Showing posts with label Film Photography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film Photography. Show all posts

Sunday, August 6, 2017

Getting Things Back Underway

Contaflex Super BC - Pro-Tessar 35mm ƒ/3.2 - Polypan F
So I admit, I've been absent from the Blog Scene for a bit.. But I'm coming back to it. Life is less hectic and much more relaxed now that I've managed to find a groove in things. I was taking a break for the summer from work and focusing on just relaxing and shooting film.  I made a point, also, of, during my days at school, to take a camera every single day, except during exam week. I took a new camera to school every week until the final week of school, because I literally was there for an hour or two at most, then back home to not study and develop a roll or two.. Maybe veg in front of the television and watch Netflix...

Ended up getting into woodworking and thinking of a couple projects... yes, a few are photography related, but I won't get into that.. Wait until they're done, then I'll post about them.

For now, I plan on posting a new blog a minimum of one a week, possibly as many as 4 or 5 per week, depending on how things go.
Kodak Pony 35 Model C -
44mm ƒ/3.5Kodak Anastigmat
Polypan F 50

I'm also starting up a small gallery website.. Nothing fancy, which currently is basically... nothing.. But I'll be posting images up there for viewing and, of course, to order a print or two... maybe even a photobook!

It'll be nice to finally have a public gallery instead of just Flickr or Facebook... Of course this blog, or even my Google+ profile, which has very limited photos

Anyway, stay tuned, we've got more things coming.. Also, don't forget, I'm broadcasting every month from the revolving Classic Camera Revival studio...

Talk to you all soon!

Remember, keep those shutters firing!



Zenza Bronica SQ-Ai - Zenzanon 80mm ƒ/2.8 - Kodak TMAX400



Monday, March 30, 2015

The Classic Camera Revival

March 31, 2015The Classic Camera Revival

In 2014 Alex Luyckx asked me about starting up a podcast with John Meadows and my wife Dawn Bitaxi.  Well, after a bit of discussion we all agreed to start it up.  In January 2015 we recorded our first episodes.

upl - A1Sup400Scan-150330-0001


What an exhilarating experience!  We discussed our Workhorse cameras… I talked about my black beauty Canon T90… while Alex discussed the Nikon F4.  My wife Dawn discussed the Olympus OM2 S/P (which has sadly since died) and John discussed his beautiful Mamiya M645 Pro!

A1Sup400Scan-150330-0003



A1Sup400Scan-150330-0004
Alex gets very animated holding the Nikon F4

A1Sup400Scan-150330-0005
John's Mamiya 645
In episode 2 we went outside the box to Box Cameras…!  I talked all about my Agfa Shurshot Box Camera, Alex talked about a Kodak Brownie Box and Dawn discussed the Kodak Brownie Bullseye camera…

upl - A1Sup400Scan-150330-0008

upl - A1Sup400Scan-150330-0009

And finally in Episode III we got into the Rangefinders… Those wonderful cameras that we all love to use for Street photography.  They are super quiet and unobtrusive. From the Leica to the Zeiss Contax…. I discussed my Kodak 35 RF, while Dawn discussed her beautiful (and incredibly sharp) Olympus 35SP.   Alex happily blabbed on and on about his Himatic 7 from Minolta, which is a real sleeping gem of a camera… John, however, stole the show with his stunningly beautiful Voigtlander Bessa!  Talk about a real star of a camera!  LTM mount, and TTL metering!
You can catch us every month at the end of the month on iTunes and from the Classic Camera Revival Blog (hosted by author of the Podcast Alex Luyckx). Stay tuned as we delve into APS and DIY… plus the Communist Cameras in May!
Also with all episodes we also discuss Darkroom printing and at-home developing! Look forward to hearing from you regarding the CLASSIC CAMERA REVIVAL! Until next time, keep those shutters firing!


*All above images were taken on a Canon A-1 w/50mm ƒ/1.4 lens on Fuji Superia 400 film

Saturday, January 3, 2015

Svema Photo-125 C-41

This is not the first post I have done on the Svema 125ASA C41 film.  It's fantastic!

I can easily compare it to Portra 160 for smoothness and grain structure.  But for colour palette, it is in a league of its own.  Portra 160 is wonderful, absolutely, but I will have to say that this Svema film makes it look pale in comparison.

After seeing the way it renders landscapes, I will never shoot Portra 160 again!  It just seems to be missing that little bit of something for it.
Portraits? Well, I cannot compare.  Sadly I haven't seen how this Svema 125 works with portraits under proper controlled light, but I'm sure it probably does very well.

The first roll I shot was in my T90, and I gave it as much of a fighting chance to prove itself as I could. Rated +1EV and slapped a very damn good (and sharp) lens in front of it (Vivitar 28mm ƒ/2.5).  The images were nothing short of stunning.

However, I loaded roll #2 in my Ricoh Mirai 35-135 camera.  This thing is bizarre!  Looking more like a weapon from the future, it is very well designed. The lens is one of the best lenses I've used as a Zoom!

Milk Thistle

So using the funniest looking camera in my collection, I have captured one of the best images I've taken of a flower, or any other kind of plant life..

There's a reason I rarely take out this camera.. I'm scared that one day I'll have an accident with it and be left without it.

It's just such a damn good camera!  Optically, and functionally...

Until next time.. Keep those shutters firing!

First post of 2015 - Stay Tuned.. More are coming!!

Thursday, October 16, 2014

Large Format..

I've been asked a few times why I have chosen to shoot large format.

It's not about resolution.  It's not about detail.  Heck, it isn't even about the size of the photo...

Then what is it about?

