TMax 100
The last time that I was in a darkroom was right before I left home to begin my life as an adult. Sometime around late 1983, early 1984. So, about a good 25 years ago. Today, even though I am suffering from flu-like symptoms, I had to take a stab at developing at least one roll of film from my Mamiya 645.

I had to first go online to look for the proper mixes and times for the various films that I have shot. Note to self: Choose one film, like back in the day, and stick with it! :-) The first roll that I developed was TMAX 100. The guy who sold me the camera was nice enough to include it as well as a roll of TMAX 400. I’ll develop that later.

Into the makeshift darkroom I go. AKA, the bathroom. I made it light tight with a blanket hung over the door to prevent the light around the edges and top and a towel to take care of the light coming in at the bottom. After setting my tank and film in place, I closed the door, made sure that everything was light tight. Then, I began to unroll the film and attempt to get it onto the reel. After a couple of unsuccessful attempts, I realized that I hadn’t spaced the reels wide enough for this film. While attempting to do that, i promptly dropped the film on the floor. Now, as I said, it was DARK. So, I had to get down on hands and knees and use a serpentine motion with my hands. I finally found it. After a number of failed attempts at getting the reel the right width, in the dark, I managed it.

Uh oh! What’s this? My nose is starting to run! Drip! Drip! Drip! Well, I finally get the film into the tank, sans nasal drippings, and got the top securely in place and could turn on the light. The rest of the development went according to plan as I only needed to pour in the solution for the correct amount of time: 9 minutes for developer, 10 seconds for stop bath, 5 minutes for fixer, rince for a few minutes and viola! I had negatives!

Dang it! I don’t have any way to hang them! Hmmm??? Ah ha! Chip clips! I have two of them, so that is what I used. I hung them in the laundry room. Oops. One more problem. No way to cut them. I don’t have any scissors! I had to go out and get some. Also, no sleeves to put them in. Hey! This guy is prepared! Looks like envelopes will have to do until I get sleeves! Indeed CF Cards are a lot easier to work with BUT there is a certain joy in seeing the negatives come out! I’m pumped up!

The final battle was with the scanner. I use and Epson Perfection 3200, now outdated and no longer produced, to scan. It tries to be smart using the medium format holder and thinks that you are using square negatives and always seems to divide one negative into two. I finally wrestled it to the ground and got it to submit to my will!

So, here are a couple of scans from my first roll. I’m happy to say that the camera works quite well even if the darkroom technician has forgotten many of his skills! :-) I didn’t do any changes to these. They are as they came out of the scanner. Both with scanned at 2400 dpi, which will give a long side dimension of about 5400 pixels as 645′s image area is slightly under 6 cm. That said, at 2400 dpi, one could get a very nice 16 x 20 quite easily.

 


Agfa Pan 25 Lightroom preset
I’m making it a daily habit to visit Chris Klug’s blog. I like it. I’m also intrigued as to why he still uses film. So much so that I asked him to write a post about it. I’ll keep checking back. Mind you, there is nothing wrong with shooting film, to be sure. I’m just kind of an instant gratification guy these days and have been spoiled by digital.

However, I think that when I look back at an image scanned from film it seems to look ‘different’. I’m not sure of different in what way. Digital black and white is, I think, precise. Film seems to have a character all of its own. Though it’s been quite a while, I remember that I used to shoot about 3 different types of film, but only used one type of developer. I didn’t get crazy about my combinations. I just used what worked for me.

My favorite film was the venerable and slow Agfa Pan 25. Man! You almost needed a tripod in bright sunlight! However, this stuff was buttery smooth and you could enlarge it to your heart’s desire and see not a whisper of grain. And talk about tonality. Sweet! It was, if I remember correctly, fairly low to modest on contrast. This, though, was taken care of quite easily by using Kodak’s Polycontrast paper and the right color filter. My color equivalent was Kodachrome 25! I rarely shot color negative. I liked slow film, small grain!

Next up, for general duty and shooting in all types was, as far as I was concerned, the reigning champion of the time, Tri-X. ASA (back then) 400. I could use this film anywhere. I could push it a stop or two and still get some decent pictures. For you younger guys/gals, pushing film meant to shoot at a higher ISO than it was rated. So, pushing one stop was to shoot at 800, 2 stops, 1600. Pushing meant that development time and or temperature had to be increased to give the underexposed shadow detail to develop. If I shot one roll pushed, I’d have to save until I had another to develop so that I could do two rolls at a time.

It certainly was fun, back then and still there is nothing to match the anticipation of waiting for the film to be ready to view, or in seeing your photos develop right in front of your eyes. Nor has the feeling been matched of seeing a favorite photo printed on ‘real’ fiber paper, not resin coated Polycontrast paper. I guess that maybe I can understand the attraction, but now I just prefer less hassle. :-)

While thinking about this post, I just downloaded some free Lightroom presets that mimic certain types of film. The above photo, taken with my D2x at White Sands was done using the Agfa Pan 25 preset.

Addendum: Chris made his post already!

© 2011 Paul Lester Photo Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha

Bad Behavior has blocked 409 access attempts in the last 7 days.