Post your architectural photos here

[Sirius Glass]

Well, I had my first big goof shooting film this year. I picked up a Mamiya C330 yesterday, and I ran a roll of Arista 400 through it. Since the C330 doesn't have a meter, I used a meter app on my phone which has shown to match what my R5 and my Mamiya 645 meter at, so it's pretty accurate. Shot the roll, and was sitting at home later and opened the light meter app again....and realized I had shot the whole roll with the app set to -2 EC, which I had set when messing around with it and testing the features of it.

Ugh. Now, I had shot the roll at 200 instead of 400 due to some recommendations here, but that still left me a full stop underexposed for all shots, plus any errors I made it metering anyway. To compensate, I had to push process it to 800, and I only have Rodinal right now, which isn't really known as the best for fast films, nor push processing, but it is what it is. I also think I overdeveloped it, though I followed the Master Dev list for Foma 400 at 800 in Rodinal. (10 minutes at 1+25). So, learned a few lessons. The shots came out, though the negatives were very dense, and of course grain is high since it's a cheap film that was push processed in a developer known to keep grain strong, but what can you do.

Here's a shot I liked, though it doesn't have enough depth of field. I didn't have a tripod with me and the light was getting low, so I was at f/8...probably needed f/16 or f/22 at least. Mamiya C330f, 80mm f/2.8 @ f/8, Arista.edu 400, pushed to 800:

Well what you did worked out well anyway. Great photograph.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Well, I had my first big goof shooting film this year. I picked up a Mamiya C330 yesterday, and I ran a roll of Arista 400 through it. Since the C330 doesn't have a meter, I used a meter app on my phone which has shown to match what my R5 and my Mamiya 645 meter at, so it's pretty accurate. Shot the roll, and was sitting at home later and opened the light meter app again....and realized I had shot the whole roll with the app set to -2 EC, which I had set when messing around with it and testing the features of it.

Ugh. Now, I had shot the roll at 200 instead of 400 due to some recommendations here, but that still left me a full stop underexposed for all shots, plus any errors I made it metering anyway. To compensate, I had to push process it to 800, and I only have Rodinal right now, which isn't really known as the best for fast films, nor push processing, but it is what it is. I also think I overdeveloped it, though I followed the Master Dev list for Foma 400 at 800 in Rodinal. (10 minutes at 1+25). So, learned a few lessons. The shots came out, though the negatives were very dense, and of course grain is high since it's a cheap film that was push processed in a developer known to keep grain strong, but what can you do.

Here's a shot I liked, though it doesn't have enough depth of field. I didn't have a tripod with me and the light was getting low, so I was at f/8...probably needed f/16 or f/22 at least. Mamiya C330f, 80mm f/2.8 @ f/8, Arista.edu 400, pushed to 800:

If I am not mistaking, Arista 400 is (rebranded) FOMAPAN 400 film, which is a good yet very traditional emulsion (nothing wrong with that). As Rodinal is one of the oldest developers still made (°Berlin 1891), I think it's a good match...
I always had some doubts on pushing FOMAPAN 400, but here I see it works rather well at 800 ASA. I think that I wasn't using the optimum developer (X-Tol).

Anyway, I like that picture a lot, not to mention the pinpoint grain!

But, allow me to say that I would have printed this image a tod darker so to let 'speak' the quarter tones and let 'sag' the three quarter tones, but ofcourse this is a very, very, personal interpretation...

PS: the C330 is a very good camera, one of the best designed TLR's, no mirror slam, interchangeable lenses, a bellows allowing some close up and heavy enough to allow rather slow speeds handheld.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basilica Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, Vézelay, Région Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, France.

Hasselblad 500CM + Planar 80mm full open aperture (handheld), on Tri-X @ 1000ASA processed in E-76 1+1, wet scanned on Epson 750.

 

[Jman13]

But, allow me to say that I would have printed this image a tod darker so to let 'speak' the quarter tones and let 'sag' the three quarter tones, but ofcourse this is a very, very, personal interpretation...

I'm not a huge fan of large grain, so perhaps that's why I feel a little let down on this. Grain is about 4x what I get on Tri-X at box speed...also the curl on Arista/fomapan is just insane...makes dealing with the negatives and scanning just a pain.