My simplest answer is simply... Because I enjoy it.  There is a frustration and a sheer amount of joy when shooting with a large format camera. When you set up your shot, you have nothing to take the measurements for you.  The light has to be measured just right, then you have to take into account for the aperture, and even the bellows draw, before you can even take your photo.
There are no auto exposure large format cameras.  The weight of the camera is something else, too. Almost like the phrase.. "DEAD WEIGHT" ... you feel that way when you are carting around a monorail.  Even Field Cameras get heavy after a while, and I'm sure a Press Camera doesn't get any lighter the longer you're carrying it.

One of my most prized cameras is my Deardorff 5x7 1950's Chicago original camera.  Originally owned by my late grandfather, it has, sadly, gone into disrepair, and is not in the best of conditions.


Lack of proper storage, lack of care, and
moisture has not been its friend.  Stored in a basement that suffered from moisture and mold, it did not fair wonderfully.
It would have been nice if there was more to it than what there is. You can see it in the photo above.

Everything about Large Format is big.  Big film... Big lenses.. Big cameras...
And ultimately, big times for each exposure.
Just to show you a basic idea on the size of the lenses, I put a roll of 35mm film beside my Schneider 210mm lens.
As you can see, it's far from small!
The lens in the background is a Agfa Anastigmat Apotar 105mm ƒ/4.5

When I'm out in the field with my 4x5, I have to set up each shot meticulously, and slowly.  Focusing is an art!  Sure, with a 35mm camera or a 120 camera you are much closer to the view screen, and can easily focus, a large format camera requires a bit more finesse. A magnifying Loupe works great! I have a folding Magnifying Loupe to critically focus and make sure what I want sharp, is sharp.

Also, weather becomes a factor.
Sure, you have the image composed how you want it.  You've adjusted the camera to keep all the lines straight that you want straight, focus is perfect and you've set you aperture and shutter speeds.
Film is ready to be exposed and you trip the shutter...
But you have to wonder.. "Did the light change from when you set the shutter and aperture? Did the wind blow and shake the camera during the exposure?  Did you properly compensate for bellows draw?"
You won't know until you get back to develop the image and see the final negative.
Left - Agfa Anastigmat Apotar 105mm ƒ/4.5
Right - Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar 210mm ƒ/5.6
There are also other things to take into account when you're out shooting.
Such as Bellows Factor.  When you're at "INFINITY" you don't have to worry about your bellows factor, but the closer you focus the more you have to take into account for bellows draw.

I use an app on my smartphone to calculate bellows draw, but it can be done in your head or with a bit of math.

The other thing is Image Circle.  Just because you're using a Large Format lens doesn't mean you will get a full image circle.  Adjust the front for rise, and add a bit of tilt and you run the risk of losing your image circle.
I've shot a few images where I've lost part of my circle simply because I added too much rise, and gave a bit of a shift and lost the lower corner of my image, which was too bad, but it did add to the image.

It can be quite frustrating when you load the film into the holder, get the camera set up, and pull the slide out only to find that the film drops out of the holder because you missed getting the film under the rails on both sides.
It's happened a few times to me, unfortunately.
But it's always a learning experience!

Heading out in the field can be quite the challenge too, with the weight of a monorail and tripod braced against your shoulder.
I have a Duffle bag that I use to cart my camera to and from a location and the car.  But once set up, it's carried via my tripod and braced on my shoulder.
The bag carries my film holder and my lenses.

When people see me they either have no idea what I'm doing, and many times they pull out their cellphone and take a photo or three of me.  The other thing they do is start blabbing to me, asking me questions about the camera and where I buy the film for it.
Say A PrayerWhat it really comes down to is that I completely enjoy using my large format camera in every aspect.  Sure, it is not the easiest method to capture images, nor is it the lightest.
Errors are compounded by the fact that you don't get a do-over.  One shot, one chance.  After the image is taken, you cannot capture the same image again.  If you didn't get it, you didn't get it.  You cannot try again for the exact same image, you'll simply have to move on and go to the next.

Recently I went out on a photowalk with my good friend +Alex Luyckx who is one of the few that understand the enjoyment of "Large Format" photography.
Other photographers, such as +Andrew Koran+Mathew Marrash+Holger Drallmeyer and +Kelly-Shane Fuller also understand Large Format enjoyment.

It's funny how when I first started shooting film I'd blow through several rolls of film a week, but as I got more experienced I started slowing down more and more.  Eventually I found myself shifting from 35mm to medium format and large format.
Taking my time from image to image I was finding that 35mm was too long to finish each roll.  120 was a nice balance for image quality, lower exposures per roll, and let me slow down and take my time from image to image.
But I still find that it's too many frames... I'm looking for a 6x9 camera so I can slow down even more, but still be portable.

But when I want to really slow down, and really get the shot I want... I shoot Large Format.

Returned To Kodak

There's a building I've been working in (I'm an electrician by trade, but love the art of photography) and there's an absolutely beautiful retention pond.  After having to temporarily satisfy myself shooting the photos with my cellphone and with a Brownie Hawkeye (not to mention my Argus C3) and a Spotmatic and even my Voigtlander Vito CL, I got out there with my Monorail.
I set up, and shot a set of 4 exposures.  2 shots on some expired (1977) Kodak TXP320 (Tri-X Pan 320) and 2 shots on Kodak Ektar 100.

My first shot with my 4x5 was on Kodak Ektar using my Agfa Anastigmat Apotar 105mm ƒ/4.5 (see photo above) while the second Ektar shot was using a Kodak Ektar 127mm ƒ/4.7 lens.

