I hope this qualifies as recent film shots. I found a roll in the freezer from a Siyeh Pass hike (Glacier NP) in roughly 2009 and developed it last week. Hasselblad with an 80mm, Tmax 100, D-23.
I've been trying to shoot some film through the old cameras to make sure they work. This was a park bench sculpture (bench is on the other side of the gear) using parts from a local paper mill that burned down. Rollei twins lens (Schneider 2.8), Tmax 400 (exp 12/1991), D-23.
Desmolicious wrote:
I’ve used lots of film that has been expired with zero issues. It seems the only damage that happens is if it gets hot. I have given an extra stop per 10 years - but that only works on cameras where I can manually adjust the exposure. I cannot on my Rollei A110 or Pentax Auto 110.
This shot was taken Kodak Supra 100 - again 26 yrs old! - no idea how it was stored. I rated it at ISO 25 and it looked perfect. Thing is c41 film loves overexposure, so maybe giving it two extra stops wasn’t actually needed?
A few recent shots from the NY City Auto Show. All shot on Nikon F6 and 50mm 1.8G on 500T Vision 3. Scanned on the new Easy35, Z7 II and 105mm 2.8G macro. Converted in NLP.
I FUBAR'd the developing so I am happy they turned out at all. I mix my own ECN-2 developer and one-shot my rolls. However, it was a hectic and a generally bad day for other reasons and I my attention was not what it should have been. I didn't get the developer to the proper temp of 106°F and instead only got the developer to 100°F. I panicked as I had three rolls in the tank, but took a guess and developed for 4:20 instead of 3:20. It seemed to work out ok as you can see. In the end I think it was a slight push which was good because the conference center was slightly dark and had mixed lighting.
soarfm wrote:
That is really nice! And congratulations on having a wife that is willing to bring two kids and a dog under control long enough to indulge you with a subject for your 8x10.
These are from the second roll of 500T but mostly shot in daylight. I don't like the colors outside as much as the other roll and I wish I had used an 85 filter to fix the white balance. I made changes in LR but it was a drag.
I think (but I'd have to dig through the freezer) that this may be the last of the "really old" 120 BW film, meaning 1980s and early 1990s. I have some Tech Pan (exp 1999), and then the modern film, Tmax 100 (exp 2010). I'd think the Tech Pan would work fine despite it's age. It just needs the right subject.
I think (but I'd have to dig through the freezer) that this may be the last of the "really old" 120 BW film, meaning 1980s and early 1990s. I have some Tech Pan (exp 1999), and then the modern film, Tmax 100 (exp 2010). I'd think the Tech Pan would work fine despite it's age. It just needs the right subject.
I wouldn't know "really old" BW film from "really new", but that picture captures the grittiness one would imagine for experienced mining equipment. Nicely done!
I wonder about how some film effects work on our perception. If we, meaning any viewer, weren't familiar with old photographs, if crisp modern digital images on a super-hi-res screen were all we had ever seen, would we still appreciate the graininess and shading of a film pic like that one or lakatua's Trestle? Or would we dismiss it as less than perfect?
jimmuller wrote:
I wouldn't know "really old" BW film from "really new", but that picture captures the grittiness one would imagine for experienced mining equipment. Nicely done!
I wonder about how some film effects work on our perception. If we, meaning any viewer, weren't familiar with old photographs, if crisp modern digital images on a super-hi-res screen were all we had ever seen, would we still appreciate the graininess and shading of a film pic like that one or lakatua's Trestle? Or would we dismiss it as less than perfect?
Thanks. By "really old" I was referring to expiration date and not the film type. In my hands. Tmax 100/400 has been more gritty than Plus-X or Tri-X, but I haven't done side-by-side comparisons. It's just a feeling, but at the time I switched (years ago) I think I also switched developers. Tech Pan has been smooth and tonal, but sharp and fickle. I shot quite a few rolls of Tech Pan in the woods, and it just didn't seem to work. Industrial photos, like the mining photo above, seem to be a great subject.
BTW, the Tri-X roll above had quite a bit of base fog. I believe I shot it at 200 (could have been 160), so it's surprising you can just blast the film and shoot through the fog. (I also used 12 drops of benzo in the developer, but also a longer time than recommend in the "massive development chart".)
A bit of a tribute and regret regarding the RTSiii. I swear that I can get more resolution out of this camera with the 100 Makro than any of my ‘M’ system film cameras. I rarely shoot with it because of the weight/size, but I haven’t parted with it.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
-Frame-11-1(1200).jpg)
