Monday, April 20, 2020

Small Worlds On Small Bits Of Paper

Morning folks . . . bored yet
Well, you shouldn't be.
For all that this strange period is getting extended, and I grant you it isn't financially easy, all the same, to be going off your nut whilst being given the gift of time, seems to me to be strangely sinful.

Been taking many photographs on your daily ration of getting oot and aboot? 
Erm, well, no nether have I, BUT, I have been printing, albeit in a small way. 
I can and should be printing more, however working from home means that this desk-style workstation is always manned.

Allied to this, making this 'ere Blog became harder earlier this year, courtesy of Apple who removed all support for 32-bit programs from their current OS, Catalina. And what did that mean in photographic terms? well, it meant I could no longer easily use my ancient Epson scanner. Yes, I could buy third-party software, but it isn't cheap . . it isn't really even reasonably priced, especially considering I've effectively already bought Epson's own in the first place. 
So where did that leave me? 
Well, in the land of work-around
Out came Alec Turnip's old laptop; out came endless hours of getting it right and up to speed again, and finally, out came the scanner sun again. 
So basically, I am scanning with the Epson V300, saving them to a Windows 10 laptop, then transferring them over to this Mac, my main machine. 
It is, as they say around these parts, a total scutter.
Anyway, we got there eventually. 

Where's 'ere Sheepy?

Well, small worlds on small bits of paper.


Coats Please

At this point, Bruce will get confused, so don't mind him as he crouches in the corner clutching his head, but y'see, despite my insisting that I'd been printing 6x4" prints, I've just checked the box and it says 5x7". Oh I know, what's a couple of inches between friends . . but all the same, what an assumption to make. 
Fool that I am.
Anyway, the paper is Tetenal TT Vario RC. yet another of my collection of photographic dinosaur bones, and you know what, as a RC paper goes, it was probably one of the best.
That's a hell of a statement to make, so why? 
Well, unlike the likes of Multigrade RC, you didn't have to print a Grade up with it. 
I don't know about you, but with MGRC I generally always have to print on Grade 3. Grade 2 just doesn't have that slight snap that I like, whereas with the Tetenal, I get snappy on Grade 2.
I've no doubt right now there'll be someone droning on about them being effectively the same emulsion . . . well, not to my eyes or experience matey. They look different.
Anyway, taking that course is like philosophers arguing about the existence of angel's breath, as in, it's a fairly pointless exercise. Like most everything else from the photographic cull of the mid 2000's, Tetenal's TT Vario is as dead as a dodo.
But I've still got some 5x7" so why not use it.

Photographically, this was like cheese and cheese.
Two cameras: 
Leica M2 with the old Canon/Serenar 28mm f3.5
Nikon F with the pre-Ai 24mm f2.8

Film and developer both times was Delta 400 at EI 200 and it was developed in Pyrocat-HD.
They both look pretty different.
I also am wondering whether there's a light leak or something going on with the Nikon, as there's some extra sprocket density which doesn't seem to be apparent on the Leica frames. 
It could of course be occurring when I am printing - I'm using a filed-out carrier on the DeVere so that I can print full-frame. And yes, before you ask, I've used some blacking to get rid of any reflections from the edges of the carrier.
Anyway, it is really hard to say and I suppose I should dedicate some time to finding out what is going on . . . it is very annoying to say the least. 
But anyway, rather than trying to retouch it softwarily, I'll just let it be. 
See what you think.
If you've any thoughts, please chime in. 
Opinions are always welcome around here.

Ok, first up a few from a really tiddly day with a camera - scrounged around the town a bit, hit the pub about 12 had a lovely lunch and got home about 7 - great fun and all exposures guessed.
The camera was the Leica M2/Canon 28mm combo.


Abandoned Car At The Bird House

Lost Building At The Back Of The Murraygate

Coats Please

Sadly no pub pictures were added, because I didn't print them with this session, but here's some hairy scans from the rest of the film.
I suppose they don't look too bad considering.


Tiddly 1

Tiddly 2

Mennies - Quiet Afternoon

Wellcome Foundation Building

Weird Light - Murraygate, Dundee

And now we're onto the Nikon film - I was more careful with this, metering every shot as best I could given the extreme cutting sunshine at a relatively early hour and what with the Big Yellow Thing being closer to the horizon and all that.
Again, these are all prints on Tetenal TT (ta-ta!).


Unknown Location

A Nifty In The V&A

Dundee/Moscow

Hurt

Another Lost Lane

OK - unfortunately this is where the shiitake mushrooms hit the fan, because, in the words of our sponsors:

 "The surge is strong with these Luke!"


Seabraes Bridge

Not That F'ing Thing AGAIN

Dundee Waterfront Trials For Re-Creation Of Led Zeppelin's Presence

Abandoned Lifeboat


Shame eh - I love the light on the Bridge and Presence and the Lifeboat.
Now I suppose most photographic blogs wouldn't wash their dirty pants in public, 

A: because it is pretty gross

and 

B: because they want to prove they're invincible

but not here, oh no - these are Shurgetastic Mate . . . see what I mean.
Weird isn't it.
I've no idea because there doesn't seem to be any extra density on the negatives.

