My (maybe brief?) return to film...need some help

[Stevejack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

31 minutes ago, MarkP said:

If I may add:

Nothing focuses the mind more for planning the photo than only having 36 shots in the canister, or even less with MF.

I also find that with digital I’m often trying to get the technically perfect shot, eeking the last drop if IQ out of the sensor and lens.  With film I have no such concerns.

 

 

Well put. For many years I was also obsessed with sharpness and technical perfection over all else. I definitely fell into the wrong crowd with obsessing over tech specs rather than the actual important aspects of photography. I think I wasted 20 years learning about all the wrong things, and I didn't learn a damn thing about what makes a good photo during that time.

It took going to a manual focus system to begin appreciating the rest of what makes a good photograph, and not caring at all if the image was actually sharp or not. Now I focus entirely on lighting / composition / expression and all those aspects and the photos that are good, are good whether they are technically perfect or not. But because my focus is on what actually makes a compelling image, my keeper rate has gone way up even as my in focus / sharp-across-the-frame hit rate has gone down. 

Don't get me wrong, I think improving equipment over time is critical to advancing photography as a whole.. I support the megapixel race, improvements in optics and autofocus etc. But it's nice to pick up a Rolleiflex or a meterless Leica film camera and just go back to basics sometimes.

[MarkP]

.

Edited October 28, 2022 by MarkP

[Advertisement]

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

[MarkP]

1 hour ago, Stevejack said:

obsessing over tech specs..

I do that too 🙂

[pippy]

6 hours ago, MarkP said:

...Nothing focuses the mind more for planning the photo than only having 36 shots in the canister, or even less with MF......I also find that with digital I’m often trying to get the technically perfect shot, eeking the last drop if IQ out of the sensor and lens.  With film I have no such concerns.

If I may address the latter part first, Mark?

I'm in the fortunate position of having a variety of lenses for my Leica cameras - some being 90+ years old - so I have the luxury of being able to decide whether I wish to go down the More Vintage or More Modern look in terms of rendering although in truth I only own one lens which can truly be described as being modern; the latest ASPH APO FLE stuff isn't something which attracts me. As it happens the youngest lens I've used over the last month or so is just a whisker off 50 years old and my digi-M bodies are hardly the Latest Thing as far as resolution goes so eeking-out the last 1% in IQ is hardly high-up on my list of priorities!

The discussion about using 35mm film is a bit different - at least as far as I'm concerned - as I will always carry spare rolls 'just-in-case'; I learned that lesson the hard way by missing some great shots as I had finished a roll but had no back-up. Not Good. I resolved never again to be caught-out without a spare.

At the same time my main 'work' camera for the first 25 years as a professional was a 5"x4" Sinar Monorail so on the matter of 'film-use' my discipline has, for a long time, been finely-tuned to ensure there is little-to-no waste and I carry-over this mindset as much as is practicable when shooting small-format stuff as well. This discipline DID slip to a great extent after I started using a DSLR for my personal snapping and I discovered that the quality of the images I was capturing went down the tubes VERY rapidly. The realisation that my picture-taking skills had gone out of the window was, in fact, the specific reason why I ditched my DSLR and went back to using a Leica M for personal work.

The type of subject-matter which interests me isn't the sort where lightning-fast reaction time is essential so most of the time I can weigh things up; take my time; consider various viewpoints and decide how I wish to capture an image. Everyone has their own method of shooting and we each have to discover what works best for ourselves.

Hope all that sort-of makes sense.

Philip.

[MarkP]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

 

Hope all that sort-of makes sense.

Philip.

Makes perfect sense Philip.  I think we're on the same page.  However, I never quite had to work to the discipline of only one shot in the camera. I did take a FujiFilm GW690 III to Antarctica with my SL/SL2 system. Having only 8 shots per roll in an environment where it wasn't easy to change film is the closest I've been to that.

 

 

[Mikep996]

Re film winding in the patterson reels:  This morning I sacrificed a roll of 36 HP4 to "do it in the daylight."  Neither of my totally dry reels would take in the entire roll before it started buckling at the little racket balls.  Carefully examining, I could see that there is plenty of room left in the reel but, obviously, too much friction between the film/plastic guides for some reason.  Again, I made sure the reels were totally dry!!

I tried cutting the front of the film into more of a curve rather than a straight cut; that made no difference.  I tried loading it backwards - also made no difference.  I tried to 'overcome' the resistance and it split the film at the ratchet.  🤬  I guess I'll be using 24EXP rolls.  

