Monday, February 10, 2014

Film Scanning

Scanning 120 film

Edward Giarusso , Feb 08, 2014; 07:07 p.m.
Years ago I scanned many of my slides to Kodak CD. What a wonderful process. This past week I sent out 40 frames of 120 (30 landscape slides/10 people negatives) I shot years ago and they all suck. The lab did enhanced scanning and the quality for resolution is just OK but they are all flat. The highlights are all blown out to be almost a gray sky for the slides. Researching scanning topics on this site does not address my concerns. Some of the better are 5/6 years old. So my question is where do I go from here. I want to shoot landscapes on my Rollei film camera and scan the good frames. Should I pop the money for a Coolscan or is there a lab that can help me out. Very much appreciate your kind response.

Responses

Karim Ghantous , Feb 08, 2014; 10:09 p.m.
Edward, perhaps you don't need a Coolscan. There are two very good options at this time. One is the Plustek OpticFilm 120:
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/PlustekOpticFilm120.html [Edit: after fully reading the review, I cannot recommend this scanner.]
Another option would be a good flatbed scanner such as the Epson V750 Pro:
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/EpsonPerfectionV750Pro.html
Read this forum post on the V700 for an interesting perspective:
http://photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/00Zdeb
Unfortunately I have not used any of these scanners. Not yet, anyway. :-)
David Henderson , Feb 08, 2014; 10:48 p.m.
Couple of points for the moment.
First, in order to give good advice on what sort of scanning/scanner might be required for your purpose depends on knowing what your purpose is for the scans. For example if you're intending to produce large prints to hang on a wall then you need a different sort of scan than if you're just planning to display your images on a screen-based application such as a website.
Second it is quite usual for scans- even good ones-to require some work in an image editor before they are ready for their intended usage. Some sources work harder than others to match the colour and contrast of the original, but as long as the data is all there its generally not such a big deal if the colours are a little flat. But it is a big deal if they have lost significant data that was in in your originals as you won't be able to put it back. I'd consider it unusual for scans to be both flat and with blown highlights as you infer.
Third there are certainly scanning services that can produce a good scan for whatever purposes you envisage, Whether you should buy a scanner or not is IMO more a function of how many you want to scan rather than being necessary to produce respectable quality.
Alan Klein , Feb 08, 2014; 11:38 p.m.
Edward: I shoot 120 color film and scan at home with an Epson V600 flat bed scanner. The Epson V750 mentioned above or Epson V700 is even better). Most scans come out somewhat flat and do require adjustments in post processing. I'd say my scanner is faily decent for internet posts and prints under 20", maybe less. http://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/sets/72157625476289859/
I haven't seen my scanner blow the highlights of film if I scan "flat" with no adjustments during the scan where the highlights were not blown on the film. However, I have blown highlights when using the scanner to auto adjust the light levels during the scan. Maybe that's what this particular lab did.
Why don't you post a couple of the photos you had scanned so we can see what they look like.
Leszek Vogt , Feb 09, 2014; 12:56 a.m.
If you're looking for (6x6) "good enough" then V750/700 will deliver. Many of us were disappointed with the Plustek 120/35...to be polite. It was hyped all along...and unable to deliver. Many of us have sizable archives and some would pay even $500 more (I know I would) for better DR and be able to get a crisp scan....in a timely manner.
Essentially, and unless you go to drum quality, the Minolta or Nikon scanners are no longer supported....so any sort of service will be uber expensive or nonexistent.
Frankly, you can do a digi copy with P&S or DSLR for web use or you can have it done by more reliable lab....and get high quality scans done when you wish to enlarge your image/es.
Les
neil poulsen , Feb 09, 2014; 12:58 a.m.
Here are the last couple of paragraphs from the above linked review. Check the last sentence:
"The Plustek OpticFilm 120 does not have many competitors on the film scanner market. The extremely fast film scanners Nikon Super Coolscan 9000ED or Hasselblad Flextight X1/X5 play in a different league both in terms of price and in terms of quality. The Reflecta MF5000 is cheapter and much faster than the Plustek OpticFilm 120 and delivers a similar image quality, however, in a lower resolution. Flatbed scaner like the Epson Perfection V750Pro don't achieve the image quality of the Plustek.
"Since we and lots of our customers had many problems with the Plustek OpticFilm 120, we have taken that scanner out of our assortment."
Anthony Oresteen , Feb 09, 2014; 11:04 a.m.
Humm. Here's a review of the Plustek Opticfilm 120 scanner that gives it high marks:
(link)
E. Short , Feb 09, 2014; 05:57 p.m.
Use a different lab.

Sunday, February 9, 2014

Print On Demand Photo Books

Up your game as a photographer!

By Clive G — You are probably sick and tired of me extolling, ad nauseam, the virtues of film photography. You are no doubt fed up to the hind teeth hearing about how digital photographs are so very vulnerable to oblivion. And you are probably fit to be tied when you see me rabbiting on about how we must avail ourselves of photo printers and good quality photographic paper and print our best shots as insurance against our digital storage devices getting corrupted, self-destructing, or becoming obsolete. And you no doubt feel an almost overpowering urge to strangle me with my own camera strap when I say that if you do not make an effort to look after your best photographs and preserve them for posterity, then you are robbing your descendents of their right to a family past. No problem, you can thank me later!
“Enough already! We get the message,” you are probably yelling at this page. “How about giving us a few solutions for a change instead of just going on and on about the legions of problems associated with digital photography?” OK, here’s one. The week before last, I joined a couple of friends for dinner at a little Thai restaurant in Qurum. There was a Thai soap opera showing on the television, there was a gaudy fountain in one corner gurgling incessantly, and there were plastic covers on the tables. In short, the place was so unpretentious and unassuming that I could easily imagine myself back in my favourite little family-run eatery in a side street off the Surawong Road in Bangkok. If the food is half as good, I thought, then I’ll be a happy man.
1391759815028383600My friends, a married couple from Australia, are both very interested in photography, though never having been through the mangle of an undergraduate Photography course as I have, they are much less hung up on technical issues than I am. The fairer half of the couple is the more prolific photographer, as she makes a point of having a high-quality compact digital camera in her handbag at all times and of using it on a regular basis. While we waited for our papaya salad, spring rolls and Tom Yum soup to arrive, she produced a ‘print-on-demand’ photo book they had made together as a Christmas gift for their family and friends. The book contained dozens of excellent photographs, documenting their travels around Oman and their holidays to such photogenic locations as Ethiopia and Italy. As I leafed through the pages, I couldn’t help thinking how wonderful it must feel to be in such a loving relationship that you are constantly impelled to record your life together. Well, Australians are famous for knowing how to enjoy themselves, aren’t they?
Some of you may be wondering what the heck a ‘print-on-demand’ photo book is. Well, simply stated, it is a way to produce a professional-looking book of your photographs at a very reasonable cost. The beauty of it is that rather than having to pay for a print run of, say, 1,000 books, which would cost the earth and which you will never be able to get rid of in a thousand months of Sundays, you can print whatever quantity you like, from just one upwards. If you Google ‘print on demand photo books’ you will find quite a few companies that can turn your collection of digital photographs into hard or soft cover books. All you need is a computer and a bit of time to edit your images and drop them into the easy-to-use templates you can download for free from the website of whichever company you choose.
Last week I mentioned one such book I made of my late grandmother’s old negatives. I have also made one of the best photographs I took when I went to India with my little boy. And I’ve made some others relating to photographic projects I’ve worked on here in Oman, including one I made last summer on the beautiful old village of Al-Qaryatain in the Wilayat of Izki, in which the two photographs accompanying this article appear. Print-on-demand books are relatively inexpensive, they bolster your pride in your photography, they are immense fun to do and they will make you want to up your game as a photographic practitioner.
Most importantly of all, they put in place a safety net for your otherwise vulnerable digital photographs. (“Oh, no! There he goes again!”) I can easily imagine that in twenty, fifty or even a hundred years from now, future generations of my Australian friends’ extended families will be able to look at those photographs taken in Oman, Ethiopia and Italy in the first decades of the 21st century and marvel at what a beautiful couple their ancestors were. I offer one word of warning, though. Making such books is highly addictive!
And by the way, the food was absolutely delicious.