AT THIS POINT YOUR FEARLESS AUTHOR ARGUED HIMSELF INTO SUBMISSION AND:

Anyway, as I was writing this and everything was in one place as it were, I thought, why not check it now and it IS being created in the printing process, as I have just scanned some of the negatives of the above prints and the density is definitely not there.

Och well . . . have to be more careful with my masking . . . not so easy - might have to do some precision taping over the top of the glassless carrier, or use the sliding masks though I always feel you get a sort of penumbra of less density from those. If you have any thoughts on negative masking with printing full frame (and especially on a DeVere) please speak!

Well, I guess that's it really. Nothing much else to report, though I will say I have done something recently photographically which I have never done before, and, you know that stuff they tell you about exposed film needing to be processed as soon as possible? Watch this space.

Take care, stay safe and keep taking the beers. 
Don't know about you, but this whole thing is making me drink more . . at least, that's my excuse.

















12 comments:

  1. Well, I had the same problems with Catalina.
    Happily, I was already scanning with VueScan. It works with every scanner I've ever used and you pay once and get free updates apparently forever. My wife discovered that Apple's Image capture worked well with the scanner that came on top of her printer.
    I did have to transfer my allegiance from Photoshop CS6. All my CS6 Adobe applications stopped working, despite being mostly 64-bit. Grr...!!!
    Now I use Affinity software. At the moment they are offering an extended 90-day trial and half-price if you buy it. This is about one month's rental for Adobe and you get constant free updates. And it's a UK firm.
    If this looks too much like advertising (which it isn't) you don't need to publish, but it would be worth a look at both.
    Comments on the actual pictures later. Looking at pictures takes longer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a chuffin' bloody nuisance, but I will look into it.
      I dunno about software - never bought photoshop - everything is done on Apple's Photo and Irfanview - thanks for the tips though - I'll have a butchers.

      Delete
  2. And a bright new morning to you.
    Are you talking about unsharp masking? You'll need to devise, beg or steal some sort of registration device. It can be done, but on 35mm it would be tricky.
    I've been looking at the actual pictures, would you believe and there seem to be two themes intertwined. One is the narrative of "what I did in the hols" – I went here and photographed this , then I went there and photographed that.
    But there's another series embedded and it's about barriers. The expanded metal gates, the fences, even the hanging banners. Even the dark shadow across the path in the distant view of the V&A. All some kind of barrier or obstruction between the camera and the objects or path behind.
    In happier times, you could force yourself to complete the series on "Half-empty glasses I have befriended."
    What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi David - coo that's a deep one for this time of the morning! I'd never thought about it like that - maybe I am confronting my own barriers (actually and coincidentally, I've been writing another FB about such things . . .). Anyway, thanks for making me think - hmmmmm.

      As for masking, it's int he negative carrier of the DeVere . . Omar has kindly sent me a couple of jpgs of Salgado using some rather neat and excellent thing to do it, and that has got me thinking too.

      Great stuff and all grist for the mill.

      Delete
  3. Lots of strong photos here. I especially like the first three and the abandoned car in particular. It seems cinematic for some reason.
    I would like to stop using Lightroom because it's money out the door every month, but I haven't found anything that works as well for me. I'll keep looking, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Marcus - always appreciated!

      I would say:

      Basic - Irfanview (it's free)
      Advanced - Gimp (also free)

      Delete
    2. No Irfanview for us Apple Boys . . .
      I've tried Gimp but didn't like it that much. I'll keep looking, but I suppose Lightroom is not that expensive if you think about it. And it includes Photoshop, though I never use it.

      Delete
    3. Ah, an Apple Boy . . . why not Photos? It works really well and is what I do the majority of FB with - I'm not tinkering too much, but for colour and B&W and cropping and retouching, it is definitely worth trying and it costs nothing.

      Delete
  4. I had a go at Photos today after reading your post. I already use it to share my portfolio amongst all my devices, but it doesn't seem to play well with raw photos and photo management. Maybe I just need to experiment more? I might have another look. I always suspect that Photos is hiding lots of stuff from me, storing several copies of files, and so on. But maybe I'm just paranoid . . .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you're syncing with icloud there's all sorts of weird stuff going on all the time - hard to get one's head around it actually.
      Everything I do is jpg - it's mostly on screens so really is there any need for RAW? I suppose it is different for everyone, but I can't be bothered with the time factor of really massive files, and besides, there's storage etc etc.
      Go and have a really good tinker and see what you can pull up - always worth as go!

      Delete
    2. I was trying to find a way to sync my Pictures folder on the hard drive with the Photos folders, but Photos seems to have its own way of organising things. Anyway, the search continues . . . .

      Delete
  5. Even if you crease folders in Photos, when you click on them, the photos you put in them are there, but they are also in the amorphous mass of photos in the timeline too - try opening two sessions of Photos and you'll see what I mean.
    I no longer sync to icloud, just time machine and a specific HDD for photographs - it was getting too confusing.

    ReplyDelete

Hello!
Feel Free To Chat,
But Remember,
"Anonymous" Comments WILL NOT Be Published