Modern Film with an Old Look?

There's been a lot of discussion of this issue on the large format photography forum, and there seems some agreement that the Camera Work type of look comes from the printing methods as much as anything else. Ortho films, pictorial lenses, contact prints from more primitive methods like bromoil, gum, or similar printing all contribute.

Many of the older print methods require a contrastier negative, as xray film delivers. I'm messing with simple soft focus lenses and xray film, myself, trying to replicate an early 1900s portrait/pictorial look. Examples are most of the things here, down to the fence photo: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton A friend suggested toning would add to the look, so I've been doing that, too.

The most recent one, the Spinner, seems most successful to me so far. Ultimately, I hope to be doing carbon printing. I'm looking for a really retro look, basically, without going full blast to ambrotypes, which seem like too much work.

mdarnton said:

There's been a lot of discussion of this issue on the large format photography forum, and there seems some agreement that the Camera Work type of look comes from the printing methods as much as anything else. Ortho films, pictorial lenses, contact prints from more primitive methods like bromoil, gum, or similar printing all contribute.

Many of the older print methods require a contrastier negative, as xray film delivers. I'm messing with simple soft focus lenses and xray film, myself, trying to replicate an early 1900s portrait/pictorial look. Examples are most of the things here, down to the fence photo: http://flickr.com/michaeldarnton A friend suggested toning would add to the look, so I've been doing that, too.

The most recent one, the Spinner, seems most successful to me so far. Ultimately, I hope to be doing carbon printing. I'm looking for a really retro look, basically, without going full blast to ambrotypes, which seem like too much work.

Click to expand...

I'd disagree that the methods you outline above are 'primitive' - they were popular for the reason that you could physically intervene with them - abrade, scratch, reticulate, texture - much more easily. Paper internegatives were not uncommon with further intervention on the silver gelatin. Most of the pictorialists had a love of expensive variable diffusion lenses & enlarging techniques etc.

xray film has always struck me as being rather like the document film obsession - except that instead of ultra fine grain, it's people desperate for ultimate cheapness - I'll never get why someone will spend $5k+ on a camera & lenses, then complain about the cost of film...

Hi, thanks for posting your comments. While x-ray was not in my original post, I wanted to provide you another perspective about that medium. I can only speak for myself. I have used x-ray film in my Ebony view camera, but not for cost reasons. I explored it for aesthetic reasons for a series of prints I was making. I was using the wafer thin litho ortho film and needed another ortho option that had a substantial base to it and had the option for enlargements in addition to contact printing. It turns out that x-ray film gave me what I was looking for in my project irregardless of the cost. I did indeed like the lower cost option that allowed me to play and explore options that I likely would not have done with Tri-X or T-max. I also liked the ability to develop by inspection in trays and snatch the negative at the point I wanted (under red safelight). I used the two-sided Fuji HR-T and the single sided Kodak BR/A Ektascan films with very good success. All in all I really liked the look that I was able to achieve with the film and would use it again when needed. Thanks again.

Lachlan Young said:

I'd disagree that the methods you outline above are 'primitive' - they were popular for the reason that you could physically intervene with them - abrade, scratch, reticulate, texture - much more easily. Paper internegatives were not uncommon with further intervention on the silver gelatin. Most of the pictorialists had a love of expensive variable diffusion lenses & enlarging techniques etc.

xray film has always struck me as being rather like the document film obsession - except that instead of ultra fine grain, it's people desperate for ultimate cheapness - I'll never get why someone will spend $5k+ on a camera & lenses, then complain about the cost of film...

Click to expand...