It's a distraction ploy. We're supposed to be stringing red yarn on our cork boards to connect TC to CD, when it's obvious that he's actually Default Cube!!!
Not only you look like Captain Disillusion but you two are probably the only two youtubers left that make simply 10/10 content and dont show sponsor messages, you two also never repeatedly asking from viewers to ''like subscribe check patreon etc.'' and both are completely underrated and treated unfairly by the YT algorythm.
Although I agree both are amazing content creators, I don't have any issue with other youtubers I follow doing things to make some money for making content.. 99% of the time, if the content creator is able to rely solely on youtube for income, the production quality improves, and it allows them to post more than they would otherwise.
@@JayquanDeMarcusWashington I don't have anything against them as well. more income helps them create better content of course. I'm just observing the similarities of those two 😋
If you want an honest RUclipsr who never does sponsor reads, you can always go to Matt's off road recovery. Because they are all it is is I dude who owns a towing company just to try to get people out of sticky situations using the RUclips ad revenue to lower his prices (in many cases he doesn't charge a thing)
Wow! When you reached for your camara, and pulled it off the "set", there was no way I could tell it wasn't real! You must be some kind of wizard with AfterEffects!
That little “crash course in basic photography” was the most comprehensive explanation i’ve seen on youtube, and it wasn’t even supposed to be the focus of the video! What a pleasant surprise it was! Thank you.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Pre-digital mechanical designs like this feel like sorcery until you get a look at the right part of them. So cool!
I like how the gray box behind his head looks like a square halo. (Like in medieval paintings of saints, where the halo was shown behind/around the head.)
@@christopherdavis478 the borders of the overall units look too thick to me to be KALLAX. I think it’s EXPEDIT, whichever is the previous version. All the internal dimensions are the same so all the accessories fit, but the thickness of the outer walls is a bit thicker on the EXPEDIT. I know because I got an EXPEDIT mere months before they discontinued it and replaced it with KALLAX, which annoys me no end as it means additional units don’t quite match. Sigh.
@@timotab Hah, a fellow aficionado. I've got a mix of the two as well, though fortunately nowhere side by side. You're probably right, I just said KALLAX as it's the current line. I love the damn things as they're so versatile: I've made behind-sofa tables, night stands, mini-bars and that most revered usage, record storage.
for some reason i actually thought about CD as soon as he mentioned his background and aftereffects... then he actually mentioned him... i felt very cool... for once...
As someone who didn't switch to digital photography until 2009, it still seems kind weird to hear film photography discussed as (nearly) ancient history.
I still use film in my large format camera. For everything above medium format, digital STILL cannot compete with film. It's quite expensive, but I can get perfectly sharp 400 MP scans out of my large format film. There is no digital camera on earth that can deliver this quality (though the difference has become noticably smaller in recent years).
I'm in the same boat. In fact I made it a point in 2000 to switch to Pentax because like Nikon you could use the older lenses on the DSLRs. I kept the analog body for a fair amount of time before giving it to my kid's school as, well, no chance I'd ever buy film again.
Yes, agree, and I think this is more nostalgia than anything else. I do own a film Canon AE-1, and as good as that camera is, it is no comparison to my Canon 6D. The quality of the picture, the dynamic range, sharpness, and quick focus time. I have the same opinion about turntables. They are nice and nostalgic. I enjoyed the process of taking the album out and placing it in the turntable, but the quality of the music is no match for a good high-quality digital player.
Wait til you hear about all the Tiktok kids who are all shooting on film now because they were simply too young to have ever experienced it the first time around...
And that's why I like the mechanical shutter inside my GH5. It just gives the nice feedback that you actually made something happen instead of the almost indistinctive clicks from a small relay in older digital cameras and the completely silent operation on the GH5 when set to electronic shutter.
@@Rocketryman people call film cameras analogue cameras because it differentiates them from motion picture film cameras, digital still cameras and digital motion picture cameras. Proper terminology be damned in this case, it just makes things easier.
@@sumvs5992 Clearly, you know nothing about film cameras, or digital still cameras or digital video cameras. The only thing it makes easy is you do not learn and it shows a weak understanding of the craft. If I called an x-ray, MRI, or CAT scan an xray. If I told you I was going in that big tube to get an x-ray. You would not only correct me but you would go into what the difference is. People call film cameras analog cameras because they do not know what either is.
@@Rocketryman ok, no need to get hostile. Let's say we're at the beach and I say "I'm going in the water" are you going to correct me and start spouting off about it being salt water and part of the "Bay of X"? Surely you would understand that I meant I'm going into the sea? That's the same thing as saying "anolog camera". It's for clarity, it's so you don't need some long winded explanation that inevitably confuses the person you are talking to. In fact, I was talking to my mom about my analog cameras about a month ago and because I used the term "film camera" she thought I meant a motion picture film camera, not a still camera. People do get confused about these things, and industry terms confuse people if they aren't in that industry. Like it or not mate, your world where we refer to all film shooting cameras as film cameras isn't coming anytime soon, probably never. Also I have shot on about 6 analog cameras now, and about 4 digital cameras. I can tell the difference between them.
Fully mechanical shutters are honestly kind of arcane to me. It sounds like an insane task to create a door that opens only for a thousandth of a second without any electronics let alone one that can, within the same mechanism, additionally open for a bunch of other, longer times. Yet here we are! So beautiful.
I also have the F-1 although it is a newer model than the one represented in the video. There are three different iterations of this beautiful camera and is one of the setting stones why Canon started really gaining on the professional market compared to Nikon. Its funny to me how the current users of these systems compete with eachother when looking up the history you realize they were once very tightly tied to eachother, but thats a topic of its own. The F-1 is by far the most complex purely mechanical camera to have ever been built, bar none. The amount of parts that go into all of these mechanisms is insane.
My late grandfather owned a camera store in Manhattan years ago. He could have taken that camera completely apart and put it back together again. He knew in full detail exactly how all of those mechanisms worked. He explained it to me when I was a kid; it blew my mind. I wish he was still here. I mean seriously: he would have known exactly what every last spring, gear, etc did in that camera. At the beginning of this video, when he pressed the shutter and it took a second or so, and made that noise--that noise is actually a mechanical timer clicking (probably around) 1,000 times per second. You may well have known that, but I had to make sure. Think about the intricacy of the mechanism that does that.
@@mickocastren6544 My parents have a Nikkormat, which is similar. It has a focusing screen just like that one. The light meter wasn't quite as snazzy looking, but almost. That thing really takes awesome pictures. They don't use it anymore, I should beg my dad for it. He would probably be very protective of it, still. Understandable.
The Canon F1 was my main camera when I worked as a press photographer in the UK some 50 years ago. Excellent workhorse, never let me down. Happy memories!
I worked with Canon F1/F1n from 1971 to 2003 when I moved to digital photography. Never the slightest functional issue with any of them over the whole time.
As a lifelong film camera user, I'm super impressed by how much you accurately covered in 30 mins. I actually laughed out loud when you covered sunny 16 since I assumed you'd never have time in a short video.
My mom still has one of those and as a kid in the 80's, I loved playing with that thing. The feel of the buttons, knobs and levers and how each one was unique in its size, shape, and tactile feedback was just delicious. I memorized where each function was with my eyes closed for some reason. Watching this video, I can still feel what each button and knob felt like back then.
@@incognitou I personally don't know. I understand the basic concept, but you're on the internet... all you have to do is search and you'll find the answer.
@@incognitou This camera takes 35mm film so the images are printed the same way as with any other film negative. Nowadays the negatives are developed and then scanned as a digital image but back in the day they would create prints in a darkroom by shining light through the negative onto a photosensitive piece of paper underneath which would create the positive image.
@@tristanwh9466 usually, I am a weird person who still makes darkroom prints instead of printing from scans. Doing either one at home would cost some money and a darkroom seemed more fun.
When I found your channel a long time ago when you only had a few tens of thousands of subscribers I wanted to copy your set almost exactly. Seeing as though you have now passed me in subscribership, I'm glad I didn't do that 🤣
I never realized you weren't a million sub channel, ya really seem like one and put effort into your productions as if they were a television program/ mini doc. Love the ModBook saga
Also, I love seeing this YT tech community all supporting each other and not competing. It's really refreshing to see. I mean hell, even SlowMo Guys Gavin Free is in this comment section
"Only" a few tens of thousands... 😂 You guys live in cloud cuckoo land. I've got only around 2,000 subs and I'm blessed to have each one of them. Life's more than subscriber and "like" metrics my young friend.
@@2010ngojo Worse still, he'll make a video to clearly show us exactly how he did it in easy to understand language so that even an idiot could comprehend.... .....That CD used magic and a collaboration with the time lords to accomplish it.
Four and a half decades ago I used a Canon F1 when I was a photographer for my high school newspaper and yearbook. The F1 was pretty much my constant companion in my junior year, I took it with me all the time in school to grab candid photos and to photograph school assemblies and sports events. This video was a great refresher of an old friend. Thanks.
@@ThompYT like taking a picture without someone knowing you're taking a picture, or they act like the camera isn't there. It makes for more realistic photos. Photographers at weddings or events are supposed to be Flys on the wall to just get pictures of people enjoying themselves in a natural way.
@@LaskyLabs We used Tri-X 400 because we almost never used a flash and we could push it if we needed to for low light like in hallways (it was an old, dark school) or night football games. We bought it in bulk and loaded our own canisters.
Imagine Captain Disillusion's blood pressure after social media explodes with requests to explain how 0:45 was done. ... the reflection in the background made it very convincing!
Captain will spot the pixels we can't see, and reveal that this whole channel is being operated by a 75 year old bald swedish man with incredible blender skillz
@@khairulhelmihashim2510 I am also fairly certain that SLRs are analog only and when someone figured out you can use a couple lcd displays instead of a complex prism and mirror set up to take the same picture is where Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras come in.
@@michealpersicko9531 SLR's are indeed analog only, by definition. That's because the D in DSLR stands for digital. Digital Single Lens Reflex. Also, both terms refer to the mirror mechanism itself. As khairul pointed out, when they got rid of the pentaprism/mirror assembly, they called it "mirrorless" or MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera).
I have a Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n. Its digital, but I turned off pretty much any fancy features and use it pretty much like a film camera. Manual focus, manual speed, aperture, the only fancy feature is the light meter. And I use lenses from the 70s on it (its sensor is the same size as 35mm film). And I shoot in raw so I have more control over any over/under exposures. This was darkened a little, and cropped to 4% of the image... imgur.com/a/m1FF3HG and it can even look like the photos were taken in the 70s imgur.com/a/UkEG40c
@John Texas how about a global-H Soviet copy of widelux. Built for tractor pulling but you have to shake it hard before taking a photo to get the gearing to mesh. PS who you calling kid. I've got 2 twin lens medium format staring down at me right now.
This just taught me more about how a cameras exposure works than I ever knew, including when a professional photographer tried to explain it to me. well done.
We have to remember one thing: This system looks intuitive and simple because it has been an object of countless design proposals and staff meetings. That's what always fascinated me about these things. We just use small things that were someone's work for like 3 months.
When I worked as a software engineer for a large software company there was an inverse relationship between the number of design meetings/reviews and the complexity of the code. As a designer/coder I could build an elegant solution, only to have it torn apart and bloated with useless post hoc requirements from (usually) the QA department.
Loved this! I was a photography professor at our local community college for 20 years, and my favorite class to teach was beginning photography. Your explanations were dense content-wise but perfect! Your affection for the F-1 was clear. It was (is) a great camera. I can’t wait to see more of your photo-related videos! Well done, Sir!!
_"After effects is a program that I open accidentally, stare at in terror, and then feel guilty about never bothering to learn despite multiple New Years resolutions"_ How did you manage to so perfectly describe my exact relation to After Effects? 😅
It's basically Photoshop for masochists. Photoshop you can easily teach yourself without even a manual, let alone a tutorial. With After Effects on the other hand, you just look at it as if it was some alien artifact and quickly close it again, fearing it may wake up and swallow the planet.
The F-1 is the camera my parents grew up on. The simplicity of these older mechanical cameras made easy to understand what shutter speed and aperture meant when my dad explained to me what was going on. In the late 90's I shot film with an "AE-1 Program" (another Canon FD-mount SLR) for a few years, but I was so hesitant to use film that I spent a month to expose a roll and didn't really get enough practice to learn from my mistakes. Also I was super slow at manually focusing with a split-prism. Still, I very occasionally miss the physical split prism on modern DSLRs when AF just can't get the job done.
I wish all modern DSLRs had split-prism focusing. After using film for so long and auto-focus working only about 80% of the time, it would make life so much easier.
Nothing gets your eye dialed in for manual focus without a split prism like macro work. It's a struggle at first, but with practice you get to know where your focal plane is without needing an aid, and the skill transfers nicely to ordinary lenses.
Love this episode! I have been a photographer since this camera was new. I also once worked in a camera store selling these era of cameras. I reluctantly switched from film to digital cameras some time ago. I have recently returned to using film media since the reintroduction of Ektachrome film stock. I have even purchased two medium format cameras that I use quite a lot. I had to remember how to use these cameras, with the light meters and exposure requirements of the film stock that I had not really needed to do with the new digital cameras. It has awakened my creativity. Please consider more episodes covering photography in the future.
In about 1972 when I was in the Navy, I bought a new 35mm slr: A Yashica TL-Electro X. it was all manual like this great Canon F-1. I think I bought the Yashica because it was not as expensive as the Canon. I am glad the camera was all manual because I had to learn about film speed, aperture, F-stops, focus, different film types, light meters ( internal & external ), etc. I took thousands & thousands of slides and print pictures and the Yashica performed flawlessly. Yea, I didn't know how my pictures came out until I had the film developed at a camera store, but I mostly got what I had wanted. Today's digital cameras are so nice to be able to just delete something when you don't like what you just snapped, a major difference for sure, and no wasted expensive film( at least today...film was cheap enough back in the 70's ). Good educational video...thanks..!!
ISO is a name, not an acronym or initialism. From their website: _"Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek 'isos', meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO."_
There’s something I just remembered (and I can’t wait to see whenever Alec can finally release it since I’m sure he’s working pretty hard on it)- *Teletext!*
That would be cool. I don't know if it ever really took off in the US, but here in the UK (where I believe it was conceived and developed) it was a big thing right up until the advent of the Web. When I was a kid (early 80s), Teletext-equipped sets and decoder boxes were expensive, so our public library (a wonderful old Victorian building that was torn down in 1993, right about the time my family got their first TT set) had a couple of sets available for public use, much as today's libraries have PCs.
@@rich_edwards79 he's mentioned in one of his videos he's doing a teletext video. The entire Turner broadcasting family and a few local systems (Chicago, LA, etc) had teletext services. It didn't take off because of TV guide pressuring companies not to use the system as they were worried it would reduce their magazine sales. Ah American commerce. Stifling innovation since day one.
@@medes5597 I think Richard was talking about the similar looking but quite different system where a modified TV and a keyboard were hooked up to a 1200/75 bps modem for online services like searching public records or ordering train tickets. This is quite different than the TTV system that distributes up to 800 pages of text information via the closed captioning part of TV signals.
@@johndododoe1411 the BBC Micro did basic 800 page teletext and was the computer of choice for libraries because of government subsidies, educational grants from the government and BBC and various Acorn price reductions for buying more than one. I assumed they meant that. I concede I may be wrong. Did you you know you could buy a TV with a built in teletext printer? It's insane to me that existed.
As a photographer who shoots mainly with a 1986 Nikon FM2n and also a fan of your channel, I was waiting for this video! More old camera videos please!
One of the best quick explanations of analog photography and the shutter speed/aperture relationship. Well done! From a photographer of 60 years (and still happily using ‘70s SLRs)
I have the 1980 Olympics version of the camera. My parents got it for me as a gift. The pictures I took made a lot of good memories. Those pictures are still on my walls today.
ISO is not an acronym for International Standards Organization, a common misconception. The group is actually called the International Organization for Standardisation. The abbreviation ISO comes from the Greek word isos, which means equal. It may be a silly semantic point, but I’m a member of one of the standard development organizations that is governed by ISO and Its like a nervous tick I have to inform people of the nuance. I’m a huge fan of your content and a pleased patron. You’re a blessing during the COVID madness!
Neat, but I kinda wish its actual name were International Standards Organization, sounds better to me and even avoids the "s vs z" problem standardization, baby
It’s not just silly pedantry! “ISO” was intentionally *not* an abbreviation for the name of the organization, since that would only work in one language (or be a different abbreviation in different languages), and, in the spirit of global standards, they didn’t want to privilege one language over another.
