Right place right time Agfa 400s

 

As I write this, the log fire is blazing but it still feels cold. Outside the wind is howling, throwing rain against the windows like small stones, and distracting me from writing this article. The part of the article’s title is wrong in that the 120 format film contained in the black tubes is really Rollei Retro 400s.

I have used the film once before - so long ago that I cannot remember if I liked the results, nor even which developer I used. Now the rolls of film that are left are passed their best before date, by about two years. The film has traveled a lot in my camera bag, waiting for a set of circumstances which would allow me to use this fast film to its best effect. 

I was at a location that I may not return to and the weather was not playing ball, with long, dull, overcast days. It would be a challenge to produce any images without the sun casting a shadow, but I was not going to be deterred.

The hand held light meter was telling me F 1.4 @ 125 the sec for my usual 100 ISO film, which was well below my Bronica SQAi F 2.8 lens. As I looked into my camera bag, there it was waiting - three rolls of Agfa 400s. Brilliant! Finally it would be used on a worthwhile project, instead of being used for the sake of it. 

As I was loading the film into the camera, my mind had already wandered off to which film developer I was going to use and which paper to print with. I have been using Kodak’s HC 110 a lot and thought it would be a good idea to continue with it to enhance the contrast and reduce grain on the negatives.

Before you ask why I didn’t use a tripod, the simple answer is the terrain was very difficult to navigate and to use one would have been more of hazard than an asset. Needless to say that the time making images slipped by unnoticed, as did the changes of film backs. There was an ongoing question mark over the whole proceedings and whether or not it was a good choice of film.

Back in the darkroom, I checked out the dilution and time needed for the 400s in HC 110. I was surprised to see it was dilution B (1+31) for 6.5 minutes - the same as delta 100, apart from the extra half minute. I had a nagging doubt at the back of my mind as to whether it would be sufficient time. 

With the diluted developer in the graduate and the thermometer reading 20C, I poured the chemical into the tank and proceeded with my standard processing method. When I removed the lid to pour out the developer, I noticed a lot of bubbles in the top, so alarm bells started ringing. The last time this happened, I ended up with a set of mottled negatives. Fifteen minutes later I was rinsing the developed negatives, regardless.

After dismounting the film from the spiral into the tank full of water, I pulled it out and between my fingers to get the excess water off, only to be presented with some very thin looking negatives. I was not pleased with myself for dismissing my doubts about timings. The upside was that the negatives looked to be very contrasty compared to the very overcast and flat day when they had been made.

I did increase the development time for the second and third films. It did make a difference, but not as much as I would have liked. Another downside of this film is its server curl. It was going to be interesting getting a contact print. Having studied the negatives in their sleeves, they look to be the thinnest I have ever produced. Printing will confirm whether this is the case. The other issue is that one set of negatives looks mottled.

The paper choice would be determined by the level of contrast the negatives produced. Normally I would not make pictures on dull, overcast days as I do not like low contrast light and the grey, washed out look that can result. However, on this occasion I had no choice, as I was at a location that inspired me with image ideas and despite the days being overcast, I doubted I would get a chance to return in better weather. 

All the images were scanned from photographs
 

 

 

lost and found

 It has been a very tiring year. One that has knocked out of me any notion of making photographs in any shape or form. I have not wanted to do any of it - not make, print or talk about it. My interest has been rubbed out to such an extent that I have wondered whether I was ever a photographer.

The writing of this article is the first time I have given photography any serious thought recently. I have noticed over the past few weeks that my interest has started to re-assert itself here and there. I have never found it easy to write about my love of photography and the scrapes I manage to get myself into. This blog still remains a mystery to me as to why I started it.

I am still surprised at how popular it is. I know a lot of you judge popularity by comment and the number of likes, but I do not. For me it is the number of visits and also the number of other blogs carrying some of the themes I have talked about long with the odd magazine article. That in itself is all the incentive I need. 

So, to the year ahead. I’m hoping I will be able to get on with all the things I have been meaning to, including making more magazines, selling more prints etc. Will just have to wait and see.

 I’m going to end with a big thank you to all those who have been reading the blog in these barren times with few new posts. To all of you, I wish a very creative future.

The articles that follow this post were, in some cases. written before my creative slump and are now being published.

A big thank to our new editor for getting things rolling again.

 

Out of date film Home truths.

The use of out of date film has become very popular over the last few years. So much so that it has become a bit of a sub culture within the film world, with some photographers stating that it is all they use. I get the impression that in some cases there is a bit of grand standing, look at me, my photography is better because of it! If it has improved your picture making then all well and good, but I have to say that some of the images I have seen makes me wonder why did they bother! I personally see no advantage in using out of date, apart from the fact it is slightly less expensive than fresh. 

Lets be honest about this how often do you end up with a blank film?

But then again there is a certain extra thrill in the knowledge that when you take the lid off the developing tank and view the wet film with nicely exposed negatives, a sense of relief at your gay abandonment to the natural order of things was worth the risk. In my experience the risk is very small but if you read some blogs it is a step to far to contemplate.

120 Fujicolour Superia
out of date by 10 years.

So why would you treat out of date film to a different set of process times?

I have always used out of date film long before it became popular. I just keep using the film stock till it runs out. It was not until recent times that I have taken note of the process before date and now that I have that knowledge it has not made any difference to the way I make images and process the film. When comparing them to in date negatives of the same make I can see no difference.

120 Fujicolour Superia
out of date by 10 years.

So how do you store your film?

There is a lot of myth and misunderstanding about how to store your film after you have purchased it. The one thing that destroys film faster than anything else is humidity. Even in these situations, as long as the film is kept in its sealed containers and wrappers (medium format) it will remain in good condition. So common sense would suggest that you only break the film out when you are about to use it. Surely? 

So why would you need to store it in a fridge or freezer?

I used to do this until I was caught out by not getting the film from the fridge the day before. I seriously questioned whether there was any advantage to doing it. Common sense suggested that the weather in the UK never really gets that extreme so why bung the fridge up? -(there was a cheer from the other half when I removed it all!) - after all, I purchased it to use, not stock pile. Obviously everyone's circumstances are different. But I have found a growing number of people who store film in a draw find it more convenient and allows for spontaneity. Not having to second guess myself about will I or Won't I need a film tomorrow has freed up creativity.

 With this in mind I purchased a carton of out of date film. It is a mixed box of T max 400, Ilford delta 100, 3200 and XP2 400. I did this because I had been toying with the idea of trying out TMAX 400, but it then occurred to me that I had never used the others either. So now is my chance. I was told they had all been stored in a draw and were still in the sealed wrappers. Good enough for me! 

This selection of emulsions are a maximum of seven years out of process date. I have used so far the delta 100 and 3200 at box speed. Developed in RO9 @1+50 @20C using my usual method. The results are what I would expect from fresh stock.

There is a down side, it can go wrong occasionally, but it is a lot rarer than people would have you believe and it is more than likely to be human error than failure of materials. Some of you will be uncomfortable with the idea and I understand that reticence, especially if you are new to film photography.

I have written two other posts on the subject: Film storage - is a more technical look and colour out of date - which talks about an old film left in the camera for years. My view on film storage has not changed as these other post will reinforce. Remember do not be influenced by other peoples narrow mindedness. Photography is about being creative and that means there are no rules. 

Out of film Delta 3200, dev RO9,
 printed on Adox MCP

Here is a link to the delta film mentioned earlier in the article.

Updated 2022:

Since writing this there is a downside to out of date film. It is unexpected and inconsistent in its appearance and affects black and white 120 film so far. The main reason for it is the paper backing, for some reason it can produce a blotchy look to the negatives which is most noticeable in the sky detail.  

