NCD - Large Format

[Gary R. Smith]

Now I'm just waiting for some predictable sunny days.

 

[Gary Ayala]

2.488 Aufrufe · 91 Reaktionen | Jennifer Hudson sings “Tomorrow” from “Annie” | In celebration of today's release of "Respect" starring Jennifer Hudson as Aretha Franklin, here's a #flashbackfriday to Hudson singing "Tomorrrow" from... | By Auditoriu

In celebration of today's release of "Respect" starring Jennifer Hudson as Aretha Franklin, here's a #flashbackfriday to Hudson singing "Tomorrrow" from...

www.facebook.com

 

[Tony Warren]

Such fun and games - you have still to do the two exposures on the same side of the DDS. A sheet of glass over the screen for scanning is the answer there I would guess and quite a large aperture. I believe it is called te learning curve - but no less frustrating none the less.

 

[Pete Askew]

I think the main articles about LF vanished when the blogs disappeared during the forum upgrade. This article (and a couple of others) survived though. I thought it might be useful / interesting.

Thread 'Anatomy of a Technical Camera'

Mar 6, 2012

I should probably have written this before showing how to load film into a film holder but, I just happened to have a sheet of old film lying around that day. Now it strikes me, partly based on some questions that Hamish asked in that thread, that quite a few people may have wondered what on earth you do with a single sheet of film when you've loaded it into a holder. Well hopefully this will begin to answer that.

Most large format (LF) cameras whether they be an ABS pinhole camera, a ancient mahogany field camera or a modern technical camera are actually very simple things. They are...

• Pete Askew
• Replies: 7
• Forum: Equipment & Media

 

[Gary R. Smith]

...was a Toyo board for a Copol 2 shutter

No such animal since there are only: 0, 1 and 3 (and a 3s). In any event, nobody noticed so my reputation is still whatever it was previously.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

Here is a new scan/inversion that I did using a different light table (and a different camera/lens as well). Clearly there is a problem with the initial exposure as well as with the developing.

 

[Gary Ayala]

IMO, looks more on the development end than exposure. Either bad Developer or bad Fixer or both.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

looks more on the development end

Agree that the developing was a part of the problem. Since I have never shot the lens/shutter previously, I have no idea if the aperture is opening correctly or if the shutter is fast or slow.

The chemistry was old Df96 which is a monobath. I had run a test strip of film which came out totally black so I was assuming that it was still OK.

This is a learning experience in many ways. I was using a Stearman SP-445 sheet film tank for the first time. I also needed to elevate the chemistry temperature whereas previous b&w was done at ambient (it was cold in the garage).

 

[Gary Ayala]

What is odd is the lower right where there is a strip of something which looks somewhat 'normal/better'.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

On the right is a stack of books which you would see the whole spine going back to the wall but only an inch or so of pages (the rest extending out of frame). The very bottom appears to be a "splatter". The closest edge of the book spine is a good 3" closer to the camera than the row of film cameras.

 

[Pete Askew]

That does look odd, Gary. How are you agitating the film during development?

 

[Gary R. Smith]

How are you agitating the film during development?

The film is in a Stearman SP-445 tank and I was doing inversions. I suspect it is a combination of things: old chemistry, damage from the squeegee, improper exposure of the film. Hoping that once I get some sunshine to cope with the slow 100 ISO film my next attempt will be an improvement.

 

[Paul Taylor]

The film is in a Stearman SP-445 tank and I was doing inversions. I suspect it is a combination of things: old chemistry, damage from the squeegee, improper exposure of the film. Hoping that once I get some sunshine to cope with the slow 100 ISO film my next attempt will be an improvement.

I own the same tank and have had good results - however ever once in a while I will get a transfer of the "slats" on the film holders that is a result of the negative contacting the film holder. They mirror the oblong cutouts on the negative holder. After I develop I usually notice them, and then gently wash them while wiping with a clean cloth and that "scrubs" them off with no damage. I haven't seen anything like that as a tank issue.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

Planned next steps:

1. Shoot outside on a sunny day.
2. Shoot 4 exposures with the Sony a7R3 set to 100 ISO and use the shutter/aperture readings from the Sony to set the shutter speed and aperture on the Toyo.
3. Shoot the same 4 exposures with the Toyo.
4. Use fresh chemistry (planning to use Df96).
5. Do not use squeegee prior to hanging to dry sheets.
6. Scan on new light table.

Since I have 48 sheets left of the Fomapan 100, I'm not planning to trash that.

If the results using the Df96 are unacceptable, I'll look at alternative chemistry. I used D-76 years ago, maybe I'll go there or maybe Rodinal.

I'm pretty sure that back in the days of my wet darkroom, I used a diluted acetic acid stop bath.

I have no idea what I used to fix. Perhaps I'll just go with a trio of "Kodak" products from Cinestill that will allow me to do a three part development.

 

[Paul Taylor]

I have not had good luck with DF96 and Fomopan film - so I would not use that combo. Fomopan is the only film I have not had work well with DF96. I shot 4+ rolls of both 120 and 35mm to verify it was the film (it is.)

It would either be zero density or very low density with ghosting. Extending the development time helped a bit - but it was still unusable. I have shot many other B&W stocks and used DF96 with great results (Kentmere, Ilford, Arcos, Kodak, CatLabs, etc - and the only issue is Fomopan.

It was really confusing because I had great results for quite a while - then all the sudden it stopped working. This was mirrored by my online research with many other people saying "all the sudden" the combo wasn't working. Theory is something changed with the film stock and now it doesn't play nice with DF96 and similar developers.

Since I still have a bunch of Fomopan - I bought some Kodak and Rodinal B&W developer to use with the stock.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

Thanks Paul! Based on your experience I'll modify my planned chemistry for the next set of sheets. I've not used Rodinal but it seems to be quite popular. I'll likely "price shop" looking at Kodak against other known entities.

 

[Paul Taylor]

Yeah, I don't know what they changed with that film stock - but I was super bummed the two rolls I developed that didn't turn out. Luckily I had a digital with me for that trip so it wasn't really a loss from a memory/picture perspective. I thought for sure that maybe my chemicals expired or I made a mistake - but I shot another test roll with fresh chems and it was the exact same result. I then shot a few more rolls and played with the dev times - and it wasn't the issue either.

When I did a internet search for fomopan and df96 issues - there were quite a few people who had suddenly started having issues using the combo. It was a shame, because I really like the results of the combo when it was working.

I didn't realize the B&W Kodak kit I bought was to make gallons of developer - so I will save that for when I have a bunch to develop - so I bought some rodinal and a smaller kodak kit. Unfortunately I bulk ordered a ton of Fomopan 100 and 400 as I caught it on sale, Lol.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

I had read something about Fomapan being finicky. I bought 50 sheets because it was the least expensive sheet film I could get (on a per sheet basis). I'll need to find something that I can break down the recipe since I can't deal with gallons of chemistry these days. I don't remember what I did back in the old days. I do remember the darkroom always smelling of acetic acid.