@jaggedbubbles@OutbackJon@troy disposable film cameras used to be featured on tables at wedding receptions. Anybody could take pictures. I guess they have a digital version now but it’s not the same feel.
@jaggedbubbles@OutbackJon@pmarin@troy
This is still a thing, you can buy a traditional Fujifilm one from a drug store for $20 or less (so this one is a good deal).
@jaggedbubbles you’re right, but I think that because of the price and simplicity of this camera, many would assume it was a disposable so they explicitly stated it is reusable. I thought it was a disposable at first glance.
Who processes film now days? I wonder how expensive it is to develop film? I guess I could look it up……I imagine it is difficult to find rolls of film these days.
@mbstringham I’m a hobbiest film shooter and there are slim to none physical locations I can drop film off to. I pay a premium for higher quality scans since I print them pretty large.
@barchie@mbstringham There’s a small structure about two blocks away whose Fotomat origins are obvious to those of us who remember that era. I’m not sure what purpose it’s serving at the moment, if any.
YES! Where DO you get film developed these days?? I have a couple rolls that turned up more than a decade ago, maybe almost 20 years? But it was well after I went digital. The film may have images from 30-40 years ago, I just have no idea. I looked up where to get them processed maybe 10 years ago, but it was kinda expensive and $$ was very tight at that time.
@drz Don’t get your hopes up too much. It can be hit or miss whether you can develop anything from those rolls after so much time, depending on how they’ve been stored.
Something something film costs more than the camera or something something if you were gonna use film why wouldn’t you use a good camera or something? Something used Nikon film camera for the same price at a garage sale something something
@hchavers Analog stuff is surprisingly popular with GenZ. I have read that film photography is one of those categories that is experiencing a (slight) resurgence.
It’s time to take a bunch of pictures, say you’re going to get them developed. And then ten years later, you throw away the camera.
I say that in a sarcastic way, but I kick myself often for being that guy.
What’s the date code on these
Has the film expired?
Is the battery replaceable or rechargeable
Is the fixed lens plastic (most likely).
Just how bad are the pictures it takes
@dahobbs9
Film should be developed before sometime in 2026.
Battery is AA and replaceable.
Unsure on the lens (but you’re probably right… this thing is $9).
Not the best (but better film improves it quite a lot)
@actionPacked You just reminded me of when I was kid and I went to summer camp for photography, not only did we learn how to develop film but we made our own cameras using a little cardboard box with a pin hole! It was really neat and super easy! Fun times!
@actionPacked You can find all the darkroom supplies you need and many instructional articles at: https://www.freestylephoto.com/
This is a good place and gets my highest recommendation, for what they sell. The website is at least a good place to start. It is an actual store in Los Angeles, and I have been there.
@actionPacked Developing even black and white film takes some time and experience to do correctly. I did it for myself many years ago in the bathroom in the two bedroom apartment I shared on the Lower East Side of NY(last in about 1970) and it was mildly arduous. Unless you can do the printing also (which I did) it is unrewarding. Color developing was not available for the usual amateur like me; the film with this is color but you can get B&W.
If you want to do it, I would suggest as have others, you find someplace with the equipment and space.
@actionPacked@andyw I haven’t souped a roll since about 1996, but I still have my darkroom stuff up in the attic. And I still have my 1964-vintage Nikon F with the Photomic TN meter. I also have a Speed Graphic in mint condition. But if I’m going to shoot some photos, I haul out one of the digitals. They range from a Canon ELPH 115 up to a Nikon D300 and a Nikon D7500. The zoom ranges and image resolution of the digitals is so good that the film cameras really have zero appeal at this point.
@actionPacked@werehatrack That’s some great old equipment! I lusted after the Nikon F but could only afford Nikkormats back then. They were good cameras too with those terrific lenses. Now I mainly use a Z7ii along with my phone and a pocket-size Panasonic at times. My enlarging equipment was stolen from my apartment in 1970 and I have not replaced it, not will I, since I was not that good at printing (although I still have some of them on the wall).
Forgot! I see Meh went all out this time with the 360/3D rotating item view. IS this going to become a daily occurrence It’s pretty cool you can better see what your getting .
Too bad the mystery bag doesn’t have it
I suppose this might be a teachable moment for young people who are wondering just wth this is. But as someone who once had to go to a neighbor’s house with most of the other kids in the neighborhood to see the Wizard of OZ in COLOR!! I am perfectly happy to leave film in the rearview mirror as a memory of what was.
