Critique Kodak Brownie and Rera Pan 127 100

Crtm

Crtm

Messages
1,406
Name
Carol
Edit My Images
Yes
I would first like to thank all the guys who have helped me to get to this stage especially @steveo_mcg your help has been invaluable in the development stage it was very very much appreciated. I have had such a great time producing these photographs from something I picked up at a boot sale, the whole process has been so satisfying, there's something tangible and exciting about developing your own film.......hooked!!

I found using the black bag and threading the 127 film onto the spiral a little tricky and unfortunately some of the negatives were scratched in the process.

The camera is a 1963 Kodak Brownie 127, the film Rera Pan 127100.
Developer R09 Special for 5 and half minutes, washed with tepid water to stop the development process, Amfix used for 5 minutes again washed as Steveo_mcg had advised, lastly Tetenal Mirasol 2000 wetting agent.

Negatives scanned on an Epson Perfection 4870.

Should add this is my first time using the camera and developing my own film so will be very interested on your thoughts as to how I have done and if there is anything I should have done differently..............

Carr-Bridge by MrsR66, on Flickr

Market by MrsR66, on Flickr

Inverness Castle by MrsR66, on Flickr

Street Musician by MrsR66, on Flickr

Lunch by MrsR66, on Flickr


 
Last edited:
You got them out a box camera! They're very good Carol. You'll get the hang of loading film but it might be worth sacrificing a roll of vista to get some more practice in before you do your holiday shots. Looks like you've got detail in the shadows and the highlights so from a developing pov I'd say you pretty much nailed it.

Compositionally they're all nicely done especially given the gear you were using. The Market has got a bit blocked up but thats the aperture being so small you'll need to try to remember where you're light gets a bit too low but I do like the contrast with the windows. The Lunch shot is especially good, it would probably have been more difficult on a metered camera as it would blow either the window or block up the interior.

I don't know if a little longer in the developer might have brought out a bit more of the shadows with out ruining the highlights, you'd have to do some more experimenting.

Does it have any writing on the edge of the film? I'm curious to see if its a re-rolled something and if so what.
 
Brilliant results, well done Carol. The shots have a real timeless quality to them, particularly the first two. The last two show just how good those cameras can be when the light is favourable.

I hope we see more self dev'd film from you now you've taken the plunge, I'll never get tired of the magical moment when you pull the film off the spiral.
 
steveo_mcg said:
You got them out a box camera! They're very good Carol. You'll get the hang of loading film but it might be worth sacrificing a roll of vista to get some more practice in before you do your holiday shots. Looks like you've got detail in the shadows and the highlights so from a developing pov I'd say you pretty much nailed it.

Compositionally they're all nicely done especially given the gear you were using. The Market has got a bit blocked up but thats the aperture being so small you'll need to try to remember where you're light gets a bit too low but I do like the contrast with the windows. The Lunch shot is especially good, it would probably have been more difficult on a metered camera as it would blow either the window or block up the interior.

I don't know if a little longer in the developer might have brought out a bit more of the shadows with out ruining the highlights, you'd have to do some more experimenting.

Does it have any writing on the edge of the film? I'm curious to see if its a re-rolled something and if so what.
Click to expand...

Hi Steven there was no marks/writing on the film.

Yes one of the negatives was very dark and another was really quite bright not blown though as there was still detail in the sky and the third one was a double of the bridge but scratched from when I was transferring the film to the spiral, I would say that was the most difficult part of the whole process!

The Market is quite dark but I loved the contrast between the windows and the rest of the building also there are little fairy lights strung along the ceiling which I was surprised came out in the photograph. I will be more careful regard the light in future.

My two favourites are "Lunch" and "Street Musician" but "Lunch" has the edge for me.

Thanks Steven for all your help.

Carol
 
Crtm said:
Hi Steven there was no marks/writing on the film.

Yes one of the negatives was very dark and another was really quite bright not blown though as there was still detail in the sky and the third one was a double of the bridge but scratched from when I was transferring the film to the spiral, I would say that was the most difficult part of the whole process!

The Market is quite dark but I loved the contrast between the windows and the rest of the building also there are little fairy lights strung along the ceiling which I was surprised came out in the photograph. I will be more careful regard the light in future.

My two favourites are "Lunch" and "Street Musician" but "Lunch" has the edge for me.

Thanks Steven for all your help.

Carol
Click to expand...

No worries Carol, Its amazing what you can away with using decent film and a scanner
 
Two questions if I may, please. When you scanned the negatives did the scanner do the reversal and are you sure that the scratches were from the ;loading into the spiral for development and not from something inside the camera over which the film is transported?
 
Littletank said:
Two questions if I may, please. When you scanned the negatives did the scanner do the reversal and are you sure that the scratches were from the ;loading into the spiral for development and not from something inside the camera over which the film is transported?
Click to expand...


Hi Norman no they are from my manhandling of the film it too several goes to get the film on to the spiral, it kept falling off I actually thought I was going to loose the film altogether! The scratches are on the last 3 frames of the film the other five were scratch free.

Re the scanner I have never really scanned negatives, I just loaded it "shiny side up", (I am sure there is a correct terminology for that but I don't know what it might be). If anyone has information on what is the best way to scan negatives and what settings it should be set at I would be most grateful.
 
Last edited:
Crtm said:
Hi Norman no they are from my manhandling of the film it too several goes to get the film on to the spiral, it kept falling off I actually thought I was going to loose the film altogether! The scratches are on the last 3 frames of the film the other five were scratch free.

Re the scanner I have never really scanned negatives, I just loaded it "shiny side up", (I am sure there is a correct terminology for that but I don't know what it might be). If anyone has information on what is the best way to scan negatives and what settings it should be set at I would be most grateful.
Click to expand...
It depends what your scanner wants, the Epson I believe wants the neg emulsion side up and it's the opposite for my Nikon scanners.
 
Carol, they are simply wonderful. The first 3 have a fantastic old world feel to them (not surprising I suppose given the equipment) and the last 2 just go to show how good older cameras are, lovely detail in both, lunch really floats my boat.

Andy
 
Wow! Hard to believe that's your first effort and on such a basic camera. Excellent stuff, well done!
 
RaglanSurf said:
It depends what your scanner wants, the Epson I believe wants the neg emulsion side up and it's the opposite for my Nikon scanners.
Click to expand...

Much better to scan emulsion down and flip it over later (my Epson does it in the scan software).


Steve.
 
Steve - is there evidence to support this, please, I do not think I can see any difference?
 
Littletank said:
Steve - is there evidence to support this, please, I do not think I can see any difference?
Click to expand...

I used to think it didn't make any difference, and in a lot of cases, I don't think it does. But logically, it's going to be clearer looking straight at the emulsion than through a layer of plastic.

If the plastic layer is not optically perfect, then any defects will show up in the scan.


Steve.
 
Good job, I especially like the last 2, must ask where did you get your film from, would like to try out a couple of cameras I have that take 127 film.
 
When printing a negative onto paper the light always passes through both the emulsion and the layer supporting the emulsion also, when using a flatbed scanner, doesn't the light also pass through the film?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top