When I set up a shot it can take a few minutes, or more..
One image I set up took about 5 minutes from the time I had the camera up on its tripod to time I had the image composed and focused, it was over in the blink of an eye..

In 1/15s I had the image recorded to film, and it was one of the few times (like the image of the stairs above) I knew I had the shot as I wanted it..

There was no wind, no motion in the camera at all, and I had the shot..
Twisted RemainsIt gave me a strange sense of satisfaction to get the photo exactly as I wanted it.
Only taking 5 minutes was also quite the surprise, as the latest image I have taken took more than 40 minutes from start to finish to take.

I got the camera set up in only a matter of moments, but the light wasn't right.
It's amazing how waiting for the sun to reach the right spot in the sky to give me the right colour of light, the right intensity and the best reflection off the glass of a building, can take so long.
I had to satisfy myself with using my Spotmatic and Vito to take a few random shots around the area where the 4x5 would just be showing off.

So I waited... and waited.. and waited
Finally the sun was giving me the right amount of light, was in the right spot.. and I knew I only have a few minutes to get the photo..

So I cocked the shutter, pulled the darkslide, and tripped the shutter...

I know I've got the shot how I wanted it... But currently the image is ... waiting for development..
The Ektar will be sent out to Borealis lab in Quebec, while the Tri-X Pan will be developed in either Caffenol-C or HC-110 Dil. B....

I have yet to decide fully..
Voigtlander Vito CL
For now, I'll have to be satisfied with the images I took using my Voigtlander Vito CL and Spotmatic.

As it stands right now, I'm only moderately satisfied with the Vito and Spotmatic images, but my Brownie images completely blow them away, for the most part.

Although it can be quite trying to shoot 4x5 (or larger) film, and rather daunting, there is a satisfying feel to it.  You get some remarkable image resolution out of it, and incredible enlargements should you so choose.

My fellow shooters know that for detail and resolution you cannot beat large format.
Pinholed Kodak
But that's not why we shoot it.  No, that is not at all the reason whatsoever.  If it was all about sharpness, detail and resolution, why would anyone in their right mind shoot Pinholes with 4x5?
They do.  In fact, so have I!  The image to the right was shot with a homemade Pinhole lensboard using nothing more than my original Calumet metal lensboard, some tinfoil, electrical tape, and a piece of wire thread to poke the hole.
That's it.. and here's an image created using nothing more than a super small hole, and the mindset to create it.

There's no automation with creating these images.  It's just you, the camera, your film and knowledge, a bit of chance and your light meter.  Keeping notes is a very valuable asset, especially when it comes to development.  N+2?!  Or was it.. N-1?!  Oh yes, film holder 1-2 loaded with Fuji Acros 100... July 10th.... Here it is..
Okay, Develop as normal, good...
When you have multiple film holders, this is a very good habit to have.  Keep notes!  Not only will it help you keep track of each shot you take and how to develop them, but will also help you stay organized and disciplined.

I'm never going to say that Large Format is for everyone.  In fact, it's definitely not for everyone.  People who prefer to shoot small formats, and like the fact that you can shoot many images and have multiple chances to get that "image" will be better off not shooting 4x5 or larger, but those that find 35mm or even 120 a little too quick, well... Large Format photography might be for you!
Carl Zeiss Jena
One thing is for certain... I got the bug.. and I got it bad!
So bad, in fact, I'm actually pulling lenses on Quarter Plate cameras, 116 cameras, 616 cameras and even 6x9 cameras for their lenses to use on 4x5!
Every time I see an old Kodak Folder I check.. "Oh do I have that lens?" or... "I wonder if that'll give me full coverage....

All in all, I will not stop shooting large format.  I find myself shooting more and more lately.  After the last photowalk where I went with Alex to the University of Toronto campus in Downtown Toronto, I blew through the most frames of 4x5 I have ever gone through in a day..  Actually both him and I both did!

He claims 8 sheets of film, while I claim 10.  Sadly I mucked a couple, but it's all in the enjoyment of shooting..

Oh, and speaking of old Kodak Folder lenses...
Running
Not bad, I think for a 100 year old Rapid Rectilinear lens off an old Kodak Autographic Brownie that used to use 116 film!
In fact, I would have to say, this makes for one hell of an enlargement!  I happen to have made one on 11x14 Silver Gelatin paper..  Absolutely stunning!  Sadly, however, it's still not quite big enough.  I think, perhaps, 16x20 is in order!  At least it'd be without cropping!

For now, I'll have to remain satisfied with the monorail, as I am too funded out to get my Deardorff restored, but it'll be a wonderful project, and a beautiful (and stunning) camera once it is finished.

So until the next time... Keep those shutters firing!

Friday, February 28, 2014

Roll Developing

I have learned a technique for developing sheet film from a friend, and fellow photographer, +Holger Drallmeyer.  Now, he doesn't take full credit for it, as his method is using 300mL of chem, and usually uses it for C-41 developing.  I have refined it to using only 100mL of chemical.

I have been asked many times, how do I do my developing?

Well I have been promising my blog post for it for a while, but haven't yet done it.  Until now!

So, for starters, I use a 5-roll Nikkor Stainless steel tank with a Kindermann plastic lid.  They seem to work very well together, nice and tight!
This is very important to prevent leakage.
This is the tank and lid I use.  Behind I have the 650mL cylinder that is filled up to the 300mL mark.  This will be used for 3 sheets of film, 100mL at a time.  I decant it into another cylinder to 100mL.  This is specifically done to make sure I have the suggested 6mL of developer, as I use Rodinal for 4x5 sheet film.  Of course, I don't always do this.  Sometimes I mix it 100mL at a time with 2mL of developer, as I use a 1+50 ratio.

