A Development In My Hobby - The Film Journey

Afternoon everyone. I’m just about to head out for the first time with the Yashica-Mat to give it a test run. Given the poor weather and light I’ve loaded an Ilford XP2 to try some B&W shots. I think the light metering on this is on the side of over exposing, I don’t think the meter is as sensitive anymore. It was giving me lower shutter speeds than what the Yashica minister and canon 500 were giving me when I was checking them out in the house. So think I’m just going to try underexpose a little and see what happens.

Now this film is C-41 process, so does that mean I process it the exact same way as I would say an AGFA colour negative?
 
XP2's main characteristics are quite a wide exposure latitude, so it won't really test your camera's meter as much as something more 'fussy' such as slide film, where you have to be pretty much spot on or your shadows will be black or your highlights will be... well, not really there to see! At least using XP2 will let you see if the focus and film transport mechanism work OK, so it's probably a good film to start with. Perhaps try a colour print film next and see how you go with that? Looking forward to seeing the results from the XP2 once you've scanned them. (y)
 
Mr Badger said:
XP2's main characteristics are quite a wide exposure latitude, so it won't really test your camera's meter as much as something more 'fussy' such as slide film, where you have to be pretty much spot on or your shadows will be black or your highlights will be... well, not really there to see! At least using XP2 will let you see if the focus and film transport mechanism work OK, so it's probably a good film to start with. Perhaps try a colour print film next and see how you go with that? Looking forward to seeing the results from the XP2 once you've scanned them. (y)
Click to expand...

Thanks for that :). I’ve got two rolls of Fuji NPS 160, it’s expired 07 but was kept refrigerated, so should do me to give it a test for colour.

First 3 are scanning through now. You’ll have to forgive me in advance as I don’t really know where to start with adjusting or editing B&W
 
If your Epson software 'professional mode' interface is the same as mine then, as a starting point, where it says 'Film Type' then just select 'B&W Negative Film' from the drop down menu. You'll also need to click the 'Configuration' button at the bottom and select the 'Film Size' tab from the pop up window, then chose '6x6' where it says 'Medium Format Film Size'. You may have already worked that out, but if not there you go (if it's the same software!).

I generally scan at '48 bit color' at 3200 dpi and convert to greyscale when tweaking in Photoshop Elements. There's only 12 shots so it shouldn't take long to do a bit of post processing on them. Or you could scan at 16 bit greyscale and see which you prefer when you have more time.
 
Mr Badger said:
If your Epson software 'professional mode' interface is the same as mine then, as a starting point, where it says 'Film Type' then just select 'B&W Negative Film' from the drop down menu. You'll also need to click the 'Configuration' button at the bottom and select the 'Film Size' tab from the pop up window, then chose '6x6' where it says 'Medium Format Film Size'. You may have already worked that out, but if not there you go (if it's the same software!).

I generally scan at '48 bit color' at 3200 dpi and convert to greyscale when tweaking in Photoshop Elements. There's only 12 shots so it shouldn't take long to do a bit of post processing on them. Or you could scan at 16 bit greyscale and see which you prefer when you have more time.
Click to expand...

Ah bugger, I wondered why it was splitting them up into 6 frames, so I went on normal view instead of thumbnail and manually selected the frames. Will that make much of a difference?

The last 3 are going through now and don’t fancy doing them all again lol.

I went for 16bit greyscale, purely from a guess as to that’s what I thought it would be lol
 
Shaun Palmer said:
Ah bugger, I wondered why it was splitting them up into 6 frames, so I went on normal view instead of thumbnail and manually selected the frames. Will that make much of a difference?
Click to expand...
I seem to get better looking scans if I use the auto 6x6 setting, but that might just be my set-up. You can always re-scan the last 3 negs using the 6x6 setting and see what you think?
 
Right I've done 3 edits on my favourites from today, my absolute favorite needs fixing as I scratched the negative with the scissors in the bag, so I'll hopefully have that uploaded tomorrow. First ever MF film shot, dev & scanned, Ilford Super XP2. I wasn't sure what I was going for, I felt almost nervous using the Yashica-Mat for the first time! Crap weather and light, so focused more on the more 'industrial' side around the outskirts of my village.

As it turns out, the light meter seems almost spot on, as do the shutter speeds and aperture blades. Focusing looks good too, one or two from the roll we're off but that'll be my error!

SouthHyltonMF10 by Shaun Palmer, on Flickr

SouthHyltonMF12 by Shaun Palmer, on Flickr

SouthHyltonMF9 by Shaun Palmer, on Flickr

Any CC is very welcome, I feel I need to understand B&W imaging more.
 
I think you've pretty much nailed those mate, the one of your little lad is really lovely.

I think editing is really a matter of finding what you like by trial and error. Personally I like black blacks and white whites and a fairly contrasty look, but not always, some shots look well with s dose of sepia.
 
Andysnap said:
I think you've pretty much nailed those mate, the one of your little lad is really lovely.

I think editing is really a matter of finding what you like by trial and error. Personally I like black blacks and white whites and a fairly contrasty look, but not always, some shots look well with s dose of sepia.
Click to expand...

Cheers Andysnap. Yeah I think I like the more contrasty look, suppose it would sometimes depend on the scene and subject as well wouldn’t it. Looks like I’ll have to order a few more rolls to practice then lol
 
Great results for your first time with medium format! The shot if your son is lovely, it could just be the difference of the white clothing against the dark background but to my eyes there's a bit of a glow to it.
 
If you fancy shooting b&w I'd recommend getting some HP5 or Tri-X 400 speed. It's all a matter of personal taste but I think they look better than XP2.
 
mdjchat said:
Great results for your first time with medium format! The shot if your son is lovely, it could just be the difference of the white clothing against the dark background but to my eyes there's a bit of a glow to it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback! Is the glow a good or a bad thing do you think? The patio doors were about 1.5 meters in front of him, so kind of illuminated him more.

mdjchat said:
If you fancy shooting b&w I'd recommend getting some HP5 or Tri-X 400 speed. It's all a matter of personal taste but I think they look better than XP2.
Click to expand...

Yeah I’m going to get some traditional B&W film, and the Chems for developing. I got the XP2 as I could dev with my C-41 stuff to see if I like the B&W, which it turns out I do lol
 
I think that most people would agree that glow is a good thing. It looks good to me. Leica fans spend big money to get Leitz glass that has the fabled Leica glow.
 
ChrisR said:
Last time I looked, a Yashica Mat had a medium format lens?
Click to expand...

Well yes but my comment about more pop was for any medium format lens....might be something to do with DOF being different to 35mm......anyway IMO maybe others would agree?
 
There you go, I told you those Yashica TLRs were OK, didn't I? I bet Mrs P has forgiven you for buying your new camera already after taking that photo of Joshua; it'll be a lovely keepsake for you both, and for him when he gets to your age and can look back and see the house he grew up in in the background. That's the thing about photography, it can bring back some very happy memories. :) Anyway, congratulations on christening the new camera and developing your first roll of 120 film. Once the weather gets a bit brighter you'll have to try a roll of Fuji Neopan Acros 100 and see what you can make of a sharp and fine grained b&w film. (y)
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
There you go, I told you those Yashica TLRs were OK, didn't I? I bet Mrs P has forgiven you for buying your new camera already after taking that photo of Joshua; it'll be a lovely keepsake for you both, and for him when he gets to your age and can look back and see the house he grew up in in the background. That's the thing about photography, it can bring back some very happy memories. :) Anyway, congratulations on christening the new camera and developing your first roll of 120 film. Once the weather gets a bit brighter you'll have to try a roll of Fuji Neopan Acros 100 and see what you can make of a sharp and fine grained b&w film. (y)
Click to expand...

Thanks MrBadger, yeah she’s kind of coming round to the idea now. I think I’m going to order a nice big print of the one of Joshua.

You did say that and I’m blown away with the results and the performance, as of it was built nearly 70 years ago and still works pretty much as it should. It does make me wonder though how digital took such a hold over film, is convenience really that much more important? Obviously it is to most people, and was to me for many years, but I think I can class myself as a true film convert now. Don’t get me wrong there’ll always be a place for digital for me when I need it, but you can’t beat the character and enjoyment of film!

Just waiting on payday now for some new B&W Chems and get some B&W film ordered!
 
excalibur2 said:
Well yes but my comment about more pop was for any medium format lens....might be something to do with DOF being different to 35mm......anyway IMO maybe others would agree?
Click to expand...

I think this might of got lost in translation, did you mean the pop was because of the fact it was on medium format? As in you get a better DoF from a full frame compared to a crop, sonyou would expect a better/more appealing DoF from medium format?

I don’t know the science behind it too well but I think I know what you mean :)
 
Shaun Palmer said:
I think this might of got lost in translation, did you mean the pop was because of the fact it was on medium format? As in you get a better DoF from a full frame compared to a crop, sonyou would expect a better/more appealing DoF from medium format?

I don’t know the science behind it too well but I think I know what you mean :)
Click to expand...

Yes, for a given field of view, a longer focal length is needed when the image size gets bigger. For the same aperture, a longer focal length has less depth of field, so you tend to get more shots where there is differential focus between the subject and background/foreground. 35mm shooters have to use faster lenses, open wider, to get a similar effect.
 
Shaun Palmer said:
It does make me wonder though how digital took such a hold over film, is convenience really that much more important?
Click to expand...

Convenience in some ways, perhaps. The direct interface to the computer certainly helps, especially in a world where most image sharing is online - much easier than processing and scanning to get to the same point. High ISO performance for low light and action is now very good indeed. Digital has its inconveniences as well, though - I find the whole idea of having to have backups of backups because none of it is tangible to be a pain, and the constant need to stay on top of battery charging is another hassle.

There's probably a perceived cost saving in that you're not buying film and processing all the time, but there's a risk of getting drawn into buying very expensive equipment and, even worse, getting into upgrade cycles and taking heavy depreciation hits every couple of years. I sometimes wonder if more gets spent on that than the average amateur film shooter spends putting film through old cameras that cost a fraction of the digital gear.

When I first got back into photography, I got a DSLR. Of the various things that I was less than keen on, the thing that really killed it for me was the camera itself - the controls were all in the wrong place and I seemed to spend too much time looking at the little numbers in the viewfinder. Having started on film in manual mechanical SLRs in the 70s, I never really settled into using the DSLR intuitively. Sensor dust also bugged me - it seemed that every time the lens was changed, it would be back to having bits of crap on it (and the cleaning stuff was ridiculously expensive). If anything, I would say that I found the DSLR too much of a distraction while taking pictures.
 
Last edited:
Shaun Palmer said:
I think this might of got lost in translation, did you mean the pop was because of the fact it was on medium format? As in you get a better DoF from a full frame compared to a crop, sonyou would expect a better/more appealing DoF from medium format?

I don’t know the science behind it too well but I think I know what you mean :)
Click to expand...

Yes more chance of getting pop (3d) using medium format (and higher) lenses and saves you buying that expensive Zeiss lens (who boast about pop for their lenses with micro contrast and all that)....... for your digi ;)
 
Evening all. I’ve just had a pop out with the 2007 expired colour 120 I had, someone mentioned an extended dev time but I can’t find it, I’ve google searched and the answers I found isn’t as simple as what someone suggested.

All I remember is X amount of time for each decade
 
Shaun Palmer said:
Evening all. I’ve just had a pop out with the 2007 expired colour 120 I had, someone mentioned an extended dev time but I can’t find it, I’ve google searched and the answers I found isn’t as simple as what someone suggested.

All I remember is X amount of time for each decade
Click to expand...

Normally the idea is to over expose by one stop per decade, so rate 100 ISO film at 50, then process normally. I'd suggest just processing the role normally and see how you go...
 
ah ok I got that wrong then lol,

I've just spent 20 minutes trying to get it onto the reel and it kept jamming and coming off for some reason, ended up ripping it in half with frustration lol. I'll let you know if anything comes from the half roll lol

Is it normally so much more difficult to reel up than 35mm?
 
Shaun Palmer said:
ah ok I got that wrong then lol,

I've just spent 20 minutes trying to get it onto the reel and it kept jamming and coming off for some reason, ended up ripping it in half with frustration lol. I'll let you know if anything comes from the half roll lol

Is it normally so much more difficult to reel up than 35mm?
Click to expand...

A bit, but not too bad. I usually take it a bit slower with 120.

Frustration is the enemy when loading film into a reel. Frustration can lead to a little bit of sweating, which can result in enough of a humidity change to affect how easily the film loads - the emulsion side gets a bit tacky and sticks to the plastic in the reel rather than passing smoothly over it. Make sure your reel is bone dry. Always stay cool, calm and collected. If necessary, have a strategy for dumping the film into the tank temporarily such that it's protected from light so that you can get your hands out and take a breather.
 
Nomad Z said:
A bit, but not too bad. I usually take it a bit slower with 120.

Frustration is the enemy when loading film into a reel. Frustration can lead to a little bit of sweating, which can result in enough of a humidity change to affect how easily the film loads - the emulsion side gets a bit tacky and sticks to the plastic in the reel rather than passing smoothly over it. Make sure your reel is bone dry. Always stay cool, calm and collected. If necessary, have a strategy for dumping the film into the tank temporarily such that it's protected from light so that you can get your hands out and take a breather.
Click to expand...

Oh my god, I didn't even think of that :( I felt like I needed a time out and never give it a thought
 
They look fine to me. I've only ever loaded 120 film onto a tank spiral whilst sitting comfortably at a table in a darkroom so I don't know what it's like to do that using a changing bag... I imagine somewhat cramped, sweaty and uncomfortable! This is one of the things that putting me off going back to home developing.
 
Mr Badger said:
They look fine to me. I've only ever loaded 120 film onto a tank spiral whilst sitting comfortably at a table in a darkroom so I don't know what it's like to do that using a changing bag... I imagine somewhat cramped, sweaty and uncomfortable! This is one of the things that putting me off going back to home developing.
Click to expand...

Thanks Badger. It is exactly how you imagined lol, I’m thinking latex gloves for the next time as it may retain some of the moisture in the glove instead of on the film lol.
 
Shaun Palmer said:
Thanks Badger. It is exactly how you imagined lol, I’m thinking latex gloves for the next time as it may retain some of the moisture in the glove instead of on the film lol.
Click to expand...
If you do try that then make sure you get the 'powder-free' type gloves, otherwise you might end up with a film that looks like it was dusted for prints by a police scene of crimes trainee!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top