Pretty sure you can take your film to Walgreen’s and they can do a preview with thumbprints and you can choose prints. IDK, I have too many rolls to admit to from back when I couldn’t afford to develop them. When I had the $$$ to develop I never thought of it. One day… I used to have mailers that were great, dbl prints…
@Mandamm Not any more, Walgreens only does 1-hour photo for digital now. They mail 35mm film out to a lab for processing, and you don’t get your negatives back. You’re better off going to an independent photo lab.
@jmrobinett I think they keep/destroy your negatives though, right? There are mail services that develop film reasonably cheaply if you can’t find someone local.
@gwrankin everyone I’ve ever had a conversation with that has involved aa cells has said “a a” rather than “double a”. This is across both the UK and USA…
@gwrankin@Shagbert And do the people you talk to also call them cells rather than batteries?
[Yeah, ‘cell’ is technically correct, but language is a living thing where useage, over time, is what defines the term. Consider ‘decimate’ - does anyone use it in its original meaning? Or the phrase ‘begging the question’. That phrase referred to a particular logical fault in an argument - but it is so useful in its common meaning that it has been forever co-opted.]
As someone old enough to remember film cameras, I have no desire to go back to that era. I don’t even do much photography myself nowadays, and I think the ubiquity of digital photography has resulted in a lot of younger people producing terrible images because there’s no cost to doing it. Even then, I’ll stick with digital because of the live preview and ease of editing.
@Atomizer@JohnQ118@rpstrong And there’s no guarantee of WYSIWYG in suboptimal lighting. That flash is probably only adequate to about 15 ft, maybe less.
When I saw “flash” my brain immediately assumed the digital memory kind, and I thought that this was a regular digital camera in a retro design just for the fun of it.
Which is ridiculous because I used cameras for three decades before I ever had a phone with a camera.
What is the movie where the person gets a job at photo processing and the guy is showing how to process film and she is watching and then she covers her mouth lookingand he says well we do get those from time to time and she says well what do ya do with em? And he says oh we still process them but we make extras and they go here in our private file.
MEH y’all know your stuff is out there somewhere…
@el1c1a You may be thinking of “Hope Floats” with Sandra Bullock. And no one will convince me that her 9-year-old daughter isn’t the true villain of that film.
Ilford’s Sprite 35-II – $34, @bhphotovideo.com in 2021
(Now $29.95 in All Black)
$9.95 – Ilford HP5 Plus Black and White Negative Film (35mm Roll Film, 36 Exposures)
B&H # ILHP5P36 MFR # 1574577
REVIEW 9/5/2024 – Well, it lasted two rolls. Tried to shoot a third roll and the gears started slipping so it would no longer advance the film. So there you have it, basically these are disposable cameras - maybe you got more than two rolls out of yours before it broke, but that is all I got.
Get the Reto Ultra Wide N Slim. It is so much better in every possible way.
For any analog photographers on the fence with this (maybe just for the film), the film is respooled cinematic film with the Remjet stripped off (not worth $9). Also Walmart recalled these and apparently unloaded the rest to Meh. I don’t know why they issued a recall, but it’s probably not for safety issues, so there must have been a high failure rate.
@haskins187@MrJazz
My daughter teaches a photography course in Nashville. She respools for her students and has a dark room. I’m glad someone is still teaching young people how to actually create a photograph.
@haskins187 They probably had lots of pissed-off customers who took the film (or entire camera) to a different place to get it developed, and got horrible results and/or a delayed response of “we can’t develop this, it requires a special process”.
@haskins187@werehatrack Shouldn’t be a problem. The remjet layer is removed before packaging, which allows the film to be developed with normal processes.
@haskins187@rpstrong It could still be ECN-2 process, or something else that’s not even Kodak-origin. C-41 is pretty much just for still-photo use, and the reason to strip the remjet is to prevent developer contamination and extend solution life.
@steelopus Fellow Rochesterian here, and this was my exact thoughts when I saw it. Reading through the comments does almost inspire me to go out and find some film and then dig out my old Pentax K-1000 and try my hand, after many years, at shooting pictures on a camera that does absolutely nothing for you, though.
Your likelihood of getting quality pictures of the type shown in the photo book on the sales page pics is slim to none.
One of my biggest complaints about digital is that due to it’s cheapness the concept of composition, lighting, framing,etc for a shot have all pretty much disappeared.
When there was an expense involved with purchasing film and making prints people tended to be a bit more selective with what they shot. I remember a trip 25 years ago to Peru and visiting Machu Picchu (and climbing Huayna Picchu). I carried 15 rolls of 36 exposure color 35 mm film for my SLR and all the gear to go with it. Each shot was something I put thought into before I pushed the shutter button.
(And I don’t even want to get into a discussion about optical zoom versus digital zoom! )
@chienfou Decades ago, my now-ex volunteered my services as a wedding photographer for her secretary. I was terrified; I had only tried to shoot a wedding once prior to that, and it had not been up to any reasonable standard. But I threw myself at the project, added a Metz CT-5 to the gear, and shot 214 exposures in the hope of getting a dozen that would be acceptable. To my enduring horror, I ended up with 213 damned good images, in composition, lighting, focus, and subject. I handed them three albums of 4x6 prints with the negatives, and let them choose which ones to get enlarged themselves.
@kodiak55@OnionSoup
I just bought a digital underwater camera for a trip to Hawaii. Checked it out before I left and found that to be exactly the case. Fixed focus meant nothing was in focus. I set up objects along an 8 ft length to see what distance would focus. Nothing did. That meant it was totally useless for my intention of snorkeling. It will go back in the next couple of days.
Guess I really need to clean out my office and see if I can find my old dive camera!
@chienfou@kodiak55@OnionSoup I decided to use a GoPro as my camera for snorkeling, and didn’t regret it. It was not the cheapest solution, but it’s more versatile than a lot of others.
Are they marked concerning which chemistry they require for processing? The reports that these contain respooled cinematic film could mean that a lot of places would not be able to process them. I shot a lot of things over the years, and eventually regretted everything except Ektachrome.
@chienfou When I was shooting slides, I didn’t want prints. Still, I had a few that merited prints, and I just handed that off to a specialty lab. I was bollocks at color in my home lab. It’s all ancient history at this point, and I’ve been shooting with digital since Nikon introduced the D60. (I regarded the D40 as too limited, so I waited a bit and didn’t regret the choice.)
The fact that the cameras are explicitly marked as “Return to Walmart” leads me to suspect that the film supplied is something like the old 5247, which was dirt cheap in bulk but required different chemistry. I’d wager that the cameras can be snapped apart and manually reloaded with a conventional 35mm cartridge, but at that point, it’s down to “Why bother?” Cell phone cameras will produce better results, and the huge digital advantage is present; the image can be evaluated on the fly.
@werehatrack
I just never got I into slides. Too much PITA to look at them easily for me.
I suspect the return to Walmart thing is due to these being ONN which is a Walmart brand. Maybe their lab does specialty (bulk) film but suspect they mostly do regular 35mm film.
Specs say it is indeed reloadable.
I didn’t know we could still get film developed. Thanks, Meh’ers. My grandmother’s Pentax 35mm camera still works fine. I was able to use those lenses to work on a modern Pentax digital camera, but it could be fun doing some film pictures too.
@aarond12@mycya4me My Pentax had the older screw mount system; I wanted to get a DSLR that would use those lenses but that system was obsolete; they never made one so I never got a fancy digital.
@aarond12@duodec Yes I had a Pentax MX k-Mount (Film), Then I (I am sure bought it pre-own) a K-10d, (digital) then upgraded to the Pentax K3-II my current one.
My 1st SLR was a Fujica 605, Screw Mount -Film, But there was no upgrade path & screw mount lens were on the way out! I really love my Pentax, I enter my local fair & received every ribbon they offer!
Good price point. One drawback, film alone can be more than the camera, the processing. Upside, no tears if I lose it. May buy it for my trip to England.
I used to do a little amateur photography back in the day. I miss the wait and anticipation of film development. It was always a surprise; many photos you thought would be good turned out meh or bad and others you thought were meh or bad turned out to be good. That process is lost in the instant gratification of modern phone digital cameras. For $9, maybe you younglings can try it for l yourself. As for me, I would just dust off my Nikon F4.
@goldnectar Or you get home from a trip and a week later you find all the photos were bad. Other than nostalgia, I’ll go with digital cameras every time. It’s not instant gratification, but practicality. The ability to both rapidly fire off a whole bunch of shots so as not to spend too much time behind a viewfinder and to be able to take the time to go for a really great shot when I want to make digital photography better and less costly for me than film.
@ItalianScallion I don’t mean to sound like a photography snob, but if all your vacation photos turn out bad, maybe go with a point and click as you clearly don’t know how to use an SLR.
I meant good as in a cool angled shot vs bad would be just a mundane or typical photo. Rarely would my shots be out of focus or over/under-exposed to the point of being useless. Just not frame worthy.
@goldnectar@ItalianScallion Yeah but now I take waaaaay too many photos. From 37 every couple of months to like 37 a day. Who has time to review all these danged things for the good ones?
