There are days when I feel that I am simply a gatherer of images whose sole mission is to run out and gather as many images as possible on a given day, come back, give a cursory look at some of them, judge them, show one or two, then on to the next crop. Never looking back. Never stopping to consider the ‘why’.

Anymore, I don’t ask why things happen. When I purchased this film camera, I had no intention of it being my sole-use camera for any period of time. Sure, I thought, it would be a nice trip to “back in the day”, nothing more. Yet, it has become more. Lately, there have been a few posts about film either directly or indirectly. Paul Butzi talked about why he wouldn’t use film to do his theater project, more specifically, large format. His points, of course, were all valid. The other day on T.O.P (The Online Photographer), Mike talked about shooting film and using Leica for a year to become a better photographer and to be able to ‘see’ better. I think that there is some merit in his idea, though not necessarily that you ‘need’ a Leica.

So far, I’ve shot 5 rolls of film, processed 4. The final finished roll I will process this evening. All told, 75 shots. In my bag sits another 6 rolls of film, ready to go. From what I can see, my success ratio seems to be a bit higher. To be sure, I am aware that there is cost involved with each exposure and I’m not prone to shooting, shooting, shooting … even though I advocate this approach. I think that, early on, the shoot/feedback loop is very important … if you take the time to analyze the feedback. It never looses its importance, but with the lower cost of digital, and higher shoot rates, the number of shots to analyze can be overwhelming. Now, I find myself moving, looking, moving, looking, waiting, and feeling things out before even taking a shot. It’s a relaxing way to shoot.

I’m rediscovering my ‘tone vision’, if you will. Not all things photograph well in B&W and, when shooting B&W film, one must make a choice. There is no shooting it in color, then converting to B&W to see which one you like best. You get what you get. Also, the digital perfection is gone. Film has its own characteristics, like grain and tonality, and I’m finding that I really like the grain on some of the film. It adds a beauty all of its own.

So! Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Am I more contemplative because I am shooting film or am I shooting film, because I am more contemplative. It is, I believe, the latter. The photography just followed, I think. When I shot film when I was younger, I ran through many rolls of film, to be sure. Back then, I bought expired film almost exclusively and developed it myself, so it was still relatively cheap.

Though I never fully intended to do the one camera, one lens, one film thing, I think that it is happening. Will I shun digital and run back into the arms of film? Doubtful. However, I am enjoying this medium format film and the developing. As with all things in life, we’ll just have to see where it leads. Thanks for riding along.

 


Final touches
All this talk of old school film and cameras reminded me of a skill that I once had and took for granted. I just remembered after downloading the Lightroom film presets and playing around with them. Ove asked if I had solarized a particular photo.

Well, no. I didn’t. While in Lightroom I remembered what I used to do to black and white film to get dramatic skies. In my bag I always carried about 2 red filters, a Wratten 25 and Wratten 29, if I remember correctly. These filters were very deep red blocked out blue and cyan light, for the most part. Even back then, I shot most of my stuff on a tripod, so the extra stop or two that I needed for the filters was not an issue. What these filters did was to give dramatic skies. Since it would block all of the cyan light attempting to come through, it would render the skies black, as in the photo on yesterday’s post.

Now, I can do this post process by using the sliders in Lightroom under Grayscale mix. Simply pulling the blue slider all the way to the left makes my sky become very dark and dramatic. I used to carry a green filter as well. If I saw a scene where I wanted the grass to become light, with respect to the other colors, I applied the green filter. It blocked other colors and allowed green light through. Again, all I have to do now is move the green slider to the right to get more green, left for less (darker).

I don’t use color filters anymore because there is no need to. They don’t work well on digital cameras anyway, but I’m glad that that is still there in LR. It just gives me a way continue to experiment with my black and white photos in the digital realm.

For the above shot I pulled back the green sliders a bit to make the grass a little bit darker. When I saw this shot, again from my little field across the street, I had an idea of what I wanted to accomplish. A little bit of slider movement, burning here, dodging there, all in Lightroom, and I had what I wanted.

 


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 262 access attempts in the last 7 days.