The green bucket is my dump bucket.  I pour all used chemicals into that afterward, other than Fixer, which I use a 1200mL cylinder.  Normally I also have a drip tray when I am doing inversion developing, or using my Combi-Plan sheet film developing tank, at least if I am developing 6 sheets at a time, which is very rare.  I specifically use that these days for STAND developing, as my Roll Developing technique seems to suit me very well.
Lastly, this is also done at the edge of the table, and for easy clean up sakes, try to put some newspaper or a old towel on the floor under the lip of the table, as chemical can always potentially drip out of the tank.
So first thing is first.  The film.  We need to get that sheet of film out of the holder.  So, get your holder and have the tank ready.  As you can see this is in the light.  When you do it you have to do it in complete darkness, or under a 7w DARK GREEN safelight (unless you are using super panchromatic/IR film which requires complete darkness), which might as well be near on pitch black.  This information has been shared to me by another friend +Kelly-Shane Fuller who is a very gifted technician with cameras, chemistry, and apparently even cars/motorcycle engines.
That doesn't say anything about his photography, though, which is phenomenal!  A very very good photographer.  Easily rivals my work, if he would stop shooting Selfies I think he has a lot of potential (sorry an inside joke between the two of us).
But in all honesty, he really is an exceptional photographer, as is +Holger Drallmeyer.  If you get a chance, check out their work!
So opening up the holder we have now got the film ready to be removed from the holder.  Now before you say, "Good gawd man, you just ruined a perfectly good sheet of film!" you would be wrong.
This sheet of film is Chinese Shanghai GP3 film which is suffering from their complete near on lack of Quality Control  There is a good half cm (1/4 inch) missing of emulsion off the acetate, and 1cm (1/2 inch) of anti-halation missing.  Plus there are machine marks and pinholes in the emulsion.
So it is used now for experiments, and stuff like this.
From there we need to load that film into the tank. You need to cup the film slightly to fit it into the tank, making sure that the emulsion is facing toward the middle of the tank.
The reason you want the emulsion side toward the middle is so that the chemical washes across the emulsion first and foremost, for if it is facing toward the edge of the tank, it might stick to the edge, get damaged, or not develop.
Don't worry, the anti-halation layer WILL wash off.

The other question I have been asked is, "How do I know that 100mL is enough chemical to coat the film, and how did I come to that conclusion?"
Simple.  I developed a BLACK sheet of GP3 in 100mL of chemical and it developed evenly.  I have developed many more sheets of film using 100mL (and the last one with 75mL) of chemical perfectly!  I have been tempted to try 50mL, but am worried it won't work.  Have to try it with a 'scrap' sheet sometime.
I guess in answer to the question is just that.  It was a guess, and it worked!  I started at 300mL but thought that 300mL is a little much for one sheet.  So I reduced it to 200mL without a problem, then finally got to 100mL and am really happy with that!
10 sheets would be 1L of chemical solution, which is awesome, considering my CombiPlan uses 1050mL of chemical and will only do 6 sheets, and the FR Tank will do many more (I think either 10 or 12 sheets) but uses 1500mL!!
So now we have the film in the can, the lid is on, the lights are on, and we're just about ready to get started. Right, so now what?
Easy, we get the chemical ready.  I usually have at least 2L of water at around 18°C ready to go for mixing and using for stop bath.  Of course, I also usually develop a good 4 to 6 sheets in one session.  First sheet is developed, then it goes into the sink to be washed.  While washing, I'll develop the next sheet.  When it is done developing, I take the sheet from the wash, and put it into the Wetting Agent bath, and develop the next sheet.  Then it's like a procession.  Develop, wash, wetting agent, hang to dry.
And when I am done the last sheet, I set a timer for 15:00 and let it wash for that amount of time.
I almost always leave the film in the wetting agent for 5:00 unless I am developing, then it can be for about 15:00 or more, depending on how long it takes to develop each sheet of film.
So now we have the 100mL of chemical ready to go.  So lets get started!  Pop the filler cap, and pour it into your tank and start your timer.
This is where this method starts to excel over the inversion method.  You can actually reduce your developing times by about 10% because it is "constant" agitation!  The faster you agitate will control your contrast and grain levels.  Faster agitation = more grain more contrast.  Slower agitation = lower grain and lower contrast.
Of course using a different developer, like HC-110 or TMAX Developer will change those as well.
I just really like Rodinal with 4x5 because of the high acutance and incredibly smooth tones.
+Alex Luyckx will contest to that and say, "No way, Pyrocat PMK All the way!" 


Keeping the tank on the edge of the table, so it is flat, you roll it back and forth.  You can go fast for higher contrast, but you will increase your grain, or slowly to keep grain down and a smoother contrast.
On the right image you will see a line that I have drawn on the can.  This line says, "ROLL PAST" which is so I know I have given the can a full rotation left to right/right to left.
When the time is up you dump the developer, and pour in your stop bath.  Continue to roll it back and forth for at least 1 minute.  When that is complete, dump that bath and pour in the fixer.
I fix for about 5 minutes continuously agitating the film the same way.  
And now that we've finished developing it, we can pour out the fixer and peek at the negative.  And here it is!
Perfectly developed negative!

So as you can see, this method works very well, and can be used for C-41, E6, and B&W developing.

When you start using this method for developing film, you'll start to tray develop less and less.
Or maybe you never have tray developed your film, or you haven't shot sheet film before and were intimidated by tray developing, this is an excellent alternative to tray developing.
For one, you can do it in the light instead of complete darkness.  This method is easily controlled, and has less of a chance of scratching your film, pretty much almost a "NIL" chance of it.  Plus, no elastic band marks from the "TACO" method.
This is an excellent method for developing your 4x5 sheet film, and even 5x7 sheet film, as 100mL will even cover 5x7 sheet film.
Hope this was informative and gave you some insight into another, and possibly easier, method to develop sheet film!

Until next time, keep those shutters firing!

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Returning To Kodak

This year I have decided to shoot a lot more 4x5 film.  That means much less shooting, and more concentration on making sure that the shot counts!
Using my Calumet CC400 Monorail is not the easiest camera to use in the field.
Alright, lets face it, it is downright near on impossible, but I do it!  I get it into the field all the time that I can and use it.  Whether it is a wide-angle, standard, or a telephoto lens, I just find it most relaxing.

I have entirely dedicated this year to three film stocks.  FP4+, HP5+ and Fomapan 400.  I love all three films, but have a preference to HP5+ just because it is such a gorgeous film!  That said, however, I cannot deny the classic emulsion of Fomapan 400, and the wonderful contrast of FP4+.

I returned to the Kodak Plant here in Toronto, well at least what is left of it.  I spent a fair amount of time here in the past, and plan on revisiting it again, this time with more film, and possibly some EKTAR 100 and Provia 100 for some of the desolation and using my ultra-wide angle lenses.  Although those Ultra-wides aren't QUITE up to 4x5 snuff, but really damn close enough to work.  Those lenses would be the ones I pulled off a pair of Kodak Brownie folders, and one off a Agfa Billy Record.  Some 105mm lenses off the Billy Record, which normally covers 6x9 beautifully, but actually gives some really lovely coverage on 4x5 film as well.

I wandered into the plant and had one shot in mind.  The front foyer and stairs.  Once a grand entrance, with beautiful brasswork and wood rails and marble stairs, they now lay in complete ruin and are no longer the joy they must have once been to look at.

I visited this place recently with my Kodak Signet 35 and Kodak Gold film during my previous 52-rolls and made it the finale to the Month of Kodak in March of 2013.  This time however, I will be entirely dedicating my time to 4x5 film.    As such, a month of Kodak would entail using ONLY Kodak Film with a Kodak lens.  Since I have not committed to Kodak film this year, that will have to pass.
I wish I had +Mathew Marrash's Kodak Commercial D 8x10 camera with one of his gorgeous Field Ektar lenses, but alas, I do not.

My wife, +Donna Bitaxi, worked for Kodak many years ago at this very facility.  But when they decided to consolidate their chemicals into a third party company, and began the shift away from traditional B&W photo papers, their plant closed.  My wife, offered a position and moving expenses to travel to a different location in British Columbia, declined the offer, and stayed in Toronto, where she eventually met me.
She worked in the Black and White Photopaper packaging department, and like many of us, spent plenty of time under a red Safe-Light.

Sadly, in 2005, this plant closed its doors for good.  In late 2006 the demolition companies were called in and within a couple of short years the plant, save for Kodak Building #9, was erased from the map forever.
Who owns this land and the last building upon it, I do not know, but it is a place for firebugs, graffiti artists, vagrants, and Urban Explorers.  I took a few Digital Images where I was there this time, as I had my Rebel XS and 50mm lens, and figured it would be the best choice to capture some quick shots.

Image taken on a Calumet CC400 4x5 Monorail, Kodak Ektar 127mm ƒ/4.7, Ilford FP4+ 125 @ 125ASA under natural light.  Exposure 8s at ƒ/8.  Metered for a 4s exposure and added 4s for Reciprocity.
Today, this is what the stairwell looks like.  Crumbling, broken, and ruined.  A sad testament to what it once was, and possibly what lies ahead for the Film Giant in the future.

Until next time fellow bloggers... Keep this shutters firing!

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

My Deardorff

I haven't been posting much in here as I have been busy with, well, life.  Not through any lack of desire to post, just haven't had time or a chance to.
The one thing, though, is that I have started a much needed repair and refurbishing of my late grandfather's Deardorff 5x7 Wooden Field camera.  I don't think he ever used this camera, as I have sifted through his negatives and there were many 620 6x9 negatives, but nary a single 5x7 negative.  No back and ground glass, or lens board or lens came with it.
So I am having to do a lot of the work by fabricating parts, or buying from the Deardorff factory in the USA.

So far I have made a new lensboard for it, and realigned the focusing racks.  I am in the processed of acquiring new hardware for it, and making a new front focusing rack for it so that I can have it a little more sturdy.

As it stands now, it is not yet usable.  Without the rear ground glass and film holder, I am unable to use it to take a single image.
Hopefully within this year I will have the camera in service again finally.  But as of now, here is how it looks..



The lensboard is not yet finished, as I have to sand it smooth, add another coat of paint, sand that again smooth, using some 600+ grit sandpaper, then protect it with some clearcoat lacquer.
The lens is off a Kodak Autographic Folding Brownie Hawkeye No. 2A.

Very impressive lens indeed!

Until next time, fellow bloggers...

Keep those shutters firing!

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Life to Old Lenses

So some may call me evil, and some may even call me nuts..
While others will think it is terrible that I have ripped apart old folders for their lenses, but here's the thing. The cameras are basically just decoration, and for me, that's not much of an option.  I am also considering selling a few of my cameras.  Mainly the ones I do not use, but that's a hurdle I'll climb when I come to it.

Anyway, one of the cameras was a Kodak Autographic Folding Brownie No. 2a, which has a Baush And Lomb Rapid Rectilinear lens.  The stops listed on the lens if 8 16 32 64.  The thing is that is the old style Universal Stop.  ƒ/16 is US 16, so US 8 will be ƒ/11.

