57andrew Posted March 25, 2011 Share #1 Posted March 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Tomorrow after 10+ years of digital I am going to take out my M3, newly overhauled in Solms, and a couple of rolls of Tri X. Whilst browsing I found this quote: "Shooting B/W and then turning the film and processing over to your local lab is like Leonardo buying the canvas and paint and then turning it over to the local quick sketch artist." As they say ion school exam papers..... discuss. I don't have a dark room and I work 12 hours a day or more and doubt if I can find time to spend on meticulous printing. I did do my own B&Ws under dad's supervision about 40 years ago. My idea was to to get a reputable local dealer to develop and then scan the negs and go from there. Probably defeats the object? Views? BTW I am horrified to calculate that each frame is going to cost me about HK$1.3 before processing. Yikes. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Hi 57andrew, Take a look here DIY. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
DavidStone Posted March 25, 2011 Share #2 Posted March 25, 2011 "Shooting B/W and then turning the film and processing over to your local lab is like Leonardo buying the canvas and paint and then turning it over to the local quick sketch artist." As they say ion school exam papers..... discuss. Andrew Well, that's more or less what Henri Cartier-Bresson did, and the printing too, so you'd be in good company. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 25, 2011 Share #3 Posted March 25, 2011 Your analogy doesn't make any sense to me. I sometimes paint too, if I just buy a canvas and paints and hand that to someone else how does that make me an artist? P... artist maybe! Plenty of photographers past and present don't do their own processing or printing, including digital processing, but what I would say is that B&W processing is so simple that you'd be foolish not to do it yourself. As for the cost of film, come on, its cheap compare to what you've spent on your equipment. You won't go and shoot 2000 frames in a day just because you've got an empty memory card and a spare battery, you'll make each shot count and think a little more about what you're doing. Enjoy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share #4 Posted March 25, 2011 James, not my analogy, one I picked up elsewhere but I appreciate your sentiments. The cost of film remark was firmly tongue in cheek. As you can see the budget ran to TWO rolls! Best wishes Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 25, 2011 Share #5 Posted March 25, 2011 Yes I realise you were quoting but you did ask for comments! Another thought came to mind, I watched some program on TV a while back, showing David Bailey on a fashion shoot. He doesn't 'press the button' but rather directs all of his assistants and model/s. One of the assistants is operating the camera - but the photo is still by David Bailey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted March 26, 2011 Author Share #6 Posted March 26, 2011 I saw a similar arrangement with an Italian photographer. He does the creative bit and stipulates the technical side but is nowhere near the camera when the image is executed. Id find that a little too "remote control". Regards Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted March 26, 2011 Share #7 Posted March 26, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello Andrew, Many people have many perspectives. Whether to self process or not is only a value judgement if you choose to make it one. Some varieties of photographic image capture have very little photogapher input after the image is retained by the film or sensor. An example of this might be now departed Kodachrome which had processing requirements which put it out of the category of small scale user processing. Polaroid is another which comes to mind. How much of the final image you choose to create w/ the release of the shutter & how much control you want after the image is captured is not only your choice but is something you can do one way today & a dozen different ways on a dozen other days. I disagree w/ the analogy which says buying the paints, blank canvas & brushes & giving them to someone else to do the picture is the same as someone not doing their own processing. When you capture an image w/ film or sensor you have already done significantly more than hand an unpainted canvas & other supplies to someone else. Some people like to consider image capture in the camera as the final step as far as manipulation is concerned. Some people consider a sucessful photo from an unaltered original image processed in a standardized manner w/ little or no further photographer input to be a significant portion of their enjoyment &/or challenge. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted March 26, 2011 Share #8 Posted March 26, 2011 I can develop your negs, and make a print. It will not be what you envisioned, but will be a print. Maybe you can start with a decent scan and go from there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted March 26, 2011 Author Share #9 Posted March 26, 2011 Thank you Michael and Tobey. For the record I also disagree with the quote but see the post processing simply as a starting point. Just thinking about all the "templates" you get with software like SEP2 tells me that even if I processed the same negative 100 times I could still do something different. Handing it over to a 3rd party gives me one of the options but I quite like the idea of scanning and processing myself from the raw material. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 26, 2011 Share #10 Posted March 26, 2011 I don't use any of those "filmic" plugins and just use PS on my scans. Every time I work on a shot it comes out different. That's how it should be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted March 26, 2011 Share #11 Posted March 26, 2011 Andrew, there is no issue in giving away part of the workflow. Make sure, you can rely on the lab in: - consistency of development - you underexposed a roll and would like, to have it developed, pushed in a certain, consistent way - you also want all your properly exposed film be developed always in the same constant way, to minimize this variable in the workflow - the lab handles your film properly (obviously), so no scratches, proper archival sleeves for the negatives, so you don't have to resleeve, when scanning, the lab uses a proper strip cutter, so no half frames, when shooting low light, the lab personnel will recognize reloaded rolls with improper frame to frame distance and cut accordingly, etc - calculate the cost for the film as this: a two roll tank development of your preferred film speed costs you how much time ? Calculate this time with your usual hourly rate, you work in your real job for and compare, if a higher cost lab is worth to you. I shoot mainly pushed Tri-X @ ISO3200. One roll costs me at least 15min time + loading, hanging, cutting, sleeving. The lab does this one roll for about 20 − 25 RMB for me. I don't touch any developer soon with the high quality the nice people from the lab give me. Don't sweat the costs much, until you shoot a lot (a lot means so much, that you spend weekends in your bathroom with several 8 roll tanks). Some people disagree and preach the "only silver prints are real prints", but I (and surely may others) really like the benefits from a hybrid workflow. Just make sure, that you have the scanning part covert adequately (this is an art as alchemistic as silver printing itself, but more on the geeky side). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgreernz Posted March 26, 2011 Share #12 Posted March 26, 2011 Well, I'm one that abandoned my darkroom some considerable years ago. Was it the right decision? Probably not, but that's what I did. Today, with a mix of digital (M9) and film (M3 and IIIf) in my kit, I use a lab to develop, cut and sleeve my film shoot days - and then I do battle with the scanning and post-camera editing in my own digital darkroom. Are there frustrations? Sure. Dang, the Nikon 4000 cost me handsomely, and then there's the iMac, La Cei drives, Photoshop, Lightroom and Nik software.... and the laptop for on-location stuff. And I grind my teeth at the number of times I have to edit out careless drying marks on negatives. I have to be extra extra sure that I have told the lab if I have pushed or pulled a film (and be confident that the young fella behind the counter knows what that means). But I can live with it. So in one word, would I re-establish my wet darkroom from the 60's? Naa. I'd rather have the time to enjoy a morning coffee and the Sunday paper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted March 26, 2011 Author Share #13 Posted March 26, 2011 Thank you Menos and Michael. There are a few good processing labs in HK and quite a few poor ones. I have discovered both over 14 years. When I first came here it was 1997 and I only shot transparencies, usually Velvia and sometimes I had prints made from the slides. I worked out quickly who was good and who was not. Some indeed did not understand what "pushed" meant. Realistically I can't see myself setting up a darkroom. I think I'd need to build a small extension! I quite like the creative side of PS within bounds - I've never gone for HDR and prefer BW. Looking through good quality books of old prints such as Hedda Morrison's images of HK in the 40s reminded me how evocative film is as a medium and I just want to experiment with the hybrid approach and see what I can do. All views welcome. Thanks for taking the time to comment. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted March 27, 2011 Share #14 Posted March 27, 2011 Andrew - welcome back to the world of silver-halides As to processing, if you stick with b&w, then all you need is a changing bag, tank, chemicals and a thermometer etc - no need for a dark-room. Easy-peasy (I have just gone down that route twenty+ years after dismantling my dark-room). Hang the negs in the shower to dry, cut into strips and scan - bingo! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted March 28, 2011 Share #15 Posted March 28, 2011 Andrew - welcome back to the world of silver-halides As to processing, if you stick with b&w, then all you need is a changing bag, tank, chemicals and a thermometer etc - no need for a dark-room. Easy-peasy (I have just gone down that route twenty+ years after dismantling my dark-room). Hang the negs in the shower to dry, cut into strips and scan - bingo! I second that thought! Surprising many people seem to do this approach these days, as really good developing labs went away with the advent of digitalia. The only reason, I mostly have the film developed by a lab, is, that I shoot mostly pushed TX400 film at very high ISO. This leads to development times in excess of 20min each tank. If you shoot BW film @ ISO400 or maybe 800, developing is a lot quicker, easier and more fun. Actually doing it is as straight forward, as cooking Spaghetti with instant tomato sauce - not as easy though, as heating a frozen pizza in the micro wave machine, which would be the equivalent of shooting JPGs and downloading them to a computer to consume pix on the web Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted March 28, 2011 Author Share #16 Posted March 28, 2011 Keith and Menos, thank you x2. This sounds a good solution (no pun intended). I dropped the roll off today at Photo & Scientific and they will turn it round in 48 hours, developed and scanned. I'll see how good a job they make of it. It is not outrageously expensive. I did do B&W myself in the distant past so I shall see whether I can remember what to do to get my films "al dente", spaghetti fashion. I also bought some Ilford FP4 Plus. I've got the bug. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 28, 2011 Share #17 Posted March 28, 2011 Shooting B/W and then turning the film and processing over to your local lab is like Leonardo buying the canvas and paint and then turning it over to the local quick sketch artist." Whoever said that should be embarassed. It's one of the silliest things I've ever read. Completely impertinent. Do what you have to do considering your time constraints. At some later time perhaps you can go back to personally process a negative or two. Enjoy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted March 28, 2011 Share #18 Posted March 28, 2011 Analogies are, well, analogies. For me the flaw in the one quoted in the first post is equating the vast majority of photographers with "Leonardo." Most probably don't even come up to "quick-sketch artist" ability. I like DIY because: a) it was always cheaper, for B&W, it became cheaper, for color, once inkjet printing and scanners matured, c) it was available (and fast) at 11 pm on a Sunday night - and d) I did like the creative control. Color processes tend to be "black boxes" - you stick the film in one end and slides or negs come out the other, and it really doesn't matter who turns the crank on the black box, you or a lab. So I never found those to be cost effective (counting the cost of my time). There is more fiddling one can do with B&W - either in the film processing or the printing. HCB was a fairly "straight" photographer - but even he spent SOME time with his printers, getting the images the way he wanted them. Magnum in general had "pet printers" whom they could trust to get what they wanted out of their negatives - but it was a very close symbiotic relationship, not "a corner lab." Same in the era of LIFE and LOOK - the photographers spent most of their time in the field, and let the in-house labs do the processing. But again, the in-house techs knew the photographers' tastes and could deliver what they wanted. In a lot of their books, the shooters gave credit, by name, to their personal printers. Gene Smith, by contrast, would spend up to 12 hours on one print. He was definitely in the "Leonardo" class - but also borderline psychotic. Ansel Adams said the "negative was the score, and the print was the performance." Obviously another musician can play your music - but often, if composers want it played right, they at least do the conducting. Note, however, that for Adams, the film processing was a huge part of getting the image right even before the printing began. No "black box" there. He did it himself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted April 1, 2011 Author Share #19 Posted April 1, 2011 Thanks Andy. Fascinating comments. I agree with the Leonardo point - maybe Rolf Harris. Can you see what it is yet? Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted April 1, 2011 Author Share #20 Posted April 1, 2011 OK, here are a couple of shots from last weekend with the M3 and a 35 cron - developed and scanned by Photo & Scientific. Comments welcomed. Thanks, 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/147161-diy/?do=findComment&comment=1632585'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.