Anyway, without further delay, let's take a look at what this week has in store -- nature, tombstones, dancing prohibitions, the Golden Gate Bridge, and Sterling Winery.
Sunday, September 9, 2012
A Year in Photos -- Week Thirty-eight
Well, this week has some exciting images to share. In fact, one of the days images are from a shoot that went so well, I have to break it into two blog posts. And that is always exciting. Most of this week's photos will come from my Pentax K-7, but on Wednesday we'll have a nice interlude with a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye that I flipped the lens on. The lens flip yields an interesting effect. I need to try color film, though, as the effect is a bit more interesting then.
Anyway, without further delay, let's take a look at what this week has in store -- nature, tombstones, dancing prohibitions, the Golden Gate Bridge, and Sterling Winery.
Anyway, without further delay, let's take a look at what this week has in store -- nature, tombstones, dancing prohibitions, the Golden Gate Bridge, and Sterling Winery.
Thursday, September 6, 2012
Lindsay Wildlife Museum
The Lindsay Wildlife Museum in Walnut Creek has a mission of connecting people and nature. They rehabilitate injured animals and release ones that can be set free, and provide permanent homes for ones that can't. If you get a chance, you should definitely visit. If you can support them, that would also be a great thing to do. Here are some of the residents.
How would you like to be this little guy? You know he can smell all those birds that want to eat him. That's gotta be stressful.
How would you like to be this little guy? You know he can smell all those birds that want to eat him. That's gotta be stressful.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Kodak Vision 3 250D -- in Monochrome!
I picked up a 200-foot spool of Kodak Vision 250D a while back with the intent of developing it as black and white film. A friend on a photo forum I frequent uses this and loves it (and his photos are fabulous, by the way.) He also uses other Vision films, and all have great tonal range.
Anyway, some of the images here aren't perfect as I didn't get the remjet backing off perfectly, but you'll see that this film has a decent tonal range, especially considering that the camera I used was one I pieced together from multiple broken cameras (so it may not be perfect.)
Developing 250D is similar to nut not exactly like developing standard monochrome film. Firstly, there's a carbon black backing which will partially come off in the developer. So you may not want to reuse developer after running this stuff through it. I re-use the developer, though, and it's fine. The remjet settles out at the bottom of the bottle after a few days and as long as I don't use the dregs or agitate the fluid, the developer remains fairly clear.
The only hitch for me is temperature control. Color film needs higher temperatures than monochrome, so when I develop this, after the first full-minute of agitation, I keep it under a light hot water stream during the following three minutes. This works best with a metal film tank. The developer remains warm for the rest of the 10-11 minutes this film needs to develop.
That's my recipe, but you should practice variations. Also, leave a comment if you've home developed this before and have any suggestions.
During the rinse, I rinse the film once and the water comes out grayish. That's the remjet again. Then I fill it about half way and violently shake the film tank. The water comes out nearly black. A second time and the water is mostly clear, indicating that as much remjet as can be removed by water alone has been removed.
A standard fix of 10 minutes and the film is ready to wash. At the end of the wash, I run the film under a water stream and use my fingers to squeegee away the remaining remjet. This works well and if you do it correctly won't leave scratches on the emulsion. Here are some (sub-par) results.
Anyway, some of the images here aren't perfect as I didn't get the remjet backing off perfectly, but you'll see that this film has a decent tonal range, especially considering that the camera I used was one I pieced together from multiple broken cameras (so it may not be perfect.)
Developing 250D is similar to nut not exactly like developing standard monochrome film. Firstly, there's a carbon black backing which will partially come off in the developer. So you may not want to reuse developer after running this stuff through it. I re-use the developer, though, and it's fine. The remjet settles out at the bottom of the bottle after a few days and as long as I don't use the dregs or agitate the fluid, the developer remains fairly clear.
The only hitch for me is temperature control. Color film needs higher temperatures than monochrome, so when I develop this, after the first full-minute of agitation, I keep it under a light hot water stream during the following three minutes. This works best with a metal film tank. The developer remains warm for the rest of the 10-11 minutes this film needs to develop.
That's my recipe, but you should practice variations. Also, leave a comment if you've home developed this before and have any suggestions.
During the rinse, I rinse the film once and the water comes out grayish. That's the remjet again. Then I fill it about half way and violently shake the film tank. The water comes out nearly black. A second time and the water is mostly clear, indicating that as much remjet as can be removed by water alone has been removed.
A standard fix of 10 minutes and the film is ready to wash. At the end of the wash, I run the film under a water stream and use my fingers to squeegee away the remaining remjet. This works well and if you do it correctly won't leave scratches on the emulsion. Here are some (sub-par) results.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Monday, September 3, 2012
Studying SOMA
Back in May I took my Canon RT out and wanted to document how One Rincon Hill Tower 1 dominates SOMA's landscape. With One Rincon Hill Tower 2 entering construction soon, SOMA is again about to change. Here are my photos from SOMA, each of which somehow capture an aspect of One Rincon Hill Tower 1.
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Better than Scanning my Bum
Scanography. What a great portmanteau. Scan + photography. Scanners have turned out to be extremely useful photographic tools. You can scan pictures, and film, which is great. You can also scan objects and turn those scans into images. Most impressively, someone with actual technical knowledge can replace a large-format camera's film back with a scanner and use high-resolution large-format cameras with ultra-high-resolution scans. Image an image scanned at 4,800 dpi (my typical native scan size for a 35mm negative) that's 8X10 inches. That's 1,843,200,000 pixels (1.8 GIGApixels.) That, printed at 300 DPI, is a 13-foot-by-10-foot image. That's a 13-foot-by-10-foot high-resolution print. On screen or in typical printing, that 1.8 gigpixel image is more like 55 feet by 44 feet. So scanners are a powerful tool for digital imaging.
