วีดีโอ

Thanks for your insights, I'm new to scanning and this helps more than you think !

Thank you so much for this video! I just got my grandfathers K12 and took it to a 90's themed LARP and it worked wonderfully!

Ugh. I had one. I hated it. For some reason the standard lens made everything tinged slightly yellow. Nothing says 'overrated product' like the K1000.

jeez dude. waaay too much bloody chit chat.

Agreed wholeheartedly on ALL of this! While I still have a bit of Gear Acquisition Syndrome on occasion (still looking for a Leica M7 with the perfect price point 😂🤣), I do keep my lenses to a minimum when I travel with cameras. On my Leica M240, I only travel with 3 lenses (SMC Pentax L 43mm f=1.9, KMZ Jupiter 9 85mm f=2, and Leitz Tele-Elmar 135mm f=4). I have TONS of lenses, all sitting in a separate camera bag, that never get used… all because I know I’m going to get the best results with the 3 I keep in my main bag! Gear definitely DOESN’T and DOES matter! P.S.: Shoutout to Clint, because you mentioned him… I was linked here from his video of the Cybiko, and frankly thought it was a GREAT idea to check your vids out! I appreciate the heck out of the work both of you guys are doing here, keep it up!

Kentmere and HP5 do NOT share the same development times. Kentmere needs to be developed longer in most developers (look at Ilford's recommended times, not Kodak's), Are these greyscale images? If not, why not? Why waste 3 colour channels on a greyscale image? And if they are greyscale images, one cannot be "warmer" than another, unless you are talking about colour discrepancies that appear on different monitors. Greyscale images are by definition neutral across the board, across all densities. If one greyscale image appears "warmer" than another, it's your monitor or display, not the film. The pole in the comparison at 5:30 is LITERALLY in shadow for the HP5, and in sunlight for the Kentmere. You can see the pole does not throw a shadow in HP5 pic because it is already in shadow, but does in the Kentmere pic, because it is lit by sunlight. You cannot seriously be trying to compare the contrast between these two scenes? Surely? Sorry, switching off now. This is subjective nonsense.

Hey, do you still have this camera? I have a question about the viewfinder assembly and can't find many people talking about it.

Nobody cares or wants to hear about your fucking political beliefs!!! We watch these TH-cam videos to learn about cameras only. How about you stick to that.

Hey Luke! Quick question -- when using the soft effect, do you have to rotate it and keep held in that position while taking the photo? Or, is it automatically switched on when you rotate it?

Looks like my favorite parking garage here in Orlando, Florida. I use XP-2 regularly. The sharpness & grain is so fine that enlargements are no problem. You can develop it using B&W developers, which means the difference in appearance depending on which you use, so not using up your color chemistry.

The top screen on the 7000 and 9000 crack frequently. I had to hunt on ebay for a while to find a 7000 without any black marks. Heck im still looking for a 9000 model with a decent screen

I got on to collect some Mavica Floppy cameras and I find them so wonderful. Because the floppy takes ages to write (especially long on fd7 because it's got x1 drive!) and the space is very limited on the floppy, I tend to be more selective with my shooting. Shooting just feels more meaningful even if the pictures in reality are pixelated post stamps. But the vibe these pics give you! omg. The pink sky is indeed pink and not red like my iphone would think. The overblown highlights are indeed very overblown and shadows are crushed. The grain is on everything. The pics just look like the 90s

I’m a huge LGR fan, every Friday I watch it as a source of “zen” in an otherwise chaotic week. That being said, I have NEVER rewatched a video on youtube as much as I have rewatched your series on Chicago. The way you’ve captured the “feel” of a city such as this is truly special. I just wanted to say thank you. Great job! Talent runs in the family. I know your bro is skipping the next VCF for understandable reasons…but I’m mostly bummed we won’t be getting another excellent Chicago Vlog from you…First blood part 4?! Anyway, please revisit this in 2025! Thanks for your work, Luke! It’s appreciated to say the least!

My latest short was shot on a mavica. They are so, just fun.

What about " Debbie does Dallas " ?

Yes matter what, I gotchu fam.

BRUH at 6:40 that's a terminal from SDF! That likely means smj (Stephen Jones) was there with it! Lucky!

I've heard that CineStill 800T is very very high resolution but the examples you showed seemed very soft to me. Was it a focus issue or is that just how the film develops?

800 and 1600 look really good wtf

Came for the photography lesson, stayed for the music. My god, what a beautiful piece.

4:43kentmere has good tone of sky and cloud.maybe sun angle is different.

neat!

38:55 VCFMW coverage...Luke, fantastic video! Thank you!!!

