Show us yer film shots then!

FujiLove said:
I thought the stabiliser had a wetting agent 'built in'? But maybe not. Is the Ilford stuff I use for B&W the same thing?
Click to expand...


Yes, you're quite right. My brain didn't make the leap between colour images and colour processing, sorry tired! I would however try to avoid the squeegee, the wetting agent will work best if allowed to run naturally.
 
Martpix said:
CHP plant at Royston near Barnsley shot on a Bronica ETRsi, 75mm lens, using 3 Metz CT-60 flash heads onto Portra 400 film.
Click to expand...

I really enjoy this series of industrial shots. It would be interesting to know the circumstances under which you make them, eg are they taken at your place of work and do you have any difficulty getting permission, or indeed are you commissioned ?
 
Kevin Allan said:
I really enjoy this series of industrial shots. It would be interesting to know the circumstances under which you make them, eg are they taken at your place of work and do you have any difficulty getting permission, or indeed are you commissioned ?
Click to expand...

Hi Kevin,
Glad you like them!
I'm commissioned to do all the industrial pictures that have been shown, so there's never a problem gaining access to the sites.
 
Last edited:
This is a set of three,taken in Eze,south of France in March.It was that misty or maybe more.:)

Fuji GSW690II with Ektar 100Asa.

#1.


#2.


#3.


Click on photo and then click twice to see original size
 
Last edited:
Martpix said:
Hi Kevin,
Glad you like them!
I'm commissioned to do all the industrial pictures that have been shown, so there's never a problem gaining access to the sites.

Here's another one taken at Riccall Mine in the Selby, sadly now closed like a lot of British industry.

View attachment 15283
Click to expand...

how did you get permission to use a camera and flash down there ? though they would be worried bout the risk of gasses being set off by a possible spark that close to the face
 
dave clayton said:
how did you get permission to use a camera and flash down there ? though they would be worried bout the risk of gasses being set off by a possible spark that close to the face
Click to expand...

Hi Dave,
I just rammed my fingers in my ears and closed my eyes...

All the flash guns are FLP and enclosed in a sealed steel casing with a thick glass front to let the light out. They are set to full power and have no cables to the camera and weigh about 50 pounds each. The camera is mechanical.
 
Scuse my ignorance but what's FLP?
 
steveo_mcg said:
Yes, you're quite right. My brain didn't make the leap between colour images and colour processing, sorry tired! I would however try to avoid the squeegee, the wetting agent will work best if allowed to run naturally.
Click to expand...

Yes, think that's where I've been going wrong. I don't recall using one years ago when I last did home dev and the film was fine. I think I got caught up into the idea of using one as I now live in a very hard water area and thought it would help. I'm doing my final wash/stabiliser with bottled water, so I guess that will be enough.
 
Lov
Liam said:
Its been a very long time but managed to get out this morning, good to see this thread still going!





Chamonix (4x5) / 150mm / FP4 (Rotary in xtol)
Click to expand...

The sort of image I love, but almost never 'see' well enough to take. My brain will be saying, "but where's the subject?"
 
Martpix said:
Hi Dave,
I just rammed my fingers in my ears and closed my eyes...

All the flash guns are FLP and enclosed in a sealed steel casing with a thick glass front to let the light out. They are set to full power and have no cables to the camera and weigh about 50 pounds each. The camera is mechanical.
Click to expand...

that makes sense now thought letting flashes off next to the face would be a big no no due to the mines and quarries act and the risk of fire damp. have you got an image of the rig you used to light this i could see please
 
FujiLove said:
How are you finding the Shanghai? I was tempted to buy some (saw ten rolls on eBay for about £17.50) but then read a load of horror stories about numbers and dots on the negatives and it put me off.
Click to expand...

I had no complaints at all about the roll I shot. I also read the stuff about the dots, and followed the advice on the Flickr GP3 group to pre-soak. (Well, pre-wash. The idea is to get rid of the anti-halation dye, not to soak the gelatin.) I washed it twice with a few inversions in 20 degree water. No dots/circles to be seen. It's possible the batch I bought has a different backing paper to the older stuff, too, but I'm going to keep washing anyway.

It also wasn't nearly as curly as I was expecting - it did curl more than Ilford, but it's not like it curled into a ring the second I let go or anything.

For £17.50 for 10, I'm very happy. Definitely going to buy more.
 
Last edited:
abdoujaparov said:
I had no complaints at all about the roll I shot. I also read the stuff about the dots, and followed the advice on the Flickr GP3 group to pre-soak. (Well, pre-wash. The idea is to get rid of the anti-halation dye, not to soak the gelatin.) I washed it twice with a few inversions in 20 degree water. No dots/circles to be seen. It's possible the batch I bought has a different backing paper to the older stuff, too, but I'm going to keep washing anyway.

It also wasn't nearly as curly as I was expecting - it did curl more than Ilford, but it's not like it curled into a ring the second I let go or anything.

For £17.50 for 10, I'm very happy. Definitely going to buy more.
Click to expand...

Good to hear. I may give it a go :)
 
FujiLove said:
How are you finding the Shanghai? I was tempted to buy some (saw ten rolls on eBay for about £17.50) but then read a load of horror stories about numbers and dots on the negatives and it put me off.
Click to expand...

I've shot more of it than I'd care to admit to. Its got a nice old school feel to it but it does curl like a coil spring, I curl it the other way for a couple of days to try to straighten it out. If you underexpose it you'll get the frame numbers, I don't know why!
 
