Using the camera from Dresden part 2

The camera from Dresden has been a joy to use. A little quirky at first as my fingers got used to the placement of the controls. But, once mastered, it became intuitive when using the light meter and shutter. It is obvious that the controls lack the finesse of its Western counterparts, but that is part of its character.

CLICK! As the last frame on the Fomapan 200 is exposed - with this camera more than others I have used, you need to hold it correctly with your left hand supporting the body and lens, while the right grips the body and actuates the meter and shutter. With the camera turned upside down, I press the button that releases the wind on and slowly rewind the film back into the canister.

Now, to develop the film, it was always going to be HC 110 as it is the new kid in the darkroom. The more I use it, the better my understanding of what to expect from it with different film manufacturers.

The technical bit: Dilution 1:31 in 300 mls which equates to 9.7 mls of developer. The film was exposed at 200 ISO box speed, which means a time of 3 1/2 mins, but I extended it to 4. I also prolonged the fix time to 10 minutes after checking the film halfway through, as it still showed signs of fog. 

At first glance, the negatives appear to be on the thin side (under exposed). I think this is due to the built-in light meter. I noticed that if you held the meter on for more than a few seconds, the needle started to fall. I did, on occasion, allow for this - whether I should have or not, I’m not sure.

At the time of writing this, I still have not had the chance to contact print the negatives in the darkroom. This is the real test of how good your negatives are - this point being borne out by a new member of the FADU forum who has switched from scanning his negatives to processing them analogously and is having trouble getting his prints right. This illustrates just how much the scanning process compensates for the differences between the highlights and shadows.

I use the hybrid system myself (analogue to digital) and know it is far easier to get the results you want than in the darkroom, especially if there is a problem with density. But I prefer the wizardry of chemicals on paper to the click of a button on a screen.

Even though I’m not happy with the way these negatives look, I will still print some of them. As I print them, I consider the sense of disappointment I feel. Why should I be disappointed? The negatives are less than technically perfect, but what about creatively? In our pursuit of knowledge on the best way to produce our images, our minds become polluted with other people’s expectations of what constitutes a properly produced picture. Photography is, by its nature, technically based, but should we be sacrificing creativity for technical excellence? That’s my personal view, even though I am not for one minute suggesting sloppy workmanship.

My disappointment with these negatives is because they do not resemble what I have come to recognize as well exposed, but this should not be the whole story. When I started out with the MTL3, it was to be an adventure - some fun with out-of-date film. I, however, ignored the golden rule of not using old film that has been opened and partially used, which is asking for trouble. 

Taking into account all that has gone before, this film is a triumph in that there are images to be printed. In the old days I would have just filed these negatives, never to be seen again. Nowadays, I keep an open mind as to what may be possible. I am pleased that I did.

Technical data: 

All the black and white images were scanned from the contact print.

 

 

 

Passion for 35mm film reignited

 It was the suggestion by an acquaintance on Twitter that had me reaching for my Nikon F.5 and macro zoom. It has been a very long time since I hefted this brick of a camera and lens combination to my eye to make images. In that time, my 35mm film stock has gone from fresh to very out of date. Where have the fresh years gone?

The thought of looking at large subjects and small detail had my imagination in a spin with ideas. I needed to slow down and think - but I didn’t! I ran with all the ideas, poking my lens here and there in a scatter gun approach, in the hope that it would provide me with some interesting pictures.

Even with a very itchy shutter finger, it was time to take a deep breath, slow the heart rate and enter the creative zone. Macro photography can be quite tricky with its very narrow depth of field. Getting the point of focus right can, in some cases, mean just a knife edge’s worth of refinement. Small aperture (large F number) settings play an important part in increasing the area of sharpness, along with hyperfocal distance. The good thing about film cameras is you can check what is in focus by pressing the shut down button on the camera body, or, in the case of my Bronica, the lens.

Macro photography is not just about what is in focus. Undoubtedly, this is where the eye will be drawn to first, so it is important to get it right. However, you should also give consideration to what is in soft focus and the patterns of those areas. It is the combination of all these focus points which combine to make a good photograph.

I surprised myself with the number of frames that looked interesting as the wet negatives were hung up to dry. What is more extraordinary, and something I have taken for granted, is that this is the first time I have used HC 110 with Agfaphoto APX 100 @ISO 100. I chose to use a dilution of 1+31 for 6 mins at 22 C. I had no choice really - it had been swelteringly hot for days, making it difficult to reduce the temperature of the water and it was too hot to argue. It has provided me with a toned set of negatives that look very fine grained. All I need now is a break in the weather so I can print them in the darkroom. 

A few days later, the heavens opened, the clouds banged together as the rain fell from the sky and the ground sighed with relief, producing that delightful aroma of damp that pervades the air after a hot spell.