So it's a very easy conversion to understand.

I have tested these lenses out prior to actually committing them to film.

A Lot Of Snow
"Snowy Post" - Kodak Rapid Rectilinear Lens
Ilford MGIV Fibre based paper - Dektol 1+3
Paper Test

Getting the Monorail to the site to setup the shot was fairly easy.  Slippery somewhat, but not too bad.
I had a yellow filter and a polarizer on the camera, oh and a fashioned lens hood out of a black plastic thingy.

"Flow" - Kodak Rapid Rectilinear 114mm ƒ/11 @ƒ/16
1/15s Exposure - Ilford FP4+ 125ASA

I really think that this lens is far sharper than I originally though it would be.  I was actually hoping for some anomalies that never manifested themselves, which is actually rather unfortunate.

But perhaps that'll change when I give the Achromatic lens a go!  It's different than a Rapid Rectilinear.  The Achromatic lens is basically a cemented Doublet lens, but instead of the lenses being separated (front and rear elements) by a pocket of air, they are actually cemented together.

Should make things interesting!

Until next time.  Keep those shutters firing!

Monday, January 6, 2014

Positively Speaking..

Last month Michael Raso of the Film Photography Project sent me a care package of some specialty films that might be coming to your FPP store for sale.
One of the films is this Kodak #5363 Positive Cinecopy film.  I was challenged by +Alex Luyckx  to shoot and process as a positive image instead of as a Negative.
Well, I just happen to have a B&W reversal kit from Kodak that I've been playing around with.  So I used a HC-110 Dilution that the lovely and very friendly Leslie Lazenby of Imagine That! in Findlay Ohio.  Oh, and The Mecca.
HC-110, the soup of Ansel Adams, Dilution G (1+119 from syrup) for 15:00 since I shot it at EI 6, as we are still unsure as to what speed this film really is.
Well, after mixing up the Bleaching bath (1 part Sulfuric Acid Concentrate to 1 part Potassium Permaganate to 3 parts water).. so 75mL of each part of the bleach to 250mL of water and I had slightly UNDER mixed it by 50mL of water, but no problem, I got to business.

Putting the film into the soup and developing it for 15:00 I got my next bath out.  The Stop Bath.  Yes, I used an ACID stop bath before I put the bleaching agent in, even though it is a highly concentrated Acid, so the developer wouldn't contaminate the bleaching agent.  After mixing it in the bleach for a good 2 minutes it was then clear of all developed silver, and ready for the clearing bath, which is basically concentrated Sodium Bicarbonate (Baking Soda) which negates the acid and clears the yellow stain from the film.  Oddly enough, though, the stain didn't quite vanish, and I wasn't very impressed it was still there!
But ... whatever, it's all good!
After the clearing bath, it's a rinse then off the reel and reexposure to light.
So holding up to the light, I rexposed the film for 30 seconds, and popped it back onto the developing reel for final stage.
DekTOL.  Yup, good ol' Kodak Dektol STOCK dilution.  Just dump it on the film and agitate it until it is all developed.  This is done in the light, obviously, and once developed, you pop it under some water and give it a good long washing.
Hypo, if you have it, wash, and then Photoflo.
After a good 10 minutes under running water, I added the Photoflo mix, and let it stand for 2 minutes.
After letting it stand for a couple of minutes, I dumped the solution and hung the film to dry.
That's when I made an inspection of the film.

It looked pretty good.  A little foggy, and that is something I thought was odd, considering that it should be nice and clear.

Either way, they looked good to me!  Not quite as good as the Foma 100R I developed, but pretty good.




So there they are.. The slides that I scanned.  Not a lot came out great, but the majority worked.  I still need to work on proper exposure, and next time I do this I think I'll try at a more expected exposure, perhaps 25ASA and in HC-110 G for 25 minutes.
Aside from that, the film was well exposed and had very good images on it.
Just upset that the film was a little... foggy.

Exakta Varex
Steinheil Munchen Lithagon 35mm ƒ/3.5
Kodak 5363 Cinecopy Film @ EI6
HC-110 Dil. G (1+119) 15:00
Bleach
Dektol Redeveloper

Scanned on Epson Perfection 4990

Thanks for reading!

Until next time fellow bloggers, keep those shutters firing!

Saturday, January 4, 2014

Pushing or Pulling - Welcome to Film

So I have noticed a common question, and that is.  Push or Pull.

What is Pushing and pulling?  Can it be done with Digital, or is it a strictly film practice?

Well, the answer to that question is... well, yes and no.  Can you push a digital image, you can.  But that is all done in post processing, and requires a lot of patience.  And, like film, will work a similar way, but instead of accented grain, you get accented noise.  More often than not, it doesn't look very appealing on digital, where as on film it can look pretty good!
With a lot of patience and care you can do it with a digital image.
Lets take this image, for instance..
Under exposed, but not too badly.  Say 2 stops under, which is easily worked with.  So after a bit of level tweaking in Photoshop, and having to up the contrast a bit to keep it from looking washed out, here's the image..


So now you can see more detail inside the bus, and even behind and around it.
This is essentially similar to PUSHING film.  You can see the highlights have also started to get a fair bit stronger and it is a higher contrast.
But, in areas that had no exposure, such as under the bus, behind the driver, and around the houses in the b/g, they are still in shadow. Since there is no exposure, there is no information to bring out.
Now how does this relate to pushing a film?  Well, lets take that the image was about 2 stops under exposed.  That's because I set the cameras ISO setting to 200 so that I would get a smooth motion on the vid screen of my phone to compose it.  I chose a phone image over a dSLR as, for one I had no under exposed image for my dSLR, and 2, this image is probably one of the better images to use for explaining a push.

