This tried to do everything to NOT get printed!

jcc · Oct 1, 2013

I started out with Porta 160, for an hour-long exposure. Fine and dandy. Then I got home, and accidentally developed it with BW chemistry and temperature with ISO 400 film (was shooting with 3 different films during the trip, but stored exposed sheets in one box, and got mixed up in the dark notches felt similar). Upon realizing my bumbling mistake, and letting out some expletives, I proceeded to hang the film to dry. The sheet slipped off the clothes pin and landed emulsion-side down on the gritty concrete more expletives were unleashed. Needless to say, the film had way too much density I couldn't even scan it! I went ahead and tried to print through it anyway. After 192 sec. at f/5.6, it finally made it to a 9"x6" print, and here it is:

Has anyone else made a similar fumble before?

NedL · Oct 1, 2013

It's unique! Sometimes these kinds of mistakes lead to something fun or new.

My story is not as interesting, but I just developed a roll of 135 FP4+ where most of the frames were blown out because the aperture blades on my lens were sticking. Last night on a whim I picked the most dense frame and tried to print it. A 5x7 print, it needed 50s green and 35s blue for a split grade print at f/2.8 -- and it probably could have used a little more high contrast blue exposure. A normal 5x7 print for my setup is around 20s green and 5s blue at f/8 ( my cold light is very blue. ) The result was grainy and not very nice, especially compared to yours, but it was a print. I was just amazed it was even possible to focus the enlarger. Some of the other frames will be out of focus from using hyperfocal and then not getting a small aperture, but I'll try to print a few more.

jcc · Oct 1, 2013

NedL said:
... The result was grainy and not very nice...

I have had the same as what you described with 135 film. That's why I didn't really want to enlarge this one as much.

polyglot · Oct 1, 2013

(there was a url link here which no longer exists) of mine might be useful to you; there's a link to a Kodak PDF wherein you can bleach and redevelop the film and get it back to colour without the insane density. I haven't tried it yet.

Sirius Glass · Oct 1, 2013

jcc said:
I started out with Porta 160, for an hour-long exposure. Fine and dandy. Then I got home, and accidentally developed it with BW chemistry and temperature with ISO 400 film (was shooting with 3 different films during the trip, but stored exposed sheets in one box, and got mixed up in the dark notches felt similar).

I get much better results when I use the C-41 process on Kodak Porta rather than Black & White chemistry. YMMV

ME Super · Oct 1, 2013

That looks like a good picture to me, despite all the goofs. Well composed and with pretty good contrast. I especially like the glow around the tallest skyscraper in the photo.

removed account4 · Oct 1, 2013

hi jcc

i have had similar problems but not the same.
many years ago i used to coat LARGE glass plates with
liquid light and coat the plate with gunk, then reapply liquid light
to various places and print more, you know, like a collage ..
then i would make a contact print of the glass plate .
one day, after recoating my best plate and having it sleep on the edge of my darkroom sink ...
it fell on the floor and shattered to a million pieces.
some were attached to eachother because of the emulsion, some because of the collodion or albumen, or rubber cement
or varnish or urethane or whatever else i painted the pane with ...
i picked a few pieces up, shook my head and said a few choice words to myself ( and outloud )
and then stuck a few shards into the head of my enlarger and began printing them ... it helped me turn the corner ...
i still have some pieces i take out once in a while they are hidden in an old 4x5 film box i have mixed in with my film
so i randomly find it ...

drastic problems lead to new things sometimes ..

i hope you have the same troubles again and next time STEP on the film when its on the concrete

nice photograph btw !
john

jcc · Oct 1, 2013

polyglot said:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists) of mine might be useful to you; there's a link to a Kodak PDF wherein you can bleach and redevelop the film and get it back to colour without the insane density. I haven't tried it yet.

Thanks for the link. The PDF is promising! I hope it also works for selenium-toned negatives (as thi. I might give it a shot on another sheet before I do it with this one.

jcc · Oct 1, 2013

Sirius Glass said:
I get much better results when I use the C-41 process on Kodak Porta rather than Black & White chemistry. YMMV

That would have been the easier route.

jcc · Oct 1, 2013

jnanian said:
hi jcc

i have had similar problems but not the same.
many years ago i used to coat LARGE glass plates with
liquid light and coat the plate with gunk, then reapply liquid light
to various places and print more, you know, like a collage ..
then i would make a contact print of the glass plate .
one day, after recoating my best plate and having it sleep on the edge of my darkroom sink ...
it fell on the floor and shattered to a million pieces.
some were attached to eachother because of the emulsion, some because of the collodion or albumen, or rubber cement
or varnish or urethane or whatever else i painted the pane with ...
i picked a few pieces up, shook my head and said a few choice words to myself ( and outloud )
and then stuck a few shards into the head of my enlarger and began printing them ... it helped me turn the corner ...
i still have some pieces i take out once in a while they are hidden in an old 4x5 film box i have mixed in with my film
so i randomly find it ...

drastic problems lead to new things sometimes ..

i hope you have the same troubles again and next time STEP on the film when its on the concrete

nice photograph btw !
john

You just gave me a brilliant idea!!!

jcc · Oct 1, 2013

ME Super said:
That looks like a good picture to me, despite all the goofs. Well composed and with pretty good contrast. I especially like the glow around the tallest skyscraper in the photo.

Thanks! It took a lot of trial and error, with mostly errors. The glow is probably due to the clouds that were passing around the top of the buildings.

This tried to do everything to NOT get printed!

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency