First 4x5

[Barney]

first 4x5 shot

Fomapan 100 Ei 100 in R09 1+100 for 18 mins

PP 1 clock auto, I can make it significantly better but there is still a fair bit of halation around rhs of deck chair.
It was so much of a faf I forgot to take multiple readings of highlight and shadow areas Used incident meter.

 

[Ian Grant]

Soot and whitewash.

Fomapan 100 is only a 100EI film in ID-68/Microphen, that's according to Foma's own datasheet, I've always shot it at 50EI developed in Pyrocat HD with excellent results.

You need to realise LF lenses have vert shallow DOF, lenses need stopping down well, and movements like front tilt would help here.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

OK a harsh but pertinent comment, just stop shooting multiple formats for a short spell. You bare flailing around getting nowhere, you are just wasting time and film, and money, with no improvements.

You have to go right back to the basics of using film, it really is not difficult. At the moment it's like you are trying to sprint before you have barely learnt to walk, and you are just constantly falling over, helplessly.

Use a 35mm camera, really nail exposure, effective EI, and development, tightly, you can quickly see a huge increase in image quality. It's a no-brainer.

Ian

 

[Barney]

OK a harsh but pertinent comment, just stop shooting multiple formats for a short spell. You bare flailing around getting nowhere, you are just wasting time and film, and money, with no improvements.

You have to go right back to the basics of using film, it really is not difficult. At the moment it's like you are trying to sprint before you have barely learnt to walk, and you are just constantly falling over, helplessly.

Use a 35mm camera, really nail exposure, effective EI, and development, tightly, you can quickly see a huge increase in image quality. It's a no-brainer.

Ian

I am sure that you enjoy photography, far more than I ever could.

 

[StephenM]

Good for a first attempt. I may post mine later...

It's impossible to judge the negative when all I've seen is a digital version on a screen, with variations likely due to my screen, how you got from negative to file for posting etc., but the impression I have is underexposed and overdeveloped.

 

[Barney]

Thanks Stephen, what has caused the halation do you think?

The auto knocked everything darker, original is very bright indeed

 

[StephenM]

Just making sure, but underexposure in my comment was about lack of shadow detail, not how light or dark the image is. To my eyes the right hand side of the chair is the brightest detail, so it could come down to the antihalation backing of the film.

 

[Barney]

Just making sure, but underexposure in my comment was about lack of shadow detail, not how light or dark the image is. To my eyes the right hand side of the chair is the brightest detail, so it could come down to the antihalation backing of the film.

so if I had been considering the zone system instead of, how do i work this effing thing I should have exposed for the dark areas and knocked the development time right down.

I deliberately chose a tricky scene so that I would learn more

 

[StephenM]

Based solely on how the image appears on my tablet, which isn't calibrated in any shape or form, I'd say that most of your results show underexposure and overdevelopment. This subject doesn't look tricky at all to me. And I never consider the zone system, as it doesn't help me. It could possibly solve problems I've never encountered, but at the expense of complicating my working methods. Rather as I know about the dangers about going into cellars in Cornwall, but it doesn't impact on what I do.

In your shoes at this scene, I'd have put the palm of my hand in the sunlight, taken an incident reflected (corrected per Kevin's correction, below) reading from it, opened up one stop, exposed my FP4 at 80 (not 125) and developed in Rodinal 1:50 for the time in the massive development chart. Mainly because everything I photograph works fine with this method.

 

[Barney]

Based solely on how the image appears on my tablet, which isn't calibrated in any shape or form, I'd say that most of your results show underexposure and overdevelopment. This subject doesn't look tricky at all to me. And I never consider the zone system, as it doesn't help me. It could possibly solve problems I've never encountered, but at the expense of complicating my working methods. Rather as I know about the dangers about going into cellars in Cornwall, but it doesn't impact on what I do.