Funny seeing these now; our purging in prep for retirement and moving just ran across our old cameras. We haven’t used the SLR or the fancy auto-everything 35mm camera in at least 25 years, and my Dad’s Kodak Instamatic 500 in maybe 45 years. Time to let them go.
I also found my first digital, a Sony Mavica FD-88 that used 3.5" floppy disks for storage. Still works but the early lithium batteries only last about 10 minutes.
@duodec there should be volunteers willing to take them off your hands (even for no $, just the cost of shipping). The classic old tech needs to be saved and some will appreciate it.
I had one of those Sony cameras also that recorded to floppy disc. I donated it to something back at a time when it was not laughably obsolete yet.
Specs
Product: Onn Reusable 35mm Camera
Model: CABRN100129676, CABLK100129676
Condition: New
What’s Included?
Price Comparison
Was $24.98 at Walmart
Warranty
90 days
Estimated Delivery
Tuesday, Mar 11 - Thursday, Mar 13
Interesting…
@yakkoTDI Bewry Bewry interesting
Reusable camera? Isn’t that just… A camera?
@jaggedbubbles There are disposable cameras
@jaggedbubbles @troy Perfect for the disposable world we live in.
@jaggedbubbles @troy
@jaggedbubbles @troy The “disposable” cameras were actually reloaded with film, a new label applied, and they were resold over and over again.
@jaggedbubbles @OutbackJon @troy disposable film cameras used to be featured on tables at wedding receptions. Anybody could take pictures. I guess they have a digital version now but it’s not the same feel.
@jaggedbubbles @OutbackJon @pmarin @troy
This is still a thing, you can buy a traditional Fujifilm one from a drug store for $20 or less (so this one is a good deal).
@troy I know that, but that would be a “disposable camera,” and this would be a “camera”. Maybe I’m just old.
@jaggedbubbles you’re right, but I think that because of the price and simplicity of this camera, many would assume it was a disposable so they explicitly stated it is reusable. I thought it was a disposable at first glance.
@goldnectar @jaggedbubbles Also, good luck finding a place that develops 35mm film any more.
So, is the battery rechargeable?
@Euniceandrich Or is it replaceable? If replaceable what size is it? There are questions we need answered!!
@Euniceandrich @yakkoTDI 1 AAA and it’s replaceable
@Euniceandrich @yakkoTDI My bad! It’s an AA battery
Who processes film now days? I wonder how expensive it is to develop film? I guess I could look it up……I imagine it is difficult to find rolls of film these days.
@mbstringham Fotomat?
@mbstringham If you don’t have a local place that’ll do it, a store like CVS or Walgreens will let you mail in your roll of film to an offsite service
@mbstringham Wally World still does tho they’re slower than molasses getting the pictures back to ya.
@barchie @mbstringham IF there’s anyone still in a Fotomat parking lot booth I do feel sorry for em
@mbstringham You?
https://shop.lomography.com/us/daylight-film-developing-tank-35mm
@mbstringham I’m a hobbiest film shooter and there are slim to none physical locations I can drop film off to. I pay a premium for higher quality scans since I print them pretty large.
What is… the next item on Meh, @stinks ?
@barchie @mbstringham There’s a small structure about two blocks away whose Fotomat origins are obvious to those of us who remember that era. I’m not sure what purpose it’s serving at the moment, if any.
@pakopako Hey I might buy that!
Where can you get the film developed these days? I still have a Kodak mailer but don’t think it can be used any longer.
YES! Where DO you get film developed these days?? I have a couple rolls that turned up more than a decade ago, maybe almost 20 years? But it was well after I went digital. The film may have images from 30-40 years ago, I just have no idea. I looked up where to get them processed maybe 10 years ago, but it was kinda expensive and $$ was very tight at that time.
@drz Walmart does it, if any don’t turn out because of expired film ect they don’t make ya pay
@drz Don’t get your hopes up too much. It can be hit or miss whether you can develop anything from those rolls after so much time, depending on how they’ve been stored.
Cute! I’m in. Surely crappy, but that’s part of the charm — otherwise I’d just use my phone
@agnesnutter they are crappy, and dont call me Shirley.
Something something film costs more than the camera or something something if you were gonna use film why wouldn’t you use a good camera or something? Something used Nikon film camera for the same price at a garage sale something something
@thismyusername exactly like the new ink jet printers
@dahobbs9 @thismyusername At least with a camera, even this one, you can use any 35mm film.
Film is fun because unlike “AI” it can actually develop into something useful.
@DrunkCat
This is the kind of offbeat yet earnestly charming deal I love seeing here. Good find! I’d buy if I didn’t already collect cameras.
