Which film would Weston Use

[JBrunner]

Also bear in mind that those were most likely shot with an 8x10 camera, not medium format. Not that you can't approximate that look with 645, but you won't be able to match it exactly. Also, both the film he used and the paper he used for those shots is discontinued. There does seem to be a bit of sabbatier effect in the image, which in this case was done on the film, not to the print. Sabbatier on the print will be much more heavy-handed and harder to control.

He shot those images of the dancer Bertha Wardell on his 4x5 Graflex, IRRC. The prints are all smaller than 8x10. I have the impression preferred silver chloride and above all platinum papers (you could buy them ready made in those days). The dancer photos are listed as silver gelatin, but I can't find any information in my Weston stuff regarding films.

The copies of the images as I have them have a definite smooth grain, but clearly not solarized or reversed. This same grain structure is apparent in quite a few of his interior portraits and still life work, and informs the tone a great deal. I don't think it is anything peculiar to the materials of the era.

 

[George Collier]

I don't know if this makes sense, but since Ortho film was not red sensitive, maybe a green filter (or cyan, strictly speaking) might help hold back red from Pancro film to simulate the Ortho image recording.

 

[JBrunner]

I don't know if this makes sense, but since Ortho film was not red sensitive, maybe a green filter (or cyan, strictly speaking) might help hold back red from Pancro film to simulate the Ortho image recording.

It would to some degree depend both on which Pan film you are using and what ortho film you are trying to simulate. 44A is pretty good.

 

[Denis K]

I think that format/camera/lens has really little to do with it. To me it's all light and printing.

A group of use was interviewing a head shot photographer for the show business world and he told us, "If you really want to take what people think are excellent photographs, pay particular attention to what you place in front of the camera."

The advice is obvious but since then I have always thought how nice it would be to have a constant stream of pre-screened subjects walk in my door wanting their picture taken.

Denis K

 

[noah977]

That's very true.

I'm helping a buddy learn photography and we've been using using some random test subjects. Unfortunately, more than once, we've caught ourselves saying, "Great photo. Really nice lighting. Too bad the model isn't better looking"

I don't want to get too off topic, but your comment leads to another discussion we've been having. It seems like there is a weird power play between models and photographers:

"I'm a professional model, people pay me to take my picture, so you have to pay to photograph me"
"I'm a profession photographer, people pay me for my pictures, so you have to pay me to photograph you".

I've seen endless struggle back and forth over this.

 

[Trevor Crone]

Cole Weston in the book, 'Darkroom 2' published by Lustrum Press (1978). Said most of his father's negatives were made on Agfa Isopan film which he rated at 12 ASA and developed in ABC Pyro.

In his early years Edward Weston printed on platinum paper but latter switched to silver papers such as, Velox, Apex, Convira, Defender Velour Black and Haloid. To quote Cole, "Dad loved Haloid". He developed these in Amidol.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm helping a buddy learn photography and we've been using using some random test subjects. Unfortunately, more than once, we've caught ourselves saying, "Great photo. Really nice lighting. Too bad the model isn't better looking"

When we were getting married and selecting a photographer, my ex complained that the brides in a professional photographer's samples were not very good looking!!

Steve

 

[noah977]

Trevor. Great post.

The question is, which commercially available roll film would be closest to the Agfa Isopan. Maybe Plus-X 100 but pulled a few stops to compress the tonal range??

 

[J. Miller Adam]

I would suggest that you be sure to look at high-quality reproductions of Weston's images, not pictures on websites. The images you linked to look a lot darker & more contrasty than I remember any of Weston's images being. You're trying to extrapolate technical details from reproductions that distort the original. Weston's prints are in a class of their own, and if you ever have an opportunity to see them in real life you will be shocked – they have a subtle life and luminosity of their own that even the best photography books fail to capture. Many of his negatives, developed in pyro, tend to look thin to our eyes, which are not used to reading stain in a negative. The Center for Creative Photography at the University of Arizona, in Tucson, has all of Weston's negative archive, except for a small collection of the famous ones that the family kept. They (the CCP) would have an accurate record of the different film types, such as could be determined by notch codes – not all manufacturers identified their film back then.

 

[noah977]

Wow. Good point. I hate what a web-sized jpeg does to my photos, so can only imagine what they do to the greats like Weston.
That "subtle life and luminosity" is what I'm going for. Clearly easier said than done.

 

[Trevor Crone]

Noah977, I believe Agfa produced several Isopan films. Cole Weston thought that the Isopan film his father favoured was 25 ASA, which as I quoted EW rated at 12 ASA.

If you wish to experiment I would look towards a film like Adox CHS 25 developed in pyro.

As J. Miller Adam rightly said an EW original print have a subtle life and luminosity. A beautiful thing to behold.

 

[aluncrockford]

I suspect the closest you are going to get to the feel of Edward Westons work is as Trevor has suggested by using Adox film deved in Pyro ,I have been testing with this combination and the results are quite astonishing , the combination is giving me a quality of neg which certainly has the feel of classic black and white ,particuarly when contacted on Adox paper deved in neutol if you want to get hold of the film try silverprint who stock everything you will need

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have to echo the importance of seeing Weston's prints in person, not in any kind of reproduction. They are contact prints--3x4", 4x5" or 8x10"--so it's not even an issue of scale compared to reproductions in books or even on the web. While Weston had a great sense of form and composition, the tonal range and luminosity of the prints is what makes the work really special. I didn't "get" Weston until I saw some original prints.

 

[noah977]

I was fortunate enough to meet Ansel Adam's widow and tour his house many years ago. So, I can relate to what you are saying about seeing the original prints. There is something amazing about them.

I can only imagine that Weston's are the same.

 

[noah977]

I'll probably catch flak for this, but I don't have a darkroom setup right now. So anything I shoot is going to the commercial lab for development. (The horror!!)

So, I might have to stick with something a bit more mainstream for film.

-N

 

[Mike1234]

Really, it's primarily the lighting and development. Don't worry about it.

EDIT: As others said, just place the light nearly touching the lens and just above it and minimize or eliminate ambient light. I'm just guessing but it looks like Weston underexposed and overdeveloped the film to exagerate contrast between light and shadow. It's really that simple. Film spectral sensitivity runs a far third in this race.

Does your lab offer push processing?

 

[Tom Nutter]

I agree with the "Negative fill" to enhance the dark edges. Get some black foamcore and put it on either side of the model, then put the light, either something specular or a small softbox...photoflex makes a wonderful 12-inch model... in the center like others have explained. This should work if that effect is what you are looking for.

 

[billparrott]

I'll probably catch flak for this, but I don't have a darkroom setup right now. So anything I shoot is going to the commercial lab for development. (The horror!!)

So, I might have to stick with something a bit more mainstream for film.

-N

you likely won't get anywhere near this level of luminosity with lab processing.. not gonna happen ... Weston used a highly dilute form of ABC Pyro dilute 1:1:66 (i think) ... it was just totally different than the "average" processing that most labs do with B&W films... fwiw

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

According to Anchell's _Film Developing Cookbook_ (3rd ed.), Edward Weston's dilution for ABC Pyro was 3+1+1+30.

I usually use 1+1+1+7 or 1+1+1+12.

 

[billparrott]

thanks for that clarification... I couldn't remember where I had seen it but I knew it was a much higher dilution than what is typically used

 

[Rick A]

How about trying Rollei Ortho 25? Its available in 120 and the price appears reasonable. You can check it out at Digitaltruth.
Rick

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I'll probably catch flak for this, but I don't have a darkroom setup right now. So anything I shoot is going to the commercial lab for development. (The horror!!)

So, I might have to stick with something a bit more mainstream for film.

-N

You do NOT need a "darkroom" setup for processing film. All you need is a changing bag/tent where you can load the film into a developing tank of some kind. Everything else can be done in room light, in the bathroom sink. If you want that kind of look, you NEED to process your own film. Labs are pretty good at following directions when it comes to printing your images; they're not so good at following directions when it comes to developing film. Anything you want filmwise that doesn't fit their "standard process" will A: cost you extra, and B: until they know you well, likely result in you not getting exactly what you want. It's easy to show someone what you want in a print - just take a work print, mark the areas you want burned/dodged, and you have a roadmap for the printer to follow. With film developing, it's not so clear because they can't see what you want, and there is the possibility that a lab tech will think "they can't really mean THAT" and override your instructions, or just forget and give you standard development anyway. With a print, it's always possible to re-do it if they botch it. If they botch your film, that can't be re-done.

 

[noah977]

- You're saying he pushed the film? (I would have thought he pulled it one or two stops)

- Flying camera. You make a good point. I probably still have my old film developing canisters in storage. I guess I could do the kitchen sink method. Thanks!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

He wouldn't have thought of what he was doing as "pushing." He was known for giving a generous amount of exposure, based more on experience than a light meter, and to print in platinum as he did early in his career or to contact print on silver chloride papers as he did later, he would have needed a contrastier negative than would be needed today with enlarging papers, so he would have used an extended development time, but in fact, he developed by inspection, not by time and temperature. Some might describe that as "underexposing and overdeveloping," but I would say that he was exposing and developing appropriately for his print process.

You can still use a fairly similar process by shooting large format and contact printing on Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee's Lodima paper, but if you're not doing that, then developing and exposing for Weston's print process isn't going to get you the same result with your print process.

 

[kompressor]

Last night i got 100 sheets of Plus-x pan dated 1999. So i did an atemt on the Weston direct light from straight behind the camera. I did use Xtol 1:1 on the dev but i will test all kind of developers soon on this fine piece of film that im very sorry for its discontinued.