In your shoes at this scene, I'd have put the pslm of my hand in the sunlight, taken an incident reading from it, opened up one stop, exposed my FP4 at 80 (not 125) and developed in Rodinal 1:50 for the time in the massive development chart. Mainly because everything I photograph works fine with this method.

I have just tried that with digital camera using my meter as the guide and manual settings on the camera, the histogram was perfect.

Now that I am confident that I have not ballsed up the loading of the film into the dark slides (no mean feat) I will have another go tonight.

Despite the result not being perfect I am pleased with my first effort, I made a couple of lens boards, replaced a defective shutter and swapped over the lens, loaded the film correctly, figured out how to view and adjust focus on the screen of an upside down image and then adjusted all my chemistry to huge quantities and I actually got a picture!
Success !
There is a lot that can go wrong at each stage.

 

[zx9]

I have just tried that with digital camera using my meter as the guide and manual settings on the camera, the histogram was perfect.

Now that I am confident that I have not ballsed up the loading of the film into the dark slides (no mean feat) I will have another go tonight.

Despite the result not being perfect I am pleased with my first effort, I made a couple of lens boards, replaced a defective shutter and swapped over the lens, loaded the film correctly, figured out how to view and adjust focus on the screen of an upside down image and then adjusted all my chemistry to huge quantities and I actually got a picture!
Success !
There is a lot that can go wrong at each stage.

Indeed there are so many new things to think about with large format many of which can cause a total loss of image, I think that you have done well for a first 54.

 

[myotis]

so if I had been considering the zone system instead of, how do i work this effing thing I should have exposed for the dark areas and knocked the development time right down.

I deliberately chose a tricky scene so that I would learn more

How much dodging and burning are you doing when you make the print or on the scanned file before posting?

Rather than going for perfection in the neg, I would go for a flatter neg, and bring the contrast back during the printing.

As I posted before, although I did use the zone system, a lot of the time, I just used an incident reading (Weston Master or Gossen Lunasix ), to get the equivalent of meter reading from a Zone V, and then bumped the exposure up or down a stop depending on the characteristics of the subject.
i.e if it was portrait, I would give a stop more than the meter said.

What would maybe have been useful in this picture would have been a spot reading from the highlight on the chair to see what zone that was going to fall on, at the exposure you chose to use

Which books have you read about the Zone system.

I've already suggested Ansel Adams Trilogy but the other "classic" texts from the time which gave step by step instructions were

The Zone System Manual by Minor White (1967) but with several printings.

The New Zone System Manual by White, Zakia and Lorenz (1976) My copy seems covered in chemical stains !

The Zone VI workshop by Fred Picker (1974) I can't find my copy of this, but I seem to remember it was one of the easiest to follow.

Even if you don't go through the tedium of doing all the work to fully use the Zone system, getting a proper understanding of what it involves is useful.

 

[FishyFish]

There is a lot that can go wrong at each stage.

Yes. You could use holders with no film in them, as some unnamed person did this weekend..

 

[Barney]

Yes. You could use holders with no film in them, as some unnamed person did this weekend..

I feel your pain Nigel

 

[Barney]

How much dodging and burning are you doing when you make the print or on the scanned file before posting?

Rather than going for perfection in the neg, I would go for a flatter neg, and bring the contrast back during the printing.

As I posted before, although I did use the zone system, a lot of the time, I just used an incident reading (Weston Master or Gossen Lunasix ), to get the equivalent of meter reading from a Zone V, and then bumped the exposure up or down a stop depending on the characteristics of the subject.
i.e if it was portrait, I would give a stop more than the meter said.

What would maybe have been useful in this picture would have been a spot reading from the highlight on the chair to see what zone that was going to fall on, at the exposure you chose to use

Which books have you read about the Zone system.

I've already suggested Ansel Adams Trilogy but the other "classic" texts from the time which gave step by step instructions were

The Zone System Manual by Minor White (1967) but with several printings.

The New Zone System Manual by White, Zakia and Lorenz (1976) My copy seems covered in chemical stains !

The Zone VI workshop by Fred Picker (1974) I can't find my copy of this, but I seem to remember it was one of the easiest to follow.

Even if you don't go through the tedium of doing all the work to fully use the Zone system, getting a proper understanding of what it involves is useful.

Thanks for that Graham, I will look for those, I have only read Adams chapter, i got half way through it then was lost, it will take a couple of read thoughs I think, its already incredible !

 

[myotis]

Thanks for that Graham, I will look for those, I have only read Adams chapter, i got half way through it then was lost, it will take a couple of read thoughs I think, its already incredible !

Strangely, I think the less you know, the easier it is to understand, because you aren't trying to make it fit in with how you "think" exposure works. I can remember struggling when I first started to read about it

I had a similar problem with digital, because I thought that ISO with digital worked like ISO with film, and it took me a while to get my head around how different they are.

 

[Kevin Allan]

In your shoes at this scene, I'd have put the pslm of my hand in the sunlight, taken an incident reading from it, opened up one stop, exposed my FP4 at 80 (not 125) and developed in Rodinal 1:50 for the time in the massive development chart. Mainly because everything I photograph works fine with this method.

Surely you'd have to take a reflected reading from your palm, not incident ?

 

[StephenM]

Correct. On the other hand a reflected reading from a target of known reflectance is effectively measuring the incident light. But yes, I used the wrong word.

 

[Garry Edwards]

OK a harsh but pertinent comment, just stop shooting multiple formats for a short spell. You bare flailing around getting nowhere, you are just wasting time and film, and money, with no improvements.

You have to go right back to the basics of using film, it really is not difficult. At the moment it's like you are trying to sprint before you have barely learnt to walk, and you are just constantly falling over, helplessly.

Use a 35mm camera, really nail exposure, effective EI, and development, tightly, you can quickly see a huge increase in image quality. It's a no-brainer.

Ian

That's very harsh, but I agree. It seems to me that you're trying to learn everything at once, confusing yourself and making things unnecessarily difficult.

so if I had been considering the zone system instead of, how do i work this effing thing I should have exposed for the dark areas and knocked the development time right down.

I deliberately chose a tricky scene so that I would learn more

And there you go. The zone system is beyond me, I accept that it's useful but Adams was an incredible technician as well as a great artist, what works for him doesn't work for thickos like me

I think that the best system is KISS.

 

[Barney]

Third attempt

Upped the development time again, still very foggy Its annoying because I can see a fair bit of potential in this film. Still not hit the sharpness.

Will try another developer tomorrow,

 

[Barney]

Last attempt at a bit of garden practice, I am getting the hang of using the controls from under the darkcloth and have got the hang of setting the horizontal focus pretty good but when incorporating the front to back focus its a bit more time consuming when used in conjunction, but it was so much fun I set it took camera back to neutral and did it again. In the end I could not get it right front to back, whether that was because of the angle and height or because I was using the side focus as well I don't know. I decided to go for out slightly at the front so that the eye is drawn into the image by the better focus. It is absolutely incredible what you can do with this type of camera, I think I would be focus stacking for well over six foot with a digital camera.



I am pleased with the focus at the back. just for some idea of scale, when I am scrolling round at the back there the pixels are about 6mm square on my screen.



I am confident enough to go out side into the real world and have a go I think

 

[Wacky Adventurer]

Last attempt at a bit of garden practice, I am getting the hang of using the controls from under the darkcloth and have got the hang of setting the horizontal focus pretty good but when incorporating the front to back focus its a bit more time consuming when used in conjunction, but it was so much fun I set it took camera back to neutral and did it again. In the end I could not get it right front to back, whether that was because of the angle and height or because I was using the side focus as well I don't know. I decided to go for out slightly at the front so that the eye is drawn into the image by the better focus. It is absolutely incredible what you can do with this type of camera, I think I would be focus stacking for well over six foot with a digital camera.