So what did I do to "push" this image?
well, first off I changed the curve to bring out more of the midtones and started to try to draw out the shadows.  In doing so I caused the image to feel... well washed out and unbalanced.  So I had to increase the highlights, and when I did that the image looked better but it just didn't have the right balance, as it was definitely washed out with light shadows, smooth midtones, and highlights that were strong, but seemed to blend too much with the mid-tones..
SO I had to increase the contrast.  This is where it starts to resemble a pushed film.  The shadows stay dark, as they are supposed to, instead of a 18% gray, or a darker gray shade, and the highlights start to feel a little over powering.  The problem is, if you scale back the highlights, they actually become dull, and blend with the mid-tones, and the image feels flat.

So in theory, yes, you can push a digital image,.
So what about pulling a digital image?

This is where film and digital actually start to slip apart.  Pulling a digital image is far more difficult, as the highlights are going to lose detail far faster than the shadows will.
This is where Latitude starts to come into play, and where film starts to win the fight.  At least, Negative film. Not a FILM vs Digital post, I'm explaining Pulling and Pushing.   I have explained PUSHING with a positive image in a digital sense, and now pulling.
See, when you pull an image, you are actually halting the development of the highlights after over exposing the image.  This is the tricky part with digital.  It is also tricky with E6 films, which are a positive image similar to Digital.  The only thing is, with an E6 film, prior to developing the film, you can decide on how to develop it.
Wth positive film that is over exposed a stop or 2, and you pull it, you keep the highlights from developing to the point of clipping, and create a smoother contrast over the image.
This is the point where digital cannot compare...  to work around this, photographers develop an HDR image, which stands for "HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE".
The problem is when you see most HDR images, it has the Saturation pumped way up, and it looks like a false image.  See the human eye actually lies to you and what you see.  The brain is so powerful that it will actually adjust the image your eye is seeing and keep the highlights that you see from being just that.  In fact, if you look at a darkened place while in a bright area, no with the sun in your eyes, you can see into that darkened place, so long as you don't have any strong reflective surfaced rebounding harsh lighting into it.
And if you are in a dark area and look outside, good chance that you will be able to see some of the colours of the sky
Your iris will adjust itself against the light.  Narrower for bright, and wider for darkened areas, similar to how the camera works.  But unlike the camera your brain has exceptional corrective abilities that film or digital does not.
So the image you see in an HDR image feels, well, like it is wrong, and that it just isn't how it should be.
But the concept is usually there. The sky is a smooth shade of blue, tapering off toward the grown as a lighter cyan until it makes contact with the Earth.  At that point the shadows are now defined, and you get a good fair amount of detail in the darker areas of the image, without it being washed out or clipped.  Underexposed shadows, or over-exposed highlights just don't exist!
This is how digital has begun the process of how to "PULL" an image, and in doing this, the photographer takes a series of bracketed images.  Say a series of 7 shots.  One being the control, or EI0, 3 at +1 +2 and +3, with the other three at -1 -2 -3..
Using a program light Aperture, lightroom, or Adobe Photoshop they combine these shots and create a layered image.  The photographer then can pick and choose how each layer intertwines and defines each zone.
They can bring Shadows up to Zone IV, while pulling the highlights back to zone VII keeping everything within equal viewing range, and having a smooth contrast image that is not over powering, or under whelming.
That is a whole bunch of added steps to pull a digital image and keep it from being over-exposed, or under exposed.
Take that same roll of E6 positive transparency film that you over exposed 2 stops.  Well, when you pull it in processing, you are halting the development of the
This causes the image to lose contrast, but gain shadow detail and retain the critical highlight detail.  This is very useful when shooting without gradual N/D (Neutral Density) filters, which help against over exposed highlights and keeping the ground and shadows in a more visible range, instead of dark and underwhelming.
highlights, and allowing the shadows to actually catch up!
So that's the idea behind pulling a film.

But all that did was cover Positive film, and not negative film.

Yes, but the theory is the same.  Negative film has a higher (much higher) latitude than Positive films, like E6 and Digital, which sometimes you do not actually have to waste your time with a Push Pull method.
Many modern emulsions have enough latitude to capture a under exposed image, sometimes even up to 3 stops under, or an image up to 3 or even 4 stops over exposed!  And to do all that without a single change in how your developed the film.  It handled it through the latitude of the film itself.
So in a basic nutshell, lets look back at this.  What is Pushing and what is Pulling.
Pushing is the method of under exposing an Image and taking more time to develop it.  With digital, it means fine tuning the curves to try to keep it from being overly noisy, yet still well defined.  Trying to control the contrast, highlights, and not letting the shadows become a gray tone and noisy.
With film it means that you spend more time developing the film.  As pointed out with a digital image, you will not gain shadow detail at all.  You increase the contrast, and brighten the mid-tones and increase the density  of the highlights.  Stronger, brighter, and more dense highlights, while keeping deep and solid shadows.  Where there is no exposure, there can never be exposure, so you can push until the film just stops reacting to the developer, and you will never gain any exposure in the shadows.  Where there is no information, you cannot draw out information.