It starts at 10 minutes. I'm at about 19 mins and I'M LOVING EVERY SECOND OF IT! Man! This is so detailed and interesting even from the photography learning point of view that I finally got why the F's are so weird. Thanks Alek! Now back to watching the rest!
Really? People actually think that set is rendered? Anyone who has been to Ikea once or twice can see that it is an Expedit or Kallax with fancy LED lighting mounted in it.
Doesn't mean you can't render it. I really have to say his after effects are astonishing. Everything looks so real as if it would be real (but we all know it is not)^^
There would be two ways to make a compartment look black and white. The easiest is to put monochrome stuff in the compartment, e.g. motamuseum.com/2015/07/23/stavinsky-bw-rubiks-cube/. This also works well with the colored(!) background of that compartment. The other way would be to light it with infrared. Some cameras can register infrared and it usually looks like a gray or bluish color. Try your TV remote on your phone camera to see what I mean. Now as the background of that compartment is colored, this is not a viable option, as the light from the background would spoil the illusion.
(Almost) everything in the IKEA catalogue is rendered. They have gotten/are getting rid of the photography division. It does not make sense, since everything in the catalogue was already rendered for aesthetics and virtual stress-testing, anyway, before they wee ever manufactured, using the same 3-D renders to fabricate the materials. Why re-invent the wheel? They are not the only people who do this now. Product photography is becoming niche.
My gosh, I love how you still take the time to complete the sub titles. Google removing user generated is sad; I think more people use CC than they know. It's fantastic for keeping the volume low at work, at night, and when you miss a word, you can just read below! Also the lav mic has seemingly disappeared some 9 months ago with no trace left. A mystery.
I’m a 36 year old German and started experimenting with photography at about age 10, i.e. in the beginning of the 90s. I have never used or even heard of (until this video) DIN degrees for film speeds. Today, everyone here uses ISO just like everyone else. I even remember that when I was young, films were marked with “ISO/ASA 400” (or whatever number), but I don’t recall ever having seen the degree system in use.
What I love about your channel is that, as you're talking, questions pop into my head and, almost without fail, you answer that question nearly immediately. Great videos! I've been binge watching them.
I love it! It's so cool to actually see something mechanical like this once and a while, where you can describe exactly what's happening and how it's happening, instead of just saying, "Oh yeah, just hook into the camera API and grab the shutter speed variable." I learned something today!
In 1653, Patriarch Nikon enacted reforms of Russian Orthodox Church. Those who haven't accepted the reforms were called Old Believers (Raskolniks). This is known as Raskol (split or schism). There are still settlements of Raskolniks in Russia. Some visitors report that Nikon cameras are met negatively, while Canon are approved.
Well whatever the reason for it is, The reality is that every time I pick up my nikon I spend a solid few seconds aggressively trying to stuff the lense on the wrong way. It gets exceptionally weird when you run adapters for old lenses on the digital, where the old lense mounts the proper way, but you have to turn the adapter backwards to take it off the camera
@@Alexagrigorieff Interesting. Actually, the Nippon Kogaku company began making cameras by producing the German Zeiss Ikon camera under license. They called it "Nikon" for Nippon Ikon.
"We call those stops.... 'Stops'". :D I love it!! Your sense of humor is half the reason I (for one) love this channel. The other half is all the cool tech, some of which I vaguely remember my parents using when I was a young child, and all of it I enjoy learning about as a Mechanical Engineer.
@John Verne Actually, in most cameras, they did not use a needle matching meter, but a ‘centre needle’ meter, where increasing the exposure time caused the needle to move in one direction, while increasing the F-number caused it to move in the other direction. Meanwhile, more light moved the needle in one direction, while a higher EI moved the needle in the other direction. One simply had to keep the needle centred. The description here does not match that at all, in either appearance, or workings. Yes, they both used a light sensitive module, and they both used an aperture linkage, (for open metering), but how that linkage affected the needle is quite different. In some cases, it could have manually moved the needle support, while in other cases, it was a potentiometer, or some other electronic solution. So substituting a Pentax and quite a lot changes. Indeed, whereas Pentax was one of the first to do “open metering”, they were one of the few to also allow stop down metering simultaneously. I.e., on some brands with open metering, the DoF preview function meant that the light meter failed. Pentax also used light through the lens to illuminate the needle, so that if one was in a dark theatre, shooting a brightly lit stage, one can still see the light-meter.
Wow. 5 minutes 37 seconds to explain almost all of photography (and that includes tangents and digressions). You, sir, are an amazing expositor. Keep up the good work!
Yeah, I can't imagine how someone that's only had 30+ years to learn a subject would ever understand even 10% about it, let alone enough to explain it simply to others. Wow! /s How old do you think Alec is? 10?
The camera is definitely older than Alec is, so I'm not sure why you're being a dick about it. It's not like a classic car, where you still see them all over the place.
@@ananthropomorphictalkinggo6641 I see those cameras all over the place. Before camera phones in smartphones got good many photographers still preferred to use these cameras. And as explained they aren't rocket science. So I don't get why it's so amazing that a dude in his 30s could understand a lot about a camera.
@@catfan__ congrats, you go to the one public school in the country with a budget to buy $500 antique cameras for their students. Most public schools can't even afford updated textbooks for $50 a piece, so forgive me if I don't believe that every high school kid has seen them.
Interestingly ISO is actually not an acronym. According to ISO.org: "It's all in the name Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek 'isos', meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO."
Being old, I was a young photography buff in the late 70s, but the Canon F1 (and later A1) were for rich folks only. I had to make do with my trusty old Pentax K1000, which did pretty much everything the F1 did, and all mechanically too, but didn't have all the cool expansion modules. Those were amazing cameras too, and a lot more affordable.
I picked up a Canon A-1 with 200mm f2.8 lens and auto winder for $50 last year. Worked like it was new. Sadly someone stole the camera and lens from me along with other camera gear. I do have a second A-1 I use though.
K1000 was a great camera, and was pretty much standard college photography starter kit. I believe, though I could be mistaken, that you could also change the focusing screen on the K1000.
@@sloth0jr You could not change any of the focusing screens on the K series cameras. You could on the MX and LX though (The LX being Pentax's equivalent to Canon's F-1n)
With Digital you make a program that goes in jumps till it has passed the target. Then back in smaller jumps till it has passed the target again. Now do that again with even smaller jumps. Keep going back and fro till you jump onto it. With Analog you order the prog to Find target and have coffee. It just goes at the work .
This was a walk down memory lane. My first "real" camera was an Asahi Pentax that worked (and was laid out) almost identically (except for the flash shoe location). I stopped using it some time in the 90s, but I remember well trying to find a suitable replacement for the mercury button battery for the built-in light meter.
I bought mine 40years ago as a second hand camera, it was beautiful camera to use. Everything in it was built to last hundreds of thousands photos, which is amazing for fully mechanical device. This video brought back lots of good memories.
Watched this video two years ago and enjoyed it as a fun tech deep dive and now I'm taking notes so I can buy a manual film camera of my own. Great work!
@@kip258 At this point, I would say it's more like trying to drag the table cloth off a set table without destroying the dishes and the food in the process.
I'm only 3 minutes in and this is my favorite video you've done. Dusting of my Pentax K series film cameras just got bumped up in priority on my to do list.
K1000 was my first SLR camera when I was a kid. I bought it used from a guy selling it in a local newspaper ad. Then after that I stepped up to the Pentax P30t.
8:57 When I was learning video engineering we didn’t abstract the ccd sensitivity into iso numbers on our CCU. We called it gain and we would express that as dB, with 0 dB being roughly analogous to ISO 320. Each additional 3 dB of gain would double the sensitivity, so +3dB would be ISO 640, -3dB was ISO 160 and so on.
Ahhhh, a Tech Connections video on vintage cameras! I fell deep into the vintage photography hole this year (as did all of my money.....) so I am always down to see more of this good content. Lovely camera btw, I haven't tried an F-1 but that 50mm 1.4 lens is rad Also lmao "news flash"
Thanks for the memories! I still have an Olympus OM-1 still tucked away in my basement collection - about the same vintage as your Canon. I shot many rolls on it starting in the 80's, when I bought it second hand from a friend who had used it since the 70's. I love the elegant engineering that went into these devices and the tactile control of it. The distinctive scent of film emulsion that lingers inside, even when you open an old camera, brings back memories. Cheers!
9:17 Ah ILFORD. Reminds me of photography class in high school. *Edit - And now I want to get back into manual photography and develop my own film again!
That reminds me of Freestyles Sales Company, where I discovered "European black-and-white film" in the late 1960's/early 1970's. Ilford wasn't officially available in the U.S. market, so i learned about Pan F, FP3, and HP4. There was even mystery "classic black-and-white film" that turned out to be East German ORWO, such as NP22 and NP27, which stretched this cash-challenged college photographer. (I learned how to use a changing bag and bulk film loader for a wide variety of interesting 135 films of the day.)
This was mind blowing!! I'm a huge fan of tiny mechanical devices. Watches being at the top of my list. I always knew that film cameras were a feat of engineering marvel taken for granted in a huge way, but I didn't realize how damn clever it is!
This about covers how I learned photography. And it made it so easy to learn to understand the "trinity" of exposure. Most cameras these days have so much bells and whistles that learning those basics seems much harder. (I've seen a few other people learn those on modern stuff.) I also found this interesting because I learned on Nikon F2. It's from same time period and a lot is very similar but then there are small details that are different.
Umm, accesssory flashes still make that sound. Its the inverter circuitry that is used to step up the voltage to the amount required by the capacitor which is, in turn, the voltage need to trigger the 'strobe' light. The pitch of the whine goes up as the load from the capacitor decreases. Befor this inverter circuitry was developed, photographers actually used 410 volt batteries (carried in a separate pack) to power their flashes.
Great video. Really pulled out all the stops for this one.
That one hurt
🤣🤣🤣
Yeah, this video wasn't over in a flash
Wow... the Tech Connected :)
Holy flaming hot roast beef, Gav watches my favourite channel. And I know this is Gav and not Dan as theres no cross eyes females here
"and yet some of you think Captain Disillusion and I are the same person."
That's exactly what a skeptical superhero with a secret identity would say.
imagine what Alan would say if he knew the Captain and Technology Connections were the same person! :o
It's a distraction ploy. We're supposed to be stringing red yarn on our cork boards to connect TC to CD, when it's obvious that he's actually Default Cube!!!
Dang! I didn't expect to find traces of the Blender world here! 🎉
Tbh hes probably the guys brother since tc seems to be fatter than cd
He's alan the intern
Not only you look like Captain Disillusion but you two are probably the only two youtubers left that make simply 10/10 content and dont show sponsor messages, you two also never repeatedly asking from viewers to ''like subscribe check patreon etc.'' and both are completely underrated and treated unfairly by the YT algorythm.
They don’t look the same captain
Just looks odd with the face paint
I have to type I like this comment😅😊
Although I agree both are amazing content creators, I don't have any issue with other youtubers I follow doing things to make some money for making content.. 99% of the time, if the content creator is able to rely solely on youtube for income, the production quality improves, and it allows them to post more than they would otherwise.
@@JayquanDeMarcusWashington I don't have anything against them as well. more income helps them create better content of course. I'm just observing the similarities of those two 😋
If you want an honest RUclipsr who never does sponsor reads, you can always go to Matt's off road recovery. Because they are all it is is I dude who owns a towing company just to try to get people out of sticky situations using the RUclips ad revenue to lower his prices (in many cases he doesn't charge a thing)
Wow! When you reached for your camara, and pulled it off the "set", there was no way I could tell it wasn't real! You must be some kind of wizard with AfterEffects!
It's funny because the first videos were indeed greenscreen.
@@K-o-R but not the ones with this set :)
That effect was seamless!
It seems suspicious he spent so much time claiming it was "real" and a "set"
He is Captain Disillusion, so of course!
XD At this point these jokes almost feel cruel.
That little “crash course in basic photography” was the most comprehensive explanation i’ve seen on youtube, and it wasn’t even supposed to be the focus of the video!
What a pleasant surprise it was!
Thank you.
Yes that was excellent. I really learnt a lot.
This video series is best I've watched:
ruclips.net/video/3eVjUrY9a9c/видео.html
Exactly! He'll have another video about focus later. Many light-meters from now.
Yes it was very well focused and not at all shallow.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Pre-digital mechanical designs like this feel like sorcery until you get a look at the right part of them. So cool!
And the fact that more advanced leaf shutters predate this camera by 50 years
The background looks fake because it is so ridiculously well lit.
I like how the gray box behind his head looks like a square halo. (Like in medieval paintings of saints, where the halo was shown behind/around the head.)
Not to mention well designed
@@KevDoy It should. That's a few hundred bucks worth of IKEA, namely KALLAX shelving units and bunch of door and drawer modules.
@@christopherdavis478 the borders of the overall units look too thick to me to be KALLAX. I think it’s EXPEDIT, whichever is the previous version. All the internal dimensions are the same so all the accessories fit, but the thickness of the outer walls is a bit thicker on the EXPEDIT. I know because I got an EXPEDIT mere months before they discontinued it and replaced it with KALLAX, which annoys me no end as it means additional units don’t quite match. Sigh.
@@timotab Hah, a fellow aficionado. I've got a mix of the two as well, though fortunately nowhere side by side. You're probably right, I just said KALLAX as it's the current line. I love the damn things as they're so versatile: I've made behind-sofa tables, night stands, mini-bars and that most revered usage, record storage.
the line about you and captain disillusion being the same person made me laugh a little to loud at my desk.
i only now spottet the simularities xD
for some reason i actually thought about CD as soon as he mentioned his background and aftereffects... then he actually mentioned him... i felt very cool... for once...
Has anyone seen them both in the same room? No?
Hypothesis proven.
Poor desk, laughed at for no reason 😉
Your DEFINETLY REAL desk.
As someone who didn't switch to digital photography until 2009, it still seems kind weird to hear film photography discussed as (nearly) ancient history.
A lot of people still use film as well!
I still use film in my large format camera. For everything above medium format, digital STILL cannot compete with film. It's quite expensive, but I can get perfectly sharp 400 MP scans out of my large format film. There is no digital camera on earth that can deliver this quality (though the difference has become noticably smaller in recent years).
I'm in the same boat. In fact I made it a point in 2000 to switch to Pentax because like Nikon you could use the older lenses on the DSLRs. I kept the analog body for a fair amount of time before giving it to my kid's school as, well, no chance I'd ever buy film again.
Yes, agree, and I think this is more nostalgia than anything else. I do own a film Canon AE-1, and as good as that camera is, it is no comparison to my Canon 6D. The quality of the picture, the dynamic range, sharpness, and quick focus time. I have the same opinion about turntables. They are nice and nostalgic. I enjoyed the process of taking the album out and placing it in the turntable, but the quality of the music is no match for a good high-quality digital player.
Wait til you hear about all the Tiktok kids who are all shooting on film now because they were simply too young to have ever experienced it the first time around...
Petition to name the episode on film, "35mm Film: Exposed!"
Overdeveloped? Underdeveloped?
@Atari Master Aperture Science. We do what we must, because, we can.
Don't be so negative.. you must have an underdeveloped sense of humour.
@@richardoakley8800 that idea slides in my mind
Okay, now you are really pushing it.
That "floating mirror" isn't "neat". That's absolutely ingenious!
There's something satisfying about the sounds produced from analogue cameras like the Canon F-1.
And that's why I like the mechanical shutter inside my GH5. It just gives the nice feedback that you actually made something happen instead of the almost indistinctive clicks from a small relay in older digital cameras and the completely silent operation on the GH5 when set to electronic shutter.
Analog is what the video signal was before it went digital. Non-digital cameras are FILM cameras. That is why there are SLR and DSLR cameras. :-)
@@Rocketryman people call film cameras analogue cameras because it differentiates them from motion picture film cameras, digital still cameras and digital motion picture cameras.
Proper terminology be damned in this case, it just makes things easier.
@@sumvs5992 Clearly, you know nothing about film cameras, or digital still cameras or digital video cameras. The only thing it makes easy is you do not learn and it shows a weak understanding of the craft. If I called an x-ray, MRI, or CAT scan an xray. If I told you I was going in that big tube to get an x-ray. You would not only correct me but you would go into what the difference is. People call film cameras analog cameras because they do not know what either is.
@@Rocketryman ok, no need to get hostile.
Let's say we're at the beach and I say "I'm going in the water" are you going to correct me and start spouting off about it being salt water and part of the "Bay of X"? Surely you would understand that I meant I'm going into the sea? That's the same thing as saying "anolog camera". It's for clarity, it's so you don't need some long winded explanation that inevitably confuses the person you are talking to.
