That pre-war, 1930s look.

MCTuomey · Dec 3, 2006

Uncle Bill said:
Go with the Fortepan 400 expose at 320 and process in Rodinal 1:50 for 14 minutes. Especially this time of year you will get some nice moody shots.

Bill

PS I shot both photos below with a Leica M3 with a 50 f2 Collapsable Summicron.

OT: Very nice look, Bill.

nworth · Dec 3, 2006

Ole said:
There are none of the 1930's films left in the market today, but you could try either ADOX /EFKE KB25 or some kind of ortho film. Develop in Rodinal for maximum grain...

This was one of the first modern films. It may work, but the look will probably be more 50s or 60s. The EFKE 100 speed film or 200 speed may be better here. These are still basicly old style films. Development in straight (not diluted) D-76 may help, as will development to a slightly higher gamma.

fhovie · Dec 3, 2006

My negatives from relatives from the 30s are very dense -I think everything was overcooked due to uneven exposure and trying to get the weak ones printable. Only use 3 element uncoated - I have a Zeiss Iconta with a lens like that - lots of flare and only sharp in the middle. Rondinol and overdevelop - Nothing you can do about the paper. Even with ferrotype plates and an antique bottle of plate polish - modern emulsions are not soft enough to take the shine and they usually stick too. Maybe albimum or kalitype would do the best. I don't think 35mm will give the look you want - I think you need to use a fast grainy film at a high shutter speed and an open aperature to let the lens do what those lenses did - pinhole??

Harry Lime · Dec 4, 2006

ADOX (EFKE) 25 and 50
Your Elmar lens
D23 or Rodinal (D23 is a low contrast solvent developer)
;-)

Cheers

gainer · Dec 4, 2006

What we call the "Sunny 16" rule was the "Sunny 11" rule then. Not as many people owned exposure meters as do now. I started doing my own development when I was about 12, which was 1939. I had my first exposure meter in about 1952. The box camera was popular. My first one was a Brownie Bullseye, using 127 film. I'm not sure that was its name. It was all bakelite and the lens mount screwed in when not in use so you could carry it in a pocket.
I have over 100 5x7 glass plate negatives that my grandfather took and developed before 1905. I know, because he died in that year. They are nothing much like the look you appear to be trying to get. I never knew him. Not even my father knew him as he was born in 1903. I'll try to share some with the group if I can figure out how.

braxus · Dec 4, 2006

So use Efke 100 or an ortho film, old lens/ camera, slow exposures, over develope and overexpose, and use a low contrast paper. I might have to try this next time. I wonder if using a Holga might achieve some of this look due to its plastic lens and no meter. I also have a 6x9 folder Balda I could try this on.

Since Im not experienced with B&W printing techniques, what is Ferrotyping?

MattKing · Dec 4, 2006

braxus said:
So use Efke 100 or an ortho film, old lens/ camera, slow exposures, over develope and overexpose, and use a low contrast paper. I might have to try this next time. I wonder if using a Holga might achieve some of this look due to its plastic lens and no meter. I also have a 6x9 folder Balda I could try this on.

Since Im not experienced with B&W printing techniques, what is Ferrotyping?

braxus:

It's been a very long time......

Ferrotyping is a process where you dry a glossy, fibre based print against a smooth metal surface, with heat.

There is no more effective way to achive a truly glossy surface, than with the ferrotyping process. It has the greatest potential to reveal a very wide range of brightness vs black - i.e. highlights to dmax.

It is very difficult to do (unless you put up with minor imperfections).

I understand that it is a bit of a lost art.

Matt

Gerald Koch · Dec 4, 2006

If you wish to produce the effect of an orthochromatic filter what you want to use is an anti-red (cyan) filter and not a blue filter. Orthochromatic films were sensitive to both blue and green light. You might try one of the color correcting filters Wratten 82A thru 82C or a CC20C or higher value.

Photo Engineer · Dec 4, 2006

Gerald; I agree, but a thought just entered my mind when reading your post.

There were enough non-ortho, blue sensitive only films back then to warrent that type of test as well.

Just a thought.

PE

Gerald Koch · Dec 4, 2006

The difference between orthochromatic and only blue sensitive films was so dramatic, even more dramatic than between ortho- and panchromatic films, that I wonder how much of the blue sensitive stuff was actually still being used. It would be interesting to know what the relative sales of the two classes of film were.

jimgalli · Dec 4, 2006

Just Listed in the Classifieds

I've just listed a sweet little antique 90mm lens that is about 95 years old and would go a LONG way towards the "antique look" you desire.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Jim Noel · Dec 4, 2006

My first job related to photography was in the darkroom of a moderate sized camera store in 1940.

We used, as did many others, total development of film. In other words, the film was developed until it would develop no more. This produced very dense highlights, and adequate density in shadows. The same process was used for all film regardless of maker or speed. They were all developed together. Of course, the norm for that time was to contact print everything. Enlargements were a special order, even for 35 mm. until the special 35 mm automatice enlarger was installed.

Our method was to spend the last hour each day hanging all of the roll film on a large rack and place a 2 oz lead weight on the bottom. This rack was then lowered into the developing tank which was quite large and about 6 feet deep. The film was left so suspended overnight. The next morning the film was moved through the remainder of the processing, dried and printed.

