Sunday, February 28, 2010

Technical Stuff

Just to let you know, this post is going to have a lot of info about processing techniques, accidents, discoveries, and all those sorts of things that only might be of passing interest to someone who's really into photography.

Consider yourself warned.

So I developed this roll of film last night. It had been sitting in a vintage film developing tank in my fridge for a while. I was under the impression it was this undeveloped 127 roll that came with one of my cameras. Now I had been developing all of my vintage-exposed film in Ilfosol 3, yet according to the bit photo machers on the internet, they recommend any number of other developers for such tasks, most notably Kodak HC-110.

So last week I picked up some HC-110, mixed up the stock solution, and last night made myself 600ml of Dilution B. I developed at 15 degrees celsius for a little over 15 minutes, agitating every 30 seconds or so. After I fixed, I took off the top of the tank, and to my surprise, there wasn't a 127 roll in there, but a 120 roll. Apparently I had forgotten that in that particular tank I didn't put the 127, but one of my circa 1950s rolls of Verichrome that I had shot several months ago in my Kodak Jiffy Six-20. Oh dear!

Now up to this point, I had been developing those rolls in the Ilfosol 3, for about 7 minutes at 20 degrees celsius, and was getting seriously fogged, yet really cool images. If you scroll down, you'll see them. I know I could put in a link, but I figure that's too easy, so if you're reading this for the first time, you'll have to see all the other stuff I've posted inbetween.

How would this film fare with a process I was expecting to use on a completely different film? You tell me:

This is a straight color scan of the black and white negative without any post-processing. I swear. Not bad, eh? That's the Grace Memorial House on Fourth Avenue, in case you're wondering. Aside from the "SAFETY" outside of the frame on top, and the very light impression on the top right half of the image of the backing paper, this looks like I could have taken it on modern day film.

So here's the question. Do I use the Ilfosol 3 and get clouded yet way cool images, or do I use the HC-110 and get something a bit more pristine?

Well, here's another shot from the batch. It's post processed from the color scan. In the original, the sky behind the Flatiron was way brigher, with the rest darker. Yet somehow I like this. The flatiron and the street actually look like it was taken in another time. And in a way it sort of goes with the differently-hued sky (being color-blind, I have no idea what color it is).

I think it looks like one of those old NYC postcards from the early early 1900s. All that's missing is the glitter outline (If you've seen these you'll know what I'm talking about).

I think I just might print this out and have the glitter and Elmer's at the ready. Maybe some macaroni too.

The film isn't Kodak Verichrome. It's not even Kodak! I don't even remember what it was! I think it was some kind of weird foreign film that just said "Panchromatic" on it. So maybe that's why the images came out...because I wasn't dealing with 55+ year old film!

Though I'll still try the same developing method with the HC-110 when I use my next Verichrome roll to see what happens.

Forgetting which film is in which tank, forgetting which film I put in which camera which went in which tank...maybe I should start writing this stuff down...

I just developed that 127 roll. I got nothing.

No comments:

Post a Comment