my glass i saw: The Middle Reading Deck

[Brian Moore]

It's the "Middle Reading Deck" at Huntington Beach Public Library, in Huntington Beach California.

I used my Olympus XA and Legacy Pro 400 film.

I developed the film in Rodinal, diluted 1:100, using a "semi-stand" technique. By semi-stand I mean that I agitated the film for 30 seconds at the beginning of the processing, then for another 30 seconds after half an hour in the developing tank. The total developing time was one hour.

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Very nice Brian - great job capturing some of the exterior detail without it burning out.

The darker tonality remins me of many of the images in my wife's photography book from the 70s - she said she wanted to go back to basics with her new DSLR, so dug out this very analogue 'how to' book from the back of the closet.

Lot's of stuff about D&P, and some stuff they used to use called 'film'?

On a side note - Did you see that new West Hollywood Library that just opened? - a very very nice building with a stunning reading area overlooking the Hollywood hills I believe.

Surprised you or Darren B hasn't snapped it yet!

Not my shot, but you get the idea

 

[Paul Lange]

Another lovely shot Brian. Is the XA a bit of a cult item? I've seen then on ebay going or silly amounts of money. There is also the XA2 but these seem to go for less.

 

[Hamish Gill]

You posted this before back when you first joined!
I really like it!
Absolutely spot on exposure I think!

 

[Brian Moore]

You posted this before back when you first joined!

Sorry about that Hamish! Must have posted it before I started my blog. But thanks for your comment.

Lot's of stuff about D&P, and some stuff they used to use called 'film'?

"Film" is a stuff that went into a cavity in the back of a camera back in the day. It came in rolls usually, and you could make multiple images on a roll. Think of it like a roll of "sensors."

Thanks for you comments Chris. I'm not familiar with that library in W. Hollywood. Looks cool though.

Paul, thanks for you comment. Also, I'm not sure the XA is a cult item or not, but I love mine. It has its quirks: hard to see the focus through the rangefinder in dim light, and hair-trigger shutter release are two examples. But its excellent for carrying around concealed upon your person (fits comfortably in pockets) and it's capable of producing sharp images. The XA2 has a slower lens (f3.5 I think, versus the XA's f2.8) and it has a zone focusing system as opposed to a rangefinder. Also the lens design on the XA is considered the most technologically cool: 6 elements in 5 groups or something like that, whereas the XA2 has something fewer than that number. Still, many people love their XA2s and some have posted that the image quality of the XA2 is little different from that from the XA. (By the way, Olympus made and XA1, but that is a very different camera from the XA, XA2, XA3 or XA4.)

The XA does indeed go for silly money sometimes. I paid $40.00 for mine off E-bay a year ago or so. I think I got a fair deal.

Anyway, it's a great wee camera, and when mine eventually breaks I'll be looking for another for sure.