Posts Tagged ‘ 400 ’

More Kids and Lights

IMG_20090301_11714.jpg
Stella

You know, they are still my new toys. So, more kids and lights. Stella was being a really good model, and I managed to get a couple of good snaps of her.

IMG_20090302_11744.jpg
Lucy, colorful

I wanted to try something a bit different (for me) and Lucy let me take a couple of snaps of her. I wanted to try using the colorful background and pushing the exposure on the skin a bit brighter than I normally would. This was shot at f/4.5, 1/250 with two strobes at 1/16th power each.

print_scan_487.jpg
Table day bed

I did find some time to develop and print a couple of film pics too. This is Tri-X 400 pushed to EI3200. I developed it for about 45 minutes in Rodinal using semi-stand (5 min) agitation. It was very hard for me to print. I tried different grades of filters, but I was either blowing the highlights or just too flat. I finally tried split grade printing. I printed the highlights for 20 sec with a 00 filter, and the blacks for 8 sec or so with a grade 5 filter.

My guess is that I developed the film too long. A couple of the other pictures from the roll were much easier to print using a grade 2 filter for 16 seconds, so maybe not? Not too sure. Maybe this picture was just overexposed?

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Advertisements

More Champaign at Night

Merry Ann's Diner
Merry Ann’s Diner

I had a chance to grab some pictures in the snow the other night in downtown Champaign, IL. These are scans of the prints that I made with the new (to me) enlarger. I am particularly happy that they turned out okay. I was shooting Tri-X 400 at EI3200. I wasn’t sure how long to develop, but based on my EI1600 development trials I shot for 1.5 hours with 5 min agitation intervals. Let me tell you, that was a long time. The highlights got blown out, density wise, and I should revisit that.

Here’s a picture with the blown highlights.

Orpheum
Orpheum

On my test exposures, that I developed at the same time, the highlight density was 1.36 for zone 8. I think that if I can that back to 1.2 or so, I’ll have my time for EI3200.

I could try to burn in the lights to the right, but I kind of promised myself I’d avoid dodging and burning so that I wouldn’t spend a tremendous amount of time making prints. I guess rules are made to be broken….

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Christmas Party

film_scan_454.jpg
Stella and Grandma Flossie

This past weekend my Grandparents held their “early” Christmas party. It was a good time and I was very glad to be back in the midwest. Living in AZ, we weren’t able to come to the Christmas party for several years now. The picture of Stella and Grandma (above) is probably my favorite picture from the day. I’m very happy with the tones in the picture. I’m probably also biased as it’s my kid, but so be it. I am very excited to get my enlarger. This will be one of the first pictures that I’ll try to print. Knowing me, I’ll print it 20 times trying various times, etc.

film_scan_448.jpg
Stella was a tired little puppy

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Champaign at Night

film_scan_427.jpg
Orpheum

I wanted to try shooting a roll of Tri-X 400 in really dark conditions and then use the “minimal agitation” method for development. I developed the film in Rodinal 1:50 for 55 minutes, agitating every 5 minutes via 3 gentle inversions. For someone with no reference point, I’d say the pictures turned out okay. I particularly like the one above, Orpheum. My camera’s meter wasn’t responding, so I just shot everything at f/4, 1/60. I find that focusing with my Pentax is very hard. More specifically, I find that it’s really hard to focus wrong. Even when I am careful I tend to mess it up. I’m not sure what’s going on there.

I am still having difficulties deciding if I’m getting the best that I can out of my scanner. After development, the Tri-X comes out (for me anyhow) very bowed. The film holder that came with the Epson v500 is relatively flimsy and does not provide any sort of support for the film. So, I ditched it. I instead placed the film on the flat bed (emulsion side up, if I remember correctly) and put a piece of glass from an 8×10 frame on top.

film_scan_428.jpg
Patio

Unfortunately, using this method I couldn’t figure out how to crop properly in Vuescan. Argh! One frustration after another! So, I went back to Epson Scan. I think that I got a better scan, but this could just be a placebo affect. This has lead me to seriously think about buying an enlarger. I have been watching them on Ebay for a few weeks now. Am I just asking for more headaches? Probably.

film_scan_430.jpg
Book shop

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Now the experiments

Ugh. This is the part of film that I’m both looking forward to and dreading. Experimentation. I don’t understand how the film will respond in different situations, etc.

Plus, reading on line, there are about a zillion different developers and development techniques. Yikes. Add to that the scanning and it’s a many variable equation that doesn’t seem to converge.

Here are my kids captured using Ilford Delta 400 pushed to 800. Not too bad, but man, is it dark in the basement. Most all of the pictures are taken at f/2.8 or f/2.0. I was trying to stick to 1/60th, but I know that I pushed to 1/30th sometimes. I’m out of my comfort zone when I’m shooting like that.

But, for the most part, the pictures turned out okay. Not the best, but I was able to successfully get the pictures and develop them. The grain is definitely better than a roll of Ilford Delta 3200 shot at 3200. Right now I’ve got a roll of Ilford 3200 in my camera set to ISO1600. We’ll see how that turns out.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,