Jun 062013
 

Allotment, Fomapan 100, 5x4 film

Cossington South Lakes, Fomapan 100, 5x4 filmFlooded Field, Fomapan 100, 5x4 film

Cossington South Lakes, Fomapan 100, 5x4 film

Fomapan 100 was the first film I purchased to use with the Graflex Pacemaker Speed Graphic. I chose it for one reason – cost – it worked out at about 50p a sheet, which was roughly half the cost of the next cheapest film I could find (which happened to be Rollei IR400).

Prior to that I’d tried using paper negatives to get a feel for using the camera (and because I’d been given a lot of old photographic paper) but the results were a little unpredictable. Some of the paper was quite old and it was difficult to find the precise ISO to base meter readings on. Photographic paper is normally around ISO 6 but it slowly loses its sensitivity to light after its expiration date, with the speed of this degradation depending on how it has been kept.

After spending some time thinking about how I was going to process sheet film I picked up a Paterson 3 reel tank along with a MOD54 insert. This method uses 1L of fluid to process up to 6 sheets at a time so it’s perhaps not the cheapest in terms of processing costs but it seemed to offer the lowest set up costs.

I didn’t find the MOD54 the easiest thing to use for a couple of reasons:-
1/ It took me some time to get used to loading the film. I practiced in daylight with some test sheets, I practiced with my eyes closed, but still when it came to doing it for real in the change bag it was a shambles. I’m a lot more comfortable loading it now but it has taken me some time to get used to it.
2/ Uneven development. I noticed something that other people had reported, denser negatives (resulting in brighter areas) around where the fins held the film in place. This was more noticeable in areas of continuous tone, like skies/snow.

The difficulty I had loading this film on to the MOD54 for developing led me to discover what is probably the biggest issue with Fomapan 100 – the emulsion does appear to be quite fragile. I had scratches on quite a few of the first sheets I used which looked like they were made by the fins of the MOD54. Additionally I spent so long loading the MOD54 that it become slightly humid inside the change bag and I had a couple of instances of sheets of film touching and patches of emulsion coming off.

Out of the first fifteen or so sheets I probably had one that I’d consider ok so I decided a different approach was in order and processed the next couple of batches by hand using dev and fix in takeaway containers inside my change bag. The bottom three of the images above were processed using this method, with Rodinal 1:40 for 7 mins 30 seconds.

By now I was starting to think that large format wasn’t worth the extra stress. I didn’t want to process sheets by hand and I needed to overcome the scratching and uneven processing issues I was having using the MOD54

I shot four more sheets and loaded them – loading four sheets (two each side) was a lot easier than loading the full quota of six. I’d run out of Rodinal by this point and only had Ilfotech HC which, according the data sheet for the film is not a recommended developer. The Massive Dev Chart had no time for the Fomanpan 100/HC combination so I used the Fomapan 100/HC-110 dilution F time which was 12 mins when rating the film @ ISO100.

Some extra research about the uneven development revealed that my agitation technique had been causing the development issues and possibly some of the scratching. There seemed to be more advice/videos available since I had purchased the MOD54, including this video showing the agitation technique recommended by the inventor. This had to be worth a go so I opted for slow inversion of the tank followed by a twist, doing this for first minute of development and then again for 10s at the start of each minute. This next batch came out absolutely fine and I was starting to think that maybe this film is alright after all. The top image above was shot @ ISO100 and developed in Ilfotech HC 1+47 for 12 minutes @ 20C.

I decided to experiment with the remaining sheets to see how well Fomaoan 100 coped with being pushed, first one, then two stops, mainly because I wanted to explore using the Graflex without a tripod. The development times for these were as follows:-

Fomapan 100 shot at EI200, 18 minutes in Ilfotech HC 1+47 @ 20C
Fomapan 100 shot at EI400, 24 minutes in Ilfotech HC 1+47 @ 20C

These times were based on these general guidelines for push processing and also this excellent resource page for Kodak HC-110 (Ok, so I know Ilfoech HC and HC-110 are different developers but they do seem to be very similar)

Both sets of tests came out really well – there was a slight increase in contrast but I couldn’t discern a great deal of difference in the grain.

Foma’s own product text states that Fomapan 100 Classic “gives good results even when over-exposed by 1 stop (asa 50/18) or under-exposed by 2 (asa 400/27), without any great impact on processing, that is without having to change the developing time or the bath temperature” but I’ve yet to test these claims.

I’ve used all 50 sheets now but I’ll be getting some more – if you’re wanting to shoot large format and trying to minimize costs, two things that don’t often go together, then I can recommend Fomapan 100. Maybe it needs treating with extra care as it lacks the some of the durability of modern emulsions but it’s more than capable of producing quality results.

May 242013
 

Intake Quarry, MiddletonIntake Quarry, Middleton

Intake Quarry, Middleton

Intake Quarry, MiddletonIntake Quarry, Middleton

Intake Quarry is one of a vast number of quarries scattered around the Middleton/Cromford/Via Gellia area and was operational between 1853 and 1968. Access to the quarry, which is owned by Tarmac, is prohibited and it’s easy to see why – there is evidence of numerous rockfalls and paths close to the walls of the quarry are scattered with boulders. It has been popular with climbers in the past but its use for climbing is now strongly discouraged. Numerous trees have taken root, more so in the western section of the quarry, and few structures remain.

