Jump to content

My "Monochrome"


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A very sunny saturday, strong light, strong shadows, so let´s try the oldest lady of my collection, to test focusing and exposures. No pieces of art, just photos.

Hardware:  Leica IA sn  44562  -  1930, +  Leitz Elmar 1:3,5, F=50mm nsn + Yellow Filter (outdoor shots)

Software :  Ilford XP 2 Super - 400 ASA

Processing :  C41 Development by a good professional shop, normal “fast-food” commercial digitalization; a bit of Photoshop for adjusting contrast,  it´s not a sin (I remember doing  the same, using the shadow of my hands under the enlarger).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice pictures Antonia.

Congratulations for your Monochrom :)

and welcome to film's  club

 

Try also Kodak TX 400 and develop yourself,it's better and cheaper

(click on the picture to enlarge)

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822410

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822422

Best

Henry

Edited by Doc Henry
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To me they're great. It seems to read one of the catalogue of the time. I will just try not post processing. I mean, doing it if there's something really wrong or not the way is expected, but I would leave the film as more original as it is. Try to take the filter off for more contrast.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ileo it depends on the film brand, Ilford, Kodak etc....
You have to try them all. The advantage of the film is "each film is a new sensor
" as said a famous photographer.

I like much kodak and sometimes Ilford.

Look at the film thread mentioned above

Henry

Edited by Doc Henry
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely, and possibly Steve's "anemic" comment is from the age (or possibly condition) of the lens?

 

 

Flat images are not excused by a lens. When the lens was new it didn't by default produce flat images, were Bresson's early images flat for example? Of course they weren't, he or his darkroom printer adjusted the contrast by using different developers and grades of photographic paper.

 

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve,

When you come from digital photos, we usually correct with Lightroom or other software,

but with film, we do not need (my case) almost all my color photos are not corrected,
and I do not use filters too,  to accentuate anything because it distorts the original
:)

Some recent examples here :

Please click on pictures to enlarge

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822368

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822403

or in b&w :

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822410

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822422

Best regards

Henry

Someone who shoot with digital M9-M8  (5 years) and analog M7-MP (40 years) !

Edited by Doc Henry
Link to post
Share on other sites

To me they're great. It seems to read one of the catalogue of the time. I will just try not post processing. I mean, doing it if there's something really wrong or not the way is expected, but I would leave the film as more original as it is. Try to take the filter off for more contrast.

 

If I understand you correctly I think you are misinterpreting 'the catalogue of the time' with 'the bad magazine illustrations of the time'. There is a vast difference between cheap magazine illustration and what you would have seen in a gallery in the 1920's and 30's. In the 1930's there was no nostalgia for the 1930's, it was the contemporary world, and camera's recorded it with (nearly) as much fidelity as they do today.

 

Steve

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice pictures Antonia.

Congratulations for your Monochrom :)

and welcome to film's  club

 

Try also Kodak TX 400 and develop yourself,it's better and cheaper

(click on the picture to enlarge)

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822410

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2822422

Best

Henry

.... sorry for the mistake of the first name. :wub:

I mean Antonio

Best

Henry

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve,

When you come from digital photos, we usually correct with Lightroom or other software,

but with film, we do not need (my case) almost all my color photos are not corrected,

and I do not use filters too,  to accentuate anything because it distorts the original :)

 

 

True, but the image has been scanned, so what you may have got in the darkroom by doing a test strip and choosing a suitable grade of paper now needs to be done in Lightroom or Photoshop. For instance the person who did the scan, or the automated scanner software, has no way to know what the original scene looked like nor how the photographer wants the scene to look. The OP has already said they used Photoshop, I simply suggest they use it a bit more. If you scan your own images you have the luxury of setting the scanner software to mimic what you saw, others who send their films out don't have that luxury.

 

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to take the filter off for more contrast.

 

And taking the yellow filter off will reduce the contrast. So remove the yellow filter and the deeper tone of the sky will now be closer in tone to the white façade of the building.

 

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but the image has been scanned, so what you may have got in the darkroom by doing a test strip and choosing a suitable grade of paper now needs to be done in Lightroom or Photoshop. For instance the person who did the scan, or the automated scanner software, has no way to know what the original scene looked like nor how the photographer wants the scene to look. The OP has already said they used Photoshop, I simply suggest they use it a bit more. If you scan your own images you have the luxury of setting the scanner software to mimic what you saw, others who send their films out don't have that luxury.

 

Steve

It's correct Steve ...  but in b&w it's better to develop in silver paper (my case)

no inkjet printer for me !

I have a Focomat in my lab home !

Cheers

Henry

for my Nikon Coolscan 5000 (for the post) I put in "RGB calibrated" !

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I expressed myself not clearly. I haven't spoken about differences between bad magazines and top galleries. I meant the overall appeal, appearance, feeling, a photo like that has compared to the modern ultra-sharp, ultra-defined images.

That's it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My most dear Gentlemen

I am very surprised and delighted with so many and so valuable answers, that “My Monochrome” post, and myself, indeed do not deserve.

As a small collector, some time ago I posted  a part of the Leica chapter of my cameras “Some Leicas” and it was subject of many nice comments, one of them (Carlos Danger : Please tell us that you use them regularly... ) made me thinking not all of them, no time nor life I´m afraid, but why not the oldest and probably the least reliable, (no way to see the curtains of shutter working, or looking thru the lens to see haze or “cataracts”, without dismantle the poor thing).

So I tried only to see (and post in Collectors & Historica) the possible result, without special technical or aesthetical preoccupations, except my usual and almost automatic way of seeing as an architect, geometry, composition, (urban)landscape, good or not so good architecture.

I was thinking in old camera and not so in Photography, my mistake.

XP2 was an obvious and lazy choice because I can put the canister in that good professional lab, and they gave me the film back, developed and digitalized, about half an hour later, giving me time to have a coffee and think a little about, for instance, "The Meaning of Life" (Monty Python´s)

About fifty years ago I was a fan of Ilford and remember to use Pan F for contrast, FP3 for “normal”, HPS, HP3, 4, and 5 for low light, small aperture, low contrast, and a bit of grain. Grain was nice in those times, except for Architecture, where contrast and sharpness were mandatory, as mandatory was an orange filter for contrast (the sky, Jesus Christ, look for that boring sky without shadows). By the way, please remember that “our Modern Architecture" was at those times (almost) always white, so the importance of contrast between wall and sky.

Now I attach two versions of my first photo, comparing the results with and without that said bit of Photoshop, to show the anemic situation. 

By the way do you really think (Steve) that is time for me to put same photos in Photo Forum? How can I?

I apologize for that long and boring text, but I feel that I must show my respect and delight for that so many and valuable answers that "My Monochrome" post, and myself, indeed do not deserve.

Best regards

Antonio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't trash this photo at all. I saw many very, very, very trashcans, jokes, scribbles pretending to be pictures. Well, this is not the case. Sure, technically could have been a different shot, but I appreciate the... Leica behind it? Antonio, I don't know if your camera is in good conditions, but I would bring it to a serious service for a general cleaning and a overhaul. It's not fair to keep it in a drawer. If not alwyas, you should carry on shooting with it from time to time.

Or, if possible but in order to be more than comfortable and safe, send it direcly in Solms. But keep use it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Self-portrait with the same Leica IA

Here I think that because a little low light, good old XP2 Super shows a bit of grain, not present in exterior shots.

Regards

Antonio

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...