The following pictures show the affect: 

Technical data:

The black and white images were scanned from photographs. 

Camera used was a Bronica SQAi with a 120-format film back.

Black and white film used for the pictures above Fomapan 100 with the black backing paper. They have recently changed the paper to the same one Ilford use. you can see what the different backing papers look like here

   

  

 

Bronica battery trouble.

I really enjoy using my SQAi But recently its reliability has become unpredictable to the extent that I have seriously thought about getting rid of it.

I know what the problem is, it is to do with the silver oxide batteries and the way they make contact or not with the contacts in the camera. On occasions a film has built up insulating the batteries from the camera contacts. A quick scrape and all is well again. Recently this has gotten out of hand in such away that I'm no longer sure if the shutter will fire from one frame to the next even after checking that the contacts are clean.

I've concluded it is one of three things: the batteries are not up to the job, bad manufacture, or that something in the camera has worked loose? Or maybe all three. I am so fed up with it so much so that I have dug out my motor drive for the Bronica - something I have not used in years. I have also bunged on the eye level prism, which corrects the backward view you get from the flip up viewfinder. I did this because it makes the use of the camera more seamless.

A drastic move I know as Bronica did not produce an auxiliary battery pack for its cameras like others have. It adds weight that I'm not happy about but if it makes the camera more reliable then all to the good.

I can not believe how much these changes have reinvigorated my image making. It is akin to when I first purchased the camera. It works every time freeing me up from that nagging 'will it?' or 'wont it?'. It was satisfying to hear the clump of the shutter with the outlandish sound of the motor as it wound on. No more senior moments. With the addition of all this technical wizardry it has made it more enjoyable. If I had known this, I would have made the changes ages ago.

Has anyone else experienced this problem with their Bronica, if so how did you cure it?  

update 12/2018

I thought I would update this post by saying that the motordrive I fitted a couple of years ago has dealt with the battery problem. It does this by taking on all the power requirements of the camera. 

Update 5/9/21

Further to the battery problem noted above I have now put a bit of card in the battery box to force a better connection. It has work well but the build up on the contacts needs an eye kept on it. As it can go back to it's old ways. It is also a good idea to sand the negative side of the battery it gives a better contact.

If you use the motor drive without the silver oxide batteries fitted the light meter view finder will not work as it takes its power from them only.

Cropping your photograhs

Print of the whole negative

When it come to cropping your prints there are two schools of thought. Those that believe that once the view has been carefully framed in the camera, you should print the whole negative and in some cases include the rebate as well to prove it. The alternative view is that each image is unique and should be judged as such irrespective of its format.

My stance tends to follow the latter view or what best emphasis the composition whole frame or part of. It does not always follow that what your pre visualized view at the time translates to the baseboard when it comes to printing. 

It is important to consider how you're going to frame the image at the beginning of the printing process. The start of which is the contact print once produced time should be taken to consider what is best for each picture. In some cases it is an automatic decision how the picture is going to look. In others it is not quite so clear as to what is right. In these situations it maybe better to print the whole negative and use a crop tool to ensure what framing brings the best out of the image. 

Cropped for impact

Setting hard and fast rules when it comes to producing your pictures will prove detrimental in conveying the vision. It is better to keep an open mind and be bold in the way you frame your pictures. Sometimes it is good to seek other peoples opinions they may offer an idea that you have not considered, but remember these are suggestions that should not be followed blindly. You should only do what others indicate if you truly believe that it is the best for the composition and coincides with your vision for the picture.

I crop photo's for a number of reasons some listed below:

• 

  change story

  To remove unwanted items from the picture that sometimes get missed in the making process from around the edges.
• To correct a bad holding angel.
• To remove processing faults, dust hair etc.
• To change the balance and or emphasis of elements in the picture.
• To change the format of the picture.
• To remove dead areas from pictures tightening the composition.
• To create a better sense of intimacy.
• To improve composition.
• To tell a different story. If you are doing this then you should give serious consideration to the facts of the situation before changing the emphasis especially from a photojournalists perspective.

Crop tool.

You can use a crop tool which was mentioned earlier. It can help to improve how you compose images at the making stage. It is a way of training your eye.

Crop tool made from

They are simple to make as described below:

You can make a crop tool out of two bits of cardboard it needs to be 50 to 75mm (2” to 3”) wide and 500 x 400mm (20” x 16”) long or bigger than the largest print you are likely to make. If you do not want to make it completely from scratch then you can use a pre cut mount frame cut to make two L shapes. This allows the framing of the picture to be infinite.

This simple idea allows you to try out those more radical ideas along with the more prosaic to see if they work. It may surprise you in the process.

Fare well Followers

 

Printed on Bergger 8 x 10 Prestige variable CB
Film 120 6 x 6 negative Bergger Pancro 400
Exposed at 125 iso

 Dear Followers,

Google are removing this blogs ability to automatically inform you of any new posts we make. This will start from July they say it is to improve the service. The one thing we use it for cannot be sustained is automatic email subscription.  

I could jump up and down about it but it will not make any difference. The little guy getting a kick in the teeth for providing free content has no say, when people have got anything better to do than update stuff that has worked OK for years now they have to break it. So the blog looses out.

We have value the support of our followers over the years a small number I know but all the same a worth while bunch. 

We would like to say a big thank you to you maybe in the future you will be able to subscribe to this blog again for automatic updates.

All the best

Photomi7ch

Zero double take project first results.

Zero 6x9 pinhole camera.

As I sit here reviewing the first batch of photographs from double take, the wind and the rain is still lashing the property - something it has been doing for the last twenty four hours. I'm pleased to be inside in front of a warm fire with Tabatino who is stretched out in front of it like a rug. 

Zero 6x9 pinhole camera.
 

The contact print shows that the second exposures are quite weak and will require dodging and burning to make their presence felt. With this in mind I  have been using half page test strips  so I can see how much more exposure is needed to bring out the weaker parts of the negative. This has given me a better overall idea of how much extra time the weaker parts of the picture need so I can get as close as possible to what the final print will look like. Having  chosen to use 6x6 negatives I find myself cropping them to a landscape frame size giving me more choice over which parts of the negative make the final composition and partly to get the best use out of the paper size. I'm using Silverprint's gloss proof paper mainly because I believe it has added something to the overall expression of the photographs.

Zero 6 x 9 pinhole camera.

The results of this first film have been a pleasant surprise in that most of the negatives have produced picture combinations that work well. Whether this is down to luck or the pre-planning in the picture combinations only time will tell. The day I took the pictures was a challenge in that it was windy with a broken cloud sky that was fast moving making metering each shot difficult. By the time I had worked out the shutter speed and opened it the scene in some cases had gone from bright sunshine to dull and overcast or vice versa. It just goes to show how forgiving film is when it comes to exposing it in rapidly changing light conditions over extended periods. These were printed at grade 3 and not my more common split procedure.

Technical data: 

Film 120 FP4+ set to 6 x 6 negative size, developed in PMK Pyro, Printed on silverproof paper, developed in Ilford warmtone developer.

Related posts:

Split grade printing.

Zero pinhole camera

Using Zero pinhole camera

Reciprocity

The start of double take.

Reciprocity How it may affect monochrome film

The use of a Zero pinhole camera means that long exposures are the norm. It might be a good idea to give an insight into how reciprocity affects the negatives. It is a wide-ranging subject that afflicts colour and black and white materials in different ways at long exposures, extremely short exposures and with flash. Because of this I am limiting this post to long exposure times with black and white film.

The Law:

The formula E=IxT expresses reciprocal relationship between the intensity of light reaching the film and the time allowed to act on the film. If one increases the other decreases proportionally, no net change in exposure occurs.

Ansel Adams The Negative.