In fact, I was talking to my mom about my analog cameras about a month ago and because I used the term "film camera" she thought I meant a motion picture film camera, not a still camera. People do get confused about these things, and industry terms confuse people if they aren't in that industry.
Like it or not mate, your world where we refer to all film shooting cameras as film cameras isn't coming anytime soon, probably never.
Also I have shot on about 6 analog cameras now, and about 4 digital cameras. I can tell the difference between them.
The amount of engineering here is amazing, like imagine making this thing.
Pre-CAD/CAM people were smart.
Fully mechanical shutters are honestly kind of arcane to me. It sounds like an insane task to create a door that opens only for a thousandth of a second without any electronics let alone one that can, within the same mechanism, additionally open for a bunch of other, longer times. Yet here we are! So beautiful.
I also have the F-1 although it is a newer model than the one represented in the video. There are three different iterations of this beautiful camera and is one of the setting stones why Canon started really gaining on the professional market compared to Nikon. Its funny to me how the current users of these systems compete with eachother when looking up the history you realize they were once very tightly tied to eachother, but thats a topic of its own. The F-1 is by far the most complex purely mechanical camera to have ever been built, bar none. The amount of parts that go into all of these mechanisms is insane.
My late grandfather owned a camera store in Manhattan years ago. He could have taken that camera completely apart and put it back together again. He knew in full detail exactly how all of those mechanisms worked. He explained it to me when I was a kid; it blew my mind. I wish he was still here. I mean seriously: he would have known exactly what every last spring, gear, etc did in that camera. At the beginning of this video, when he pressed the shutter and it took a second or so, and made that noise--that noise is actually a mechanical timer clicking (probably around) 1,000 times per second. You may well have known that, but I had to make sure. Think about the intricacy of the mechanism that does that.
@@mickocastren6544 My parents have a Nikkormat, which is similar. It has a focusing screen just like that one. The light meter wasn't quite as snazzy looking, but almost. That thing really takes awesome pictures. They don't use it anymore, I should beg my dad for it. He would probably be very protective of it, still. Understandable.
Love the "Media pending" shirt
Kinda cool, if I find it I might get it for Christmas
yeah i want one
Yeah, friggen love it but I would totally wear an “Analyzing in background” shirt though.
I litterarly opened the comments to write the exact same thing, and this was the first thing I saw!
What does that mean?
The Canon F1 was my main camera when I worked as a press photographer in the UK some 50 years ago. Excellent workhorse, never let me down. Happy memories!
I worked with Canon F1/F1n from 1971 to 2003 when I moved to digital photography. Never the slightest functional issue with any of them over the whole time.
Aperture: How big the hole is.
Shutter Speed: How long the hole is open.
ISO: How sensitive (the film or sensor inside) the hole is.
OK, noted.
These days sex words are strange...
I've never managed to get any Aperture for any length of Shutter Speed. One day soon, guys🤞 some girl gonna be desperate as me.
W-Why am I sweating???
@securitycountercheck antici....
Please, nobody make a joke about number of F's or such... (although the commonly assumed connection would be inverse :D )
As a lifelong film camera user, I'm super impressed by how much you accurately covered in 30 mins. I actually laughed out loud when you covered sunny 16 since I assumed you'd never have time in a short video.
My mom still has one of those and as a kid in the 80's, I loved playing with that thing. The feel of the buttons, knobs and levers and how each one was unique in its size, shape, and tactile feedback was just delicious. I memorized where each function was with my eyes closed for some reason. Watching this video, I can still feel what each button and knob felt like back then.
Can you tell me how did they print the shots taken from this camera,if you know?
@@incognitou I personally don't know. I understand the basic concept, but you're on the internet... all you have to do is search and you'll find the answer.
@@incognitou This camera takes 35mm film so the images are printed the same way as with any other film negative. Nowadays the negatives are developed and then scanned as a digital image but back in the day they would create prints in a darkroom by shining light through the negative onto a photosensitive piece of paper underneath which would create the positive image.
@@tristanwh9466 usually, I am a weird person who still makes darkroom prints instead of printing from scans. Doing either one at home would cost some money and a darkroom seemed more fun.
When I found your channel a long time ago when you only had a few tens of thousands of subscribers I wanted to copy your set almost exactly. Seeing as though you have now passed me in subscribership, I'm glad I didn't do that 🤣
I never realized you weren't a million sub channel, ya really seem like one and put effort into your productions as if they were a television program/ mini doc. Love the ModBook saga
Also, I love seeing this YT tech community all supporting each other and not competing. It's really refreshing to see. I mean hell, even SlowMo Guys Gavin Free is in this comment section
@@WalnutSpice yeah yt tech community is one of the most engaging and informative...!
So you would not care about copying small youtubers? But if they grow afterwards you would then regret it?
"Only" a few tens of thousands... 😂
You guys live in cloud cuckoo land. I've got only around 2,000 subs and I'm blessed to have each one of them. Life's more than subscriber and "like" metrics my young friend.
I love how it takes 11 minutes into a 28 minute video to actually even mention the subject of the vide. Wouldn't have it any other way!
Yeah that quick side note went another way lol
Try @1:42
I agree
That shirt is awesome.
The shirt is awesome; what it represents is not.
I love that shirt
@@fafmotorsport what does it represent?
@Chip Wiseman OHHhhhhhj COOOOL I lovs it
@@fafmotorsport yeah I thought it said patent pending too
Man, now I'd really like to see a collab between Captain Disillussion and Alec. I don't even know how that should work, but I know I need it
But Alec isn't real, this whole thing is animated.
@@wesleymays1931 animated by Captain Disillusion obviously
So an episode featuring both is possible
Then do a collaboration with "captain disillusion", show us the PROOF and the truth.
I surely never saw them in the same room... waiting for it!
He won't expose himself
Silence is as good as admission at this point...
Captain disillusion collabs with himself. It proves nothing.
@@2010ngojo Worse still, he'll make a video to clearly show us exactly how he did it in easy to understand language so that even an idiot could comprehend....
.....That CD used magic and a collaboration with the time lords to accomplish it.
I absolutely love devices like this. Everything from extremely-intricate to cleverly-simple engineering in a single product.
Four and a half decades ago I used a Canon F1 when I was a photographer for my high school newspaper and yearbook. The F1 was pretty much my constant companion in my junior year, I took it with me all the time in school to grab candid photos and to photograph school assemblies and sports events. This video was a great refresher of an old friend. Thanks.
Candid?
@@ThompYT like taking a picture without someone knowing you're taking a picture, or they act like the camera isn't there. It makes for more realistic photos. Photographers at weddings or events are supposed to be Flys on the wall to just get pictures of people enjoying themselves in a natural way.
What stocks did you shoot on?
Was it mostly color or black and white?
@@LaskyLabs We used Tri-X 400 because we almost never used a flash and we could push it if we needed to for low light like in hallways (it was an old, dark school) or night football games. We bought it in bulk and loaded our own canisters.
Are you… Peter Parker?
Imagine Captain Disillusion's blood pressure after social media explodes with requests to explain how 0:45 was done.
... the reflection in the background made it very convincing!
Captain will spot the pixels we can't see, and reveal that this whole channel is being operated by a 75 year old bald swedish man with incredible blender skillz
When you said that "SLR" stands for "Single Lens Reflex", I thought to myself: "ah okay, so DSLR must be Dual Single Lens Refl- wait.."
actually there's a dual lens camera called "twin lens reflex" ("TLR").
@@khairulhelmihashim2510 I am also fairly certain that SLRs are analog only and when someone figured out you can use a couple lcd displays instead of a complex prism and mirror set up to take the same picture is where Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras come in.
@@michealpersicko9531 , mirrorless camera.
@@michealpersicko9531 SLR's are indeed analog only, by definition. That's because the D in DSLR stands for digital. Digital Single Lens Reflex. Also, both terms refer to the mirror mechanism itself. As khairul pointed out, when they got rid of the pentaprism/mirror assembly, they called it "mirrorless" or MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera).
@@jasondashney Mirror I'd Like to Clean
Love it! I got into analogue with the Nikon F2 which has an early digital light meter. Looking forward to more on this topic!
I just wanted to refer to your channel for more in-depth videos about lighting, shutter and aperture. But then you already commented.
