what is the last thing you developed or printed

Sirius Glass · Aug 23, 2015

RalphLambrecht said:
an attitude towards people who scan film and still call themselves traditional photographer

What can one say? Just consider the source.

Pioneer · Aug 23, 2015

I like the darkroom Ralph but I can't say I was ever very traditional at anything.

I just picked up 4 dozen glass plates for my 5x7. I am not sure there is a sharper negative than what you can get on glass.

But neither do I mind the results I get from scanning some of my film either.

I love working with large format but if Migrant Mother was shot with a Canon digital it would not bother me a whit.

NedL · Aug 23, 2015

A paper negative from my new 7x11 view camera. My new 100 year old camera that is.
I am going to enjoy using it and it was sheer pleasure to use a real film holder for a change.

Sorry Ralph, I scanned it. The negative was a bit overexposed and it would have been difficult to contact print. Not impossible, but difficult.
But then I don't call myself anything, so probably you won't mind

oh, and I processed it in LPD, but yanked it out after about a minute when I realized it was overexposed.

JPJackson · Aug 24, 2015

10, 5x7 sheets of FP4+ souped in Xtol 1+1 yesterday (exposed 8-22). Will proof them today on MG RC paper.

pdeeh · Aug 24, 2015

some delta 100 I rolled from bulk, shot at box and developed in rofinal 1:25 for 11mins at 18C. Because that's the temperature the water came out of the tap. and I just couldn't be arsed to use 1:50 because I wanted lunch and it would have taken 17mins at that dilution.
looks terribly overcooked. plus the last few frames are clearly multiple exposures. i think the tape wasn't sticking to the cassette spindle properly.
at the moment, I am feeling slapdash.

polyglot · Aug 26, 2015

Been recreating my archive of prints that were either bronzed (thankyou, Foma) or that I destroyed with Sistan trying to prevent bronzing (aargh). It's pretty quick when I actually get time in the darkroom, but finding that is hard.

removed account4 · Aug 26, 2015

RalphLambrecht said:
an attitude towards people who scan film and still call themselves traditional photographer

not sure what this has to do with this thread, it isnt' a digital versus analog bash thread.

i don't really care if people consider themselves traditional photographers, picture takers, professionals, retired professionals
putzes, camera operators, imaging enthusiasts, hybrid photographers, alternative process photographers, technologists, scientist photographers
iphone users, flickrs, throwbacks, the next diane arbus or ansel adams et al.
i'm not really interested in one's attitude towards output methods, plenty of people before the digital age had someone else print and process for them,
but instead i am interested in what one did with the film ( or paper, or glass or ? ) and if it was done with sun, or light and chemistry, great !

if the comment was directed towards me --- not really sure what to say ...
sure, i develop negatives and use a machine often times to get a image
but i also make cameras+lenses, hand coat glass plates, paper negatives,
hand make, bleach and color cyanotypes, lumen/retina prints  and
made my own emulsions from scratch/coated glass plates 29 years ago
( when there was no internet, local experts, kodak retirees to help )
 and currently i am attempting to recreated a ferrotype developer the holy grail ( or so i was told ) of photography ...  
and after probably 34 years of mostly hand processing, darkroom enlargements and contact prints ( for myself and others ) 
i do more scanning than darkroom enlarging ( especially with materials i can't enlarge, print or they degrade before an image can be extracted from them )  
and have made between 25-30 hand made books ( only sewing rack, board and cloth, no blurp, ibook &c except for 1 wedding album for a client )
i use traditional methods as well as modern ones .. ( and i don't talk about the modern methods here )
...  i don't uulesman, know how to use lab colors, jump through techno-hoops, do gymnastics or do much else but
invert and adjust contrast  ( as i would do in a darkroom ) ;
maybe add colors ( as i would have done with crayons ) ;
or merge color separation negatives ( what i would do if i used color chemistry )
and i am not sure what the big deal is.

real traditional photographers make daguerreotypes and retina prints ...
not many traditional photographers here on apug to begin with ...

i've plenty of gripes about a variety of things, but this really isn't the thread to post them

NEDL:

7x11 !
congratulations on your new camera !

polyglot:

great to read you're reprinting those prints ...

Rick A · Aug 26, 2015

This is a symphony of errors. I was setting up to shoot this at my local park, a couple drove in and started asking a bunch of questions, while starting a fire to have a cook out, smoke in my face. I decided I wanted to shoot the scene vertical, had to pull the camera from the tripod and loosen the QR plate to rotate the back, was answering more dumb questions and turned it the wrong way, didn't realize the holder loading gate pointing straight down until I was ready to shoot. Pull the camera and re-do. Start reframe and reset, re focus, etc. finally ready and shoot, open one stop and take a second shot for insurance. Pack up and leave, the whole while they were babbling at me(I bet that camera takes neat OLD pictures, huh. I have an Instamatic!) . Got home and load the film in my processing drum, mixed my PMK at wrong dilution(half strength-didn't catch that until I was 6.5 mins into development)Then realized I forgot to add part B(syringe still on counter loaded to mix --CRAP, stop the drum and figured what've I got to lose and added it to the drum, added 7 minutes to my timer(not nearly enough for half strength , but oh well). Finished developing, pulled the negatives out, WOW, one was a little thin, one was very printable--go figure.

the streaks are scanner artifacts

darkosaric · Aug 26, 2015

Test from my new toy camera (Lomo fisheye), printed on old emaks paper.

TheToadMen · Aug 26, 2015

Rick A said:
This is a symphony of errors. I was setting up to shoot this at my local park, a couple drove in and started asking a bunch of questions, while starting a fire to have a cook out, smoke in my face. I decided I wanted to shoot the scene vertical, had to pull the camera from the tripod and loosen the QR plate to rotate the back, was answering more dumb questions and turned it the wrong way, didn't realize the holder loading gate pointing straight down until I was ready to shoot. Pull the camera and re-do. Start reframe and reset, re focus, etc. finally ready and shoot, open one stop and take a second shot for insurance. Pack up and leave, the whole while they were babbling at me(I bet that camera takes neat OLD pictures, huh. I have an Instamatic!) . Got home and load the film in my processing drum, mixed my PMK at wrong dilution(half strength-didn't catch that until I was 6.5 mins into development)Then realized I forgot to add part B(syringe still on counter loaded to mix --CRAP, stop the drum and figured what've I got to lose and added it to the drum, added 7 minutes to my timer(not nearly enough for half strength , but oh well). Finished developing, pulled the negatives out, WOW, one was a little thin, one was very printable--go figure.

You should have brought the Instamatic as a backup ....
But still, a nice shot.

Sirius Glass · Aug 26, 2015

Rick A said:
This is a symphony of errors. I was setting up to shoot this at my local park, a couple drove in and started asking a bunch of questions, while starting a fire to have a cook out, smoke in my face. I decided I wanted to shoot the scene vertical, had to pull the camera from the tripod and loosen the QR plate to rotate the back, was answering more dumb questions and turned it the wrong way, didn't realize the holder loading gate pointing straight down until I was ready to shoot. Pull the camera and re-do. Start reframe and reset, re focus, etc. finally ready and shoot, open one stop and take a second shot for insurance. Pack up and leave, the whole while they were babbling at me(I bet that camera takes neat OLD pictures, huh. I have an Instamatic!) . Got home and load the film in my processing drum, mixed my PMK at wrong dilution(half strength-didn't catch that until I was 6.5 mins into development)Then realized I forgot to add part B(syringe still on counter loaded to mix --CRAP, stop the drum and figured what've I got to lose and added it to the drum, added 7 minutes to my timer(not nearly enough for half strength , but oh well). Finished developing, pulled the negatives out, WOW, one was a little thin, one was very printable--go figure.

the streaks are scanner artifacts

Unfortunately some days are like that.

jeffreythree · Aug 28, 2015

I managed some time to get my test roll of cheap, slightly expired TMAX 400 developed in Diafine out of my new Fujica GL690 that had a lens with messed up focus(front lens element was loose). I don't know where this film was from before it became mine, but it took an awful set to the spool and will barely go on a reel without twisting itself in knots. It is good(ie. cheap) for these kinds of camera test jobs, though.

Oscar Carlsson · Aug 30, 2015

I've discovered that selenium 1+20 is too weak to protect my highlights against bleach, which was my test for longevity. I've toned the prints for 10, 20 & 30 minutes in selenium. So I guess I'm back to sepia then. But now I have three extra split toned prints so I guess I'm happy with the results.

I also managed to print an older image I've wanted to print for some time.

removed account4 · Oct 15, 2015

been printing 4x5 velvia and provia and vericolor III that were processed in coffee and dektol
contact printing on rc paper with a 300W bulb in ... dektol and coffee..
some of the negatives don't like being printed, others LOVE it.

NedL · Oct 15, 2015

I've got some old paper negatives from my Kodak 3A, and just recently got a Kodak postcard-sized contact printing frame, so yesterday and today I am playing with making contact prints. So far just test strips and a couple test prints, but hopefully more than that soon. I want to re-start a project that I started a couple years ago and never got going on. I've been using my enlarger to provide the light, but a 300W bulb sounds like a good down to earth approach too....tempting....

There is something fundamental and enjoyable about making contact prints. I don't know exactly what it is, but it always makes me happy to do it.

removed account4 · Oct 15, 2015

sounds like fun ned !
but unfortunately you can't
do filtration with a 300W bulb

NedL · Oct 16, 2015

jnanian said:
sounds like fun ned !
but unfortunately you can't
do filtration with a 300W bulb

Before I had my enlarger I just used a bean can with a flashlight bulb in it... and a little cardboard holder underneath to put filters. That worked fine for making contact prints... it used to take about 2 minutes to make a contact print from a paper neg. 300W is probably overkill for what I'm doing anyway.

You know what would be kinda' fun and cool would be to use two simple flashlights... one with a green filter and one with blue. I'll bet that would work just fine. I always try to keep the light source up pretty high above the paper and a point source... I wonder how much difference that really makes.... I'll bet if you held the flashlights a few feet above the paper it would work just as well.

I'm actually off to make a few more right now... definitely fun... see ya!

jeffreythree · Oct 16, 2015

Lomo Orca 110 in Barry Thornton two bath developer, and first time using a home mixed developer. I need to make a mask to start printing these tiny negatives.

nosmok · Oct 17, 2015

Some 1953 Verichrome, in Caffenol C. Got a shot or two that's usable. In the same brew, did 2 rolls of 828 Verichrome Pan from the 70's, most all shots came out.

Rules of thumbs for very old, slowish (125 asa and under) film: 80's and newer, almost always good. 60's and 70's, worth a shot. 50's, almost never good, for fun only, maybe I'd chance some PanX. The slower the film, the older you can go. Just my limited but hard won experience.

Black Dog · Oct 17, 2015

nosmok said:
Some 1953 Verichrome, in Caffenol C. Got a shot or two that's usable. In the same brew, did 2 rolls of 828 Verichrome Pan from the 70's, most all shots came out.

Rules of thumbs for very old, slowish (125 asa and under) film: 80's and newer, almost always good. 60's and 70's, worth a shot. 50's, almost never good, for fun only, maybe I'd chance some PanX. The slower the film, the older you can go. Just my limited but hard won experience.

Thanks for that-mine's been similar. My 1988 Agfapan 400 turned out great!

TheToadMen · Oct 19, 2015

jeffreythree said:
Lomo Orca 110 in Barry Thornton two bath developer, and first time using a home mixed developer. I need to make a mask to start printing these tiny negatives.

How did you develop the film? With a tank? I have several tanks but not a reel for 110 film - and I can't seem to find one?

Black Dog · Oct 19, 2015

Are the Paterson reels not usable for 110 then ? IIRC they were.

jeffreythree · Oct 19, 2015

TheToadMen said:
How did you develop the film? With a tank? I have several tanks but not a reel for 110 film - and I can't seem to find one?

I found an old Yankee Clipper II tank marked for 16mm film at a resale shop for practically nothing since the reel was a bit messed up where it clips in the groove for the film size. They still make them, but were out of stock every where when I wanted one.

removed account4 · Oct 21, 2015

another 24 4x5 contact prints

NedL · Oct 21, 2015

jnanian said:
another 24 4x5 contact prints

You're faster than me! I made another one postcard-sized contact print.
It took 3 or 4 tries to get the contrast / burning just the way I wanted it....

Now I'm done with testing and happy and the next contact prints will be with new photos, still to be taken.

what is the last thing you developed or printed

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency