This isn't macro, but I thought you guys might enjoy a print from my "new" camera, a circa 1957 GOMZ Sputnik. In 1965, GOMZ became LOMO, which you may have heard of...
Anyway, the Sputnik is a 120 roll film camera that takes a pair of 6x6 (60 mm square) images, through a matched pair of 75 mm f/4.5 anastigmat triplets. There is a third lens for framing / focus, and all three focus together! It's a cool manual camera, for sure!
Cross-eyed stereo
This is two 8x8 prints that are slightly different, so we'll see how the stereo vision works out for people. I took this picture today and developed it this evening.
Sorry for the random posting!
I hope you like it!
Mike
off topic... stereo
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Hi Mike;
I think your vintage camera is very rare one, you said its 1957 model
Anyway I like vintage cameras. Lomo was a very successful brand at its time I think. It has so many optical equipments. I also like Lomo 3.7 and 3.5 microscope lenses very much, they are cheap but high performer lenses.
Bytheway is it hard to develop roll films? I think you should have an enlarger and a darkroom
I think your vintage camera is very rare one, you said its 1957 model
Anyway I like vintage cameras. Lomo was a very successful brand at its time I think. It has so many optical equipments. I also like Lomo 3.7 and 3.5 microscope lenses very much, they are cheap but high performer lenses.
Bytheway is it hard to develop roll films? I think you should have an enlarger and a darkroom
Regards.
Omer
Omer
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23564
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
Looks good.so we'll see how the stereo vision works out for people
Since you asked for critique... There are some alignment issues. The right side image is higher than the left, which requires a head tilt and introduces some unmatched areas around the edges of the frame. Three dust spots light up like fireworks. For my tastes, the pair can be significantly improved by pulling them into StereoPhoto Maker, doing an "Auto alignment", then tweaking the shift and cropping ever so slightly to avoid framing discrepancies. After correction, I see some differences in shadow density around the frame of the sculpture at bottom of picture, leading to a perception of difference that I often call "shimmer". But of course I am channeling my inner perfectionist. This is a good pair.
--Rik
Thanks, everyone!
No, it isn't hard to develop film or make contact positive prints. You need a dark room to get the film into a developing tank, from there it is done in room lights. You need a few cheap chemicals. For enlargements, you would need a medium format enlarger. I've got a Beseler 23CII-XL, which is a lovely instrument from many moons ago. I also have a Beseler Cadet II, but it only does 35 mm and smaller negatives. These were enlarged something like 4x, so the grain is really not visible, which is the beauty of larger format film. For simply contact prints at native size, you could get away with no enlarger, but you do need a uniform light source of some kind. From there, you need a dark room with safelight, processing trays and chemicals. You can round up most of the hardware on eBay used and the chemicals aren't too expensive on Amazon or whatever.
I put the pair together in Stereo Photo Maker, but didn't play around with it at all. I'll investigate... I bet I can do better!
I said circa 1957 - I don't know the exact year, but it is the first version, putting it somewhere between 1955 and 1961, I think it was.
As for the subject, the sculpture is chunks of Pyrex from I think the second batch ever made, in 1935!
One further point about the photo quality itself - the enlarger lens is a 100 mm f/5.6 Schneider Componon S, so it is no slouch on that end...
Of all the versions and companies that produced this from 1955-1974, I think there were 86,000 made. They are available, but not super cheap - I think I paid $130 for my copy.
Do a little research - you will find common complaints being light leaks, internal reflections and lens flare. I've only done two rolls so far, but I haven't seen major defects with the particular unit - got lucky I guess!
Thanks again,
Mike
No, it isn't hard to develop film or make contact positive prints. You need a dark room to get the film into a developing tank, from there it is done in room lights. You need a few cheap chemicals. For enlargements, you would need a medium format enlarger. I've got a Beseler 23CII-XL, which is a lovely instrument from many moons ago. I also have a Beseler Cadet II, but it only does 35 mm and smaller negatives. These were enlarged something like 4x, so the grain is really not visible, which is the beauty of larger format film. For simply contact prints at native size, you could get away with no enlarger, but you do need a uniform light source of some kind. From there, you need a dark room with safelight, processing trays and chemicals. You can round up most of the hardware on eBay used and the chemicals aren't too expensive on Amazon or whatever.
I put the pair together in Stereo Photo Maker, but didn't play around with it at all. I'll investigate... I bet I can do better!
I said circa 1957 - I don't know the exact year, but it is the first version, putting it somewhere between 1955 and 1961, I think it was.
As for the subject, the sculpture is chunks of Pyrex from I think the second batch ever made, in 1935!
One further point about the photo quality itself - the enlarger lens is a 100 mm f/5.6 Schneider Componon S, so it is no slouch on that end...
Of all the versions and companies that produced this from 1955-1974, I think there were 86,000 made. They are available, but not super cheap - I think I paid $130 for my copy.
Do a little research - you will find common complaints being light leaks, internal reflections and lens flare. I've only done two rolls so far, but I haven't seen major defects with the particular unit - got lucky I guess!
Thanks again,
Mike
- rjlittlefield
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23564
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
- Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
- Contact:
Good eye, Rik! They are details I "fixed" in the first version, but didn't do again on the second.
I finally broke down and got some color film and (gasp! ) took it to a professional film lab since I'm not set up for color at home.
Here is a quick taste:
I will get these and more in larger versions on my PBase site http://www.pbase.com/the_microscope_tuell/ in the stereo section.
As a reminder, these were taken with a GOMZ (subsequently LOMO) Sputnik stereo camera from circa 1957 or so. Medium format 120 roll film, Kodak Ektar 100, with the negatives scanned at 6 MP.
Sorry to be off topic again - I just think it is pretty cool making vintage tech shine again, and how it relates to the stereo images so many of us enjoy on a small scale.
Mike
I finally broke down and got some color film and (gasp! ) took it to a professional film lab since I'm not set up for color at home.
Here is a quick taste:
I will get these and more in larger versions on my PBase site http://www.pbase.com/the_microscope_tuell/ in the stereo section.
As a reminder, these were taken with a GOMZ (subsequently LOMO) Sputnik stereo camera from circa 1957 or so. Medium format 120 roll film, Kodak Ektar 100, with the negatives scanned at 6 MP.
Sorry to be off topic again - I just think it is pretty cool making vintage tech shine again, and how it relates to the stereo images so many of us enjoy on a small scale.
Mike