So lets take a film out there like Polypan F.  This is a 50ASA rated film, so we'll take a look at an image I took at 50ASA, developed normally.  The film is smooth, with even and lovely contrast, and some lovely gray tones that make this film super famous, especially after the promotion and work that myself, and fellow Polypan Shooter and abuser Larry Dressler has done.  The thin base, lack of anti-halation, and polyester backing make this film prone to blooming, which is the spreading of the highlights.
Just look at the head on this pint of beer.
So this is quite a basic image, nothing special.  How does it relate to pushing or pulling?
Actually, quite a lot!  This is showing the film as it is supposed to be. Exposed and developed at box speed, without any extra steps.
So lets say I have only that same 50ASA film and I just went from the bright outdoors to a subdued lighting indoors.
I could;
A) Use a tripod
B) Use a flash
C) Push the film

So I don't have or cannot use a flash.  A Tripod is not an option. and will be rather difficult to use, so I will choose option C.  I will push the film.
How much, is the question.  Lets go with 2 stops so ASA200.
So here is an image I exposed at 200ASA with Polypan F.  Shot indoors, slightly different lighting, and a completely different time of year, but the principle is the same.
Longer time in the tank to develop the mid-tones and highlights.  So the highlights start to get stronger (look at the cup behind the hat, shadows are deeper and the image becomes higher contrast.  Under the hat is black, while the hat itself remains quick evenly toned.  Contrast is also significantly stronger.
This is pushed film.

So lets now recap this entire post on Pushing and Pulling.

Pushing and Pulling is a method that is done at the development stage of processing your film.  It cannot be done before or after the film is processed.

It is through over exposing and under developing, known as pulling, or under exposing, and over developing, which is known as pushing.

So how can you call what I did to the digital image Pushing?  Because it is during the Processing stage of the image, before the final image.  That said, the negative is not the final image, but the Print is.
Working with an under exposed and normally developed negative is very difficult.

When do you use PULLING as a technique?

Well, lets say you load some 400ASA film, but either forget to set the ASA dial, or in the case of AUTO-DX coded cameras, maybe the canister isn't DX coded, or it is a bulk loaded can.  The ASA setting on the camera is slower than the loaded film, and when the images are all shot on the roll, they are over exposed.
Then you'd consider pulling.  Some films that is unnecessary for 1 or 2 stops, while others it is very necessary to prevent over exposed and overly dense negatives.

The other reason is to control contrast in high contrast scenes, like say a beach or a snowy landscape.  Or perhaps to reduce the contrast of a high contrast film, like Microfilms.

There are many reasons to pull a film, and some are employed by large format photographers who use the "ZONE" system.

What about pushing a film?

Pushing a film, well, similar idea.  You load a slower film and require a faster one, or forget to reset the speed dial and leave it faster than the film loaded, or the DX coding isn't set.  This is when you'd consider pushing a film, or to gain contrast in lower contrast films.
Even photographers who use the Zone system will also push a film

So in a basic nutshell, that is pushing, and pulling, film.
It is not quite as complicated as all the above, but it sometimes requires more explanation than just;

PUSH = UNDER EXPOSE OVER DEVELOP
PULL = OVER EXPOSE UNDER DEVELOP

Sometimes you'd like to know when to apply such techniques, or why people employ such techniques.

Until next time, Keep those shutters firing!

Friday, January 3, 2014

The Sharpest Film - PART II

So for an ongoing saga in this "SHARPEST FILM" I will continue to test films that claim to be "THE SHARPEST" films.
Kodak claims that TMAX400 is the sharpest 400 speed film, so I will put it up against TRI-X, HP5+, Delta400, Kentmere 400 and Rollei 400.  I will skip Foma 400, because I already know it'll lose badly. Beautiful tones, absolutely, but not exactly a sharp sharp film.

Anyway, this is about ADOX CMSII at ASA 3 instead of ASA6.  I have tested it at 6, and loved the results, so here's the film at ASA3.






But that's not the most interesting thing about this film.  The detail and entire lack of grain, even under such a huge crop, just shows how amazing this film is.
If it didn't cost so much in 4x5 I'd order a box.


Even under such magnification I can see no grain, and there is still very recognizable detail.
Absolutely a film that I will definitely be getting more of, and since I'm essentially all done testing it, shooting it without considering it to be "test" shots only.

Until next time fellow bloggers, keep those shutters firing!

All images were exposed at EI3 which is a 2 2/3 stop pull.  Film was developed in Rodinal 1+200 at 20°C  (68°F) for 10:30 using standard agitation.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

The Sharpest Film

So 2013 isn't over yet, and I'm posting another blog post, this one about one of the best films I have ever shot, when it comes to Sharpness.
Being a Microfilm that is designed for extreme amounts of reduction it needs to be a very powerfully resolving film.  I mean, it's stupid sharp!  SHARP SHARP SHARP!
So I have shot this before with disappointing results.  It's a 20ASA film in Adotech developer, and is usable in that developer at 20, but developing it in, say, TMAX developer, or HC-110.. Forget it!
For that you need to pull it.  So lets say 6ASA, which is what I shot it at, and it's beautiful!

So I got a roll from John Meadows.  He and I have been trying to crack this film for a while now, and I am happy to say, I think I have managed to do so.
Without using something like the specialized ADOTECH developer, which is rather pricey, and getting usable results, I tried Rodinal.

Rodinal is a great developer.  Very high acutance, sharpness, and beautiful tonal range.  It is like the magic of film in a liquid package.  It's easily one of the very best developers... ever!  It's liquid magic...!

Anyway, enough praise of Rodinal....  It deserves it, but here's the ADOX CMSII 20ASA film rated for 6ASA in Rodinal 1+200 developed for 12:00..





Images were taken down in the Beach area of Toronto, at the Victoria Park and Queen Street Water Processing Plant.

All images taken on a Bolsey B2 35mm Rangefinder, with a Wollensak 44mm ƒ/3.2 lens and developed in Rodinal 1+200 for 12:00 using standard agitation.

Until next time fellow bloggers, keep those shutters firing!