Nous utilisons, ainsi que nos partenaires, des technologies comme les cookies pour vous reconnaitre et vous montrez plus de choses que vous appréciez. Consultez notre politique de protection des données pour en savoir plus. En visitant ce site internet vous acceptez l'usage de ces technologies.
J'accepte.
"I find that black & white brings out the emotions more." — Photographer Alice Marie Brigitte reveals three superb series of photographs taken with our 100 ISO monochrome films.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
Last year we received 2 ORWO NP20, exp. 10/1992 from @rolfmg.
I shared the first one with @guja.
The second is to be used for a three-way swap.
I exposed this to ISO 50 and processed this in Kodak D76 stock for 6.5 minutes.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
We want more and more and more in every field. Also in photography, amateurs start with a 4/3 sensor, then APS-C to finally sell the kidney and buy their dream full frame. Maybe it would be enough to eat less - we will lose weight, which is always OK, and we will also buy our dream camera. But what do I know - I’ve got a belly ring and I take photos with a half-frame camera... BTW... Why to take photos only on half a frame? Isn't shooting a full-frame film photography not hipster enough? Well, back in the day, when cigarettes cost a dollar a pack, there was no other option than an analog film. Every hipster knows (of course hipster knew it long before it was cool) that film produces very good image quality. Too good… Manufacturers of photographic equipment looked at all the rolls they had developed so far and at a secret meeting in a bunker under the Kodak's headquarters concluded that 90% of them were shit. Why give people such a great tool when they use it to take pictures of their cats and weener? Pearls before swine. It is true that some photos they examined that day were from people’s holidays, but they were a few. The average user does not need such a good image quality for photos of his cat or of Aunt Anna's thanksgiving party. Good enough photos to paste into an album and to gossip about unloved relatives can be made on half frame easily. Maybe it's even better because we don't have to look at those hated faces in high definition. This is how the idea of half-frame cameras was born - twice as much for the same money. If we want to spare some money, we should look to the east. There, in the distant and frosty Soviet Union, one of the cheapest half-frame cameras - the Chaika - was produced. Chaika means a seagull. What does this have to do with a camera? I don’t know. Maybe because the seagull is flying over our heads, and if we take a picture vertically, despite the fact that we hold it horizontally, there is a chance that we will catch a flying bird in the frame? Is this a special device for ornithologists? Have I just solved the greatest mystery of the Soviet Union? I cracked the secret code by accessing messages encrypted in camera names? I don’t know.
