Photography is nonlinear.
This is not new. It came from the same area as this one, but on a different day and shot on color film. I felt like experimenting with black and white with toners last night, and so I processed this as a selenium print. I think it’s a little eerie. There’s another process of this same image as a deep red-orange. I like this one better because of the juxtaposition.- the orangey autumn tones have been replaced with a monochrome in icy blue. It plays with the mind, and I like it.
Test roll in my K1000, Fuji Superia X-tra 400, digital selenium process (sorry, no darkroom).
Photography is seasonal.
Heading out to a trailhead on my mountain bike a few days ago, I saw this cluster of trees that were simply incredible. I shot an entire roll of film that day (I had the presence of mind to load some of the “borrowed” Fuji 400 color film I had in the fridge into my K1000 before I left), but since I don’t particularly like that film, have no idea as to the metering accuracy or light integrity of the camera, and tend to make horrible mistakes with film that I don’t pick up until days or weeks later when I see the results, I dragged the digital rig over tonight for the second “golden hour” (the hours following sunrise and preceding sunset) of the day.
I tried a few things with this shoot, and many of them didn’t work out. A few more, however, may make their way onto this site sooner or later. I find that more often than not, I go out with a specific shot or series of shots in mind, and come home with something completely different. It’s hard to say whether this is because I don’t yet have the skills to execute what my mind “sees,” because my mind doesn’t yet “see” photographs in a realistic manner, or because I get distracted by better things. As with almost anything, it is probably some combination of the three.
Film makes things interesting because there is no “this isn’t working” moment. Without the power to doubt myself, I tend to either hit hard or miss completely. For me, film isn’t just a different medium, it’s a different approach all together. The negatives should be done mid-week, and I’m curious.
The Pentax digital system has some extremely good lenses, espeically primes. I need some of these.
Another fun title. The more I look at it, the more I like the results from my Tri-X roll from early in the summer. The images aren’t fantastic, but I like the character of the film. I’ll have more to look at soon, as my second roll from the summer’s D.C. work trip is now developed (one roll of T-Max 400, one roll of Tri-X 400). I hope to have them scanned later today and ready for consumption tomorrow.
Also, I have a cart full of Plus-X and Tri-X ready to go because I ran out of fixer this week and need to meet a $25 minimum for my order. I’m interested to see what the Plus-X is like.
Kodak Tri-X 400, Clayton F76+.
This is from my first-ever roll of Tri-X, and is very typical of the results I like to see from the film. I’m going back and considering my film options now that I found out that my Agfapan source has apparently run dry (which makes sense, since Agfa itself ran dry years ago). The films that are frontrunners to succeed APX400 for everyday use are Tri-X 400 (I don’t think the 320 even exists in 35mm) and Plus-X, since I have been happy with my Tri-X , it’s common and information related to using it is readily available, and I can get those two cheap (the most important factor). I developed my second-ever roll of Tri-X Wednesday night (and into the wee hours of Thursday morning- long story), and hopefully I’ll be seeing and sharing the results early next week. They look good enough to me, but I am in no way a good reader of negatives yet.
Kodak TX400, Clayton F76+ at normal 1+9.