Friday, February 7, 2014

Paul Sweeney's Portfolio

camera club badge

 

Guardian Camera Club: Paul Sweeney's portfolio

Through Tower Bridge
Through Tower Bridge. Photograph: Paul Sweeney/Flickr
These images were made with lovely little 1970’s rangefinder film cameras - the Olympus 35 RC, and the Canonet Q17 GIII. The natural perspective of their lenses has given these photos a pleasantly ‘easy’ feel, combined with that forgiving film tonality. It’s made for a very interesting set. What with the film grain, the tonality and a bit of flare, this photo has a necessarily 1970’s feel; it’s lovely.
Reaching Out
Reaching Out. Photograph: Paul Sweeney/Flickr
This has depth and tone, the natural perspective of the lens making a very ‘ordinary’ looking image (and that’s not a criticism!). Photography used to be this simple, if you ignore much of the excesses of 'post production' it still can.
Downtown
Downtown. Photograph: Paul Sweeney/Flickr
The field of view of the 40mm lens on the Canonet encompasses these buildings perfectly, only the sign on the left hand side grates a little. However, it’s certainly a lucid image.
Platform
Platform. Photograph: Paul Sweeney/Flickr
This photo has captured perfectly that characteristic heavy, oppressive light, you can almost feel the next train coming. The solitary figure counterpoints the heavy atmosphere, it’s excellent.
Milk Crates
Milk Crates. Photograph: Paul Sweeney/Flickr
This is the only image in this set that I don’t get on with, maybe it’s because photographing a homeless person asleep is a bit sneaky! Next time, you could wake him up.
Waiting for the
Waiting for the "L". Photograph: Paul Sweeney/Flickr
The strong sunlight, deep shadows and flare all combine to make a very cool and confident image. All it needs is a little more foreground, so as not to crop that central figures shadow.

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Film buff on a roll with new exhibition - by Rebecca Smith-Dawkins

  • undefined
    Keeping it reel: A selection of Martin's photographs.
  • Nothing negative about film: Photographer Martin Leighton.
FORGET the digital revolution – a photographer who is holding one of his first exhibitions has vowed he will continue to use his 20-year-old camera "until the last roll of film is made".


Martin Leighton, a self-taught photographer from Beeston, has been snapping British landscapes for ten years and is set to show off his pictures at Hucknall Library.
But Mr Leighton's work – which includes photographs of Ratcliffe-on-soar, Sawley Marina and Moorgreen – has not been shot using a modern digital equipment.
Instead Mr Leighton prefers to use his medium format Pentax 67II camera.
And as the camera uses film, Mr Leighton is unable to see what he has shot until the photographs have been developed.
Mr Leighton said: "It's always a long waiting game but when you get the pictures back and they are stunning it's like Christmas has come. Everyone is shooting with a digital camera these days but mine is completely manual.
"It is a lot more basic than a digital camera but I like to be individual."
The 29-year-old, who has a part-time driving job and a gardening role in the summer months, said he would love to make a living out of running photography workshops.
His exhibition coincides with his guide to shooting winter landscapes in Amateur Photographer magazine's February edition.
It will take place from Friday, February 7, until Friday, March 7. On the opening day people can meet Mr Leighton at noon. All images on display will be for sale.
Sharon Wells, manager at Hucknall Library, said: "I am looking forward to seeing the exhibition as Martin has an eye for atmospheric landscape and the colours are beautiful."

Read more: http://www.nottinghampost.com/Film-buff-roll-new-exhibition/story-20561793-detail/story.html#ixzz2sXfgnssB

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Winners!


South West winners receive a chance to enhance their creativity

TWO winners have been announced for the inaugural Emergence scholarship program as part of the Emergence Creative Festival.

Sarah Taylor and Emma Jane Kim are the recipients which are funded by the City of Busselton and Shire of Augusta Margaret River.
The scholarships enable the winners to participate in the full festival program which is set to be held in the Margaret River Region from February 19 to 21.
The program includes workshops in communication, film, photography, digital space, music, innovation design and technology.
Capes Region Organisation of Councils chair Mike Smart said there was a high calibre of applications to go through.
“It was difficult to determine winners when there are clearly so many deserving recipients however judges appreciated Emma Jane Kim’s application as it demonstrates past interest in arts and included a novel proposal for a new local tee-shirt label,” he said.
“Sarah Taylor’s application demonstrated emerging talent and passion for photography that was a little bit different to the norm.”
Locals who were not successful in their scholarship application are encouraged to apply for the Regional Discounted ticket.



Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Best of January Photography


PHOTO GALLERY: The Desert Sun’s best photography in January
The story behind four of the month’s best photos:
TDS busted hydrant
New Year’s Day is normally a slow news day. Take a photo of the New Year’s baby and call it a day. This geyser could be seen from the balcony of the Desert Sun a few miles away. I initially wanted to cross the street and through water to shoot from the other side. A Edison worker warned me that the water maybe electrified. So I stay where I was and got this shot that’s back lit. I think it turned out well. It’s dramatic and the street sign gives the exact location of the incident.
A worker with the Desert Water Agency tries to shut off the water to a busted fire-hydrant on the corner of Via Olivera and Indian Canyon in Palm Springs on Wednesday, January 1, 2014.
— Richard Lui

TDS Gala afterparty
Actress Lupita Nyong’o winner of the Breakthrough Performance Award takes photos and is photographed at the Palm Springs International Film Festival Gala after party at the Parker Palm Springs on Saturday, January 4, 2013.
Lupita was on the other side of the room and I was trying to figure out a way to make her stand out from the crowd. When I saw someone’s iPhone flash light her I grabbed this shot.
— Richard Lui

BestPicJan18536
This photo of Chelsea Clinton was my favorite for January.  It was nice for her to break away from her handlers to meet with the local children for an unscripted moment in old town Coachella.  The kids were happy to meet her and she seemed genuinely interested in them as well.
— Jay Calderon

BestPicJan18525
My favorite image of this group is that of U2’s Bono mugging for a “selfie” with a fan during the Palm Springs International Film Fest Red Carpet arrivals. He didn’t hesitate in the least to get right with the fans, and in fact he and The Edge kept trying to get off the red carpet and back to the fans lined up across the street. He gave that particular fan a once in a lifetime memory.
— Michael Snyder

Monday, February 3, 2014

Washington Camera Club marks 75 years



Members of Washington Camera Club were skeptical about digital photography when it was new to most people about 20 years ago.

Some of them held on to the belief for about a decade that black-and-white film captures the best images.

And then digital technology kept improving to the point that, today, all of the club’s members use digital cameras to capture images, said club president Ray Racunas of Washington, a retired teacher.

“Most of our prints are made from digital,” Racunas said as the club prepares to celebrate its 75th birthday and he reflects on how it has adapted to the many photography industry advances that have taken place during its existence.

The club formed in 1939 “for the purpose of advancing the knowledge and enjoyment of the art of photography for its members,” the club’s charter states.

Photographers in 1940 were using complicated, labor-intensive equipment that required them to manually set a camera’s aperture and shutter and film speed. Every shot counted.

The innovation of digital photography was as revolutionary as the use of film was to the tintype and wet and dry emulsion processes in the 19th century, club members agreed.

“The big advantage now is you see your image on the back of the camera,” Racunas said. “You used to have to wait until you got back to the darkroom to see it under an enlarger.”

Photographers who still use darkrooms today have to follow stricter regulations for the disposal of their chemicals as compared to 30 years ago, when they simply flushed them down sink drains, said club member Dan Halulko of Washington. “I donated my darkroom to Trinity High School,” Halulko said, adding that a few professional photographers in the club still use darkrooms. Other members occasionally return to using film for certain projects, he said.

The fact that everyone with a cellphone has become a photographer has resulted in stricter rules for photo contests.

“I belong to the Photographic Society of America,” Halulko said. “Today the bar is raised so high. You have to have a perfect image to win an award for a serious competitor.”

For example, there cannot be anything manmade in a photograph submitted in the nature category of such contests. In the past, something like a fence or a car in a photo would have been overlooked by judges in the nature category, he said.

“Your capture is most important,” said Halulko, a retired accountant.

The club has 50 members, one of whom resides in Puerto Rico and travels for business to Washington County Airport. A near-equal number of men and women belong to the club, which has a print display every other month at Citizens Library in Washington. Membership is open to anyone interested in photography.

The club will hold its salon in March at Frank Sarris Public Library in Canonsburg.

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Film Developing by Nathan Jones

The following three part article by Author and Photographer Nathan Jones is tailor made for the do it yourself from home photographer.