At long exposures this law breaks down, known as reciprocity failure. It is where a seconds worth of light is not enough to satisfactorily produce the required densities in the negative. So the longer the exposure the greater the compensation needs to be. With these exaggerated times comes a side effect in that the lower values recorded become under exposed more than the higher ones causing the contrast of the negative to increase. You can make adjustment for this when developing the film by a reduction of ten percent for up to ten seconds, from ten seconds by twenty percent and from a hundred seconds by thirty percent. These changes are easy to control for single frame exposure made with large format cameras but a little difficult to achieve with roll film. If all the frames on the film are exposed for no longer than ten seconds then the ten percent reduction will control the increase in contrast across the whole film, but in practice this is not always the case with exposure times being all over the place. I would suggest that a reduction of ten percent be the starting point and that with experimentation will find what works best for you. Having said all this the side effect of higher contrast maybe to your liking in which case where's the problem.

Further reading

The picture included in this post shows a slight increase in contrast. The negatives Ilford FP4+ were processed in PMK Pyro without an adjustment for increased contrast. Printed on grade two multi grade paper developed using Moersch 6 blue.

The following images and those above were all made using a Zero multi format Pinhole camera. The pictures below are from negatives using Fomapan 100 at box speed developed in studional for 11 minutes. scanned from photographs printed on Ilford multigrade 4 developed in souped ilford multigrade. 

Taking the stop out of printing?

An acquaintance recently posted that he was having trouble with his photographs. The prints were producing brown stains on the edges and face of the paper which he had not seen before. He went on to describe a process that does not include stop bath. I have always accepted that stop was essential when printing.

This revelation made me stop and think about all of the books I have read over the years on photograph production. As far as I was aware none of them said that there was a choice. Just to be sure I went back to the reference books on the subject I trust most. After consulting Tim Rudman  Master Printing course, Michael Langford Basic Photography and Ansel Adams The Print - by the way this is the only book to explain what happens when stop is omitted.

Ansel Adams writes: That stop bath is a weak solution of acetic acid that neutralizes the alkalinity in the developer stopping development straight away. Fix being acidic would have the same affect as stop bath but it prevents the contamination of the fix from the alkaline in developer which quickly exhausts the fix making it more likely that the prints will stain.

I should point out that my acquaintance has been producing prints that have not shown any signs of staining till now. It turns out that it was a lack of proper washing before the fix that was causing the problem and not exhausted fix.

The question that keeps coming into my head is why wouldn't you use stop? It makes no sense from my point of view. I spend a lot of time in the darkroom making test prints carefully choosing the right amount of light for exposure. Once in the developer I watch and wait for what I judge to be the right amount of development so I can remove it to the stop, freezing it at that point in the process. If this was substituted for water this would not be the case it would only slow down development making a mockery of all the careful planning gone before and adding a degree of uncertainty as to whether or not it was going to stain.

This is one of the main issues I have with not using stop bath which for me translates to film as well. You spend all that time getting the time, temperature and inversion right, - for what? Because you can not be bothered to use stop?it's to expensive? I will admit to not using stop at one point but not for the reasons given earlier when developing film. I reverted back to stop mainly because I did not like the look of the negatives it was producing. They seemed to have a soft look to them.

I know that this must sound like a bit of a rant and to a certain extent it is. Sometimes it's good to get things off your chest. As far as I'm concerned there are many different paths to creative nirvana and how you reach it is up to you.

Since writing this I have discovered a number of print developers that do not require a stop bath. As long as you use running water in its place for at least thirty seconds. These developers use Amidol in the formula. They can be found in The darkroom cookbook.

You maybe interested in this article on Fixing faults

 

Camera candy, Agfa Isolette

This is for all those who delight in the design and form of the light box. This one has some wonderful lines. I shell put it down nice and easy, so you can Savor its lines.

Related post:

An Agfa Isolette has landed.

Using the Agfa Isolette