I have to get this off my chest since it's been on my mind the last handful of weeks. I've come across a serious error in my equipment, expectations, and process.
Years ago, I felt 35mm wasn't giving me the crisp and smooth images that I thought I wanted. Oddly though, after a year or so of experimentation, I settled on Neopan 400 in 120 as my go to film, developed in PMK and printed with color heads on VC papers. Life was good. The images had a subtle amounts of grain, sharp edges, and overall the look I had created in my head of what I want my images to look like. Then, Neopan 400 died, so I switched to Acros 100 and Pyrocat. Combined with my Mamiya 7, the results were flawless--perfectly sharp, beautiful contrast, zero grain and easy to print.
....But then over the last couple of weeks I have been teaching my lady friend how to use film (converted her from a Nikon D80 to a Nikon FE and Canon AE-1), so I figured I'd shoot 35mm as well for shits and giggles; nothing serious. Except I found a serious problem: Acros 100 in 35mm form and Pyrocat re-created the look I have been searching for since the demise of Neopan 400 in 120. In fact, I went into the darkroom to print a picture of my buddy (attached) that I took with a $20 rangefinder. It looked great. I then tried to print it larger at 11x14--it looked even better!
Then it hit me: I've been fixing my mistakes with 35mm by using a larger format, but now that my technique is better, 35mm does exactly what I want. And the Nikon FE is a so much fun to use, my Mamiya hasn't been touched. Have I been chasing the wrong tail the whole time?!
So now I have a conundrum, where I really love the larger negs and potential for larger prints, I also love "not-perfect images". Grain, maybe not perfectly sharp, tonal transitions not perfect. It looks beautiful in not being perfect. I love 35mm!
Ok, I got that off my chest. Now someone talk me into not selling my MF gear to get a Nikon FE with an epic set of lenses and spend the rest on a 8x10 wet plate setup.
That's all, thanks for listening.
Years ago, I felt 35mm wasn't giving me the crisp and smooth images that I thought I wanted. Oddly though, after a year or so of experimentation, I settled on Neopan 400 in 120 as my go to film, developed in PMK and printed with color heads on VC papers. Life was good. The images had a subtle amounts of grain, sharp edges, and overall the look I had created in my head of what I want my images to look like. Then, Neopan 400 died, so I switched to Acros 100 and Pyrocat. Combined with my Mamiya 7, the results were flawless--perfectly sharp, beautiful contrast, zero grain and easy to print.
....But then over the last couple of weeks I have been teaching my lady friend how to use film (converted her from a Nikon D80 to a Nikon FE and Canon AE-1), so I figured I'd shoot 35mm as well for shits and giggles; nothing serious. Except I found a serious problem: Acros 100 in 35mm form and Pyrocat re-created the look I have been searching for since the demise of Neopan 400 in 120. In fact, I went into the darkroom to print a picture of my buddy (attached) that I took with a $20 rangefinder. It looked great. I then tried to print it larger at 11x14--it looked even better!
Then it hit me: I've been fixing my mistakes with 35mm by using a larger format, but now that my technique is better, 35mm does exactly what I want. And the Nikon FE is a so much fun to use, my Mamiya hasn't been touched. Have I been chasing the wrong tail the whole time?!
So now I have a conundrum, where I really love the larger negs and potential for larger prints, I also love "not-perfect images". Grain, maybe not perfectly sharp, tonal transitions not perfect. It looks beautiful in not being perfect. I love 35mm!
Ok, I got that off my chest. Now someone talk me into not selling my MF gear to get a Nikon FE with an epic set of lenses and spend the rest on a 8x10 wet plate setup.
That's all, thanks for listening.