View attachment 484173

I am pleased with the focus at the back. just for some idea of scale, when I am scrolling round at the back there the pixels are about 6mm square on my screen.

View attachment 484174

I am confident enough to go out side into the real world and have a go I think

This adventure keeping you busy hey Barney?

I have basically know knowledge about film, took a season of photography at school which got me into using a camera and that was still film era but i missed a lot of classes.

 

[Barney]

This adventure keeping you busy hey Barney?

I have basically know knowledge about film, took a season of photography at school which got me into using a camera and that was still film era but i missed a lot of classes.

It certainly is Wacky,

If everything was straightforward and worked first time we don't learn nothing. Well I don't.

You would have a different set of problems out there in the heat Wacky, are there many shooting film in the outback?

 

[Wacky Adventurer]

If everything was straightforward and worked first time we don't learn nothing. Well I don't.

, myself I've got a bad habit of winging through things as i go and learning from prac. A little theory but mostly prac.

are there many shooting film in the outback?

I wouldn't know Mr, im pretty much a loner and prefer the company of nature and creatures to humans.

I dont know of any wombats shooting film.

 

[Barney]

I think there would be more shooting of wombats and cans of Coopers.

Not made that beer for years.

 

[Wacky Adventurer]

I think there would be more shooting of wombats and cans of Coopers.

Not made that beer for years.

I've only ever come across 2, was laying on the ground doing fungi a couple of years ago and i heard something behind me. Got up off my belly and turned around and there was mum or dad wombat with a joey.

I tried to get a pic before they noticed me and turned back around into the scrub, the camera settings were set up for mushies and i had no time to change it

I just got the back end of them.


Beer, yuck! Did you like the coopers brew?

 

[Barney]

I've only ever come across 2, was laying on the ground doing fungi a couple of years ago and i heard something behind me. Got up off my belly and turned around and there was mum or dad wombat with a joey.

I tried to get a pic before they noticed me and turned back around into the scrub, the camera settings were set up for mushies and i had no time to change it

I just got the back end of them.
View attachment 484257

Beer, yuck! Did you like the coopers brew?

When I brewed it it turned out nice. Many beers are very nice when brewed to a correct gravity, As an example "Carling Black label lager", I would not drink that, like many commercial beers beers, if it was free. I would rather do without. But back in the day I had a pal who worked at the brewery and had an opportunity to sample the beer at its brewed strength of something like 7.5% and it was an incredible tasty lager, only when watered down to the 4% it lost its magic. I consider myself a competent brewer and one of the problems is matching the water profiles of various countries and regions water profile, you can add a bit of this and a bit of that to adjust the water but it isn't the same as being filtered through bedrock for a thousand years. If you think there are rabbit holes in photography then you should try brewing beer. I ended up brewing historical British mild ales and porters, German Berliner weisse and Belgian Lambics. I bought yeast from the British National yeast archive and captured my own wild yeasts from local plumb trees. my freezer was full of yeast and stir plates whizzing constantly growing it into batch quantity volumes.
That reminds me to get into the back of the shed, I am sure that I have some 20 year old imperial stout in there somewhere. and a couple of crates of Berlinner weisse.

 

[ChrisR]

Beer, yuck! Did you like the coopers brew?

OT, but I did like Coopers when I lived in Adelaide. I really didn't like the Australian lager-type beers. Even found some Coopers in the local Waitrose here for a while. But then, it didn't compare to beer from the local pub!

 

[StephenM]

I know that you can use wine to develop films, so the obvious question has to be can you use beer (it surely must have some reason for existing and I doubt it's the taste!) as a developer, and which is best? I have heard some beers described as "gnat's urine", and know that urine can be used as a developer, so are those beers the ones to use?

 

[Nod]

I suppose Castlemaine XXXX might work (it's called XXXX because they can't spell p***!)