Returning To Film ....

[ReturningToFilm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all

 

I'm hoping for some constructive feedback, as I am here to learn....and I hope that this isn't too impertinent!

 

Its been >20 years since I developed my own B&W film at home and I am enjoying the process....but struggling a bit with shooting with a rangefinder and guesstimating exposure without a meter with my new (to me) M4. Here are some of my initial shots - I would really appreciate any feedback.

 

Most of the photos look a bit "flat" to me. HP5 @ 400, maybe should have pushed to 800, as quite dull and/or indoor/underground shots mostly so far. I have some Tri-X ready to process, which might suit my taste better, with greater contrast? Also looks like I am consistently underexposing. Maybe an M7 would have been better for me??!!

 

A lot of the negatives have water blobs on them, despite using photo flo (but no swiping - if thats the right phrase - with tongs, perhaps a mistake?)....

 

So without further ado - here are some shots. I have no idea why the last shot has a demarcation zone, so any advice on that would be great. Many thanks for looking and any comments gratefully received!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[250swb]

Apart from the water blobs the negatives you have seem to be very good, you have nice detail in the highlights and shadows. You don't say how you got to the final image, scanning the negative or darkroom print that was then scanned, but you need to increase contrast at the post processing stage with scanning, or at the print stage in the darkroom. You have a roll of 36 exposures, so any contrast adjustments by altering your processing should only be tweaks, not universal adjustments when a roll of film may be used indoors and out of doors, you need to keep the contrast to a workable average that covers both situations.

 

For the blobs look at how quickly the film dried, to quick and they can form, to slow and they can form. Best is to give the film a good shake while still on the reel, then a good flick as you hang it up. You should see water running down the film, not hanging on, so check the dilution of the Photo-Flo.

 

No idea about the fogged looking exposure, unless it is near the end of the roll, it doesn't look like a shutter fault.

 

Steve

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[machmaphoto]

Well, You have here fine grain and "dull" or "flat" gradation. This is in my experience a good starting position to make scans of it. But you must do the rest in postproduction after the scan and here you can do very much in PS with your material after having scanned it.

 

Perhaps for darkroom prints there it is a ittle bit more difficult.

 

Anyway - beautiful pictures and you are on the right way. 

[chris_livsey]

The exposures look fine, B/W is very tolerant in "normal" lighting. I find indoors much harder to guess than outside so you are doing well. Post processing looks at fault to me, you need more snap, scanner and program details?

No idea of your developer either. I find HP5+ can, like other Ilford films, be a bit flat in some brews. 

Drying, I find the Ilford liquid better than phot-flo, I think a lot depends on your tap water which works best. Again no detail but hanging in the shower after running it for a minute gives a still, dust free, humid environment, the film dries slower, less curl, and the spots are less likely to form. I am never a fan of wiping, it is asking for trouble.

The underexposed bit: was it end of roll? You need to wind on the spool a little more perhaps, if you leave it too near the end it can reduce flow and be uneven, doesn't look a camera fault. M4 rather than M7, M2 the best  ( single frame lines show)

On the shots shown I would look at cropping, only Cartier-Bresson is allowed to never crop, and even he did sometimes. on a rangefinder you often need to "tidy" the edges, eg the chair needs to loose that cushion edge topl LHS and the sprocket holes, the wire on the monument at the bottom. Tighten up the subject. Welcome back to film.

[ReturningToFilm]

Hi Steve

 

Thank you very much. The images are scanned negatives without any post processing to show their "nude" state. I followed the massive Dev tables and used HC-110 dilution B; 5 mins developing time. Any suggestions re: increasing contrast via changing the developing time?

 

Best wishes

Paul

[ReturningToFilm]

Hi Chris and Mach

Thanks for your very helpful replies. Apologies for lack of details.

In addition to the info above regarding developer and times, the negatives were left to hang in a shower, but without it being on beforehand- sounds like a good tip to try for my next roll.

The negatives were scanned with a Plustek 8100 and vuescan.

Very much can see that tightening up the frame would improve things, coming from being a lazy dSLR user, going to have to work at that with the rangefinder.

I'm also going to have to overcome an aversion with film to digitally post process it, after all one would manipulate with wet printing....

Thanks for the warm welcome!

Paul

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Regarding the 'guesstimating exposure'  if you have a smartphone with you...

There are lots of apps (even free ones) that will transform your phone to a light meter...

I use Pocket Light Meter on my iPhone

[Doc Henry]

Hi Paul , It's a good work ! nice pictures

Good idea to return to film

As said above Steve and LF members ,  it needs a little more contrast.

Try Kodak TX400  if you like deep black  and develop yourself your negative.

and if you can take an enlarger !

Look at this thread :

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2871968

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?p=2871013

Go on

Best

Henry

Don't forget to share your photos with us. Thanks in advance

Edited August 15, 2015 by Doc Henry

[chrism]

I think you're doing very well. The water spots issue is simply solved by using a bit more PhotoFlo (0.5 - 1.0ml per film) and maybe using it in distilled water for the final rinse if you live in a hard water area,though your photos look like London so you don't have really hard water. I wouldn't use a squeegee if I were you - I've tried and abandoned them. I used to take my fingers and run the film through two fingers to do the same thing but even that has damaged some films, so now I use plenty of PhotoFlo and let them hang. The only issues I have are with certain colour films that still get spots of the non-emulsion side, so I place the film emulsion down on kitchen paper once dry, and polish off the spots with some paper towel being careful to hold the film still on the kitchen paper as I don't want to cause scratches on the emulsion.