@PooltoyWolf then shouldn’t you buy to add to your collection?
@PooltoyWolf just pull the trigger n click the button. It’s only $9. Ya know ya really want to
@Ignorant @PooltoyWolf Awkward wording. Likely meant “EVEN if.”
@dahobbs9 @Ignorant Alright, y’all have successfully twisted my arm. Worth the $9 just to see how it performs!
/image whimsical-very-station
@dahobbs9 @Ignorant Now see, I was hoping for a very whimsical train station.
@dahobbs9 @PooltoyWolf YES!!! I hope you used my referral code!
@dahobbs9 @Ignorant I didn’t know there was one?
@dahobbs9 @PooltoyWolf there isn’t. Just a bad joke.
@dahobbs9 @Ignorant Whoops, my bad!
Does GenZ even know what film is? Man, do I feel old today.
@hchavers not too surprising, I mean you know what a jukebox is dontcha?
That should make you feel younger!
@hchavers the answers would probably scare ya
@hchavers Analog stuff is surprisingly popular with GenZ. I have read that film photography is one of those categories that is experiencing a (slight) resurgence.
It’s time to take a bunch of pictures, say you’re going to get them developed. And then ten years later, you throw away the camera.
I say that in a sarcastic way, but I kick myself often for being that guy.
@AaronLeeJohnson
join the club
What’s the date code on these
(most likely).
Has the film expired?
Is the battery replaceable or rechargeable
Is the fixed lens plastic
Just how bad are the pictures it takes
@dahobbs9 I think I hit all the points
@dahobbs9
Film should be developed before sometime in 2026.
Battery is AA and replaceable.
Unsure on the lens (but you’re probably right… this thing is $9).
Not the best (but better film improves it quite a lot)
I’ve always wanted to learn how to develop my own film.
@actionPacked Best of luck finding what you’d need, you’re just a few decades behind
@actionPacked Black and white isn’t too bad. You could build your own enlarger. I’m sure all the chemicals and paper are still available.
@actionPacked You just reminded me of when I was kid and I went to summer camp for photography, not only did we learn how to develop film but we made our own cameras using a little cardboard box with a pin hole! It was really neat and super easy! Fun times!
@actionPacked you might be able to do so at a local school!
@haydesigner /giphy back to school
@actionPacked You can find all the darkroom supplies you need and many instructional articles at:
https://www.freestylephoto.com/
This is a good place and gets my highest recommendation, for what they sell. The website is at least a good place to start. It is an actual store in Los Angeles, and I have been there.
@actionPacked @dahobbs9
/image Don’t call it a comeback…
https://shop.lomography.com/us/daylight-film-developing-tank-35mm
https://patersonphotographic.com/product/paterson-super-system-4-developing-tanks/
@actionPacked Developing even black and white film takes some time and experience to do correctly. I did it for myself many years ago in the bathroom in the two bedroom apartment I shared on the Lower East Side of NY(last in about 1970) and it was mildly arduous. Unless you can do the printing also (which I did) it is unrewarding. Color developing was not available for the usual amateur like me; the film with this is color but you can get B&W.
If you want to do it, I would suggest as have others, you find someplace with the equipment and space.
@actionPacked @andyw I haven’t souped a roll since about 1996, but I still have my darkroom stuff up in the attic. And I still have my 1964-vintage Nikon F with the Photomic TN meter. I also have a Speed Graphic in mint condition. But if I’m going to shoot some photos, I haul out one of the digitals. They range from a Canon ELPH 115 up to a Nikon D300 and a Nikon D7500. The zoom ranges and image resolution of the digitals is so good that the film cameras really have zero appeal at this point.
@actionPacked @werehatrack That’s some great old equipment! I lusted after the Nikon F but could only afford Nikkormats back then. They were good cameras too with those terrific lenses. Now I mainly use a Z7ii along with my phone and a pocket-size Panasonic at times. My enlarging equipment was stolen from my apartment in 1970 and I have not replaced it, not will I, since I was not that good at printing (although I still have some of them on the wall).
Forgot! I see Meh went all out this time with the 360/3D rotating item view. IS this going to become a daily occurrence
It’s pretty cool you can better see what your getting 
.
Too bad the mystery bag doesn’t have it
I suppose this might be a teachable moment for young people who are wondering just wth this is. But as someone who once had to go to a neighbor’s house with most of the other kids in the neighborhood to see the Wizard of OZ in COLOR!! I am perfectly happy to leave film in the rearview mirror as a memory of what was.
