Shaping the Past

[AlanO]

Shaping the Past by Nokinrocks, on Flickr

OM2N
50mm 1.4
Ilford FP4
5x7 print scan

 

[Rick58]

Well, that certainly has a vintage feel. Nicely done.

 

[timor]

Wow, wow, wow. What is this ? Yes, it has a vintage look, but that of bad processing. Looks like a print made from underexposed and underdeveloped negative developed with the last breath of Dektol. Or was that caffenol ?

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Fort Pulaski?

 

[AlanO]

Fort Pulaski?

yep

 

[AlanO]

Wow, wow, wow. What is this ? Yes, it has a vintage look, but that of bad processing. Looks like a print made from underexposed and underdeveloped negative developed with the last breath of Dektol. Or was that caffenol ?

:blackeye: ...Under developed maybe, I exposed ~1 stop under and cut dev time in "fresh" Tmax 25%. I was using an orange filter and polarizer on an off that day, so it is possible the shot was filtered (can't remember). Negs are thin, not sure what the culprit is.

Same role and day


IMAG0036 by Nokinrocks, on Flickr

 

[gsgary]

If you underexpose you have to over develope, to underexpose FP4 you would have to shoot it at iso250 instead of iso125 and then you have to use a longer developement time, so you have probably under developed your film

 

[AlanO]

If you underexpose you have to over develope, to underexpose FP4 you would have to shoot it at iso250 instead of iso125 and then you have to use a longer developement time, so you have probably under developed your film

I did overexpose, ISO was set at 64, when I said "under" I meant under ISO 125. Good catch, thanks for helping to clarify.

 

[timor]

If you underexpose you have to over develope, to underexpose FP4 you would have to shoot it at iso250 instead of iso125 and then you have to use a longer developement time, so you have probably under developed your film

I did overexpose, ISO was set at 64, when I said "under" I meant under ISO 125. Good catch, thanks for helping to clarify.

When you say "exposed 1 stop under" there is no mistake in our understanding, it means you cut the amount of light falling on the film by 50%. If your camera was set to ISO 64 better check your built in light meter. Olympus is known for failures of that.

 

[Rick58]

That shot of the chain is really cool. It almost looks like an antique painting.

I also really like the first shot as a novelty. If it wasn't for the clothing and modern hair style, it could have been taken 100 years ago.

 

[AlanO]

If you underexpose you have to over develope, to underexpose FP4 you would have to shoot it at iso250 instead of iso125 and then you have to use a longer developement time, so you have probably under developed your film

I did overexpose, ISO was set at 64, when I said "under" I meant under ISO 125. Good catch, thanks for helping to clarify.

When you say "exposed 1 stop under" there is no mistake in our understanding, it means you cut the amount of light falling on the film by 50%. If your camera was set to ISO 64 better check your built in light meter. Olympus is known for failures of that.

I'll watch my terminology... Might be worth trying some new batteries. see if it makes a difference. Thanks Timor.

 

[AlanO]

That shot of the chain is really cool. It almost looks like an antique painting.

I also really like the first shot as a novelty. If it wasn't for the clothing and modern hair style, it could have been taken 100 years ago.

I concur on both points... Thanks, Rick

 

[timor]

That shot of the chain is really cool. It almost looks like an antique painting.

I also really like the first shot as a novelty. If it wasn't for the clothing and modern hair style, it could have been taken 100 years ago.

I agree with this, have same feelings. The question is if Alan can repeat this look any time he wants.

 

[AlanO]

That shot of the chain is really cool. It almost looks like an antique painting.

I also really like the first shot as a novelty. If it wasn't for the clothing and modern hair style, it could have been taken 100 years ago.

I agree with this, have same feelings. The question is if Alan can repeat this look any time he wants.

Best comment I've seen in a while.