I know the feet came out a little hot, but whatever. I don't feel like going deep into photoshop to get those right.
Last week a friend of mine who doesn't live here asked me to take on a project. She said she wanted to see pictures of shoes. Not like shoes lying around, but city shoes. The footwear of the average New Yorker. Now it's hard enough for me to walk up to a total stranger and ask to take their portrait, let alone walk up to a total stranger and ask to take a picture of their feet (in Greenwich Village, no less). The latter some think would border on a fetish, and cast me in an even weirder light than your average photographer of strangers.
So I headed out to Washington Square Park with the Nettar and a fresh roll of Ilford Delta 100 and took pictures of people's feet on the sly. And yes, I felt more than just a bit of a creep while I did it. But this is what friends do for each other.
Some Tech Talk:
I developed this in Diafine (3+3 25.2c, room temp) to make sure my Diafine still worked. Remember yesterday when I mentioned that I was going to develop an old V116 roll? Well, I got nothing off of it. In fact, it didn't even look like it was even shot. Now this roll (with a few others) I bought loose, with the claim they were already exposed. I'd hate to think I was a victim of a scam. I have bought loose exposed vintage films before and have culled images from them. But I think it would be just as easy to wind an unshot vintage roll forward all the way without shooting it and sell it as shot. And if it doesn't come out, what argument do you have? You're trying to develop 60+ or however many years old film. Hell, you could sell a lot of film (I mean, a "lot" not a lot) with actual exposed rolls and just throw in an unexposed vintage one to sweeten the pot. I'm not giving up on Diafine for vintage rolls. I have some VP127 all ready to go, and I got it out of a Kodak Bullet (1930s, with the screw-out front) at a flea market, so I have more faith that it was actually shot.
No comments:
Post a Comment