 
Greyscale's Avatar
 
Greyscale is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Dodge Iowa
Age: 52
Posts: 2,137
You can follow this thread at APUG concerning creating custom DX labels.

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum172/...cassettes.html

Info on DX configuration:

http://bythom.com/dxcodes.htm
__________________
Caveman with a camera.
my flickr

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #3
Lord Nikon
Shoots Leica
 
Lord Nikon is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Northern NJ
Age: 32
Posts: 86
1234567890
__________________
Shooting film, FTW

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #4
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NEK
Posts: 7,104
I don't know this camera, but the Contax TvS had a sensor in the face of the camera I used to cover with some ND gel to skew ISO.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #5
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,757
I'm afraid most P&S cameras, at least ones not prohibitively expensive, don't read intermediate ISO values and either revert to ISO100 or closest lower value.

Suggestion to cut amount of light reaching sensor is good one, in days before I had adjustable camera I thought I could select several "filters" to trick AE brain but rather bought other camera.... Probably strip of not exposed and processed BW film would make variable density filter for this? I'll try this when I load some camera without control over exposure.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #6
Thardy
Registered User
 
Thardy is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,943
Here's an article on Wikipedia that shows the dx coding on film cartridges.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DX_encoding#section_4
__________________
Thomas

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #7
Vics
Registered User
 
Vics's Avatar
 
Vics is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 2,353
Thanks for all the replies! I think I'll start with a bit of film over the sensor. Failing that, I'll live with it. That's what Leicas are for.
__________________
Vic
Leica M3, Contax IIIa, Rollei MX, Nikon F and FM

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #8
loquax ludens
Registered User
 
loquax ludens's Avatar
 
loquax ludens is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 683
Porter's still has some ASA 40 and ASA 125 DX coded film canister labels for sale. No 320, unfortunately.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2012   #9
Greyscale
Registered User
 
Greyscale's Avatar
 
Greyscale is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Dodge Iowa
Age: 52
Posts: 2,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by btgc View Post

Suggestion to cut amount of light reaching sensor is good one, in days before I had adjustable camera I thought I could select several "filters" to trick AE brain but rather bought other camera.... Probably strip of not exposed and processed BW film would make variable density filter for this? I'll try this when I load some camera without control over exposure.
I don't know if you would need a filter, probably just a piece of black tape with a small hole cut in it to make a smaller iris for the sensor would work.
__________________
Caveman with a camera.
my flickr

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2012   #10
David Hughes
Registered User
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,294
Hi,

Count the number of DX contacts in the cassette chamber. If there's only four, which is normal, then give up as 4 contacts means 100, 200 and 400 ASA/ISO only.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2012   #11
John Bragg
Registered User
 
John Bragg's Avatar
 
John Bragg is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Penwithick, Cornwall U.K.
Age: 51
Posts: 864


This is a cassette re-coded by me to fool my camera into rating it at ei200. I call it the scrape and tape method. It is easy to use a modelling knife to carefully remove some segments and tape to make new ones. Two minute job, tops.

Good luck.
John.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2012   #12
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyscale View Post
I don't know if you would need a filter, probably just a piece of black tape with a small hole cut in it to make a smaller iris for the sensor would work.
Yes, let's imagine pouch with pre-cut pieces of film or bits of tape with holes of different sizes?

- what are you doing with this, is this new kind of school drugs?
- nope, this is to fool exposure meter!

__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2012   #13
Vics
Registered User
 
Vics's Avatar
 
Vics is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 2,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Bragg View Post


This is a cassette re-coded by me to fool my camera into rating it at ei200. I call it the scrape and tape method. It is easy to use a modelling knife to carefully remove some segments and tape to make new ones. Two minute job, tops.

Good luck.
John.
Thanks for that one, John. I'll give it a try on my next roll and post the results.
__________________
Vic
Leica M3, Contax IIIa, Rollei MX, Nikon F and FM

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2012   #14
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vics View Post
Thanks for that one, John. I'll give it a try on my next roll and post the results.
I have used real (metal foil) duct tape instead of scraping, and electrician's tape. The former is conductive enough and can be read by the contacts.



I also used it to gap seal my ducts!

Much cleaner and quicker than scraping.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2012   #15
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by btgc View Post
I'm afraid most P&S cameras, at least ones not prohibitively expensive, don't read intermediate ISO values and either revert to ISO100 or closest lower value.
That's a good point. I had one cheap camera that would only accept 25, 64, 100, 200, 400, and 800. If in doubt, stick to these.

I regularly upgrade Portra 400 to 800.



http://www.markushartel.com/blog/lea...-the-dx-sensor
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-14-2012   #16
loquax ludens
Registered User
 
loquax ludens's Avatar
 
loquax ludens is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
I regularly upgrade Portra 400 to 800.
I found a tech pub on the Kodak site for Portra 400, but not one for Portra 800. Here are some questions that occurred to me. If you happen to be able to answer any of these, Aristophanes, I'd love to know. Thanks!

Are the 400 and 800 films the same emulsion, or is it just that 400 pushes easily to 800?

How does 400 pushed to 800 compare to the 800 film at 800?

You can push the 800 to 1600. How well does the 400 push to 1600?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-14-2012   #17
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by loquax ludens View Post
I found a tech pub on the Kodak site for Portra 400, but not one for Portra 800. Here are some questions that occurred to me. If you happen to be able to answer any of these, Aristophanes, I'd love to know. Thanks!

Are the 400 and 800 films the same emulsion, or is it just that 400 pushes easily to 800?

How does 400 pushed to 800 compare to the 800 film at 800?

You can push the 800 to 1600. How well does the 400 push to 1600?
I don't know too much about Portra 800. I do know that the 400 is "new" and supposedly based on their Vision 3 emulsions from their motion picture film stock categories. The current Potra 800 speed is an older formula. I would not be surprised if Kodak discontinued it and advised shooting Portra 400 pushed.

I shoot the Portra at 320, 400, 640, 800, or 1600 in an SLR or RF and move it around if I feel the need depending on the max. aperture of my lens. For a P&S with fast enough shutter speed I mark it at 800. I have a Fuji Natura Classica that has a no-flash, fast lens system and DX-only coding which is why I started marking the rolls.

I do NOT push in processing. It is always processed at 400 (box speed). I doubt I will print much above 5x7, so not a major factor in speed/grain measure.

I started doing this because of the work of Jonathan Canlas. You be the judge:

http://canlasphotography.blogspot.ca...-beach-fl.html

There are lots of other samples and related discussions on Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/portra4...7627404027556/

For "beach" shooting or ISO 100 I revert to Ektar, a riotously fun film that I always shoot at 100. I have not shot the "new" Portra 160 (yet).
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 22:32.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.