The developer of choice was D-23. I worked in this situation for more than a year and the developer was never changed. The advantage of the system was the silver present in this used developer replated the highlights and brought them up to a density which was appropriate for contact printing.

When I run into extremely flat scenes today, such as Stovepipe Wells Dunes in Death Valley in January when it is not unusual to have 2-3 stop clouds, I still use this method, although I cut the time to about 3 hours. I keep used D-23 for this special purpose.

This method, coupled with a lens from the same era and slow film should produce a similar look.

Photo Engineer · Dec 4, 2006

Gerald Koch said:
The difference between orthochromatic and only blue sensitive films was so dramatic, even more dramatic than between ortho- and panchromatic films, that I wonder how much of the blue sensitive stuff was actually still being used. It would be interesting to know what the relative sales of the two classes of film were.

Gerald, I agree again.

Interestingly, in some of my old books, Ortho films are distinguished by special labels, but some have no designation in the ads or listings implying only blue sensitivity (?). Pan was a very expensive rarity.

This is in books from the 40s or earlier.

PE

Woolliscroft · Dec 5, 2006

Thanks for all the advice. For all those nagging me to try an old Medium format folder rather than the Leica IIIa, I seem to have become the proud owner of something called an Ensign Selfix 20. It's a 6 x 9 folding camera with a 100mm f4.5 lens. It seems to work; the lens is clear and it seems to be light tight, so I'll see what it can do.

This is all very wierd for me. I have spent a photographic career looking for resolution above all. No lens and film could be too sharp and yet suddenly I find myself chasing what a week ago I would have seen as junk. It's a funny old world.

David.

Paul Howell · Dec 5, 2006

I know of at least one commerical photog who make a living recreating the old time look ad compains and the like.

ineffablething · Dec 5, 2006

Ferrotyping isn't that hard. All you need is one of those chrome ferrotyping plates and some Pakosol. You can still get it from Freestyle. The plates are on Ebay occasionally. Before someone told me I was doing it wrong, I used to just throw my wet prints on a very clean mirror and wait for them to pop off. I've also ferrotyped POP prints by throwing them on the ferrotype plate and putting them in the sun without Pakosol. Oh, how shiny they are!

W.

ineffablething · Dec 5, 2006

Oh, and shooting ortho film will give you that "look" you might have seen in pix from the 1930's. Just don't use it when photographing a woman, they will hate it!

W.

Photo Engineer · Dec 5, 2006

Ferrotyping in the 30s was done with a special type of plate and the use of a modern plate will give away the fake. Another fact I remembered.

PE

ineffablething · Dec 5, 2006

I have a couple of the really old plates and they are simply highly polished chrome plates. When used with Pakosol, they impart a super high gloss to the print. I'm curious how the type of gloss would "give away the fake." The plates I have are from different era's, but they give the exact same high gloss finish.

W.

MattCarey · Dec 5, 2006

Does the OP really need to make prints which could fool an expert or images of the same quality. I.e. does he need to ferrotype or does he need to have a style and contrast to a 1930's print?

While the ferrotyping sounds like an interesting excercise, it seems to me to be overkill.

Matt

ineffablething · Dec 5, 2006

MattCarey said:
Does the OP really need to make prints which could fool an expert or images of the same quality. I.e. does he need to ferrotype or does he need to have a style and contrast to a 1930's print?

While the ferrotyping sounds like an interesting excercise, it seems to me to be overkill.

Matt

I totally agree with you. I was just responding to a statement above about the difficulty of ferrotyping. It's a fun thing to try, but definitely overkill.

Photo Engineer · Dec 5, 2006

I agree that this would be overkill, but earlier in the thread someone asked what would distinguish a period print from a fake. I was responding to that again.

In response to the chrome ferrotype plate, the 30s plates and into the 50s were not chrome plated, the ones in the 40s and 50s were 'japanned' or something like that and earlier they were a pressed asphaultum. These left distinct charateristic surfaces on prints.

I believe I have a 'japanned' plate here somewhere but it is peeling.

PE

ineffablething · Dec 5, 2006

That's interesting. The only kind I've ever seen are the ones that look like chrome.

W.

Photo Engineer said:
I agree that this would be overkill, but earlier in the thread someone asked what would distinguish a period print from a fake. I was responding to that again.

In response to the chrome ferrotype plate, the 30s plates and into the 50s were not chrome plated, the ones in the 40s and 50s were 'japanned' or something like that and earlier they were a pressed asphaultum. These left distinct charateristic surfaces on prints.

I believe I have a 'japanned' plate here somewhere but it is peeling.

PE

Photo Engineer · Dec 5, 2006

The old ones look like jet black mirrors.

PE

PHOTOTONE · Dec 5, 2006

I don't think ferrotyping is going to be a "telling" characteristic of trying to get a vintage look, as I have tons of "studio" type images from the early part of the 20th century, and they are just as often matte finish, as they are glossy. Exhibition prints were not particularly produced with glossy finish, however mass produced photos for pubilicity release purposes were. Most of the older "art" processes such as bromoil, etc., resulted in a matte finish. Of course, in the 19th century you had albumen prints which could exhibit a gloss.

That pre-war, 1930s look.

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency