Pre-Exposed colour negative film - I don't "get" it

[mikemgb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mike,

 

Perhaps we should try to persuade TASMA in St Petersburg to start to make colour reversal film again, after all the Russians seem to have no qualms about handling nasty chemicals. There is a whisper that  SVEMA in the Ukraine may re-issue CO-50D colour reversal, which was an analogue of Agfachrome. They might even be able to push it up to 100 ISO which would be useful. Again the restrictions on chemicals used in manufacture, is I suspect, somewhat more lax in the Ukraine than either western Europe or the USA. The downside is that I don't think it was E6 process but the same unique process that the early Agfachrome used. A bit of a pain to have to send your film to Kiev for processing but I supposed no worse than sending Kodachrome to Dayton, Ohio was. 

 

Wilson

 

Having used modern Russian reversal film - Lomo - I wouldn't expect any remake of an old film to be anywhere near the quality of the original. I think that's why Lomochrome Purple was introduced, it looks better than their regular slide film!

Edited September 8, 2018 by mikemgb

[wlaidlaw]

Mike, 

 

I don't think the Lomo is Russian film. I have been given to understand it is out of date, wide rolls of bulk Agfa-Gevaert aerial survey film, that has just been slit, perforated and rolled into cassettes at an old Kodak plant in Mexico.  I have been told it is the same rubbish base stock as Rollei Vario Chrome, the only difference was that Rollei bought it ready slit to 35mm and perforated. Variochrome = variable results from poor to completely unusable - i could not believe how bad it was. Thank goodness I only bought two rolls. The second roll went in the bin. If you look at the wacky colours of Lomochrome, it does look like a badly-stored, expired film. If this is true it is a total con, selling people re-dated expired film, that has just been recently rolled and packaged.

 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

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

[mikemgb]

I have shot one roll of Rollei Chrome 35mm and a 3 pack of 120 Lomo, they did look remarkably similar, they both had the same yellow tint. I will never shoot either again.

 

I'm actually not likely to shoot any E6 again, if Fuji really are discontinuing their offerings I don't want to get to like it too much - even though 120 Provia looks fantastic!

[semi-ambivalent]

Mike, 

 

I don't think the Lomo is Russian film. I have been given to understand it is out of date, wide rolls of bulk Agfa-Gevaert aerial survey film, that has just been slit, perforated and rolled into cassettes at an old Kodak plant in Mexico.  I have been told it is the same rubbish base stock as Rollei Vario Chrome, the only difference was that Rollei bought it ready slit to 35mm and perforated. Variochrome = variable results from poor to completely unusable - i could not believe how bad it was. Thank goodness I only bought two rolls. The second roll went in the bin. If you look at the wacky colours of Lomochrome, it does look like a badly-stored, expired film. If this is true it is a total con, selling people re-dated expired film, that has just been recently rolled and packaged.

 

Wilson

Ahhh, re-branding at its purest.

 

Once I would squeeze oranges for the juice and throw away the rinds because that's what one did. But now I grate orange rinds to put in the pancake batter and I like that result much better, besides, I no longer drink orange juice. Does that make the juice the throwaway? How has the value shifted? Or has it?

[Martin B]

I read about the pre-exposed films with weird colors a while ago, but I was not attracted at all by them. I can see that this provides some sort or "artistic" value for some, but it didn't appeal to me. This said, I see also more and more of my photographer friends converting photos into abstract painting-look a-likes because this seems the better (or only?) way these days to sell photos in exhibits etc. Even if a photo is well done and the composition looks appealing, it is hard to find buyers - abstract photos on the other hand are valued more like art and stand a better chance of being sold. I believe the same applies to the pre-exposed films - avoiding to make a photo look like a "normal" photo even with film. 

[earleygallery]

 I think that's why Lomochrome Purple was introduced, it looks better than their regular slide film!

 

It's a negative film.

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This thread is a bit like a bunch of vegetarians debating the quality of beefburgers.

Edited September 10, 2018 by earleygallery

[mikemgb]

It's a negative film.

 

They market it as such but it looks very much like cross-processed slide film, and you can get some reasonable results processing it in E6, certainly no worse looking than their X-Pro slide film.

[david strachan]

Those films remind me of special effects filters...stars, rainbow, splits, fog, etc.

 

Use them once then they stay in the stack of collected unused filters.

 

...

[mikemgb]

Those films remind me of special effects filters...stars, rainbow, splits, fog, etc.

 

Use them once then they stay in the stack of collected unused filters.

 

...

Hey! I loved my star filters! 

[david strachan]

Haha. Remember the grad tobacco filters, for sky effects. So overdone in cinematography some time ago. Haven't seen them used lately.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have just received my monthly newsletter from the Film Photography Project. This month's big splurge is on pre-exposed colour negative film with weird colours.  I am afraid I just don't see the attraction of these weird films. Marco Barbereschi and Cinzia Cancedda I think Lomography sell them as well. It seems like an analogue medium trying to ape Instagram and I cannot see the point. 

 

Does anyone else understand what the makers of these films are trying to achieve? I can see that one or two images might be fun but 36 of them? You would also need to be carrying another camera with you with regular film in it, in case you spotted something, where you did not want it reproduced in rainbow hues. 