I use the FD92 version....1.6MP & floppy or memory stick. I use them every day in my church pipe organ building/restoration business. Pictures are printed out A4 & look great. Mobile phones don't work here in rural Lincolnshire, UK. I note that mobile phone users don't seem to keep them very long. I dont buy anything that I dont think will last at least 15 years. I therefore don't bother having a mobile phone. If you compare the Canon offering from the same 1997 your MV5 came from, the Canon is very poor indeed yet was similar cost. Until I bought the first mavica (FD73) in 1998,I was using a very good 1960's Pentax SLR 35mm camera. One day we dismantled (well over three days) of pipe organ only to disvover I'd made a speed selection error on the SLR camera & had half a picture of everything. That error was costly in wasted time trying to work things out during restoration of that organ. After that I used the SLR on a couple more jobs & used the FD73 as backup. Now, if you compare the FD5 & FD7 (the 10x zoom version), the sensor is the same as the ones used in Sony Video 8 camcorders, whereas the 18 month later FD71 etc, whilst still VGA resolution, the sensor s the type used on Sony Hi8 camcorders. The quality difference is very noticable. Richard, UK

I can't watch this video because of the music.

34:33 Damn that is art right there. Clint looking like he's in an Outkast album cover (Or he's about to drop the defining Trip Hop album of the decade) Amazing video Luke, your vids always inspire me to dust off my film cameras again

Big mic in front of your face? Come on! Who do you want to impress? Get real! Work out more and less donuts.

Which brand of battery does it use?

What a gteat video! I found your video from LGR and this is my first video from your channel and I'm looking forward to watching more!

If the guy is as uninformed and naive as he seems to be, you have to wonder why he wastes his time posting this video. This comparison is more about his limitations than those of the two scanning processes. As for the Plustek, it's results are about what you should expect, except that there is a chance it is not focusing on the film properly, accounting for its clear lack of sharpness. Competent technical analysis of the Plustek shows that its native resolution is a bit less than 3000 dpi, which puts it nearly in the resolution of a good Epson flatbed. Plustek's claims of 7000 or 9000 dpi resolution were created in the advertising department. Its internal software generates bloated files, far larger than a normal image file structure requires. Overall, film scanners are a technology which departs from tradition, in that the peak of its technology was reached in the 1990s and has been declining in quality ever since. Today, there are no quality film scanners newly available. You can pay a relatively large amount for a 20-year-old unit, a top of the line Nikon or MInolta, and you can use Vuescan to work around installing drivers which will let them work on Windows 11 or whatever. But the age of the equipment, and almost no prospect of a repair, makes the investment something of a gamble. Interestingly, until a few years ago, you could buy a second tier NIkon or Minolta for $150. Those are now more like $450. A Nikon 9000 which cost about $1,000, now goes for $3,000-4,000. At those prices, there may be room in the market for a new film scanner of high quality, incorporating all the advancement in technology of the last 30 years. Not holding my breath.

fun to take photos with, absolutely useless photos. I mean if you want nostalgia sure why not. but don't expect photos from the old mavica cameras that you can proudly post on flickr

So after 2 years this turns up from the algorithm? whatever. I used this recently. Nice and contrasty, I recommend exposing -2 stops if using in shadowy areas

damn i want one so badly, i hope find one on the flea market of tomorrow!

Thumbs up just for calling football football👍👍

The quirks of this camera were typical for the time. As for the focusing, it was never intended for close up images with narrow depth of field. Users would have used zone focusing. Personally, I like to embrace the quirks of old cameras like this, which add to the experience. If I want a camera with perfect handling, I'll use my modern digital camera.

what developer etc.?

how do you load it? ive never had a film camara so i dont really know how

I like the flat look.

For anyone wondering, or watching this after fujifilm discontinued the packfilm the only company that now produces packfilm is "one instant" hope this helps

I paid $15.00 for mine, and it came with 2 lenses , a case , a strap , a roll of film, and a super duper flash attachment of some sort or other. I have never had a camera other than a point and shoot type. Hopefully, I can get some education on how to use it . I don't know what most of the terms mean.

You don't need to apologize for shit that happened way before you were born stop being a white savior.

Your boom joke was good.

How can we find @daviljoel193 info about processing time ??? Do you have a link to reference????

"Welcome my son" 😁

Are you related to LGR? You look very like him

snuff film

enjoy your videos bro!

The thing is, people agreeing more with straight photography, will deem the pictorialist approach as invalid and their way as the correct way, whereas people agreeing with pictorialism will think that both approaches are perfectly fine, albeit straight photography being more restrictive than it needs to be. I think so at least, right?

They seem to just "randomly" switch off which one is contrastier or brighter, which leads me to believe that it's a different SPECTRAL sensitivity and depended instead on the colors in the scene. The fact that the sky always looks more like it has a red filter on in kentmere supports this. But I can't seem to find a graph of kentmere's spectral sensitivity anywhere.

Bro are you related to the youtuber LazyGameReviews? You sound like him, look like him, and speak like him 😂