The images were made with a Yashica Mat 124G, shot on Ilford FP4+ film and processed at home in Ilfotech HC 1+47 for 12 minutes.

May 212013
 

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Tools

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Bells

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, StackTaylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Tools

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Cheryl

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Bells

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Bell WheelsTaylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Bell Wheels

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Chairs

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Metal

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Loughborough, Bells

If I had a bit more gumption I’d have sorted these images out sooner but I never quite finished them. Some were hastily scanned, some I couldn’t scan initially as the Rollei 5×4 film I used was slightly too big for the Epson film holders and others had some dust on that I was just too lazy to clone out. Then I spent a day or so printing them in the darkroom, first for the Leicester Lo-Fi exhibition at FORMAT13 and later for Handmade Festival, so I just got a bit sick of them.

These images were made on various equipment/film types during a Leicester Lo-Fi trip to John Taylor & Co in Loughborough:-

Canon EOS 5, Ilford DELTA 3200
Graflex Pacemaker Speed Graphic, Rollei IR400
Bronica ETRSi, Rollei Retro 400S

The people at Taylor’s were kind enough to give us access to the workshops and let us watch a couple of bells being cast.

Taylor’s Bell Foundry is the largest working bell foundry in the world and is one of the few Victorian purpose built manufacturing sites still being used for its original purpose.

John Taylor & Co on Wikipedia

 Posted by at 7:28 pm
May 202013
 

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Handmade Festival, Bells

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Handmade Festival, Tools

Taylor's Bell Foundry, Handmade Festival, Cheryl

Four of my images (three of which are above) feature in Leicester Lo-Fi’s John Taylor & Co Bellfoundry exhibition that’s being shown upstairs at The Crumblin’ Cookie in Leicester as part of Handmade Festival.

The 14 images, shot on film and hand printed in the darkroom, are on show between 20th May – 1st June.

My other images from Taylor’s can be found here – http://www.andystafford.co.uk/taylors-bell-foundry-loughborough

Links:
http://www.leicesterlofi.co.uk/
http://handmadefestival.co.uk/photography-exhibition-of-john-taylor-co-bellfoundry-by-leicester-lo-fi/
http://handmadefestival.co.uk/
http://www.thecrumblincookie.co.uk/
http://www.taylorbells.co.uk/

Mar 192012
 

Bench and felled tree next to the River Soar

Football pitch on the other side of the riverWolsey chimney on Wolsey Island/Abbey Meadows

Traveller's caravans and trees reflected in the River SoarRailings next to the river

Driftwood come to rest on the bank of the river

Top to bottom, left to right
1. Bench and felled tree. Belgrave
2. Football pitch on the other side of the river. Birstall
3. Wolsey chimney. Wolsey Island/Abbey Meadows.
4. Traveller’s caravans. Abbey Meadows.
5. Railings next to the river. Belgrave.
6. Driftwood. Watermead Country Park. Birstall

Mar 052012
 

Curbar Edge, TrackCurbar Edge, Fallen Tree

Curbar Edge, Wall and GrassCurbar Edge, Gateway

The fish eye seems to be a much maligned lens, perhaps because its over use can become *very* unwelcome, and I often see more seasoned photographers (perhaps correctly) telling excitable newbies that it’s a lens they will tire of quickly. It’s a purchase that I spent ages mulling over, and if I’m honest I only really bought it for a certain type of shot, but seeing as I had it I thought it would be interesting (or at least, a challenge) to attempt to use it for something a little less typically fish eye – to attempt to both subtlety use and hide the distortion in landscape images.

I’d not always possible to hide the effect entirely. Straight lines become increasingly distorted as you move away from the centre of the image so standard “rule of thirds” type compositions are out – however this only adds to my joy and sense of reward.

The above images were taken on ISO200 Lomography Slide Film (and were cross processed) using a Canon EOS 5 that I picked up for next to nothing.

 Posted by at 8:48 pm
Oct 072011
 

Tree image from Brownie Six-20 Model C

What started with the relatively cheap purchase of a Canon EOS 5 (which I considered to be an old camera at the time) now seems to have become an expensive habit, with me mulling over the purchase of small colour processing kit capable of taking 5×4 film.

This seems crazy to many people – myself included until recently – with the usual phrases including things like “you can do whatever you like with digital”, “each shot is free with digital”, “you can see what you’ve taken straight away” being trotted out frequently. All of these are of course valid points, and I have no intention of putting my digital kit away but there is something inescapably fun about film. Maybe it’s actually using the cameras themselves that is fun, I don’t know – what I do know is that unless I need digital quality results I find myself choosing a film camera to take with me when I go out now instead.