I, unfortunately, do not have the technical skill to convert a scanner into a film back. So I settled for using my Epson Perfection 1670 for scanography. I was still getting images that were 545 megapixels. In fact, those images were so large I couldn't open on my computer. After finding settings that my computer could handle -- 50-200 megapixel images -- I set about doing some scanography.
Scanography is simple. If you have a scanner, you can do it. Basically, it's a high-tech photogram. Set stuff on a flat plane and, expose. Instead of exposing paper and obtaining a two-tone result, you're scanning a flat plane with a very narrow depth of field.
For a future project, I hope to be able to convert a scanner into a digital back. First, though, I need a large-format camera.
Anyway, onto some scanography!
A multi-flower blossom made from a bouquet I got at Safeway for $5. Yeah, great colors and detail. Want to see what that flower looked like at a 100% scan?
Sure thing. For reference, the entire flower was about 1/30th this scan's size which means these scans are also hyper macro shots.
A bunch of great lenses.
Study of a single petal.
I, unfortunately, do not have the technical skill to convert a scanner into a film back. So I settled for using my Epson Perfection 1670 for scanography. I was still getting images that were 545 megapixels. In fact, those images were so large I couldn't open on my computer. After finding settings that my computer could handle -- 50-200 megapixel images -- I set about doing some scanography.
Scanography is simple. If you have a scanner, you can do it. Basically, it's a high-tech photogram. Set stuff on a flat plane and, expose. Instead of exposing paper and obtaining a two-tone result, you're scanning a flat plane with a very narrow depth of field.
For a future project, I hope to be able to convert a scanner into a digital back. First, though, I need a large-format camera.
Anyway, onto some scanography!
A multi-flower blossom made from a bouquet I got at Safeway for $5. Yeah, great colors and detail. Want to see what that flower looked like at a 100% scan?
Sure thing. For reference, the entire flower was about 1/30th this scan's size which means these scans are also hyper macro shots.
A bunch of great lenses.
Study of a single petal.
A Year in Photos -- Week Thirty-seven
This week has some exciting photos to share. Scanography, birds, and an urban lake are some of the many images we have lined up this week. Also, on my shelf right now I have some cameras lined up to use in the next few weeks. They include my Pentax 6X7 loaded with Adox 25 ISO film, Nikon F3 with Bluefire Police (80 ISO), Pentax KX with Efke 25 ISO, and Canon AE-1 with a test roll of some (in all probability) VERY old Ektachrome 100 ISO. I'm not optimistic about the Ektachrome, but we'll see what I can get. So, without delay, let's take a look at what's coming.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Bugging Out
Photos of this European Preying Mantis and one quick note only today. Note: Pentax K-7, Pentax Macro Bellows II, Vivitar 135mm 1:2.8. Enjoy!
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Empire Gold Mine State Park
California is in a budget crisis and many of our state parks are at risk of temporary closure. Empire Gold Mine is not, to my knowledge, one of those parks, but I wanted to use this post to draw attention to this issue.
Closing the state parks would be exceedingly short sited and detrimental. The park system in the United States is our society's great equalizer. In the parks, all people -- regardless of wealth or class -- have equal access to inexpensive or free natural settings. Many of California's state parks charge $35 a night for camping, some being just fractions of a mile from multiple-hundreds-of-dollars-per-night hotels. Granted, for $35 a night you don't get a private shower or a bed which doesn't need inflating, but you do get a place to sleep, another to cook dinner, and 22 hours (check in is 2:00 PM and check out is noon, typically) in nature.
Closed parks also will likely attract more people who want to use the undisturbed spaces for squatting, growing illegal drugs, and supporting other criminal activities. Closed parks could increase the state's risk of catastrophic fire damage. If you'd like more information, or if you'd like to help (I hope you will do both), follow this link:
http://savestateparks.org/
I thought I might end on a monochrome conversion of the first image. Empire Mine State Park is a place set up for taking great photographs. And that holds true for most if not all of our state parks -- California and elsewhere.
It is not hyperbole to say that our parks are in a crisis and we need to be active in making sure they remain open and public. And, hey, would you like a piece of trivia? If you visited one state park each year, how many years would it take to visit all of California's state parks? In 2012, it would take 279 years.
State parks are a great and communal gift to the American people. We must steward them and ensure our state keeps them public, safe, and open.
Closing the state parks would be exceedingly short sited and detrimental. The park system in the United States is our society's great equalizer. In the parks, all people -- regardless of wealth or class -- have equal access to inexpensive or free natural settings. Many of California's state parks charge $35 a night for camping, some being just fractions of a mile from multiple-hundreds-of-dollars-per-night hotels. Granted, for $35 a night you don't get a private shower or a bed which doesn't need inflating, but you do get a place to sleep, another to cook dinner, and 22 hours (check in is 2:00 PM and check out is noon, typically) in nature.
Closed parks also will likely attract more people who want to use the undisturbed spaces for squatting, growing illegal drugs, and supporting other criminal activities. Closed parks could increase the state's risk of catastrophic fire damage. If you'd like more information, or if you'd like to help (I hope you will do both), follow this link:
http://savestateparks.org/
I thought I might end on a monochrome conversion of the first image. Empire Mine State Park is a place set up for taking great photographs. And that holds true for most if not all of our state parks -- California and elsewhere.
It is not hyperbole to say that our parks are in a crisis and we need to be active in making sure they remain open and public. And, hey, would you like a piece of trivia? If you visited one state park each year, how many years would it take to visit all of California's state parks? In 2012, it would take 279 years.
State parks are a great and communal gift to the American people. We must steward them and ensure our state keeps them public, safe, and open.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)