I have a Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n. Its digital, but I turned off pretty much any fancy features and use it pretty much like a film camera. Manual focus, manual speed, aperture, the only fancy feature is the light meter. And I use lenses from the 70s on it (its sensor is the same size as 35mm film). And I shoot in raw so I have more control over any over/under exposures. This was darkened a little, and cropped to 4% of the image... imgur.com/a/m1FF3HG and it can even look like the photos were taken in the 70s imgur.com/a/UkEG40c
Nikkormat FTN for me
@John Texas stock and processing costs compared to digital means you'ld need to be a millionaire.
@John Texas how about a global-H Soviet copy of widelux. Built for tractor pulling but you have to shake it hard before taking a photo to get the gearing to mesh.
PS who you calling kid. I've got 2
twin lens medium format staring down at me right now.
You explain things quickly and concisely. I really love your videos
This is more informative than 4 years of school based photography lessons were. Wish I'd had this when I was first trying to learn.
Waste of money eh
This just taught me more about how a cameras exposure works than I ever knew, including when a professional photographer tried to explain it to me. well done.
We have to remember one thing: This system looks intuitive and simple because it has been an object of countless design proposals and staff meetings.
That's what always fascinated me about these things. We just use small things that were someone's work for like 3 months.
3 months is kind of optimistic in most cases though. ;)
Canon took about 5-6 years to create the F-1 system
When I worked as a software engineer for a large software company there was an inverse relationship between the number of design meetings/reviews and the complexity of the code. As a designer/coder I could build an elegant solution, only to have it torn apart and bloated with useless post hoc requirements from (usually) the QA department.
@@trippmoore ahh. The good ol camel.
Canon actually stole this from Nikon. The Nikon F already came out in 1959.
Loved this! I was a photography professor at our local community college for 20 years, and my favorite class to teach was beginning photography. Your explanations were dense content-wise but perfect!
Your affection for the F-1 was clear. It was (is) a great camera.
I can’t wait to see more of your photo-related videos! Well done, Sir!!
_"After effects is a program that I open accidentally, stare at in terror, and then feel guilty about never bothering to learn despite multiple New Years resolutions"_
How did you manage to so perfectly describe my exact relation to After Effects? 😅
It's basically Photoshop for masochists. Photoshop you can easily teach yourself without even a manual, let alone a tutorial. With After Effects on the other hand, you just look at it as if it was some alien artifact and quickly close it again, fearing it may wake up and swallow the planet.
You should feel validated rather than attacked: Look, even Alec… 😅
@@calmeilles Excellent point. If even Alec feels that way, that does make me feel a little less bad about it.
... Adobe sits quietly, twiddling thumbs and making “ka-ching” noises ...
You just described all Adobe products. After Effects and Adobe Connect have achieved the rare negative sloped learning curve.
The F-1 is the camera my parents grew up on. The simplicity of these older mechanical cameras made easy to understand what shutter speed and aperture meant when my dad explained to me what was going on.
In the late 90's I shot film with an "AE-1 Program" (another Canon FD-mount SLR) for a few years, but I was so hesitant to use film that I spent a month to expose a roll and didn't really get enough practice to learn from my mistakes. Also I was super slow at manually focusing with a split-prism. Still, I very occasionally miss the physical split prism on modern DSLRs when AF just can't get the job done.
I still have my AE-1…
This video makes me want to pick up a roll of film for the weekend.
I wish all modern DSLRs had split-prism focusing. After using film for so long and auto-focus working only about 80% of the time, it would make life so much easier.
For most DSLR's you can still get split-prism screens! (if not official, usually still aftermarket. I got one for the nikon D7000 for $20 iirc.)
The Fujifilm X-T3 and X-T4 have a digital split prism mode that seems to work? I dunno might be worth a shot.
Nothing gets your eye dialed in for manual focus without a split prism like macro work. It's a struggle at first, but with practice you get to know where your focal plane is without needing an aid, and the skill transfers nicely to ordinary lenses.
Love this episode! I have been a photographer since this camera was new. I also once worked in a camera store selling these era of cameras. I reluctantly switched from film to digital cameras some time ago. I have recently returned to using film media since the reintroduction of Ektachrome film stock. I have even purchased two medium format cameras that I use quite a lot. I had to remember how to use these cameras, with the light meters and exposure requirements of the film stock that I had not really needed to do with the new digital cameras. It has awakened my creativity. Please consider more episodes covering photography in the future.
We love your bloopers. It shows us that you're human, and proves to us that you aren't Captain Disillusion. He never makes mistakes.
“That is a real dust spot, BTW.”
I appreciate your authenticity. My toy room is authentic as 🙊.
In about 1972 when I was in the Navy, I bought a new 35mm slr: A Yashica TL-Electro X. it was all manual like this great Canon F-1. I think I bought the Yashica because it was not as expensive as the Canon. I am glad the camera was all manual because I had to learn about film speed, aperture, F-stops, focus, different film types, light meters ( internal & external ), etc. I took thousands & thousands of slides and print pictures and the Yashica performed flawlessly. Yea, I didn't know how my pictures came out until I had the film developed at a camera store, but I mostly got what I had wanted. Today's digital cameras are so nice to be able to just delete something when you don't like what you just snapped, a major difference for sure, and no wasted expensive film( at least today...film was cheap enough back in the 70's ). Good educational video...thanks..!!
You're not Captain Disillusion, you're clearly his unpaid intern Alan.
Alec or Alek I believe 🙂
@@morganeasy787 No, it's Alan.
@@Tunkkis technology connection is called Alec. I think it was supposed to be some joke.
@@svendevarennes520 Captain Disillusion is Alan
ISO is a name, not an acronym or initialism.
From their website:
_"Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek 'isos', meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO."_
the more you know...
I thought it stood for "International Standards Organization"...
@@janlentan892 That isn't even their name lol
Nice
Ahhh... Personally, I prefer the Deutsches Institut für Normen or DIN for short
Please never stop doing this RUclips thing, your videos are hours upon hours of unbridled joy for me. Thank you.
There’s something I just remembered (and I can’t wait to see whenever Alec can finally release it since I’m sure he’s working pretty hard on it)- *Teletext!*
That would be cool. I don't know if it ever really took off in the US, but here in the UK (where I believe it was conceived and developed) it was a big thing right up until the advent of the Web. When I was a kid (early 80s), Teletext-equipped sets and decoder boxes were expensive, so our public library (a wonderful old Victorian building that was torn down in 1993, right about the time my family got their first TT set) had a couple of sets available for public use, much as today's libraries have PCs.
We still have teletex here in Finland. Well, it is DTV version of it, but look and functionality is still the same.
@@rich_edwards79 he's mentioned in one of his videos he's doing a teletext video.
The entire Turner broadcasting family and a few local systems (Chicago, LA, etc) had teletext services. It didn't take off because of TV guide pressuring companies not to use the system as they were worried it would reduce their magazine sales. Ah American commerce. Stifling innovation since day one.
@@medes5597 I think Richard was talking about the similar looking but quite different system where a modified TV and a keyboard were hooked up to a 1200/75 bps modem for online services like searching public records or ordering train tickets. This is quite different than the TTV system that distributes up to 800 pages of text information via the closed captioning part of TV signals.
@@johndododoe1411 the BBC Micro did basic 800 page teletext and was the computer of choice for libraries because of government subsidies, educational grants from the government and BBC and various Acorn price reductions for buying more than one. I assumed they meant that. I concede I may be wrong.
Did you you know you could buy a TV with a built in teletext printer? It's insane to me that existed.
As a photographer who shoots mainly with a 1986 Nikon FM2n and also a fan of your channel, I was waiting for this video! More old camera videos please!
One of the best quick explanations of analog photography and the shutter speed/aperture relationship. Well done! From a photographer of 60 years (and still happily using ‘70s SLRs)
"we are going to see a lot more about analogue photography" .........me smashing the like button instantly
Wow, CD really made that "pull from greenscreen" look flawless ;)
I have the 1980 Olympics version of the camera.
My parents got it for me as a gift.
The pictures I took made a lot of good memories.
Those pictures are still on my walls today.
ISO is not an acronym for International Standards Organization, a common misconception. The group is actually called the International Organization for Standardisation. The abbreviation ISO comes from the Greek word isos, which means equal.
It may be a silly semantic point, but I’m a member of one of the standard development organizations that is governed by ISO and Its like a nervous tick I have to inform people of the nuance.
I’m a huge fan of your content and a pleased patron. You’re a blessing during the COVID madness!
Neat, but I kinda wish its actual name were International Standards Organization, sounds better to me and even avoids the "s vs z" problem
standardization, baby
@@Dorumin Hell yeah! The thing I love best about standards is that there's so many to choose from.