I was slowly working my way through all the different types of film I could find (although I tend to prefer B&W as I find it hard to get excited about colour film) and also enjoying the different characteristics, and faults of the various cameras when I suddenly remembered the old Box Brownie. The Kodak Six-20 Brownie Model C, made between 1946 and 1953 – surely it wasn’t possible to still get film for it?

A bit of searching led me to http://www.photosupplies.co.uk/ who offer 120 film respooled for use in 620 cameras. Not only that, but they also provide affordable, more than adequate quality processing (which is more than I can say for my local camera shop)

The image above was taken on my first trip out with the Box Brownie, taken on Fuji Neopan Acros 100 and processed by http://www.photosupplies.co.uk.

Aug 182011
 

Wolsey Island, Abbey Meadows, Leicester

For a long time I’ve been trying to get “the shot” of this building that will stop me wanting to come back here and try again. To be fair I have a few that I quite like but it was only when this film came back from Ilford that I realised what I’d been missing – I was concentrating on the building all the time and I hadn’t noticed the obvious – the space.

What is missing is as important as what remains – the gaps where the rest of the shoe factory once stood and the word “WOLSEY” painted on the chimney – these are details I had missed until a change of camera and lens forced a different perspective on me.

Canon EOS 5, Canon 24mm f/2.8, ILFORD SFX200, Cokin P003

Jul 042011
 

Ilford SFX200Ilford SFX200

Images: left – SFX200 film with no filter, right – SFX200 film with Cokin P003 Red filter

Not too long ago, inspired by the work of others (and in order to plot another point on the Stages Of A Photographer graph) I picked up a second-hand Canon EOS film camera. I managed to get an EOS 5 from ebay for around £25 including postage – I had been wanting to pick up an EOS 3 but £100 seemed a little too extravagant. I could also have bought something more fashionable, but as a first tentative step into the world of film it seemed a sensible choice – I can use all my lenses and it works pretty much the same as my main camera, the 5D (although there are some inconvenient differences, such as the lack of dedicated Depth of Field preview button)

I put a couple of films through it to see how I got on, and got them developed locally (and cheaply). Unfortunately the results were pretty poor – lots of scratched prints – but it also seemed that how I metered for digital wasn’t appropriate for film. There were some nice images though, so undeterred I decided to try again so I ordered 4 B&W films at random and it just so happened that one of these was a roll of Ilford SFX200.

I hadn’t really read anything about the film when buying it but whilst casually researching the films before they arrived I noticed that it had “extended red sensitivity” and “using a deep red filter skies can be rendered almost black and most green vegetation almost white”. Reading a bit more about the film I couldn’t really find out any solid facts about using it – although had I found the flickr group earlier I could probably have got my questions answered – so I decided to document my limited experimentation with it so far here.

Kit used:
Canon EOS 5
Canon 24mm f/2.8 lens
58mm filter adapter – as the lens has a 58mm filter thread
Cokin P Series Wide Angle Filter Holder (BPW400A) – I could have used the standard 3 slot one but as I was going to be using film and not digital I didn’t want to be relying on the need to crop the edges if the adapter was visible. (Because the viewfinder isn’t 100% there is always the chance that you don’t see the filter holder through the viewfinder but that it is visible in the shots)
Cokin P003 Red Filter

Notes:
I was using the square Cokin P-Series filters because I already had them. Kood also produce the filter accessories (adaptor, holder), which are generally cheaper than the Cokin ones.
A screw-in Red 29 filter will perform the same function. (A Red 25 filter may also be used but the effect will be slightly less strong)

Without filter/With filter comparison:
The images at the top of this page were shot at the same time (well, within less than a minute of each other) in identical lighting conditions – bright sunlight. Ok – the composition is slightly different, which doesn’t make it a 100% accurate comparison, but my slight change of position will have made only minimal difference to the exposure.

TTL metering was used for both images, metering set to Evaluative. The Red filter has a filter factor of 8, meaning that it absorbs 3 stops of light, so bright sunlight really is necessary for taking shots hand-held. Normally when using the red filter with digital I would shoot at ISO400 but as I was using this film for the first time I decided to use it as its rated speed. ISO400 obviously gives a bit of extra leeway with the aperture setting and I found that I was shooting at f/8 and f/5.6 at less than 1/100s here. Even though statistically 1/50s should be fine with the 24mm lens I still like to shoot a bit faster, so I was expecting a few blurred shots from the roll (but was happily surprised when they were all ok)

As you can see from the images above (left, SFX200 film with no filter – right, SFX200 film with Cokin P003 Red filter) there is a marked difference in the tones when using the red filter. It’s not quite true Infrared as a) the red filter still lets a lot of visible light through and b) the film doesn’t record far into the infrared spectrum, but it’s quite a strikingly different look and one which I far prefer to the 650nm digital conversion that I have.

For a more authentic Infrared effect you could use an IR72/R72/Cokin P007 filter – however this is a very dark filter and it’s virtually (if not) impossible to compose and focus with the filter on. For the time being I’ll be sticking with the red filter as the film camera is a relatively inexpensive thing of fun for me – I’m not quite ready to stick it on a tripod and take it seriously.