 

Wilson

Actually, Instagram started with mimicking film cameras and film defects. Cross-processing digital filter came from film.

And this is how lomography was started.

Not only cheap LOMO LC-A, but cheap, expired color films, wrong chemicals and so on.

 

Over years LOMO stopped making cheap LC-A, film lost manufacturing and selling in huge quantities and as result old and defective film became less and less available and more expensive.

But the aesthetics of light leaks and trashy films is well established.

Film Photography Project was and is hipsters run business. They were always into cheap cameras and trashy film.

 

I like them, they do more for popularizing of film than Kodak, Fuji and else does.

By now they are well established,just like original Lomography guys from Austria.

 

And to me the look of those lomography, light exposed films is pleasing, then it is done with artistic approach.

It is not as easy at it might looks.

 

Questioning it as common as questioning contemporary art, I guess.

Lots of those who work the system, but many are real artists.

[pico]

Actually, Instagram started with mimicking film cameras and film defects.

By choosing unpredictable, shitty film the so-called photographers wish to absolve themselves from competence.

[mikemgb]

Haha. Remember the grad tobacco filters, for sky effects. So overdone in cinematography some time ago. Haven't seen them used lately.

 

 

I really, truly, hated the tobacco grad filter, unfortunately if you look long enough at travel company adverts you will still find it used in places.

 

I was going through my filters recently, I have a decent collection of soft focus and star filters, I'm happy to say I don't believe I have used any of them since 1995. 

[wlaidlaw]

Haha. Remember the grad tobacco filters, for sky effects. So overdone in cinematography some time ago. Haven't seen them used lately.

 

 

I still have a large CD wallet full of Cokin P rectangular filters including things like star, speed, tobacco, various ND and so on, bought as a job lot from eBay. I did want to use them on my SL but although Cokin claim you can use them with an 82mm front lens, you get vignetting. I would need to sell them all off and move up to 100mm filters from Cokin or Lee. I went on a Lee filters course run by Robert White with my SL. It was an interesting day but the sort of results you get are beginning to look hackneyed - super smooth seas, with big stoppers, dark skies with bright foregrounds and so on. Not sure that I would get the benefit of the £500 to £600 you need to spend to get a reasonable kit of filters. I will give the Cokin P filters another run with my CL. The only filters I use regularly are a UV/Skylight on my film cameras and polarising on digital. 

 

Wilson

Edited September 11, 2018 by wlaidlaw

[andybarton]

 

 

Mike,

 

Perhaps we should try to persuade TASMA in St Petersburg to start to make colour reversal film again, after all the Russians seem to have no qualms about handling nasty chemicals. There is a whisper that  SVEMA in the Ukraine may re-issue CO-50D colour reversal, which was an analogue of Agfachrome. They might even be able to push it up to 100 ISO which would be useful. Again the restrictions on chemicals used in manufacture, is I suspect, somewhat more lax in the Ukraine than either western Europe or the USA. The downside is that I don't think it was E6 process but the same unique process that the early Agfachrome used. A bit of a pain to have to send your film to Kiev for processing but I supposed no worse than sending Kodachrome to Dayton, Ohio was.

 

Wilson

 

I really don't think we should be encouraging anyone, anywhere, to start up filthy chemical processes again, just to satisfy the whims of people who want to use an old style film.

 

Sorry if this makes me sound like a killjoy, but if "we" are not prepared to use such chemicals, it is completely unreasonable to encourage others to do so. There is far too much exporting of processes that we find unacceptable already. Thankfully, the Chinese, for example, have started to refuse our waste plastic for "recycling". So now, "we" are having to take responsibility for our own waste. And about time too.

[oldwino]

By choosing unpredictable, shitty film the so-called photographers wish to absolve themselves from competence.

 

 

Or pass off the occasional happy accident as evidence of their "talent"?

[carbon_dragon]

Not that there’s a market for it, and not that anyone would actually do it, but I wonder if it is possible to create a modern film with a chemical development process that IS perfectly fine for the environment? Something that can be easily broken down by normal water processing systems. I guess it would have to be based on something other than silver. Maybe you could even lower the number of chemicals in the chain.

 

I guess it’s a little like discussing better ways to make buggy whips at this point, but it’s interesting to think about.

[Steve Ricoh]

On 9/11/2018 at 12:11 AM, earleygallery said:

This thread is a bit like a bunch of vegetarians debating the quality of beefburgers.

Any meat eaters here who like their beef burgers (😊), or better still engage in pre-exposing film and can offer tips on how to do it?

I came across someone on Twitter who pre-exposes by running a roll of film using the rewind mechanism (having first clicked the whole roll with the lens cap in place) with the shutter on B, and with the camera pointing at a computer monitor playing a random set of colours, rainbow for instance, with the lens deliberately out of focus, under exposing by a couple of stops so not to be overpowering. 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[250swb]

There are a lot of things in modern photography I don't like, such as overt HDR, or the curse of Bokeh, etc. So I wouldn't put pre-exposing film at the top of my hit list, after all there is an element of chance and experimentation and brio involved that shows a free spirit, not the 'press this button for HDR' or 'look how much I spent on this creamy bokeh'.