Photography Post Vol. 2

[LoganL]

large view : http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=3416438749&size=large

[nocoolonesleft]

[photo]

Going back abit, still amazing

[freecat]

some shots from my 24h paris trip. nothing really good but since i never post pics here...

[technicolour]

[rockon99]

brace yourself, these are from the first roll ever that i processed myself.. hence the shitty everything.

and i was using way too many filters for my wide angle lens. I'll get the hang of developing one of these days. the whole entire roll was evenly but horribly under-developed - i just post processed the scans a little to try to get some contrast out of it. No hate, this is a learning experience.

^^Top right corner is actually my umbrella by accident.. this roll is full of mistakes, whatever

yup.. any personal tips for developing tmax 100?

[daphneYOUfindME]

[captain5640]

Been gone for about a week from SuFu. There's some great shots in the last 10 pages.

[nocoolonesleft]

[cloudhands69]

rockon:

what developer (& concentration) were you using?

how about dev times and agitation?

I usually do ID11 at 1:3 for about 13 minutes for Arista pro 100 (supposedly same as the tmax you used).

Agitate 30 seconds continuously at first, then 10 seconds every minute.

[marsa]

homage to Lee Friedlander.

[rockon99]

rockon:

what developer (& concentration) were you using?

how about dev times and agitation?

I usually do ID11 at 1:3 for about 13 minutes for Arista pro 100 (supposedly same as the tmax you used).

Agitate 30 seconds continuously at first, then 10 seconds every minute.

I used d-76 at 1:1 according to the directions on the wall for tmax that said 11 min i believe. agitated 30 seconds continuously then 5 seconds every 30 seconds. maybe the directions are wrong? or i did something wrong that i'm unaware of. they just turned out a neutral gray lol and i used my editing software to make them a little more interesting.

next time i use tmax 100 i'll go a bit longer in the developer.

-next few rolls i'm gonna be shooting and developing are Ilford and i'll just follow the times supplied in the box rather than look at the directions in the film processing room.

[XXXL]

MFSC hidden anchor

[nocoolonesleft]

I used d-76 at 1:1 according to the directions on the wall for tmax that said 11 min i believe. agitated 30 seconds continuously then 5 seconds every 30 seconds. maybe the directions are wrong? or i did something wrong that i'm unaware of. they just turned out a neutral gray lol and i used my editing software to make them a little more interesting.

next time i use tmax 100 i'll go a bit longer in the developer.

-next few rolls i'm gonna be shooting and developing are Ilford and i'll just follow the times supplied in the box rather than look at the directions in the film processing room.

Do the negatives look like they have good tonal range or are they pretty flat? Sometimes when I scan my 120 film, the scanner fucks up negatives with perfect tonal range and makes them gray and nasty. Rescanning usually resolves the problem.

[cloudhands69]

Most likely you underexposed. It sounds like your film processing technique is ok. You usually need less development time than the instructions say, lots of people end up reducing their development time by 20-30, even 40%. Do not increase your development time. Overdevelopment is almost as bad ad underexposure. You wash away the highlights and end up with broad swathes of white.

[rockon99]

the negs are actually really flat and thin

hmm.. i know i exposed right though, im usually really careful about that. and i generally bracket, for assignments at least. if im just taking photos of people being people, i'll usually get a high iso film and close the aperture for maximum dof and correct exposure...... generally. im in the process of shooting another roll to develop though, i'll see what comes of it

[soonami]

flat and thin generally in my experience means over-processed

I would just be mindful of the temperature of the developer you use and shorten the time in development. Correcting under-development is usually easier than fixing over-processed film.

[anthonyhong]

Really old pics, but I just found them again

[erk]

yup.. any personal tips for developing tmax 100?

dont use tmax100 or any other tmax. they claim to have come out with a better tmax but I dont believe them. if you need a 100 speed film use delta100. it has really good grain and good contrast. but tri-x is my favorite.

also you dont want your negatives to be thick and contrasty, your images will be over contrasted and lacking in detail.

development tip : over expose, under develop.

