From what I've heard, she just drops of her film at the drugstore. I don't think she processed her own film.Hi everyone !
I've got a curiosity that has not found an answer on the web.
Which developer was used to process the films made by Vivian Maier ?
Many thanks.
many thanks !! Very kind ...There was an epic discussion on flickr (TO was John Maloof ''What do I do with this stuff (other than giving it to you)?'') in the Hardcore Street Photographer group.
Maloof reported : ... Yes, Plus-X and Tri-X. The B&W film itself is mostly from the early 1970's (some from the 1960's too). I started using Kodak D-76 but, I now use a small lab with one person working them ... (page 3 at the bottom)
https://www.flickr.com/groups/onthestreet/discuss/72157622552378986/
Are you talking about recently developed by the guy who bought the locker of undeveloped films, or when she was still actively photographing? I saw a photo of her bathroom/darkroom and she clearly also developed film herself. Also,I believe the shop is still around and staffed by people who knew her... they could answer your question. I believe the name of the shop is mentioned in the film about her...
my curiosity was about the developer used by Maloof
I'm loving Maloof so much, I don't trust a single word he says.There was an epic discussion on flickr (TO was John Maloof ''What do I do with this stuff (other than giving it to you)?'') in the Hardcore Street Photographer group.
Maloof reported : ... Yes, Plus-X and Tri-X. The B&W film itself is mostly from the early 1970's (some from the 1960's too). I started using Kodak D-76 but, I now use a small lab with one person working them ... (page 3 at the bottom)
https://www.flickr.com/groups/onthestreet/discuss/72157622552378986/
There was an epic discussion on flickr (TO was John Maloof ''What do I do with this stuff (other than giving it to you)?'') in the Hardcore Street Photographer group.
Maloof reported : ... Yes, Plus-X and Tri-X. The B&W film itself is mostly from the early 1970's (some from the 1960's too). I started using Kodak D-76 but, I now use a small lab with one person working them ... (page 3 at the bottom)
https://www.flickr.com/groups/onthestreet/discuss/72157622552378986/
and it is not known which chemistry the laboratory used ?? many thanks
In that time, D76 was the bible and the holy water.
I’m betting 85%, D76 and 15%, hc-110.
sorry ...
I don't ask about the developer used by Vivian Maier in the 60s, but the one recently used by the laboratory where Maloof brought undeveloped films.
I don't go into this that deep, but if what you say is true, Maloof will never ever show proof he's done anything (or what) with his "undeveloped" VM's negatives. What are the chances there were none then? I like conspiracy theories and Maloof just might be the character to fit this rhetoric? He surely makes no effort to invalidate it.in fact my question is less trivial than it seems ...
Everyone, absolutely everyone, agrees that films exposed but not developed for 40/50 years will return abundant veil ... And here the doubt (or curiosity) arises as to what Maloof or the lab used when in 2009 it developed the exposed rollers 30 / 40 years ago ... and yet the photos we see have no trace of it. Perhaps the most common images are those of the negatives developed at the time by the VM itself ??? And that, on the other hand, those heralded as developed by Maloof in 2009 are not printable ???
Or can a hyper professional scan recover the veil defect?
That's why it becomes important for me to know what development the Maloof lab used ... vice versa I always have a little voice that whispers in my ear ...
Sure, but if Maloof did develop (which I am beginning to doubt it happened at all) to an unprintable quality, then told the world they were all PSed, here goes the allure of Vivian Maier story as told by Maloof. The guy would have been cooked, baked, stoned and tweeterized.Don’t forget that editing programs such as photoshop clear out any fog by a simple click in auto-levels.
Many unsalvageable negatives in the darkroom come out beautiful after a digital process.
Unfortunately isn't the premise of this thread we won't ? Developing old negatives have been discussed and by people who know a lot more about it than most, especially Maloof. When I add Maloof's secrecy over the whole thing, I would not trust his input on this anyways, let alone try developing on his advice. If we got the info from some confirmed independent source, then maybe. But, as you said it yourself, your question isn't all that trivial and indeed you may be onto something, even if unintentionally.it might be useful to know which chemistry to use with expired films for 40 years and have printable results ...
Well I told you already: hc110it might be useful to know which chemistry to use with expired films for 40 years and have printable results ...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?