Developing B&W Film at Home (Part 1)


“Fall Tedium” (Rolleiflex 6006, 80 mm f/2.8, Fuji Acros 100)
Introduction
If you’re reading this, you know the truth: film is back, baby!
The first step in developing your own B&W film at home is not to be intimidated. The procedure is fun, rewarding, inexpensive, and a lot easier than you think. In doing it, you move one step closer to taking responsibility for your entire picture-making process, from pressing the shutter release button to having a glossy print in your hands.
You could go ahead and develop film without any understanding of how the process works and get great results nonetheless. However, I feel that it’s more satisfying to know a little about what you’re doing and why. A basic knowledge of how film-based photography works is therefore quite useful.
Photographic film is coated by an emulsion that contains microscopic particles of silver halide — basically a silver-containing salt, which is very sensitive to light. When you press the shutter release button, light passes through the open aperture of your camera and is focussed by the lens onto the film. When a ray of light strikes a particle, a small proportion of the silver halide is reduced to metallic silver. This forms the “latent image,” which is much too faint to see, and must be enhanced by developing.
Let’s imagine that you’re photographing starry skies at night. The figure below illustrates in carton fashion what happens on the film when you press the shutter release button. In this series of images, the aquamarine colour indicates silver halide, and the pale grey denotes traces of metallic silver in the latent image.

When you add “developer,” metallic silver in the latent image catalyzes, or accelerates, the production of more silver by reduction of silver halide in the immediate surroundings. Thus, areas of the film that have been exposed to light (bright parts of the scene) are amplified (i.e., more and more silver deposits there, making them black — you’re making a negative, remember?), while the areas that have not been exposed, are unaffected and remain as silver halide. This developing process can only occur in an alkaline environment; it is arrested by making the system acidic. Developing is typically halted by the addition of dilute acetic acid, also known as the “stop.”
We have now amplified the trace silver to visible metallic silver, thus:

At this point, the film is still sensitive to light as it contains islands of “developed” silver surrounded by seas of undeveloped silver halide. In order to render the final negative, these seas must be washed away. To do this, we use a chemical known as the “fix.” The fix contains an agent that solubilizes the silver halide, but leaves metallic silver intact. Once the fix has done its work, all we have left on the film is silver metal. This silver will be deposited only in areas of the film that have been exposed to light (rendering them black); those areas that have not been exposed to light will be colourless.
We now have the final negative, which is no longer sensitive to light:
undefined
Thus, the process consists of three basic steps:
(1) Develop — amplify the latent image by converting exposed areas of silver halide to silver metal.
(2) Stop — bring an end to the developing process.
(3) Fix — wash away all remaining silver halide to render the final negative, which is now insensitive to light.
In the next installment, we talk about the equipment and chemicals you’ll need. Go ahead and read Part 2, Preparation.

Developing B&W Film at Home (Part 2)


“Wave, Pelee Island” (Rolleiflex Automat IV, Fuji Acros 100)
Preparation
Please read Part 1 first.
Before we begin developing at home, we’ll need a few pieces of equipment and some chemicals. I’ve had most experience with the Kodak line of chemicals, but you could just as well use others. Most of the items listed here are available through Adorama, although some of them cannot be shipped outside the USA. Please consider supporting The Photon Fantastic by buying through these links: it doesn’t cost you anything extra, and I get a small kick-back, which helps me to continue adding to this site.

You are going to need these pieces of equipment (numbers in parentheses refer to the figure above):
A developing tank. (8) I use a Patterson universal tank with plastic reels. This is the light-tight container in which you’ll do all of your chemistry.
A measuring cylinder. (4) If you want, you may buy several of different sizes, but I use only a single 2 L cylinder. You’ll need this to measure out your chemicals with reasonable accuracy. You may also use a set of measuring cups — $17.95 for 6.
Air and light-tight containers to store your chemicals. I use 4 L (1 gallon) brown plastic bottles with screw top caps for my developer, fix, and stop (7); and a 1 L (1/4 gallon) bottle for my clearing agent (6).
A stopwatch and a thermometer, accurate to 1 degree. In chemical jargon, film developing is a kinetic process. In other words, it’s a chemical reaction in motion that you have to stop when it’s part-way finished. The pace and extent of the reaction are sensitive to temperature and time, respectively. For B&W developing, you need to be able to measure the former and control the latter pretty accurately. I use a mercury-in-glass thermometer from my days as a chemist, but dial-type thermometers are just fine, too — $16.95.
Bull dog clips. I use these to hang the film for drying.
Sleeves. Once you’ve developed your film, you’ll need a safe, dust-free place to store it, preferably flat. Trust me: you need to be disciplined about maintaining a well-organised filing system for all your negatives. The more you shoot, the more negatives you accumulate, and entropy can overwhelm you very quickly. Remember: your negative is your primary source, the well-spring of your digital and print copies, and your ultimate back-up. Losing it is akin to losing your RAW file in the digital world, only worse.
You’ll also need these chemicals:
Developer. (2) I use Kodak D76 — a good, all-purpose developer, applicable to most films — $5.95 to make 4 L (1 gallon) stock solution. This chemical amplifies the latent image on your exposed film. You’ll use 125 — 250 mL for each roll.
Stop. (9) I use Kodak indicator stop — $6.29 to make 32 L (8 gallons). This chemical arrests the developing process. You’ll use 250 — 500 mL per roll.
Fixer. (1) I use Kodafix — $6.95 to make 1 gallon solution. This chemical renders the final, light-insensitive negative. You’ll use 250 — 500 mL for each roll.
A clearing agent. (3) I use Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent — $5.95 to make 20 L (5 gallons). This chemical removes residual fixer from your negatives. It’s not absolutely necessary, but I find that it improves the transparency of the unexposed areas. Sometimes negatives will emerge from the tank with a pink or purple hue. Treating them with a clearing agent after fixing takes almost always takes care of this colour cast. You’ll use 125 mL for each roll.
A de-wetting agent. (10) I use Kodak Photo-flo — $7.95 for approximately 500 mL (16 oz). Once again, this is not absolutely necessary, but it helps to ensure even drying of your negatives. Basically, it’s a detergent, which lowers the surface tension of water clinging to the film thereby helping it to flow smoothly off the negative for streak- and spot-free drying. You’ll use only a couple of drops per roll.
And last, but not least, a roll or two of exposed film to develop (5).
Got everything? Great! We’re ready to begin. Read Part 3, The Process. This is where I explain the mechanics of how to do it yourself.

Developing B&W Film at Home (Part 3)

undefined
“Cliché” (Rolleiflex 6006, 80 mm f/2.8, Fuji Acros 100)
The Process
Please read Part 1 and Part 2 first. Part 1 describes the basic chemistry of film developing. Part 2 outlines what you’ll need to get the job done. Unfortunately, this version of the my guide is not illustrated with informative pictures. I hope to change that in the near future.
You’re now ready to develop your first roll of film. I typically follow the procedure outlined below. To some extent, the fine details of the process will be influenced by the format, speed and brand of film you’re developing, but the basic steps will be reasonably constant over all these parameters. Developing is also something of a “black art,” and you’ll find many differing, sometimes contradictory, pieces of advice scattered about the web. My advice is to start with this, or another, recipe, then experiment — modify the process to suit your tastes and your way of working. Film is quite forgiving, and you’ll find that you are able to coax it into giving you reasonable images even if you screw up dramatically.
(1) The first thing to do is to ready your chemicals. If you’ve bought powder-based chemicals, dissolve them in water according to the instructions on the packages. If you’ve bought liquids, you may have to dilute them. I use regular tap water for this and have never had problems, though some people recommend deionized water. The best containers are air- and light-tight plastic bottles — you’ll typically need ones that can hold 4 L (approximately 1 gallon). LABEL the containers carefully with a permanent marker, and store them at room temperature — the closer to 20 C (68 F), the better. If you’re using powder-based chemicals, it’s best to mix them at least a day before you use them: you may need hot water to aid dissolving, and the final solutions may be too warm to use immediately. If, after a day of standing, there’s undissolved sediment in your containers, it’s a good idea to remove it by filtration. A coffee filter works just fine for this.
(2) Next, you need to load the film into your developing tank. You don’t need a proper darkroom to do this, but you do need (near) total darkness; the faster the film, the more absolute the darkness. I use the closet in my bedroom. By stuffing towels under the door, I can get near perfect darkness, even in the daytime.
Disassemble the developing tank and carefully lay out all the pieces within arm’s reach before turning out the light. The Patterson tank I use has 6 pieces: bottom, centre post, reel, cone, agitation rod, and lid. Make sure that all of these are clean and dry before beginning. The plastic reels that come with this tank have three settings: “compressed” for 135 film, “partly expanded” for 127 film (who shoots 127 these days?) and “expanded” for 120/220 film. Set the reel to the appropriate size for the film you’re developing. Put your film, scissors and can opener (if necessary — see below) where you can find them quickly in the dark. Make a mental note of where everything is. You may like to practice putting your hands to all of your tools with your eyes closed. If you always stick to the same layout, this will become second nature after you’ve been through the process a few times.
Turn out the lights. Before doing anything else, let your eyes become accustomed to the dark. If you don’t wait, you won’t be able to see weak sources of light. If necessary, plug these up before continuing, or wait until night. You should not be able to see your hand in front of your face.
Be careful to handle the film as little as possible, and only by the edges. It’s also a good idea to wash your hands thoroughly with soap before beginning. This will minimize the transfer of finger grease to the film.

— If you’re developing film in 135 format, use a can opener to remove one end of the film canister and take the spooled film out. Carefully cut the leader from the rest of the film with scissors. Some people also like to round the corners of the film after removing the leader. This makes it easier to thread the film onto the reel, but it’s a little tricky to do in complete darkness — all without manipulating the film or cutting into your first frame. Insert the film under the tongues on both edges of the reel. While holding one edge fixed, rock the other back and forth; this action will wind the film smoothly onto the reel. When you get to the end of the film, cut off the spool.
— If you’re developing 120 format film, remove the adhesive tape that holds the roll tight, then carefully pull on the free end of the paper backing until you come to the film itself. I like to tear off the backing at this point. Insert the film under the tongues on the edges of the reel and wind the film onto the reel as you would 135 film. When you reach the spool, you’ll find that it’s taped to the end of the film. You need to remove the tape carefully to free the film. It is possible to tear the film at this point (I’ve done it!), so proceed with caution. Once you’ve removed the spool, continue winding so that the film is completely transferred onto the reel.
The centre post of the developing tank can accommodate either a single “expanded” reel (set for 120 film), or two stacked “compressed” reels (set for 135 film). Thread the reel(s) onto the post and place the post into the bottom of the tank. Reassemble the tank and ensure that it is properly closed before switching on the light. Once you’ve loaded the film into the tank, you can stop. The tank is light-tight, so you don’t have to worry about putting off developing until tomorrow, or next week. As long as you don’t open the tank, and the tank is assembled properly, the film should keep just fine in there.
(3) Pre-soak. Remove the lid of your tank, and add the volume of water appropriate to the format and number of reels. (This should be listed on the underside of the tank). For, 135 format film, wait 1 minute before pouring this water out; for 120 format, wait 5 minutes. If the water comes out coloured, don’t worry.
(4) Now we begin the chemistry of developing. This is a three step process: develop, stop, and fix.
Using your measuring cylinder, prepare the appropriate volume of developer. Remember, the total volume of each of the solutions you’ll need should be listed on the bottom of your tank. I typically use Kodak D76 at 1:1 dilution. For one roll of 120 format film, I need a total of 500 mL of developer in my Patterson tank, i.e., 250 of stock solution diluted by addition of another 250 mL of water. Be sure to get this right for your tank/developer/film format combination. It’s wasteful, but not otherwise detrimental, to use too much developer; using too little is a catastrophe, however, as the film needs to be fully submerged in the tank — and you can’t open the tank to check! That’s why you need to measure.

Measure the temperature of your developer using a thermometer. Once you know this to an accuracy of 1 C, determine how long you need for developing based on your combination of temperature, film speed and brand, and developer. The fine folk at Freestyle Photographic Supplies have prepared a massive developing table just for this purpose: check there first, then come back. The table has been prepared for a temperature of 20 C (68 F). If your developer is cooler, you will have to lengthen the developing time accordingly; if warmer, you’ll have to lengthen it. You may use another table to determine the appropriate adjustment to your developing time based on variations in temperature.
If you develop for too long, you will lose detail in the highlights of your final (positive) image — they’ll be “blown out” in digital parlance. If you develop for too short, you will lose shadow detail. Some photographers will intentionally develop for too long (to “push” underexposed film) or too short (to “pull” overexposed film). If you know what you’re doing, great. Go ahead and mess with the developing times. If not, stick to the time given you.
You can also find manufacturer-suggested development times listed in the official data sheets of the film you’re using. For example, see here for Fuji films, and here for Kodak.
Let’s begin:
Develop. Remove the lid of the tank and smoothly pour in the developer — not so fast that it backflows, but not slowly, either. Start the stopwatch as you begin pouring. Replace the lid. Gently but firmly invert the tank five times, then tap it against a flat surface to dislodge bubbles. Repeat this agitation once a minute during the developing time, or as your film’s manufacturer recommends in its data sheet. The purpose of agitation is to ensure that the film is always in contact with fresh developer. Do not shake the tank like a bottle of ketchup: this will make bubbles which cling to the film and prevent those areas from developing — these will make your film blotchy along the top edge. Along with developing temperature and time, agitation is yet another parameter you can use to affect the “look” of your photos. The more you agitate the film during developing, the higher in contrast it will be and the more evident the grain; the less you agitate, the flatter the contrast and smoother the grain.
Stop. When the appropriate time has elapsed, pour out the developer, and pour in your stop. Invert the tank continuously for 30 s to 1 min, then pour out the stop. If you’re using a stop with indicator, as I do, you’ll be able to tell whether you can re-use it by its colour: yellow = still good; blue = bad. If you’re on a budget, you may simply use water as stop: after you’ve poured out the developer, pour in water, shake and repeat.
Fix. Pour in the fixer. The time needed for fixing does not need to be precise. A typical guide is 5 to 10 minutes. Agitate the film during fixing as you would during developing.
(5) Wash. Your film is now no longer sensitive to light, so you may disassemble the tank as you please. Pour out the developer and pour in water. Shake thoroughly, pour out the washings, and repeat. Do this a few times. At this stage, the film base may look slightly pink or purple. Don’t worry, the next step will largely take care of that.
(6) Treat with hypo clearing agent. This step is not essential, but I find it to be beneficial in that it yields negatives with a nearly colourless base. A potential reason for residual colour is insufficient fixing. This may be true in some cases, but I’ve found that a pink or purple cast almost always remains after fixing, regardless of duration. According to Kodak, the official purpose of the clearing agent is to “promote removal of fixer from films … [in order] to shorten wash times and make washing at lower wash-water temperatures practical.” I’ve indeed found this to be true, but I’ve also noticed that used clearing agent is distinctly coloured, while the negative is correspondingly less so. Therefore, it seems also have the beneficial effect of removing colour cast from developed film. Follow the printed instructions for using the clearing agent. Kodak Hypo Clear needs to be 1:4 diluted, and the treatment of the film is 2 minutes with continuous agitation.
(5) Wash with water. As before, but you’re going to want to do this several times. The film must be absolutely clear of residual chemicals before being hung to dry. Hopefully, the hypo clear will make this job easier for you, but you must be thorough. When you feel that you’ve rinsed the film enough, do it one more time. I like to use slightly warm water for this last wash.
(6) De-wet. Pour out the last wash, then add one or two drops of photo-flo to the tank. Add water to fill. Using the centre rod, turn the reels back and forth a couple of times. Let the system stand for a minute, then remove the reel. Don’t rinse further.
(7) Dry. Either slide the film carefully out of the reel, or pull the reel apart to remove the film. Clamp both ends firmly and hang to dry for 4 to 8 hours in a dust-free zone. Many people use the shower for this.
You’re done! You may now cut and sleeve your negatives, and press them flat for scanning.

Saturday, February 1, 2014

Photographer Rikard Landberg


May 102013
 

I just wanted to tell a story about how a 51 year old camera made me leave the digital world. I have been shooting both digital and analog for some time but my film Leica was the only camera that made any sense to me.
Like so many others I started with a SLR film camera in the late 90´s. It was a Canon AE-1 with a 50/1.8 lens. I loved being out on the street trying to catch that golden moment that would turn out to a great picture. Mostly in black and white.
I jumped on the digital SLR camera train and sold all my analog gear in a second without even thinking it through. I went from a Canon 350d (rebel xt) to a Canon 40d to a 5d in a short time.
I never really liked the digital cameras so I bought a cheap film rangefinder and I loved it! I told my self that I was going to save up to buy me a Leica M film and here I am! Proud owner of a Leica M2 and a Summicron 35. For a long time I had a Fuji x100 as a backup since I felt I had to have a digital camera. Going all analog was for crazy people! :P. But in early 2013 I sold my last digital gear and bought a dedicated film scanner and have not looked back!
It was a hard decision but it really felt right! I use my Leica M2 as i would with any digital camera. I shoot what i want to shoot but i think more before hitting the shutter. To make good pictures you need to be one with your camera no matter what camera you use. Buy the one you like and never let it go. Go out and shoot and just love it!
shoeman Empire state rock Valentine Central girls WTC crossroads Central Man Brooklyn Bridge MAn BB 8517196663_1e2170108c_b