Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
A day or so ago I posted some pics in the gallery that looked like this ...
... a couple of people asked me how they were processed, if you're interested in finding out read on!
The film was Kodak VC 160 Portra shot at box speed in a dark and mixed light environment in an old shed and the charming model was our local real estate agent and post master/mistress the fair Linda.
I also shot two rolls of black and white during the couple of hours she posed for me ... Tri-X and some Fuji Acros. I don't generally shoot much colour, I don't seem to visualise very well with it and am often disappointed with the results. I'd processed the two rolls of monochrome and liked what I saw but procrastinated with the Portra because I couldn't make up my mind whether to mix up a fresh batch of C41 chemicals or go with what had now done twelve rolls of film and had been stored casually on a shelf in my darkroom over a long hot summer.
HUGE MISTAKE ... I went ahead with the old chemicals and processed the roll using standard times and temperatures. When I removed it from the Paterson I nearly choked, there appeared to be nothing on it and when it dried and the emulsion fog cleared it looked even worse ... almost totally clear. I was very close to screwing it into a ball and tossing it but did notice it had a few very faint shadows visible and thought what the hell I'll scan it anyway and punish myself visually for being so stupid! Cutting the film for the V700 holders was guesswork as there was no apparent division between the frames ... the results of the scans were virtually black and looked like this ...
In the post processing software I use there is an auto exposure funcion which I generally don't bother with ... it has a silder to increase the amount of compensation applied to an image and is there for those who just want to quickly liven up a dull pic without getting overly complicated I guess! When I pushed the slider a long way to the right the photos suddenly came to life along with all the spots scratches and other abuse I'd given the negative during my disappointment at this disaster before I eventually stopped sobbing and hung it to dry.
What can I say ... I love the weird colour casts as I do the spots and scratches and the generally distressed look that the images have. I was thinking of tossing that batch of obviously exhausted C41 chemicals ... but now I'm not sure!
... a couple of people asked me how they were processed, if you're interested in finding out read on!
The film was Kodak VC 160 Portra shot at box speed in a dark and mixed light environment in an old shed and the charming model was our local real estate agent and post master/mistress the fair Linda.
I also shot two rolls of black and white during the couple of hours she posed for me ... Tri-X and some Fuji Acros. I don't generally shoot much colour, I don't seem to visualise very well with it and am often disappointed with the results. I'd processed the two rolls of monochrome and liked what I saw but procrastinated with the Portra because I couldn't make up my mind whether to mix up a fresh batch of C41 chemicals or go with what had now done twelve rolls of film and had been stored casually on a shelf in my darkroom over a long hot summer.
HUGE MISTAKE ... I went ahead with the old chemicals and processed the roll using standard times and temperatures. When I removed it from the Paterson I nearly choked, there appeared to be nothing on it and when it dried and the emulsion fog cleared it looked even worse ... almost totally clear. I was very close to screwing it into a ball and tossing it but did notice it had a few very faint shadows visible and thought what the hell I'll scan it anyway and punish myself visually for being so stupid! Cutting the film for the V700 holders was guesswork as there was no apparent division between the frames ... the results of the scans were virtually black and looked like this ...
In the post processing software I use there is an auto exposure funcion which I generally don't bother with ... it has a silder to increase the amount of compensation applied to an image and is there for those who just want to quickly liven up a dull pic without getting overly complicated I guess! When I pushed the slider a long way to the right the photos suddenly came to life along with all the spots scratches and other abuse I'd given the negative during my disappointment at this disaster before I eventually stopped sobbing and hung it to dry.
What can I say ... I love the weird colour casts as I do the spots and scratches and the generally distressed look that the images have. I was thinking of tossing that batch of obviously exhausted C41 chemicals ... but now I'm not sure!
Last edited:
dof
Fiat Lux
Great stuff, Keith.
If we don't learn from our mistakes, then we're simply not paying attention.
If we don't learn from our mistakes, then we're simply not paying attention.
squirrel$$$bandit
Mentor
One of my favorite rolls of film recently was a severely overexposed (due to the shutter being off) series through a Robot square frame camera...everything looked like crap...but I wrestled with it and ended up with some weirdly evocative stuff:
Perfection is kind of boring, I'm afraid...
Nice work, Keith!
Perfection is kind of boring, I'm afraid...
Nice work, Keith!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
One of my favorite rolls of film recently was a severely overexposed (due to the shutter being off) series through a Robot square frame camera...everything looked like crap...but I wrestled with it and ended up with some weirdly evocative stuff:
Perfection is kind of boring, I'm afraid...
Nice work, Keith!
It makes you wonder about this fixation with better and better equipment and obsessing about a little noise in the shadows or a radical overexposure etc ...
vrgard
Well-known
Wow, Keith, I really like these. They have a great feel to them. Almost as if they were taken here in the Western US sometime in the 1800's.
-Randy
-Randy
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Western US in the 1800's
... that's current fashion here don't you know ... we're a little behind the times! We're expecting to hit the bell bottom jeans faze in about 2090!
I meant to mention ... the best three of what I salvaged are here ... http://wheelie52.zenfolio.com/p450483726/slideshow
Last edited:
momus1
Established
Reminds me of a saying in an art book that I and another painter had when we shared a studio in Albuquerque. It was a funny sort of book from the 40's with lots of funny (but not intentionally so) sayings. Our favorite was "Failure is success at a level we don't fully understand yet". We loved that, and blew it up really big and posted it on the front door to the studio. Sometimes it's realy true.
WDPictures
Established
Hmmm for me I get a nice sense of mystery/intrigue that I probably wouldn't with a "proper" image. So you like better than the b+w? Now try to do this again, on purpose. I often scan for what isn't obvious like you've described but have yet to be as successful. Nice!
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
Keith,
These are great... pay to make mistakes once and awhile... especially when the results take us in an unexpected direction and we can learn a new trick or skill in the process.
These are great... pay to make mistakes once and awhile... especially when the results take us in an unexpected direction and we can learn a new trick or skill in the process.
Al Kaplan
Mentor
They remind me of some prints I made in October. I was having an exhibit at an art gellery. The owner wanted me to "try something different" and not just hang my usual B&W stuff. I played around with exposing the B&W image on paper but instead of tray developing I flicked dropplets of undiluted Dektol on the paper, tilted it this way and that causing the droplets to run across the surface, then let it just sit for at least five minutes before letting the droplets run off the paper, and then fixing the print. The extended developing time without any agitation produced an effect called "bromiding", leaving grey streaks in places, extending out into the white borders. On a few I dampened my hand with developer and pressed my hand onto the paper for several minutes, leaving a hand print showing all the ridges and whorls of my fingers. The gallery owner was thrilled,and at the opening a number of artists told me that they loved the photos. Photographers though asked me how I managed to screw up the prints so badly. I sold several of the prints!
Last edited:
Sparrow
Mentor
When I first saw them, in the gallery, I thought you had mastered Coffeechrome, shame it isn’t a repeatable process I really like the look
Gaspar
Established
They look amazing. specially the first one. I had also an incident with my c41 wich also ended up producing something arguably better than the "normal" processing.
Sparrow
Mentor
it’s a terrible disappointment isn’t it?
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
This look could be accomplished with Kodachrome and some experimentation. A friend of mine has developed Kodachrome into color transparencies. Now the slides did not look like you would expect Kodachrome to look, but there was color and it was looking pretty cool.
Last edited: