Should I shoot color or black and white 35mm film to learn photography fundamentals?

I want to practice composition, or the basics of photography in reality. From what I’ve read, some people say shoot color, or only shoot black and white to learn composition right.

From my personal opinion as a beginner, I think if I want to practice composition and play with shadows, angles, etc. shooting in black and white is cheaper and I can practice it more.

I would like to hear your thoughts about what would be the wisest option in terms of practicing composition and photography skills in general.

Also I’m a big fan of color, if you can recommend me a cheap color film it would be great.

35mm – Film photography – what causes the following effect/error on a single frame of a developed roll of film?

I shot the following picture with a Canon AE-1 Program on a roll of Ilford HP5 400 (I pushed the roll to 800). I developed it using Ilfosol 3 and scanned it with Epson scanner V370. As you can see, there are – I’m not sure how to describe them – smudge like shadows corresponding to the perforations. The shadows are only on the third frame of the roll. I am left to wonder what caused these on only one frame, and what can I do in the future to prevent it from happening?

Smudges on film perforations

The effect is even easier to see on the negative:

Negative roll

repair – Calibrating the Shutter Speed/ISO Dial on Film Camera?

The camera is a Bell & Howell Auto 35 Reflex (Model 237), aka the Canon EXEE.

How does one calibrate/set the position of this shutter speed + ASA dial (lifting the dial’s outer ring adjusts the ASA), having been removed without recording its original position(s)? It looks to me like the gear on the left is part of some sort of rotary contact encoder but I have no clue which contact it should be touching when I put the dial back in. I believe it measures the position of the dial for the “EE” aperture setting, so that EE can calculate exposure correctly and do its job?

Secondly, is this “calibration” required even if I don’t plan on using any electronic auto modes? It looks like the wire, which should be soldered to the left edge of the silicon plate, has broken off, making this encoder useless. I could easily solder it back on but not sure if it’s worth my time.

enter image description here

exposure – Why are my recent film photo’s coming back grainy/blurry?

On my last three rolls of film I’ve had developed the pictures have been excessively grainy.
This is apparent on looking, but once zoomed in (even a tiny bit) all definition/detail is lost and the picture is really grainy and undefined.

I was wondering if it was a result of under exposure. I’ve been using a yellow filter so wondered if that was the issue as I wasn’t compensating for it. Although because my camera uses TTL (Minolta x500) and my yellow Hoya K2 filter only has a a filter factor of 2 (1 stop) I thought the film latitude should be able to handle it.

Or perhaps it was the f stop I’d chosen, making it out of focus.

Just a bit confused really.

Previously (without yellow filter) I’ve used tri x 400 (2 rolls) and had no problems.
I’ve also shot three rolls of Lomo 400 and never had an issue with blurry ness/grain/lack of definition when zooming into a pic.

With the yellow filter I’ve had a roll of Delta 400 and HP5 400 that definitely have this problem.

All film was shot at box speed, on the same camera and developed by the same lab.

I’ve attached an image below showing the problem I’m referring to. (Taken on Delta 400 with yellow filter)

I’ve also attached a picture taken in Brighton that doesn’t have this issue. (This was taken tri X 400 without yellow enter image description herefilter)

Apologies if a question like this has been asked and answered already. enter image description here

film – Hasselblad C12 back gear sync issue

I have a Hasselblad C12 back that has a gear synchronisation issue with the body. It has been tested on two working bodies, one of which has been serviced very recently, so the issue lies definitely in the back.

I performed a CLA with this video as my basis. I turned the indicated spring loaded gear 1.5 turns after initial tension was felt, and placed the gear with the dog leg so that the notch on the bottom of the gear was on the right of the white plastic lever, as per the video instructions.

However, this did not fix the gear sync issue. I expect the indicated gear to be the culprit. Do I need to turn this gear more than 1.5 turns? Could it be that the spring inside this gear is worn out?

enter image description here

film – Black and White Slide Reversal came out completely black

I tried to develop my first role of Adox Scala 160 with Caffenol, Hydrogen Peroxide+Vinegar and the final outcome was an all black role of film.

Here is the process I went by:
-Rinse film
-First development in Caffenol-C mixture (that I use for normal BW film) for 6-min (normally I do 10min for BW same strength)
-Hydrogen + Vinegar mixture
-Expose (note: I could see the images on the film as if I just finished with the fixer with BW as normal. The only difference was that the lights were much more noticeable compared to a negative, perhaps due to the base layer of the film)
-Second development in Caffenol-C (I made a new batch of the developer with the same amounts as the first development) for 10-min (my normal developing times for BW film that works)
-Ilford Rapidfix for 10-min as I normally do for my BW film

The outcome was a completely black role of film. Under extreme LED flashlight lighting, I can barely make out the individual slides, but no details. If you didn’t know there were images, you may not even notice them with the LED flashlight.

Wondering where the mix-up was. Did I expose it for too long? Did I not develop the first step for long enough? Was the second dev too long? Something to do with the fixer?

I only have a couple more roles of Adox Scala 160 left and want to be able to actually develop it properly (Caffenol dev only, not harsh chemicals)

Why is film stuck in my Advantix APS camera?

I bought a cheap Kodak Advantix C450 which I’m quite certain is not working (I am a beginner in film photography so I’m pretty clueless)

I was sure it was working at one point but now I’m not sure. My issue is that the lever that opens the film slot won’t move.(I’ve been able to open it fine multiple times already.) I was thinking of getting a new camera and using the film since this camera is a bit hit and miss.

Does anyone know why the film is stuck in the camera? How can I get it out?

I also took the batteries out at one point which might have something to do with it?
enter image description here

film stuck in advantix/ aps camera

i bought a cheap kodak advantix c450 which i’m quite certain is not working (i am a beginner in film photography so im pretty clueless)

i was sure it was working at one point but now i’m not sure but my issue is that the lever that opens the film slot won’t open.( ive been able to open it fine multiple times already) i was thinking of getting a new camera and using the film since this camera is a bit hit and miss

so does anyone know why the film is stuck in the camera? and how i can get it out

i also took the batteries out at one point which might have something to do with it?
enter image description here

olympus – Can I continue shooting when film camera counter was reset to 1 after opening film door?

First off sorry for the bad terminology but I’m a newbie and would really appreciate some help – I’ve bought my first film camera, it is an Olympus MJU zoom 70 from an as-is sale and everything seemed to be working fine.

I took 9 shots with it already but the lens got stuck while I was playing with the zoom functions. I couldn’t turn the camera off, and I read online that I should open the film door to reset the whole camera. I pressed the release door button (while holding the door down so the door wouldn’t open and films inside wouldn’t get exposed to light), and it managed to “unstick” my camera lens, but I didn’t know that it would reset the film counter back to 1.

I honestly don’t know how a film camera works, so questions below:

  1. Can the films inside still be used?
  2. Can I continue taking photos with it as per normal?

I don’t really want to get the film developed right now as there are still quite a lot of exposures left and it’s quite expensive to get it developed where I live. Thanks!

What were long, flat point and shoot film cameras called?

What were long, flat point and shoot film cameras called?

You don’t want to know what I called the cheap 110 Instamatic I was forced to use when I was young and couldn’t afford anything better! The reason they were called 110 cameras is because they used the 110 film format introduced by Eastman Kodak in 1972.

They were immensely popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Several things probably contributed to their popularity:

  • Small size and very light weight made them easy to take almost everywhere one might go.
  • Affordability (camera). Although there were some fairly high quality (and more expensive) cameras available in the 110 format, the vast majority of them were designed and manufactured to be sold as cheaply as possible. Even the Kodak model pictured in the question is ‘high end’ compared to a lot of the cheap no-name brands with plastic lenses sold at discount stores.
  • Affordability (film & developing). 110 was more economical to shoot than 35mm. The film was a little cheaper because the very small format size required much less film and the chemicals used in the photographic emulsions. A single 36 x 24 mm frame of 135/35mm film used as much film emulsion as four frames of the 110 format that was 17x13mm. Developing 24 exposures of 110 in a large, automated photo lab developing machine required less developing chemicals per print than developing 24 frames of 35mm film.
  • Affordability (prints). Prints were 3 1/2 x 4 1/2 inches for 110 film, compared to 3 1/2 x 5 inches for 35mm, so they used less paper when printed on 3 1/2 inch wide roll-fed machines. Consumer level photofinishing was a highly competitive business at the time. Most of the competition between various photofinishers for the business of non-professionals or non-enthusiasts in the 1970s and 1980s when 110’s popularity was at its peak centered on price. In the early 1990s the emphasis shifted somewhat to larger prints and faster turnaround times as more consumers were willing to pay extra for ‘1 hour’ service and 4 x 6 inch prints.
  • Simplicity of operation (film). The film was sold pre-loaded in a cartridge that had light proof spools on both ends. The film was loaded on one end, was advanced through the camera to the other end as it was shot, and required no rewinding before being taken to a photofinisher for developing. The film had a full paper backing and a see-through window in the back of the cartridge that showed the exposure number. Most 110 cameras also placed a transparent window on the back of the camera so the frame number and information on the film’s label could be seen. All the user had to do was drop the cartridge in, shut the door, and advance the film one frame and they were ready to shoot. When the roll was used up they only had to open the door and remove the cartridge.
  • Simplicity of operation (camera). There were very few user adjustable controls on most 110 cameras. The cameras were designed to use a specific speed of film for daylight operation or a higher speed of film for indoors. Different cameras were compatible with different speed films for their ‘high’ and ‘low’ speed ranges. 100 (low) and 400 (high) were the most common. The small film format and the resulting short focal length of the lenses combined with a fairly narrow aperture meant the lenses built into most 110 instamatics had very deep depth of field and no focus adjustment. Most 110 cameras had a single shutter time and aperture. They relied on the latitude of the film to allow adjustment of the exposure during the printing process.
  • Reusable flash. At a time when most instamatic type cameras still used disposable four sided flash cubes, many of even the cheaper 110 cameras had a small, built-in strobe that ran on common ‘AA’ batteries. Again, this served to lower the overall cost per picture of taking flash photos as well as increase the convenience of doing so.

Interestingly enough, the Agfa pocket series that you recall offered several models with a variety of advanced features. As 110 cameras go they were fairly high end. Built-in telephoto or macro converters that slid in front of the main lens, variable shutter speeds up to and including electronically controlled shutters that could be set from 1/15 to 1/1000 second, and even wider aperture lenses with manual focus wheels were offered in various models. Yet Agfa only offered one 110 pocket series camera model with a built-in electronic flash – the 3000 that lacked any other advanced features. Most of the Agfa 110s had a receptacle for ‘flip flashes’ that were an 8 or 10 bulb card version similar to earlier 4 bulb flashcubes. The reason it was called a flip flash is that after firing the first four or five bulbs in sequence on one side of the card the user had to pull it out, flip it over, and plug the other end of the card into the camera’s flash receptacle to use the other half of the card. Agfa did offer an optional electronic flash unit that attached to some models via an end mounted hot shoe foot that could also hold a tripod socket adapter. Another version flash screwed directly into the tripod socket on other models. It had a cable that plugged into the flip flash port.

Agfa 2008 with flash

When the 110 film format was introduced by Kodak in 1972 typical 35mm cameras required a fairly steep learning curve to operate – both in terms of exposure and focusing. Particularly among the lower priced offerings, 35mm cameras and their lenses were heavy and bulky and still a bit pricy for many people. The 110 format introduced a cheap, easy to use small and lightweight camera to the masses in much the same way that the Kodak Brownie had offered the masses an alternative to medium format view and rail cameras a generation or two earlier.

Eventually semiconductor electronics reached the point where automation for exposure became more sophisticated and accurate. Manufacturing electronics became cheaper through the widespread use of printed circuit boards. The popularity of the cheap 110 cameras and the 110 film format they supported waned in the face of new point and shoot cameras in the 135/35mm film format that provided higher quality images with much of the same ease of operation the 110 cameras had. The emergence of autofocusing 35mm lenses in the late 1980s that trickled down to compact 35mm point and shoots by the early 1990s put the final nail in the coffin of widespread 110 usage.