The other day I saw that Five Below was selling 35mm film for $5.55 to go along with their cheap film camera. Probably not Kodachrome.
@heartny Unfortunately the rolls at Five Below are short, only ten exposures! Pretty bad when labs charge by the roll to process.
I think I still have my old Kodak fixed lens camera from when I was a kid. It looks almost exactly like this.
@tweezak and it probably cost $50 back then…
Pre-loaded with 35mm film - 27 exposures. Still tempted to buy… I’ll sleep on it
My kid will be befuddled with this bday present
/showme understood-trusting-drum
@heartny said:
Congratulations!!
You’ve just discovered the secret Theme Song for today’s item!! 
Pretty sure you can take your film to Walgreen’s and they can do a preview with thumbprints and you can choose prints. IDK, I have too many rolls to admit to from back when I couldn’t afford to develop them.
When I had the $$$ to develop I never thought of it. One day… I used to have mailers that were great, dbl prints…
@Mandamm Not any more, Walgreens only does 1-hour photo for digital now. They mail 35mm film out to a lab for processing, and you don’t get your negatives back. You’re better off going to an independent photo lab.
In the photos film itself says to return to Walmartfor processing.
@jmrobinett I think they keep/destroy your negatives though, right? There are mail services that develop film reasonably cheaply if you can’t find someone local.
The copy should read a AA battery. The vowels needing an ‘an’ doesn’t get used when the word after is a consonant sound like ‘double a’.
But who even notices crap like that?
@gwrankin everyone I’ve ever had a conversation with that has involved aa cells has said “a a” rather than “double a”. This is across both the UK and USA…
@gwrankin @Shagbert you talk to strange people
@lowpass @Shagbert Yea, I’ve never heard anything but double a and triple a for battery types. Northern NJ, but all around the Northeast
@gwrankin @Shagbert And do the people you talk to also call them cells rather than batteries?
[Yeah, ‘cell’ is technically correct, but language is a living thing where useage, over time, is what defines the term. Consider ‘decimate’ - does anyone use it in its original meaning? Or the phrase ‘begging the question’. That phrase referred to a particular logical fault in an argument - but it is so useful in its common meaning that it has been forever co-opted.]
As someone old enough to remember film cameras, I have no desire to go back to that era. I don’t even do much photography myself nowadays, and I think the ubiquity of digital photography has resulted in a lot of younger people producing terrible images because there’s no cost to doing it. Even then, I’ll stick with digital because of the live preview and ease of editing.
@Atomizer the “the live preview” of a Film camera is called the Viewfinder.
@Atomizer @JohnQ118 Except this one only shows 70% of the image.
@Atomizer @JohnQ118 @rpstrong And there’s no guarantee of WYSIWYG in suboptimal lighting. That flash is probably only adequate to about 15 ft, maybe less.
When I saw “flash” my brain immediately assumed the digital memory kind, and I thought that this was a regular digital camera in a retro design just for the fun of it.
Which is ridiculous because I used cameras for three decades before I ever had a phone with a camera.
What is the movie where the person gets a job at photo processing and the guy is showing how to process film and she is watching and then she covers her mouth lookingand he says well we do get those from time to time and she says well what do ya do with em? And he says oh we still process them but we make extras and they go here in our private file.
MEH y’all know your stuff is out there somewhere…
@el1c1a Robin Williams did it it One Hour Photo for nefarious reasons.
@el1c1a You may be thinking of “Hope Floats” with Sandra Bullock. And no one will convince me that her 9-year-old daughter isn’t the true villain of that film.
I need this to take pictures of the tape deck I’m trying to sell.
@quattrose mine was a double …I could make a dupe tape lol!
@el1c1a @quattrose
Reel to reel or 8 track?
@chienfou @quattrose took up the whole wall
Ilford’s Sprite 35-II – $34, @bhphotovideo.com in 2021
(Now $29.95 in All Black)
$9.95 – Ilford HP5 Plus Black and White Negative Film (35mm Roll Film, 36 Exposures)
B&H # ILHP5P36 MFR # 1574577
REVIEW 9/5/2024 – Well, it lasted two rolls. Tried to shoot a third roll and the gears started slipping so it would no longer advance the film. So there you have it, basically these are disposable cameras - maybe you got more than two rolls out of yours before it broke, but that is all I got.
Get the Reto Ultra Wide N Slim. It is so much better in every possible way.
@JohnQ118 Thanks for the tip. At first I thought “Reto” was a typo of Retro, but no, the company is called Reto.
