Pages

 

Recent Pages by Rightwingconspirator:
Russia's New Combat Robots Blown Up by Drones Near Avdiivka Climate Scientist Michael Mann Wins Defamation Case Against Right Wing Hacks About That Flood Warning for Los Angeles? Coastal Serenity The Six Fingered Con Man

Jump to bottom

14 comments

1 PhillyPretzel  May 10, 2015 12:37:38pm

I still have my first camera. A well used 110 instamatic. Waiting for the developed pictures from the Fotomat was something I got used to. I used both color and black and white film. Today I have a Nikon Coolpix L330 and I am just starting to learn how to use it. One of the great things about digital photography is that you do not have to wait to see or adjust the pictures. :)

2 Backwoods_Sleuth  May 10, 2015 12:38:43pm

I knew it had to be Tri-X.

THE BEST!!!

3 Amory Blaine  May 10, 2015 1:12:20pm

I remember going to the Kodak shack in the neighborhood as a kid dropping off the black film containers, then eagerly awaiting them to be finished. Precious memories.

4 William Lewis  May 10, 2015 1:14:31pm

Tri-X is great but it wasn’t their best.

I deeply miss Plus-X in sheets & 120 rolls. Pushed to 400 and developed in Diafine you could get enough speed for most light yet creamy in an indescribable way. Much more interesting than yet another grainy overpushed Tri-X image, at least to me.

5 PhillyPretzel  May 10, 2015 1:15:34pm

re: #1 PhillyPretzel

As to the black and white film I think it had the name “pan” in it. My dad had to get it at the local camera store; the Fotomat did not have it.

6 William Lewis  May 10, 2015 1:19:05pm

re: #5 PhillyPretzel

As to the black and white film I think it had the name “pan” in it. My dad had to get it at the local camera store the Fotomat did not have it.

Verichrome-Pan ? That was an older classic. Double X Pan was another.

All of the major B&W films from Kodak after 1930 had Pan in the name for Panchromatic meaning they weren’t as limited in their spectrum response as older films were (known as Orthochromatic films, especially bad a handling skies though good for portraits).

7 William Lewis  May 10, 2015 1:22:21pm

I really need to dig out the last few rolls of Tech Pan I have out of the fridge and fire up my Canon 7… I just need to borrow a decent LTM 50/2 lens to use on it.

8 PhillyPretzel  May 10, 2015 1:34:06pm

re: #6 William Lewis

I think it was Verichrome-Pan. The pictures were okay. I was just starting out taking pictures then and both my mom and dad wanted me to learn how to use it.

9 Great White Snark  May 10, 2015 2:53:09pm

Hi well nice to see so many chiming in.

10 otoc  May 10, 2015 3:41:07pm

re: #7 William Lewis

I really need to dig out the last few rolls of Tech Pan I have out of the fridge and fire up my Canon 7… I just need to borrow a decent LTM 50/2 lens to use on it.

Considering that film was discontinued over 10 years ago, I hope you have it frozen for decent results. I know Kodak always pushed the “no difference between freezing and refrigeration”, with the statement to never use it beyond the expiration date regardless of storage temp, but that was BS and I don’t know any working pro that abided by that nonsense. Aging film hardens and causes the streaking/mottled development with a dash of base fog. Radiation adds more base fog over time. Have fun with that experiment.

OT-
My favorite film was panatomic-X or tri-x rated at 200 and developed in hc100 dil B as a one shot developer. Somewhere in storage I have a box of syringes and pipettes for mixing the stuff. I always found diafine too mushy and a pain to mix. If I needed finer grain at the expense of acutance, I’d add sodium sulfite as a solvent to the developer.

On the easy side for 4X5 was Type 55, which was Panatomic-X, manufactured by Kodak and repackaged by Polaroid.

lol, my first camera was a kodak brownie. My first 35mm was a zeiss viewfinder camera. My first pro 35 was a Nikon F2. My first 4X5 was a Cambo. I still have all of them. Geez, I either feel old around here, or have publicly “exposed” the packrat side….

11 William Lewis  May 10, 2015 5:30:13pm

re: #10 otoc

Considering that film was discontinued over 10 years ago, I hope you have it frozen for decent results. I know Kodak always pushed the “no difference between freezing and refrigeration”, with the statement to never use it beyond the expiration date regardless of storage temp, but that was BS and I don’t know any working pro that abided by that nonsense. Aging film hardens and causes the streaking/mottled development with a dash of base fog. Radiation adds more base fog over time. Have fun with that experiment.

Bought it knowing it had be refrigerated not frozen. What comes out of the soup will be what comes out :D

i still have my home built 4x5 field camera that started as a stripped Crown Graphic body that I hacked all to be-jeepers. But it has full front movements and it works well with my favorite glass. I’d shoot it still but my film scanner died a couple years back and one that can do 4x5 is just not in the cards :(

12 CuriousLurker  May 10, 2015 6:10:55pm

Interesting, thanks. I went looking for info on the war photographers mentioned and found so much stuff on McCullin that I didn’t get a chance to really dig into Salgado’s work other than looking at some of it via Google Images. Pretty amazing stuff—I’ll have to go back to him another time.

Anyway, here are some of the pieces on McCullin. The articles are listed in chronological order (earliest to latest):

Don McCullin’s war with guilt CNN, October 2011

The Impossible Peace: Photographer Don McCullin’s last war at Visa Pour l’Image - Imaging Resource, September 2013

(Note: A similar story appeared in The Times [UK] in December 2012, but it’s behind a paywall; the following video appears to be a companion to it).

…

Don McCullin: Confessions of a ‘war junkie’ - BBC, 2014


Last but not least, a peek at what it’s like to be a war photographer:

The shot that nearly killed me: War photographers - a special report - The Guardian, June 2011 (Warning: graphic photos) *shudder*

Okay, not that I’ve thread-jacked your Page… //

13 freetoken  May 10, 2015 7:52:54pm

One of the things about Tri-X is that it wasn’t same between the small format and the larger formats.

These Kodak films have played a big roll in the documentation of the 20th century. The Brits tend towards Illford, but I couldn’t grok them.

I like the Fujifilm T-grain products they introduced near the end of the run of photographic film. Their slow T-grain type film is remarkable in that reciprocity errors are minimal, making long exposures more practical. Love that stuff in roll film format.

Alas, few youngsters today will experience the joy of working with wet photography. Even the local photo classes in college have mostly switched to all digital. The art theorists may claim that the medium is not as important as the message and the messenger, but I think there are still looks to be achieved in film that digital doesn’t duplicate.

14 steve_davis  May 11, 2015 2:54:48am

<smile> I’ve got 3 rolls of 400tx stacked about a foot away from where I”m reading this!


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh