un-ortho-dox

Partly out of curiosity, partly because 4x5 film is getting more expensive, I decided to experiment with some orthochromatic film. On an unrelated note, today is shorter than yesterday, reminding me that another year begins to wind down and time is getting shorter by the minute.

So what did I find? First, my safe light isn't as safe as I thought (too high a wattage bulb - but that's another story) so I fogged a fair amount of film.

Second, skys look funny, perhaps something to do with the polarization of the light in that the part you expect to be deepest blue is lightest (unless that's another artifact from fogging the film).

Third, the emulsion terribly delicate. Tray processing is really hard because the emulsion scratches so easily.

Fourth, the film is very thin which creates handling problems; for example, it buckles easily, and two sheets can easily get stuck together in the tank.    

Finally, the detail the film resolves is extraordinary. On the left is a 6 kdpi scan of the Tuff Shed plaque above the door in the image above.

The film does have some very unfamiliar characteristics, but at 20c a sheet, I can do quite a few experiments to gain some familiarity with how it behaves and what I might do with it.

For the record, I developed these in Xtol 1+4 for about 8 minutes. I didn't take the temperature but I imagine given an ambient of about 80F, that it was not far off this (~26C).

More Arista Testing

Two more test of Arista EDU 4x5 sheet film. I've loaded all my film holders with ISO 100 on one side and ISO 200 on the other. Since I got into the habit of exposing both sides of the holder as a matter of course, this is a simple way to test the films; or at least is would be if Arista notched their films differently. Since both emulsions are notched the same, you have to keep careful track of them in the trays and it's possible that I mixed them up along the way. So all of what follows may be back to front.

The 200 ASA film was thin and underdeveloped. It may need longer than my time/temp calculator is suggesting.

100 ASA, Xtol 1+1,  4:52 @ 25C

200 ASA. Xtol 1+1,  5:50 @ 25C

The 200 image has blown highlights, a narrower dynamic range and steeper curve in the middle than the 100. However, while there are things I like about both images, each can be replicated with with other.

200 ASA, Xtol 1+1,  4:52 @ 25C

100 ASA, Xtol 1+1,  4:52 @ 25C

Here I have tried to replicate 100 ASA image with the 200 ASA negative (left) and the 200 ASA image with the 100 ASA negative (right). Not perfect by any means, but fairly close.

The bottom line is that there is so much that can be done in GIMP (or similar) that the main thing is to  know what kind of image you want and worry less about the developer and the film. Although purists will say that you should get the negative right at exposure / developing (it's hard to argue with that), you aren't completely sunk if you don't. With the aid of scanners and computers, it is now very much easier to recover from a poorly exposed or improperly developed image that it used to be.

So I'm not much closer to choosing a 4x5 film. I'm sure some wag will say it depends what you want to capture and that one should match the emulsion to the subject, but I'm not that good (of fussy).

This morning I did a blind taste test of Peet's and Green Mountain coffees. Both were bold dark roast. I couldn't tell them apart.  I'm sure that some people with more evolved sense could but at the moment I'll take what come (in coffees and photographic emulsions).