It’s not just silly pedantry! “ISO” was intentionally *not* an abbreviation for the name of the organization, since that would only work in one language (or be a different abbreviation in different languages), and, in the spirit of global standards, they didn’t want to privilege one language over another.
Standards are great! Everybody should have their own!
@@Floaf1 Sometimes I even have double standards, that's how great I think they are!
Wow - that was amazing - thank you! We almost need a TC-extras on how you got those in viewfinder shots!
This is literally the first time all these camera nomenclature and details started to make sense for me. Thank you.
"And yet some of you think me and Captain Disillusion are the same person..."
You look more like Allan to me, tbh.
Who? 🍄
@@davidbergmann8948 Alan is the Captain's intern
I'm convinced Captain D and Alan the intern are the same guy, but the Captain refuses to debunk this.
@@ptah956 Something that obvious shouldn't need debunking. They're nothing alike. I mean Alan is obviously not a silver skinned alien!
I know what I saw
It starts at 10 minutes. I'm at about 19 mins and I'M LOVING EVERY SECOND OF IT!
Man! This is so detailed and interesting even from the photography learning point of view that I finally got why the F's are so weird.
Thanks Alek!
Now back to watching the rest!
This video had the best editing, camera work and scriptwriting for a video explaining how film cameras work that I've seen. Pure Class
Really? People actually think that set is rendered? Anyone who has been to Ikea once or twice can see that it is an Expedit or Kallax with fancy LED lighting mounted in it.
Doesn't mean you can't render it.
I really have to say his after effects are astonishing. Everything looks so real as if it would be real (but we all know it is not)^^
There would be two ways to make a compartment look black and white. The easiest is to put monochrome stuff in the compartment, e.g. motamuseum.com/2015/07/23/stavinsky-bw-rubiks-cube/. This also works well with the colored(!) background of that compartment. The other way would be to light it with infrared. Some cameras can register infrared and it usually looks like a gray or bluish color. Try your TV remote on your phone camera to see what I mean. Now as the background of that compartment is colored, this is not a viable option, as the light from the background would spoil the illusion.
(Almost) everything in the IKEA catalogue is rendered. They have gotten/are getting rid of the photography division. It does not make sense, since everything in the catalogue was already rendered for aesthetics and virtual stress-testing, anyway, before they wee ever manufactured, using the same 3-D renders to fabricate the materials.
Why re-invent the wheel? They are not the only people who do this now. Product photography is becoming niche.
I mean, if you watch his old videos, he did use a green screen for those, but yeah he hasn't used anything like that in a long time.
Only the sheeple believe that. As if people "buy" "furniture"!
plot twist: The stage is 100% real. Alec is fully CGI.
Created by Capt. D. no doubt
@@QualityDoggo Plot twist: the background IS Capt. D.
Yeah, and Ami Yamato is 100% real while her backdrop is CGI.
But what does Captain Dissolution think?
My gosh, I love how you still take the time to complete the sub titles. Google removing user generated is sad; I think more people use CC than they know. It's fantastic for keeping the volume low at work, at night, and when you miss a word, you can just read below!
Also the lav mic has seemingly disappeared some 9 months ago with no trace left. A mystery.
I’m a 36 year old German and started experimenting with photography at about age 10, i.e. in the beginning of the 90s. I have never used or even heard of (until this video) DIN degrees for film speeds. Today, everyone here uses ISO just like everyone else. I even remember that when I was young, films were marked with “ISO/ASA 400” (or whatever number), but I don’t recall ever having seen the degree system in use.
I used DINs. Had them on "Zenit" camera and my light meter (both made in USSR). Greetings from Poland
Me, starting video: "Man, this guy kinda looks like Captain Disillusion.."
Video: "People think I look like Captain Disillusion"
Me: .......
Honestly? I didnt see it until he brought it up, now i cant stop thinking about it
I still don't see the resemblance. I guess they have similar looking hair, but that's about it.
@@trippmoore have and facial shaper mostly, maybe lip shape
Now I'm shocked seeing that he's from Latvia just like me
What I love about your channel is that, as you're talking, questions pop into my head and, almost without fail, you answer that question nearly immediately. Great videos! I've been binge watching them.
I love it! It's so cool to actually see something mechanical like this once and a while, where you can describe exactly what's happening and how it's happening, instead of just saying, "Oh yeah, just hook into the camera API and grab the shutter speed variable." I learned something today!
12:12 attaches lens with a clockwise motion.
Nikon: “no no you’re doing it wrong!”
😂😂
In 1653, Patriarch Nikon enacted reforms of Russian Orthodox Church. Those who haven't accepted the reforms were called Old Believers (Raskolniks). This is known as Raskol (split or schism). There are still settlements of Raskolniks in Russia. Some visitors report that Nikon cameras are met negatively, while Canon are approved.
Well whatever the reason for it is, The reality is that every time I pick up my nikon I spend a solid few seconds aggressively trying to stuff the lense on the wrong way. It gets exceptionally weird when you run adapters for old lenses on the digital, where the old lense mounts the proper way, but you have to turn the adapter backwards to take it off the camera
@@Alexagrigorieff Interesting. Actually, the Nippon Kogaku company began making cameras by producing the German Zeiss Ikon camera under license. They called it "Nikon" for Nippon Ikon.
0:35 thank you for clarifying, after watching nearly all your videos, I was wondering why you were a superhero once
"We call those stops.... 'Stops'". :D I love it!! Your sense of humor is half the reason I (for one) love this channel. The other half is all the cool tech, some of which I vaguely remember my parents using when I was a young child, and all of it I enjoy learning about as a Mechanical Engineer.
This is nearly a Canon F-1 review. You should change the title to include "Canon F-1" so that people can search for it.
There are tags that the uploader can add.
@John Verne Actually, in most cameras, they did not use a needle matching meter, but a ‘centre needle’ meter, where increasing the exposure time caused the needle to move in one direction, while increasing the F-number caused it to move in the other direction. Meanwhile, more light moved the needle in one direction, while a higher EI moved the needle in the other direction.
One simply had to keep the needle centred. The description here does not match that at all, in either appearance, or workings. Yes, they both used a light sensitive module, and they both used an aperture linkage, (for open metering), but how that linkage affected the needle is quite different. In some cases, it could have manually moved the needle support, while in other cases, it was a potentiometer, or some other electronic solution.
So substituting a Pentax and quite a lot changes. Indeed, whereas Pentax was one of the first to do “open metering”, they were one of the few to also allow stop down metering simultaneously. I.e., on some brands with open metering, the DoF preview function meant that the light meter failed.
Pentax also used light through the lens to illuminate the needle, so that if one was in a dark theatre, shooting a brightly lit stage, one can still see the light-meter.
Wow. 5 minutes 37 seconds to explain almost all of photography (and that includes tangents and digressions). You, sir, are an amazing expositor. Keep up the good work!
*Yes!* *More retro camera technology, please!* 🤓📸
"And yet some of you think me and Captain Disillusion are the same person - how?"
Me : Laughs
Best joke in here. Must be the hair.
outside of him looking vaguely similar, is there another joke I'm missing?
How is it that I watched this 6 months ago, and am rewatching now with almost as much enjoyment as last time?
I'm all in for this miniseries on analogue photography!
At first I wondered if such a young guy knew what he was talking about? In the end I can confirm: he knows. Very well explained!
Yeah, I can't imagine how someone that's only had 30+ years to learn a subject would ever understand even 10% about it, let alone enough to explain it simply to others. Wow! /s
How old do you think Alec is? 10?
The camera is definitely older than Alec is, so I'm not sure why you're being a dick about it. It's not like a classic car, where you still see them all over the place.
@@ananthropomorphictalkinggo6641 I see those cameras all over the place. Before camera phones in smartphones got good many photographers still preferred to use these cameras. And as explained they aren't rocket science. So I don't get why it's so amazing that a dude in his 30s could understand a lot about a camera.
@@trippmoore where are you going where you're seeing 40 year old cameras all over the place, and how do you know they're specifically Canon F1?
@@catfan__ congrats, you go to the one public school in the country with a budget to buy $500 antique cameras for their students. Most public schools can't even afford updated textbooks for $50 a piece, so forgive me if I don't believe that every high school kid has seen them.
I’m always amazed how you can make such long videos about seemingly small niche topics without making them seem drawn out. Keep it up!
