Just one more reason I LOVE film.

[rwboyer]

You can abuse the crap out of it and still get a decent image.

Just your average darkroom horror story, I am sure that all of you have yours - I just had one of those "moments" after the film dried and I stuck it on the light table to take a look at my "beautiful" negatives and...

"What the F.....?????"

It got the old perfectly calibrated, well timed, and exquisitely carefully handled N-2 process too bad it was shot for N. Let's see underexposed by a good stop AND underdeveloped by an idiotic amount.

Hey it was dark in the darkroom and there was a bunch of film. I have only been doing this for a couple decades - give me a break, I'll get it perfect with no dumbass attacks in another decade or so.

Anyway - film to the rescue - used and abused I give you TMX that couldn't have been more screwed if you tried to on purpose.

These are just quicky scans and a giant levels boost, based on that I cannot wait to print these on real paper - I will need grade 4 or 5 - not what they could have been but hey try that kind of abuse with digital - yea right.

Just wanted to share a couple of negative where my process screwed the pooch but film rescued me. I have a whole roll of these - they are all pretty cool the scene was changing so fast - It was actually raining on me while I was shooting this.

Some dodging and burning in the darkroom and these might actually graduate to some big prints silver prints.

Thoughts?

RB

 

[markbarendt]

Look great, you should do that more often.

 

[Jeff Searust]

That's at least 2 more reasons to love film.

Sure hope that rain didn't mess up your sensor...

 

[Christopher Walrath]

I can see it. Yup. There's definitely something there.

 

[Denis R]

wow
nice
tmx is good stuff, very forgiving to "operator error"

 

[rwboyer]

That's at least 2 more reasons to love film.

Sure hope that rain didn't mess up your sensor...

Two more reasons?

RB

 

[rwboyer]

wow
nice
tmx is good stuff, very forgiving to "operator error"

TMX is not nearly forgiving as a lot of other films - compared to my "normal" negatives they look like absolute shit on the light table with not much separation at all - like one big block.

I don't screw things up this bad often but when I do I do it so perfectly that there is no accidental chance it will be right. I was really really surprised that there was tone differentiation in a lot of it when I jacked the contrast through the roof on the digital scan - you know that usually is not a good thing. Based on that I am pretty confident I can get the tones I want in a real silver print.

RB

 

[Vonder]

Let's also be clear, this is fine to do with traditional B&W film. Do that sort of stuff with color negative film or slide film and you're likely to end up with garbage. Try, like I did recently, shooting a roll of Fuji Reala at ASA 400. The results were not pretty.

 

[rwboyer]

Let's also be clear, this is fine to do with traditional B&W film. Do that sort of stuff with color negative film or slide film and you're likely to end up with garbage. Try, like I did recently, shooting a roll of Fuji Reala at ASA 400. The results were not pretty.

Wow - I am sorry I thought I posted this in the B&W film, Paper, Chemistry forum. Oh wait a second - I did! You are probably right though - we should all qualify that we are talking about BW film here in the BW film forum when discussing processing, shooting, printing, fixing, otherwise someone might get confused and think that it applies to color slide film.

;-)

RB

 

[Shaggysk8]

Maybe you have been doing it wrong for decades and you have just got it right they look good.

Paul

 

[ricksplace]

Your prints look great. Darkroom magic strikes again!

 

[qwfwq]

the second image is beautiful

 

[Vincent Brady]

I think that darkroom skills can cover up a variety of errors at the taking and developing stages. That's why I never bothered with the zone system, I just have to work harder in the darkroom.