Wasn't like this with SS reels!  🙄

 

[johnwolf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, MarkP said:

.... Nothing focuses the mind more for planning the photo than only having 36 shots in the canister, or even less with MF....

 

 

True. However, there's a lot to be said for shooting freely, spontaneously, without all that thinking. As in writing, painting, and other creative endeavors, fastidiousness can be the enemy of creativity. 

I suppose it depends on your genre and temperament, but to me one of the limitations of film is the cost and time required to shoot with abandon. 

John

Edited October 28, 2022 by johnwolf

[Tom R]

25 minutes ago, Mikep996 said:

Re film winding in the patterson reels:  This morning I sacrificed a roll of 36 HP4 to "do it in the daylight."  Neither of my totally dry reels would take in the entire roll before it started buckling at the little racket balls.  Carefully examining, I could see that there is plenty of room left in the reel but, obviously, too much friction between the film/plastic guides for some reason.  Again, I made sure the reels were totally dry!!

I tried cutting the front of the film into more of a curve rather than a straight cut; that made no difference.  I tried loading it backwards - also made no difference.  I tried to 'overcome' the resistance and it split the film at the ratchet.  🤬  I guess I'll be using 24EXP rolls.  

Wasn't like this with SS reels!  🙄

 

One thing you might try (unless you've "had enough") ... If you're using the original plastic reels that come with the Paterson tank: Trim the leader/trailer (depending upon which end of the film you're loading onto the reel). Make sure that you slip this end of the film, seated correctly, in relation to the ballbearings. Then manually thread the film to about halfway around the reel--do this by manually leading the edge around the outside of the reel. If you're working with a dummy roll you should be able to visually confirm that the film is correctly seated in the outer track of the reel. If you're working in the dark, lightly run your finger across the outside edge of the film looking for any irregularities. If everything is good at this point begin to slowly wind the film onto the reel. 

I use both the original Paterson reels as well as reels that have larger thumb surface rests where the film enters the reel; this reels are easier to load in the dark, but require that you unlock them in order to remove stalled film, whereas the original Paterson reels allow you to pinch and lift the film off of the reel in the event of a misfeed.

Finally, using 24 exposure rolls makes lots of sense if that meets/satisfies your requirements. After all, after doing all of the work and expense of capturing these images, why jeopardize these efforts over what should be a mundane (if not relaxing?) task.

[jsrockit]

On 10/26/2022 at 6:46 AM, pippy said:

What, specifically, did you find to be more enjoyable about the shooting experience? I ask because IMX whether I'm using either my M2 or my M-D 262 the shooting experience is exactly the same apart from, with the digi-cam, not having to wind the film on or rewind it at the end of the roll(*).

I feel the same way as you... I use an M240 and find it the same, but with the digital results (color) that I actually prefer.  However, some people I think really enjoy winding the film crank.  I have been to countless meetups with Leica users who will sit there and compare the smoothness of the rewind etc.  I just sat there and drank beer.  Of course, people just like the look of film too.  For some it is just how photography is done.  To me, I like all photography... as long as it brings something good to the table.  

Edited October 28, 2022 by jsrockit

[TomB_tx]

1 hour ago, Mikep996 said:

Re film winding in the patterson reels:  This morning I sacrificed a roll of 36 HP4 to "do it in the daylight."  Neither of my totally dry reels would take in the entire roll before it started buckling at the little racket balls.  Carefully examining, I could see that there is plenty of room left in the reel but, obviously, too much friction between the film/plastic guides for some reason.  Again, I made sure the reels were totally dry!!

I tried cutting the front of the film into more of a curve rather than a straight cut; that made no difference.  I tried loading it backwards - also made no difference.  I tried to 'overcome' the resistance and it split the film at the ratchet.  🤬  I guess I'll be using 24EXP rolls.  

Wasn't like this with SS reels!  🙄

 

Yup - I still use stainless reels and Nikor tanks. I used Nikor reels for decades before I was given a Hewes reel, and now I only use Hewes. Having loaded SS reels for over 50 years it is really automatic now.

[pippy]

27 minutes ago, jsrockit said:

...some people I think really enjoy winding the film crank...

My father had a Leica IIIb and when I was very young - 4 or 5 years old - I used to be fascinated by turning the wind-on knob and watching the shutter-speed dial and shutter release button rotate but in the opposite direction! This would then be followed by the wonderful 'tchick' as the shutter was tripped and I'd start the process all over again...

That fascination has never left me.

Incidentally on the subject of wind-on levers / mechanisms; one of the things which I really didn't like about the Nikon F3 was the feel when winding-on. I had been using Nikon F and F2 cameras for years and in comparison the feel of the wind-on of the F3 was more like turning one elastic-band sprung cardboard tube inside another; absolutely Horrible.

Philip.

Edited October 28, 2022 by pippy

[Anbaric]

On 10/26/2022 at 7:29 AM, Mikep996 said:

It then occurred to me...what now?  If I scan the film then haven't I just made film into a far more difficult way to produce a digital image?  It's much easier to use a digital camera to do that and the "conversion" process alters the image.  IOW, without a darkroom (which I do NOT want to get back into) it seems to me that the hybrid method - shooting film, scanning it, printing it - produces something that is inferior to either all digital OR all analog.  If I just want images for computer/web/sharing, it seems to me to make even less sense to use film.

For me, a high quality scan preserves what I like about film, the texture and the grain and the different 'look'. I suppose most of this could be faked with some Photoshop filter, but I'm really not interested in doing that sort of manipulation. Of course the 'film look' isn't what everyone wants, or wants all the time (I shoot mostly digital). Before digital cameras, a lot of people were trying to make 'grainless' photos where the idiosyncrasies of the medium were minimised. The clean 'digital look' was what they were after all along, which is a perfectly understandable and respectable position.

Few of us without access to our own darkrooms have in any case been using purely analogue workflows for over 20 years, whether we realise it or not - minilabs like the Fuji Frontier or Noritsu are hybrid systems that produce prints from scanned negatives. These machines have excellent scanners, and most processing services will provide the output as high resolution tiff or jpeg for a reasonable (or unreasonable!) charge. The service I use does 'medium' scans (good enough for most purposes) for an additional £3 per film at the time of processing, or 'large' (30 megapixel) scans for £5 (still less than the price of the film itself). This saves an awful lot of messing around with a home film scanner or digital camera rig, which lowers the inconvenience barrier to shooting film.

[quietglow]

All this discussion about loading a Patterson reel makes me feel that I have a duty to mention Hewes steel reels. I was many years into my photographic journey before I stumbled upon these, and I wish I had sooner. They're as easy to load, if not easier, than a Patterson, but they have none of the disadvantages (i.e. have you ever tried loading a patterson reel that had a dot of water in it somewhere?). Their only flaw is cost: they're not cheap. If you search on youtube, you'll find a few videos showing how they differ form the normal steel reels with the spring in the middle. 

Also a plug for my most recent add to my hybrid darkroom: a Nikon LS-5000 with an autofeed full-roll adapter (which is a modified version of the feed mech that always comes with these). This thing is absolutely wonderful. I take a recently developed uncut roll, feed the end into the scanner, click "scan", then go do something else for 30 min. I come back to a pile of wonderful scans. I think it's as close to having a Frontier at home as I'll ever get, and it seems pretty darned close. 

[logan2z]

2 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

Re film winding in the patterson reels:  This morning I sacrificed a roll of 36 HP4 to "do it in the daylight."  Neither of my totally dry reels would take in the entire roll before it started buckling at the little racket balls.  Carefully examining, I could see that there is plenty of room left in the reel but, obviously, too much friction between the film/plastic guides for some reason.  Again, I made sure the reels were totally dry!!

I tried cutting the front of the film into more of a curve rather than a straight cut; that made no difference.  I tried loading it backwards - also made no difference.  I tried to 'overcome' the resistance and it split the film at the ratchet.  🤬  I guess I'll be using 24EXP rolls.  

Wasn't like this with SS reels!  🙄

 

I haven't used Paterson reels so can't really comment on what's going on there, but you might want to give Jobo reels a try. 

I'm relatively new to home development and started off with Hewes reels and Nikor tanks but gave Jobo reels/tanks a try and prefer them - especially with 120 film.  I find the reels very simple to load and have had no mis-loaded rolls or film binding issues.

[Tom R]

47 minutes ago, quietglow said:

All this discussion about loading a Patterson reel makes me feel that I have a duty to mention Hewes steel reels. I was many years into my photographic journey before I stumbled upon these, and I wish I had sooner. They're as easy to load, if not easier, than a Patterson, but they have none of the disadvantages (i.e. have you ever tried loading a patterson reel that had a dot of water in it somewhere?). Their only flaw is cost: they're not cheap. If you search on youtube, you'll find a few videos showing how they differ form the normal steel reels with the spring in the middle. 

Also a plug for my most recent add to my hybrid darkroom: a Nikon LS-5000 with an autofeed full-roll adapter (which is a modified version of the feed mech that always comes with these). This thing is absolutely wonderful. I take a recently developed uncut roll, feed the end into the scanner, click "scan", then go do something else for 30 min. I come back to a pile of wonderful scans. I think it's as close to having a Frontier at home as I'll ever get, and it seems pretty darned close. 

Second this comment. I used Hewes reels for years (having used Nikor, etc. throughout the 70's and 80's). Because I no longer have the space for a dedicated darkroom, I have had to use a changing bag which affords much less space. RE cost. Considering the rising cost of film, I don't know that the cost of of a set of Hewes stainless would not pay for themselves in short order.

[250swb]

4 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

Re film winding in the patterson reels:  This morning I sacrificed a roll of 36 HP4 to "do it in the daylight."  Neither of my totally dry reels would take in the entire roll before it started buckling at the little racket balls.  

 

It's not a secret but if the film starts to snag when loading a Paterson reel the answer is to start making much smaller motions back and forth instead of continuing with full sweeps. Some films have emulsions that grab more than others, some films have a springier film base than others. Tiny movements get the film onto the reel just as efficiently and just because there is a wide range of movement possible to load the film in a Paterson reel it doesn't mean you have to use it all if the film feels like it is going to buckle.

[Pyrogallol]

Yes, if it gets too tight start making little giggling movements to try and get the last bit of film in. Before you start you may need to bend the leading edge back to straighten it up.

Some spools work better than others, the dark stained one is the first I bought, second hand, 50 years ago and used it yesterday. It was a 36 exp film but I forgot and thought it was my normal home rolled 30 exp so the last part was unused and blank, but it all went in the spool.

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!

Edited October 28, 2022 by Pyrogallol

[Mikep996]

Thanks for all the help!  

I went out/shot 36.  I thoroughly cleaned the reels since I had used photo flo in the tank as a final wash previously.  I then dried the reels with a hair dryer.  I tried to load the film on a reel from the leader end after cutting it off.  No go - still locked up with at least 18" of film to go.  I took the film out of the reel, and loaded it backwards, as has been recommended.  It worked fine!  😃

So I guess that will be my method though I don't care for the fact that the loose film is laying in the changing bag but I guess any dust it picks up is going to wash off in the processing. This morning, when I tried loading the test film backwards, I hadn't run it through the camera so it didn't have the camera spool's "reverse twist."  I should have immediately figured out that without running the film through the camera,  loading the test film on the reel was the same regardless which end was loaded first. DUH!🥴

 

[Huss]

3 hours ago, pippy said:

..

Incidentally on the subject of wind-on levers / mechanisms; one of the things which I really didn't like about the Nikon F3 was the feel when winding-on. I had been using Nikon F and F2 cameras for years and in comparison the feel of the wind-on of the F3 was more like turning one elastic-band sprung cardboard tube inside another; absolutely Horrible.

Philip.

Yes!  So it's not just me!  Everyone goes on how amazingly smooth the film advance on the F3 is.  But to me it feels horrible.  The reason being is it has ball bearings in the mechanism to make it very light.  But that makes it feel floppy too and has a lot of play in the lever.  Unlike the F2, or any Leica, or any Minolta (the XE5 is amazing in the feel) etc.

And I have had three F3s, now down to a perfect F3P!  Perfect condition, it would be perfect if the advance lever felt like my M-A, or F2 or...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[logan2z]

18 minutes ago, Mikep996 said:

Thanks for all the help!  

I went out/shot 36.  I thoroughly cleaned the reels since I had used photo flo in the tank as a final wash previously.  

Jobo has apparently stated that their reels shouldn't be submerged in Photoflo to avoid a buildup on the reels.  Instead, I open up the reel and dump the film into a separate container that contains the Photoflo mixture.  I suppose if you scrub the reels well enough then it's not a problem, but I've been following their guidance and haven't noticed any buildup on the reels. You may want to try that with your Paterson reels as well.