Interestingly ISO is actually not an acronym. According to ISO.org:
"It's all in the name
Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek 'isos', meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO."
It’s not even “International Standards Organization”, it’s “International Organization for Standardization” (as in the above quote)
I too was going to point this out. Thanks, epaminondas3294.
He actually addressed that point in the subtitles at the very end!
@@NanoMan737400 He addressed the pronunciation, but not the fact that their official long name doesn't match the initials.
incidentally Germany DOES use ISO.
Being old, I was a young photography buff in the late 70s, but the Canon F1 (and later A1) were for rich folks only. I had to make do with my trusty old Pentax K1000, which did pretty much everything the F1 did, and all mechanically too, but didn't have all the cool expansion modules. Those were amazing cameras too, and a lot more affordable.
I picked up a Canon A-1 with 200mm f2.8 lens and auto winder for $50 last year. Worked like it was new. Sadly someone stole the camera and lens from me along with other camera gear. I do have a second A-1 I use though.
I still adored my k1000 as a young photography buff in the early 90s. Great camera
K1000 was a great camera, and was pretty much standard college photography starter kit. I believe, though I could be mistaken, that you could also change the focusing screen on the K1000.
i got my moms k1000 from highschool sitting on my shelf with my other old cameras, its great for what it is, to the point i still use it time to time
@@sloth0jr You could not change any of the focusing screens on the K series cameras. You could on the MX and LX though (The LX being Pentax's equivalent to Canon's F-1n)
I love how far analog tech can go, I never thought these things were doable without digital.
Yeah
Analog is what the video signal was before it went digital. Non-digital cameras are FILM cameras. As SLR is not analog tech it's film tech.
Analog electronics is a dark art, but in the right hands, it can accomplish (almost) anything
@@Rocketryman it's more intuitive this way
With Digital you make a program that goes in jumps till it has passed the target. Then back in smaller jumps till it has passed the target again.
Now do that again with even smaller jumps. Keep going back and fro till you jump onto it.
With Analog you order the prog to Find target and have coffee. It just goes at the work .
Glad you finally learned how to make your green screen background interactive using after effects (even with 3D rendered dust particles!)
This was a walk down memory lane. My first "real" camera was an Asahi Pentax that worked (and was laid out) almost identically (except for the flash shoe location). I stopped using it some time in the 90s, but I remember well trying to find a suitable replacement for the mercury button battery for the built-in light meter.
I bought mine 40years ago as a second hand camera, it was beautiful camera to use. Everything in it was built to last hundreds of thousands photos, which is amazing for fully mechanical device. This video brought back lots of good memories.
10:25
It actually says "news" on screen on the exact frame of the flash.
Literal news flash lol.
I love his sense of humor so much.
It does!!
I read this comment the instant the “news” flash happened lmao
10:25 The clank when he tosses the flash: Priceless
Watched this video two years ago and enjoyed it as a fun tech deep dive and now I'm taking notes so I can buy a manual film camera of my own. Great work!
He didn't wipe his hands through the dust on the "set."
GREEN SCREEN CONFIRMED
I didn't notice that. I know it's green screen because he never used a green jacket.
Also, you can see how there's a missing asset for his shirt render. Obviously a complete fabrication.
DarwinsChihuahua I think you're tugging at strings...
@@kip258 At this point, I would say it's more like trying to drag the table cloth off a set table without destroying the dishes and the food in the process.
Maybe _he's_ the greenscreen. mindblow.jpg
I'm only 3 minutes in and this is my favorite video you've done. Dusting of my Pentax K series film cameras just got bumped up in priority on my to do list.
K1000 was my first SLR camera when I was a kid. I bought it used from a guy selling it in a local newspaper ad. Then after that I stepped up to the Pentax P30t.
8:57 When I was learning video engineering we didn’t abstract the ccd sensitivity into iso numbers on our CCU.
We called it gain and we would express that as dB, with 0 dB being roughly analogous to ISO 320. Each additional 3 dB of gain would double the sensitivity, so +3dB would be ISO 640, -3dB was ISO 160 and so on.
That's basically what film engineers described as DIN. It's given in degrees for some reason but it is a dB scale starting at ISO 1
"This is obvious in-person thanks to stereoscopic vision."
As someone without stereoscopic vision...nope! Damn you parallax, you elusive dream!
Use a twin lens reflex camera :D
@@Killerspieler well a TLR wouldn't help with stereoscopic vision at all!
@@keeganwebber it was a joke, since a TLR has a parallax you CAN'T get rid of 😉
Captain Disillusion? No screw that, you're like the best stuff I used to love about PBS and Mr. Wizard as a kid.
So... Captain Disillusion?
You know, you don't have to belittle what CD does to prove that you appreciate Technology Connections
I guess he'll become cap'n dillution by the time he reaches the darkroom
Pit-kachu.
@@MonsieurBiga I loves me some Captain D, I just think this is a different thing.
Very satisfying sound when you attach the lens. Enjoyed seeing the light meter adjust at the same time too.
Newsflash! *bling*
ROTFL you had me there... outch :)
But did you actually catch the word “NEWS” flashed on the screen??
Ahhhh, a Tech Connections video on vintage cameras! I fell deep into the vintage photography hole this year (as did all of my money.....) so I am always down to see more of this good content. Lovely camera btw, I haven't tried an F-1 but that 50mm 1.4 lens is rad
Also lmao "news flash"
There's a cool video out there of Gary Oldman making tintypes and ambrotypes. You should check that out if you're into that sort of thing..
Thanks for the memories! I still have an Olympus OM-1 still tucked away in my basement collection - about the same vintage as your Canon. I shot many rolls on it starting in the 80's, when I bought it second hand from a friend who had used it since the 70's. I love the elegant engineering that went into these devices and the tactile control of it. The distinctive scent of film emulsion that lingers inside, even when you open an old camera, brings back memories. Cheers!
I know you were just making a joke, real fans remember the days where it actually WAS a green screen. Sub 35k club!
9:17 Ah ILFORD. Reminds me of photography class in high school. *Edit - And now I want to get back into manual photography and develop my own film again!
That reminds me of Freestyles Sales Company, where I discovered "European black-and-white film" in the late 1960's/early 1970's. Ilford wasn't officially available in the U.S. market, so i learned about Pan F, FP3, and HP4. There was even mystery "classic black-and-white film" that turned out to be East German ORWO, such as NP22 and NP27, which stretched this cash-challenged college photographer. (I learned how to use a changing bag and bulk film loader for a wide variety of interesting 135 films of the day.)
This was mind blowing!! I'm a huge fan of tiny mechanical devices. Watches being at the top of my list. I always knew that film cameras were a feat of engineering marvel taken for granted in a huge way, but I didn't realize how damn clever it is!
"Light-meter, not only a questionable astronomical unit." I don't know why I found this so funny, but good one.
It should be a unit of time, since a light year is a unit of distance.
@@ThisIsTheBestAnime I came here to say the same thing! It would be how long it takes light to travel 1 meter.... About 3.3 nanoseconds
@@dennisdavis6943 thanks for saving me the calculation :P
@@ronniepriveprofiel3876 my pleasure! How could I go on living my life without knowing how long a lightmeter is!?
I paused and laughed for a solid 15 seconds. So dumb. 10 big points
This about covers how I learned photography. And it made it so easy to learn to understand the "trinity" of exposure. Most cameras these days have so much bells and whistles that learning those basics seems much harder. (I've seen a few other people learn those on modern stuff.) I also found this interesting because I learned on Nikon F2. It's from same time period and a lot is very similar but then there are small details that are different.
I'm a pro photographer and have been going back into Film for about 2 years. this was pretty fun to watch! Thanks man!
Mm, that capacitor whine at the end was sooo nostalgia-inducing for me.
Reminds me of low powered Kako and National electronic flashes before Vivitar became the electronic flash brand.
Umm, accesssory flashes still make that sound. Its the inverter circuitry that is used to step up the voltage to the amount required by the capacitor which is, in turn, the voltage need to trigger the 'strobe' light. The pitch of the whine goes up as the load from the capacitor decreases. Befor this inverter circuitry was developed, photographers actually used 410 volt batteries (carried in a separate pack) to power their flashes.
I had no idea about your other channel, "Captain Disillusion!" What a great alter-ego! Subscribed!
As someone who was trying to get into film photography in this day and age, this was definitely helpful!
This year I've been getting way more into photography, so this was really neat to hear about. Good stuff.