Anyway, I don't mind a darker interpretation, though I have lost the highlights here. Here's a darker go:

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I'm not a huge fan of large grain, so perhaps that's why I feel a little let down on this. Grain is about 4x what I get on Tri-X at box speed...also the curl on Arista/fomapan is just insane...makes dealing with the negatives and scanning just a pain.

Anyway, I don't mind a darker interpretation, though I have lost the highlights here. Here's a darker go:

I can see more deepness and présence in the image, more 'recitation'...
The bridge is more extant, heavy concrete and steel, and the traces of time.
And I don't mind grain, its the signature of the emulsion.

PS: What always stroke me is that American photographers are struggling with grain more than Europeans, and this is not a negative remark, it's just the difference of vision, I think...

 

[Jman13]

For me it's just 20 years of digital shooting. I don't mind some grain, but here it really hurts the detail as well. I don't mind grain from stuff like box speed Tri-X (on 120...it's a bit too much for me on 35mm)...but this much is less appealing to me. It's not awful or anything, just not my preference.

 

[GLS]

...but this much is less appealing to me. It's not awful or anything, just not my preference.

Have you tried T-Max 400? In terms of granularity it's about as good as it gets at that speed.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm not a huge fan of large grain, so perhaps that's why I feel a little let down on this. Grain is about 4x what I get on Tri-X at box speed...also the curl on Arista/fomapan is just insane...makes dealing with the negatives and scanning just a pain.

Anyway, I don't mind a darker interpretation, though I have lost the highlights here. Here's a darker go:

I like fine grain, but here the grain improves the print.

 

[Jman13]

Thanks, everyone. Here are two more from the same roll. The overdevelopment hurt the highlights here, but the contrast is nice.

Mamiya C330, 80mm, Arista.edu 400 @ 800, Rodinal 1+25

 

[Jman13]

Have you tried T-Max 400? In terms of granularity it's about as good as it gets at that speed.

I probably have at some point in the past (talking decades ago), but not in recent use. Only really started shooting film again in earnest a few months ago. I have a roll of Tmax 100 in my C330 right now, though, so I'd image that will be nearly grain free. Also have some Acros 100 in my M645. I don't mind a little grain, and Tri-X in 120 is fine for me...but will have to give Tmax 400 a try as well.

 

[Jman13]

If I am not mistaking, Arista 400 is (rebranded) FOMAPAN 400 film, which is a good yet very traditional emulsion (nothing wrong with that). As Rodinal is one of the oldest developers still made (°Berlin 1891), I think it's a good match...
I always had some doubts on pushing FOMAPAN 400, but here I see it works rather well at 800 ASA. I think that I wasn't using the optimum developer (X-Tol).

Anyway, I like that picture a lot, not to mention the pinpoint grain!

But, allow me to say that I would have printed this image a tod darker so to let 'speak' the quarter tones and let 'sag' the three quarter tones, but ofcourse this is a very, very, personal interpretation...

PS: the C330 is a very good camera, one of the best designed TLR's, no mirror slam, interchangeable lenses, a bellows allowing some close up and heavy enough to allow rather slow speeds handheld.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basilica Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, Vézelay, Région Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, France.

View attachment 304366

Hasselblad 500CM + Planar 80mm full open aperture (handheld), on Tri-X @ 1000ASA processed in E-76 1+1, wet scanned on Epson 750.

Btw. I really like this shot. Well done! What does 'wet scanned' mean?

 

[GLS]

Another view of the Church of St James. Hasselblad 501CM, Planar 3.5/100 CFi, orange filter, T-Max 400 (EI 800), N+1 dev in DD-X.

--- by atomstitcher, on Flickr

 

[GLS]

What does 'wet scanned' mean?

It means the image is mounted to the scanning device in a fluid medium, sandwiched between two surfaces. It eliminates Newton rings, and tends to improve contrast and make dust and scratches less noticeable.