[rockon99]

flat and thin generally in my experience means over-processed

I would just be mindful of the temperature of the developer you use and shorten the time in development. Correcting under-development is usually easier than fixing over-processed film.

i think it was maybe the water temp/chemical temp. cos when i was mixing the developer the water all of a sudden fluctuated to a lot colder than 68 degrees lol then went back. i should've had it running for a while first i think. it did it also while i was rinsing it. but i dont think that would've had anything to do with it.

dont use tmax100 or any other tmax. they claim to have come out with a better tmax but I dont believe them. if you need a 100 speed film use delta100. it has really good grain and good contrast. but tri-x is my favorite.

also you dont want your negatives to be thick and contrasty, your images will be over contrasted and lacking in detail.

development tip : over expose, under develop.

yeah, when i've used tmax and had it processed in a lab i didnt find it as interesting as many ilford films, our instructor just wanted us all to use the tmax 100 for this first assignment.

i'm using Delta 100 at the moment for the first time. i've used the delta 400 before and loved it. i like hp5 better as far as 400iso ilford goes though.

do you think i'd be wrong to just follow the directions on the box though? as i am a beginner at this. delta 100 calls for 68 degree d-76 at 1:1 for 12 minutes.

[erk]

i think it was maybe the water temp/chemical temp. cos when i was mixing the developer the water all of a sudden fluctuated to a lot colder than 68 degrees lol then went back. i should've had it running for a while first i think. it did it also while i was rinsing it. but i dont think that would've had anything to do with it.

yeah, when i've used tmax and had it processed in a lab i didnt find it as interesting as many ilford films, our instructor just wanted us all to use the tmax 100 for this first assignment.

i'm using Delta 100 at the moment for the first time. i've used the delta 400 before and loved it. i like hp5 better as far as 400iso ilford goes though.

do you think i'd be wrong to just follow the directions on the box though? as i am a beginner at this. delta 100 calls for 68 degree d-76 at 1:1 for 12 minutes.

I think you will be fine following the instructions, but you will likely see improvement in over exposure and under development. you will see more detail in your shadows without allowing your highlights to explode.

you should try tri-x. it has a great latitude for error because of its silver content, which is good for a beginner. it is easily pushed and looks great especially in 4x5 films. HP5 is a very thin film with not much silver and to me has always appeared overly contrasty and cheap.

you also want to make sure your temperature for water rinses and stop bath are at a similar temperature. I wasn't paying attention when developing 4x5 by inspection and I ended up with reticulated film grain due to the extreme summer heat making hot water in the dark room. but I doubt any variation you were getting from the faucet was causing any problems.

also, nocoolonesleft is totally right about scanning negatives. Sometimes its difficult to get a good scan out of even the best negatives. rescan if you have troubles.

[marsa]

oh, hello old friend...long time no see

http://bop.nppa.org/2009/still_photography/winners/?cat=NAA

pretty awesome, someone ought to publish these.

nice pics.

[airfrogusmc]

Most likely you underexposed. It sounds like your film processing technique is ok. You usually need less development time than the instructions say, lots of people end up reducing their development time by 20-30, even 40%. Do not increase your development time. Overdevelopment is almost as bad ad underexposure. You wash away the highlights and end up with broad swathes of white.

The best negs are the ones exposed properly and those are at the threshold of exposure. Not got get to zone systemie on yeah. But after 50% of your neg development time the shadows are developed its the highlights that are effected by increased agitation, temp or time. In the zone system say you have a flat seen and your shadow is say a zone III and your highlight is a zone VI to have a full range negative you will need to do at least a N+2 development time (increase time). To move the zone VI to a zone VIII. On the other side if you have say shadow at II and highlight at X you will need to do an N-2 dev time. (Decrease time).

Pushing film pretty much wipes out the mid tones by changing the film curve and the shadows are gone anyway so you wind up with no shadow detail along with blown highlights and not much range in the mid tones.

[airfrogusmc]

A couple from the other day

Go Humans Go

push button

[Yardbird]

development tip : over expose, under develop.

My personal montra

[nocoolonesleft]

[joelz]

anyone else here been asked to do shoots on an (at least) semi-professional basis? I've been asked (separately) by three friends who are also musicians to do photo shoots for them for album work/promo material. While they all fall into the starving musician camp most are at least offering to pay. While I'm ok with attribution, does anyone have recommendation on how much you should charge?

I shoot digital only, so I don't have to cover cost of film or anything like that.

[nocoolonesleft]

Depends how much time it takes for you. I shot a wedding party for 200 bucks and free beer.

[richter]

[C0C0]

i love that second photo Richter...it would have an exceptionally timeless quality if the people with the baggy hoodies were absent