For any analog photographers on the fence with this (maybe just for the film), the film is respooled cinematic film with the Remjet stripped off (not worth $9). Also Walmart recalled these and apparently unloaded the rest to Meh. I don’t know why they issued a recall, but it’s probably not for safety issues, so there must have been a high failure rate.
@haskins187 Wow! Take me back… I forgot respooling used to be a thing. Cheap for bulk usage.
@haskins187 @MrJazz
My daughter teaches a photography course in Nashville. She respools for her students and has a dark room. I’m glad someone is still teaching young people how to actually create a photograph.
@haskins187 They probably had lots of pissed-off customers who took the film (or entire camera) to a different place to get it developed, and got horrible results and/or a delayed response of “we can’t develop this, it requires a special process”.
@haskins187 @werehatrack Shouldn’t be a problem. The remjet layer is removed before packaging, which allows the film to be developed with normal processes.
@haskins187 @rpstrong It could still be ECN-2 process, or something else that’s not even Kodak-origin. C-41 is pretty much just for still-photo use, and the reason to strip the remjet is to prevent developer contamination and extend solution life.
Finally! An Onion News Network branded camera!
Awesome! Can I use this at the Loverboy reunion concert?
EVERYTHING IS AWESOME!
I expect a lot of people in the comments will be showing their age today… both young and old.
As a lifelong resident of the home of the once great Eastman Kodak Co, cameras like this warm the coldest cockles of my sad heart.
(…but not enough to make me want one.)
@steelopus Fellow Rochesterian here, and this was my exact thoughts when I saw it. Reading through the comments does almost inspire me to go out and find some film and then dig out my old Pentax K-1000 and try my hand, after many years, at shooting pictures on a camera that does absolutely nothing for you, though.
@kodiak55 At least we still have Scott’s to lean on. So many people no longer have local photo-focused shops to support (and be supported by).
Anyone know where I can get the 35mm film developed online?
@mozalicious Tons of places, The Darkroom Lab in California is decent. Probably too expensive for the photos that this camera will produce.
Your likelihood of getting quality pictures of the type shown in the photo book on the sales page pics is slim to none.
One of my biggest complaints about digital is that due to it’s cheapness the concept of composition, lighting, framing,etc for a shot have all pretty much disappeared.
When there was an expense involved with purchasing film and making prints people tended to be a bit more selective with what they shot. I remember a trip 25 years ago to Peru and visiting Machu Picchu (and climbing Huayna Picchu). I carried 15 rolls of 36 exposure color 35 mm film for my SLR and all the gear to go with it. Each shot was something I put thought into before I pushed the shutter button.
(And I don’t even want to get into a discussion about optical zoom versus digital zoom! )
@chienfou Decades ago, my now-ex volunteered my services as a wedding photographer for her secretary. I was terrified; I had only tried to shoot a wedding once prior to that, and it had not been up to any reasonable standard. But I threw myself at the project, added a Metz CT-5 to the gear, and shot 214 exposures in the hope of getting a dozen that would be acceptable. To my enduring horror, I ended up with 213 damned good images, in composition, lighting, focus, and subject. I handed them three albums of 4x6 prints with the negatives, and let them choose which ones to get enlarged themselves.
I never shot another wedding.
In for two for the kids’ Easter baskets.
/showme demonic-distracted-hawk
/giphy demonic-distracted-hawk
I ordered two for two of my kiddos… but… not overly optimistic. Not autofocus but “focus free” does that mean nothing is in focus!
@OnionSoup It means a fixed, cheap lens, so yeah, basically.
@kodiak55 @OnionSoup
I just bought a digital underwater camera for a trip to Hawaii. Checked it out before I left and found that to be exactly the case. Fixed focus meant nothing was in focus. I set up objects along an 8 ft length to see what distance would focus. Nothing did. That meant it was totally useless for my intention of snorkeling. It will go back in the next couple of days.
Guess I really need to clean out my office and see if I can find my old dive camera!
@chienfou @kodiak55 @OnionSoup I decided to use a GoPro as my camera for snorkeling, and didn’t regret it. It was not the cheapest solution, but it’s more versatile than a lot of others.
@werehatrack
Pull stills from video or just point and hope for the best?
Are they marked concerning which chemistry they require for processing? The reports that these contain respooled cinematic film could mean that a lot of places would not be able to process them. I shot a lot of things over the years, and eventually regretted everything except Ektachrome.
@werehatrack
Did you print from that color reversal film?
Since these are marked with “return to Walmart for processing” I would suspect they are c41.
@chienfou When I was shooting slides, I didn’t want prints. Still, I had a few that merited prints, and I just handed that off to a specialty lab. I was bollocks at color in my home lab. It’s all ancient history at this point, and I’ve been shooting with digital since Nikon introduced the D60. (I regarded the D40 as too limited, so I waited a bit and didn’t regret the choice.)