Well I've got the results back from using the Konica Centuria 200, exp in 2002 and mainly used it for testing the OM10 camera plus some lenses...and it must have giving the Asda m/c a problem as every scan had mainly a magenta cast :eek: Anyway after correcting in PS the results aren't too bad.... to use the film up I changed the film to a Konica with 40mm lens for these snaps of the Ladies European masters at Denham and one snap of a pub for the alcoholics here :D






 
Rolleicord Va Type 2 on Ektar 100. 2 squares stitched in PSE11 taken looking over Blea Tarn to the Langdale Pikes.

When I got these 6 rolls back I noticed that there was an intermittent light leak, some of the negs are almost completely ruined some have a little splash in the bottom right and some nothing.... Sorted it though, there is a foot missing from the bottom of the ;cord and the piece of masking tape covering the hole was lifting very slightly so any shots where I had wound on and not taken anything for a while were clouded but any I shot straight away were fine. Filled the hole with some blutack and covered it with masking tape until I can get another foot to fit.

Blea-Tarn-&-Langdale-Pikes_Pano by andysnapper1, on Flickr

Cheers

Andy
 
Good work Andy and very nicely stitched.
 
Martpix said:
Hi Kevin,
Glad you like them!
I'm commissioned to do all the industrial pictures that have been shown, so there's never a problem gaining access to the sites.

Here's another one taken at Riccall Mine in the Selby, sadly now closed like a lot of British industry.
Click to expand...

I would love to be commissioned to do that!!
 
Quality work Asha, I love both the mirror and the table shots, great tones and contrast.
 
RaglanSurf said:
Quality work Asha, I love both the mirror and the table shots, great tones and contrast.
Click to expand...

Cheers Nick

Was a decent roll....majority were keepers.

Got a full 12 negs too.......sometimes i get 11, even had 10 on one occasion. Turned out to be a loading error on my part. Even though i've figured what i was doing wrong, i still don't always get 12 frames.
 
Liking 3 and 5 there Asha!
 
robhooley167 said:
Liking 3 and 5 there Asha!
Click to expand...

Thanks Rob.

I want to get to thé top of that mountain in No5 and get some shots....
To take thé 5x4 up there will require the services of a Sherpa.
So when can i expect to see you?! Lol
 
I processed the first roll I've shot on the Rolleicord this weekend using a Tetenal C41 kit and a rotary processor. It was Portra 160 (assume NC as it wasn't marked?). I'm generally happy with the results, although I seem to be struggling with the focusing - still getting used to the waist level finder. The only niggle is a very light yellow streak that seems to run through most of the film. The attached file is the worst one, probably because of the colour 'behind' the streak. My first guess is a light leak, but I can't see any obvious issues with the 'cord, and I was really careful handling the film, keeping it tight etc. I've been using the camera without it's case, if that's worth mentioning.

Any suggestions?


View attachment 15484
 
Absolute disaster today. Firstly I managed to not screw in the light trap on the tank properly, and promptly exposed a roll of 120 to the light when the trap fell off mid-pour. Then I took the Kershaw folder out. I managed to a) wind past frame 1 b) massively underexpose three c) take three shots with the struts not fully locked so they were out of focus and vignetted and d) double expose. 8 potential shots, zero keepers. The double exposure was probably the best of the lot . . .

Ah, well, you live and learn.

View attachment 15490

This one I might have liked, but it was one of the underexposures. It's a credit to film's latitude, though - there was hardly anything at all on the negative that I could see, but Lightroom managed to pull this out.

View attachment 15491
 
abdoujaparov said:
Absolute disaster today. Firstly I managed to not screw in the light trap on the tank properly, and promptly exposed a roll of 120 to the light when the trap fell off mid-pour. Then I took the Kershaw folder out. I managed to a) wind past frame 1 b) massively underexpose three c) take three shots with the struts not fully locked so they were out of focus and vignetted and d) double expose. 8 potential shots, zero keepers. The double exposure was probably the best of the lot . . .

Ah, well, you live and learn.

View attachment 15490

This one I might have liked, but it was one of the underexposures. It's a credit to film's latitude, though - there was hardly anything at all on the negative that I could see, but Lightroom managed to pull this out.

View attachment 15491
Click to expand...

Damn. Sometimes you just have one of those days. :(
 
FujiLove said:
I processed the first roll I've shot on the Rolleicord this weekend using a Tetenal C41 kit and a rotary processor. It was Portra 160 (assume NC as it wasn't marked?). I'm generally happy with the results, although I seem to be struggling with the focusing - still getting used to the waist level finder. The only niggle is a very light yellow streak that seems to run through most of the film. The attached file is the worst one, probably because of the colour 'behind' the streak. My first guess is a light leak, but I can't see any obvious issues with the 'cord, and I was really careful handling the film, keeping it tight etc. I've been using the camera without it's case, if that's worth mentioning.

Any suggestions?


View attachment 15484
Click to expand...

Having pondered this overnight, I am down to these options:

1. A light leak in the camera: I can't see any physical issues. I'd be surprised if it was this as some frames sat in place for days and others for seconds, but there doesn't seem to be such a wild variation in the amount of yellowing.

2. A light leak in the tank: again, I can't see any physical problems with it (Jobo 4322 tank with magnet) and the other film that went through it didn't have this problem.

3. A processing/chemical problem: Could be, but wouldn't that cause a larger zone of damage?

4. Something rubbing against the film emulsion in the camera: Again, I can't see anything when I open up the camera and there doesn't seem to be any physical damage to the emulsion. It just seems to be 'embedded' in the exposure.

5. Rubber band! In my eagerness to keep the roll as light tight as possible, instead of sticking the flap down, I used a rubber band to keep it tight. Now I'm wondering whether this either squashed the emulsion or maybe even caused some sort of static discharge. Anyone else use rubber bands or heard of this?

I'm going to stick some Tri-X in it today and see how that goes. Should at least be able to rule out in-camera light leaks and emulsion rubbing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top