The darkroom was scented with the smell of freshly diluted chemicals after its summer clean. Which negatives should I print first? Six of the thirty six took my eye straight away, so I made them the focus of this printing session. I chose Fotospeeds RCVC paper. The contact print I had made earlier with this paper showed that the negatives had normal contrast, which in my case is in the region of grade three. The segmented test prints were where I had expected them to be at around twenty seconds. Things were moving along really well and time and several cups of tea slipped along.

When I am having a good printing session I do not normally like to change makes of paper or size as it upsets the rhythm of the process. This time, however, I did because I was so taken by the photographs of the peaches in the dappled light. I increased the paper size to 9.5 x 12 and pulled out some FB warmtone by Ilford. When using these papers, time slows down and everything takes longer. The only thing that stayed the same was the grade set at three.

Thanks to Jason’s suggestion, it has reignited my interest in 35mm again.

 

 

Technical data:

Nikon F.5 with Tamron 80-210 zoom macro lens, Film Agfa APX 100 at box,developed in Kodak HC 110, Scanned from prints made on Fotospeed RCVC and Ilford warmtone Mk 4 FB gloss, both developed in Ilford multigrade.

  

 

Fast film for macro will Bergger cut it?

I'm writing this from the darkroom as I process the second roll of Bergger Pancro 400. It is being developed in Kodak HC 110 for 9 minutes. I am not sure how it’s going to turn out as I forgot to soak it for a minute in clean water. I knew something was amiss. It is becoming a joke - nearly every film I have processed this year has had a fault in one way or another. I will be pleased to get back to the mundane predictability of old, in more ways than one. 

Now, with the film hanging up to dry, I can get back to what I wanted to write. I’m pleased to say that the initial look over the negatives is good, but I will only know for sure once I start printing.

Lock down has allowed me to slow down and consider what I should do. While I mulled things over, I did a bit of online research into macro photography with a bellows. It became clear that it would be best to use a fast film because of the drop off in light reaching the film plane. The problem is that I have no 400 ISO film in 120. During my research I came across references to a film called Bergger. It did not take long, the screen was swamped with opinions on this film. I scratched the surface to see what was said and the pictures it produced, but was disappointed to find that most of it was scanned negative. One video I watched stated the negatives were flat. I am pleased to say I carried on regardless and the results I have hanging up to dry, show otherwise.

As you may have already gathered, the film needs to be soaked for a minute before the developer goes in. When you pour the water out, it has a very slight colour to it. Stop bath is as normal for those who use it, but you must fix the film for six minutes or longer, depending on how old your fix is. Agitation for the developer is for the first 30 seconds (twelve inversions) and then for 10 seconds every minute (four inversions). If you tumble your tank instead of twiddling, when you open the top to pour away the developer there will be bubbles in the top, but so far no adverse effects on the look of the negatives.

I have long held the view that one favourite film developer at a certain dilution should not be a catch all for all makes of film. This approach is the enemy of creativity and creates missed opportunities. Manufacturers go to great lengths to produce developers which bring out the best qualities of their film. As I discovered, Bergger is no different - only in this case, their film has a twin layer of emulsion, giving it full light sensitivity - hence the name Pancro, which would suggest a look all of its own. A comparison of their developer could be on the cards?

I chose to use HC 110 to develop the film. It could easily have been Rodinal or one of the half dozen others I have on the shelf, but had in mind the fine grain qualities of HC 110. Fast films are not known for their fine grain, unless it is a T grain. I should add that the developer you choose has a big influence on size of grain and the character of the negative and should, therefore, be given due consideration.

 When doing something like this for the first time, it is a leap of faith that all information about the development is correct. I have found that the time suggested for HC 110 produces a negative that looks a little on the thin side for me. It has shown itself in the darkroom with shorter than my usual exposure times. I may, therefore, increase the development time, but for now I’m going to let it stand until I have processed a few more rolls.

I have exposed a number of rolls of Pancro 400 at box speed. Most of it in high contrast conditions. In some cases, with the lens closed down to F.32 at 500 th of a second, it has managed to capture a wide range of detail from darkest to brightest. All waiting for you to utilize when exposing it to your chosen paper. I have found that printing these negatives to be some of the easiest. The whites are brilliant and detailed to a degree I have not noticed before with other film. The blacks are rich and pure, but can also be very detailed. 

 One note of caution is that it is quite easy to overexpose the paper due to the extra tone and crisp detail. I have discovered that I am trying to have it all - resulting in overly dark, and sometimes muddy, photos. Less is more, as they say, which has led to some wonderful photographs which are a joy to behold.

You should give Bergger Pancro 400 a go, if you have not already done so, and print in the darkroom - scanning does not do it justice.

Technical data:

Bronica SQAi with TTLM, bellows fitted and extension tube, lens 150 mm.

Film Bergger Pancro 400 at box speed

Photographs exposed to Kentmere 9.5 x 12 VC select paper. Developed in ilford multigrade.

Images were made using a digital camera.