Everything else can be sorted out after scanning. Reduced contrast or flat photos are very easily tuned up. If you don't mind me doing it, here is a comparison of your photo and then an amended version:

 

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!

 

 

I just added a bit of a tone curve to increase contrast in LightRoom. Your photographs look good enough for you to persevere!

 

Chris

 

 

[ReturningToFilm]

Thanks for the encouragement Henry, Chrism and dpitt.

Well, manipulating in LR certainly transformed the image- thanks for demonstrating how much of a difference that makes!

Currently have a roll of Tri-X drying so will try to post some examples from that later- a few shots are woefully underexposed - a night time indoor reception where I thought I would experiment....! Some others look good with apparently ok contrast, let's see how the scans look.

Any advice on the settings for VueScan scanning B&W negatives would be very welcome!

Cheers!

Paul

[Doc Henry]

Paul , on which scanner are you using Vuescan ?

Henry

[pico]

Photoflow 200 is named for its recommended dilution 1:200 (for 30 seconds.) In my experience more creates hazy streaks. More dilute than 1:200 works just fine if it is in distilled water.

 

Your exposures look pretty good! Focus, not so good, but rangefinders are challenging and you will almost certainly improve.

 

Increasing contrast in post-processing or if making wet print, using the proper grade paper.

 

After shooting without a built-in exposure meter for thirty-something years I moved to the M7 and was surprised by its accuracy, but as mentioned, you are doing well without it. The M4 is still my favorite 35mm camera.

[ReturningToFilm]

Hi Henry and Pico

I am using a Plustek 8100. Pico- you are certainly right about my focussing, just scanning some of the Tri-X that was cooking earlier and can see I have missed my intended subject quite a few times, quite frustrating but hey, this is all about being more considered, taking time, enjoying, so I will learn, I hope. I wear glasses, so find getting close to the viewfinder a bit challenging....and need to get used to not being babied by autofocus! I will try to post up some scans in a while. Have some lines in some of these negatives, maybe I scratched them by putting them into archive sleeves before they were fully dry, although I thought they were.....

Cheers

Paul

[Keith (M)]

Welcome back to film!    Lots of good advice has been given and I second the fact that your negatives are a very good basis for post-processing.  As to drying marks (and dust specks), my method is to use a de-wetting agent in the last rinse, take the spool out of the tank and give it a good, sharp rap against the side of the sink prior to pulling the film off the reel.  After attaching the holder to the top of the film, I step into the shower compartment (which has had the shower operated for a couple of minutes while the film was in the fix), and hang the film, attach the bottom weight then gently run a pre-wetted and thoroughly rinsed chamois leather down the film.  Have never suffered any scratches and drying marks are almost non-existent.  

Edited August 15, 2015 by Keith (M)

[Doc Henry]

Paul, Plustek is delivered with Silverfast isn't ?

Why not use it and pay another VueScan ?

Best

Henry

[ReturningToFilm]

Thanks again to all. Henry - I had heard some bad reviews of Silverfast and I'm on a mac so thought would bite the bullet and get VueScan....

 

Here are some shots from the Tri-X roll referred to earlier. Much less drying spots on this one, some of the lines I referred to above have post processed out I think. Some minimal manipulation in PS. Pushed to 800 with HC-110 B 8.5 mins developing time.

 

Once again any advice very much gratefully received and thanks for reading and sharing your experience everyone

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

[Doc Henry]

Paul, settings on any scan software :

First scan in Tiff  (equivalent in DNG digital)
With Tiff you can eventually correct in PS or LR,  for example for more contrast as on your pictures above.
But shooting with a good measure of exposition finally did not need correction (have you a light meter?) .
Scan according to your need : to post in Leica Forum or to print in inkjet (size larger or smaller) ,

in this case , if larger , the increase of "dpi" is needed .

If you have an enlarger not need to scan : direct impression on silver photo paper. It's better.
Develop yourself the film.

Good pictures and good scan.

Henry

Edited August 15, 2015 by Doc Henry

[Doc Henry]

Thanks again to all. Henry - I had heard some bad reviews of Silverfast and I'm on a mac so thought would bite the bullet and get VueScan....

 

Here are some shots from the Tri-X roll referred to earlier. Much less drying spots on this one, some of the lines I referred to above have post processed out I think. Some minimal manipulation in PS. Pushed to 800 with HC-110 B 8.5 mins developing time.

 

Once again any advice very much gratefully received and thanks for reading and sharing your experience everyone

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

Paul , it's crops ?

it lacks sharpness IMO ? focus problem ?

But tone images is better than the first series

Best

Henry

For Vuescan , I understand now ! 

Edited August 15, 2015 by Doc Henry

[ReturningToFilm]

Hi Henry

 

Scanning to TIFF. I think my main area to work on is actually my focussing with the rangefinder!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Doc Henry]

Paul,  it's hard to photograph people on movement . It can happen for me too.

But when you photograph with a M  (which is very suitable for this kind of shooting),

anticipate ,  set the focus and shoot at the right time
This is very efficient  when you're used rangefinder? I use reflex before, now I love M

because very discreet and how formidable rangefinder.

Best

Henry