The fact that the cameras are explicitly marked as “Return to Walmart” leads me to suspect that the film supplied is something like the old 5247, which was dirt cheap in bulk but required different chemistry. I’d wager that the cameras can be snapped apart and manually reloaded with a conventional 35mm cartridge, but at that point, it’s down to “Why bother?” Cell phone cameras will produce better results, and the huge digital advantage is present; the image can be evaluated on the fly.
@werehatrack
I just never got I into slides. Too much PITA to look at them easily for me.
I suspect the return to Walmart thing is due to these being ONN which is a Walmart brand. Maybe their lab does specialty (bulk) film but suspect they mostly do regular 35mm film.
Specs say it is indeed reloadable.
For your information only. I haven’t used this source to process and print photos from 35mm film. Also I believe they don’t physically print but instead publish your photos in digital format on their website for you to retrieve them.
https://thedarkroom.com/product/35mm-film-developing/?srsltid=AfmBOopKu8RM1xIMkFxbYqxtx_Ptxz4DUTY4mbVHKYpG8TXz7BIeFo0z
I didn’t know we could still get film developed. Thanks, Meh’ers. My grandmother’s Pentax 35mm camera still works fine. I was able to use those lenses to work on a modern Pentax digital camera, but it could be fun doing some film pictures too.
@aarond12 I would NOT need this cheap camera as I do have several Pentax bodies, both Film SLR & Digital SLR!
@aarond12 @mycya4me My Pentax had the older screw mount system; I wanted to get a DSLR that would use those lenses but that system was obsolete; they never made one so I never got a fancy digital.
@aarond12 @duodec Yes I had a Pentax MX k-Mount (Film), Then I (I am sure bought it pre-own) a K-10d, (digital) then upgraded to the Pentax K3-II my current one.
My 1st SLR was a Fujica 605, Screw Mount -Film, But there was no upgrade path & screw mount lens were on the way out! I really love my Pentax, I enter my local fair & received every ribbon they offer!
$9!? They’ll have to pay me more than that for me to take it. Can you even buy film anymore?
@TCayer
Yes. But it’s not cheap (to buy or process).
@TCayer Yes most camera shops still sell film, especially if you live near a Collage.
@mycya4me photos are certainly useful in a collage.
Good price point. One drawback, film alone can be more than the camera, the processing. Upside, no tears if I lose it. May buy it for my trip to England.
I used to do a little amateur photography back in the day. I miss the wait and anticipation of film development. It was always a surprise; many photos you thought would be good turned out meh or bad and others you thought were meh or bad turned out to be good. That process is lost in the instant gratification of modern phone digital cameras. For $9, maybe you younglings can try it for l yourself. As for me, I would just dust off my Nikon F4.
@goldnectar Or you get home from a trip and a week later you find all the photos were bad. Other than nostalgia, I’ll go with digital cameras every time. It’s not instant gratification, but practicality. The ability to both rapidly fire off a whole bunch of shots so as not to spend too much time behind a viewfinder and to be able to take the time to go for a really great shot when I want to make digital photography better and less costly for me than film.
@ItalianScallion I don’t mean to sound like a photography snob, but if all your vacation photos turn out bad, maybe go with a point and click as you clearly don’t know how to use an SLR.
I meant good as in a cool angled shot vs bad would be just a mundane or typical photo. Rarely would my shots be out of focus or over/under-exposed to the point of being useless. Just not frame worthy.
@goldnectar Okaaay…
@goldnectar @ItalianScallion Yeah but now I take waaaaay too many photos. From 37 every couple of months to like 37 a day. Who has time to review all these danged things for the good ones?
Funny seeing these now; our purging in prep for retirement and moving just ran across our old cameras. We haven’t used the SLR or the fancy auto-everything 35mm camera in at least 25 years, and my Dad’s Kodak Instamatic 500 in maybe 45 years. Time to let them go.
I also found my first digital, a Sony Mavica FD-88 that used 3.5" floppy disks for storage. Still works but the early lithium batteries only last about 10 minutes.
Unfortunately they’re not worth much…
@duodec there should be volunteers willing to take them off your hands (even for no $, just the cost of shipping). The classic old tech needs to be saved and some will appreciate it.
I had one of those Sony cameras also that recorded to floppy disc. I donated it to something back at a time when it was not laughably obsolete yet.
I also still have a Sony Hi-8 camcorder.
@duodec It’s me. I’ll take them.