 

[jonmon6691]

The Fremont bridge here in Portland taken on my Chamonix 45F2 with a Fujinon 210mm f/5.6 lens on Ektar 100. I waited like 5 minutes with the dark slide out for the wind to hit the flag just right. That's one thing I've found I like best about large format; I never feel the need to rush the exposure, I already spent several minutes setting up, choosing and exposure, getting focus with the loupe. At that point I can wait all day for some detail to be just right

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Abbaye Notre-Damme de Vauclair, Aisne, France

Hasselblad SWC + Y-G filter Tri-x 400 processed in Pyrocat-HD wet scanned on Epson 750.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Have you tried T-Max 400? In terms of granularity it's about as good as it gets at that speed.

I have tried T-Max 400, and some 100, the former pushed till 1600ASA in X-Tol.
Technically spoken, this film is nearly perfect, if not THE perfection, so perfect that it almost has no individuality compared to Tri-X and other 'classic' emulsions.
That's why I hardly use this film, with the exception when, at the time, Tri-X wasn't available over here and I needed a trustworthy film to push for in the Technorama...

Linhof Technorama 617 no filters, Kodak TMY 1600ASA in X-Tol 1+1, dry scanned (before I had the wet device) on Epson 750.

 

[GLS]

An overgrown portal of the Church of St James. Hasselblad 501CM, Distagon 4/50 CFi, T-Max 400 (EI 800), N+1 dev in DD-X.

Nature's Slow Embrace by atomstitcher, on Flickr

 

[Jman13]

Mamiya C330, 80mm f/2.8, TMax 100, developed in Rodinal 1+25:

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Abbaye Notre-Damme de Vauclair, Aisne, France

Hasselblad SWC + Y-G filter Tri-x 400 processed in Pyrocat-HD wet scanned on Epson 750.

 

[Jman13]

Another shot from yesterday with the C330, 80mm, TMax 100, Rodinal 1+25:

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Abbaye Notre-Damme de Vauclair, Aisne, France

Hasselblad SWC + Y-G filter Tri-x 400 processed in Pyrocat-HD wet scanned on Epson 750.

 

[Donald Qualls]

To compensate, I had to push process it to 800, and I only have Rodinal right now, which isn't really known as the best for fast films, nor push processing, but it is what it is.

FWIW, I've had excellent results with .EDU Ultra 400 (= Fomapan 400) in homebrew Rodinal (Parodinal), even pushed +1 stop. I use 1+50, double the Massive Dev Chart time, and agitate first 30 seconds then three inversions every 5th minute (dev time runs to 20 minutes at 20C, IIRC) -- not quite semi-stand. This gives the developer plenty of time to work in the shadows, but without overdeveloping the highlights -- that is, a strong compensating effect that, in my experience, is good for about 1/3 stop gain in real speed even with a developer that usually gives up 2/3 stop.

Just in case something similar happens again...

 

[Jman13]

FWIW, I've had excellent results with .EDU Ultra 400 (= Fomapan 400) in homebrew Rodinal (Parodinal), even pushed +1 stop. I use 1+50, double the Massive Dev Chart time, and agitate first 30 seconds then three inversions every 5th minute (dev time runs to 20 minutes at 20C, IIRC) -- not quite semi-stand. This gives the developer plenty of time to work in the shadows, but without overdeveloping the highlights -- that is, a strong compensating effect that, in my experience, is good for about 1/3 stop gain in real speed even with a developer that usually gives up 2/3 stop.

Just in case something similar happens again...

Thanks for the heads up! I'm fairly new to developing my own film, having done just 8 rolls of B&W and 2 rolls of C-41 thus far. The first 6 rolls of B&W were in Df96 Monobath, which came out nice, but you don't have a lot of control over what your image looks like, so I got some Rodinal and HC-110...I wanted chemistry that had good shelf life, since I don't shoot a TON of film. This oops was my first time using Rodinal...my second are the TMax shots on this page, which to my eye came out absolutely perfect...I couldn't ask for better tonality on those shots, which really mirror the nuance of the light that morning.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Abbaye Notre-Damme de Vauclair, Aisne, France

Hasselblad SWC + Y-G filter Tri-x 400 processed in Pyrocat-HD wet scanned on Epson 750.

 

[Moose22]

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Abbaye Notre-Damme de Vauclair, Aisne, France

Hasselblad SWC no filter, Tri-x 400 processed in Pyrocat-HD wet scanned on Epson 750.