Showing posts with label Adox Vario Classic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adox Vario Classic. Show all posts

Friday, March 15, 2019

A Good Sesh


For the uninitiated in Dundee drinking culture, a "sesh" is basically a large amount of time spent down the pub. It's nothing like it used to be, but certainly does happen.
Maybe the same word is used elsewhere in Scotland . . . I know not. My drinking life began here - you'd need to speak to my pal Tzchic (NOT Chic, it's got a hard glottal 'k' on the end) about the niceties of what it was like back in the day. Quite something by all accounts, and maybe somewhat sadly for a balanced culture, the people he sesshed with are nearly all long gone . . . but that's another story or three (over a few pints).

Anyway, so, there I was, with a hillwalk planned, and  typically, I go on the MWIS site, and what do I find for the Angus Glens?

"White-out down to glen level".

Great.
So I called that one off - it is pointless risking things like that - the long and winding road to Glen Doll can be challenging when it is dry, so in a snowstorm, well, you're more than likely to run off the edge (there's no snow posts) or hit one of the massive ruts that are starting to appear.
(Not sure where anyone is in the country that reads this, but Tayside and Angus has some of the most shocking roads I have ever encountered, and they're only getting worse . . I think our next runabout should be a tractor or a Sherman tank actually.)

Anyway, no hillwalk, so . . .
Plan B?
Yeah, head over to Fife and do the rail bridge from the other side . . so there I was, ready to go, everything packed, and what happens, yep, just as the weather reports predicted, the sleet turned to proper big snow flakes bang on time for me leaving.
Allied to the shiteness of the conditions, the thought of operating a largish camera in freezing (or sub-zero) conditions is definitely not my idea of fun.
I got the message, turned tail, said feck it, AND HIT THE DARKROOM.

In hindsight, this was a sensible move!

A GOOD SESH



I've had a plan to do a bunch of 35mm prints for a while - I tend to stick to one format when printing simply because it's a mini-faff to change the lens and lens plates on the DeVere  - so, it was out with the Vivitar 100mm and in with the modernish 50mm f2.8 Nikkor in a recessed plate.
I gathered a bunch of negatives from my files (and their contact prints to keep me right) popped into the darkroom and off I went.

Oh and I forgot to mention - having been desperate (but time poor) to print on fibre paper for quite a while now, I thought:

Well, it's snowing - you've got the whole day you old fart . . get on with it.

So I looked out some ancient, and I mean ancient fibre-based paper.

Adox Vario-Classic.

It's so old it was discontinued in 2009 (!) and I'd had it a year or two when it was discontinued, so that makes it around 12 years old - not the most ideal of circumstances for the making of (hopefully) fine prints.
I wondered how contrast would be, so cleaned a negative, shoved it in the carrier and did a test strip on bog standard, un-filtered, nominal Grade 2..

Adox Vario Classic
Unfiltered Grade 2.
Exposure in 4 second increments.


And you know what . . well, you can see it can't you - the test strip was like looking at different gradations of a photo of a mud fish, sitting in mud, making a mud-pie . . in other words it was a tad muddy.

That's a big problem you can hit when using old papers.
Goodness knows, the way the world has gone with digital sweeping away that whole cash-cow of really, truly fine printing papers, there can't be many boxes of the old ones left any more, and those that are left well . . speak to Bruce at OD.
He has a box of Agfa MCC which is like opening a packet of grey mud inhabited by the denizens of mud city by all accounts.

I've tried the usual adding of benzotriazole to the developer and that has never worked for me - there are some workarounds on this, but to be honest, they all seem like a complete faff, when you could just go and buy a box of fresh paper.

Broadly speaking older GRADED papers, tend to survive very well if stored cool. Multigrade though can be a different matter.
Again, broadly speaking, I've found in my limited experience that old MG papers benefit from being exposed with filtration on the hard side - it just adds a tad of sparkle and lifts it above the mud.

But what about a box of paper with no instructions about filtration, and even no info at all on the web about such filtration - such was my luck with the Adox.
As far as I remember there were no such instructions when I bought it, and I seem to remember, even contacting Adox, such things weren't forthcoming, so I basically printed the majority of the box on that un-filtered Grade 2.

No wonder I never liked it!

Darkroom Life is a steep learning curve sometimes and, going on Ilford's own words, MG papers should generally be expected not to act like Graded papers . . in other words and to cut a long story short . . if you're going to use MG paper (even fresh stuff) expose hard.

As you can see from the test strip above, the natural cut of the jib of the Adox seemed to be mud - it was certainly a good deal muddier than I last remembered it and I was afraid I'd be spending a whole day producing prints that made me go 'Ugh'
So I threw caution to the wind and used the instructions for Adox MCC, dialling in an 'approximate' Grade 3 with 40 units of Magenta (in Kodak units used on the DeVere).

And . . . .


Weird Day
Nikon F, 24mm f2.9 Nikkor-N, Tri-X, Pyrocat-HD


By jingo, it worked! 
That's a pretty close Grade 3 - I was elated actually.
My 2B pencil scribbles on the back (what d'ya mean you don't do that? It keeps you right - get a good result and you have a master print to refer to should you need to make any more y'berk) read:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 20 sec, f8, + 6 edges. HC 110 in developer.

Ah, the last bit - I can hear the nits jumping from your scratching.
Well, that last bit is a salient point.
I use Kodak Polymax; it's a good developer . . usually.
However, halfway through my current big bottle, I've found that solids have developed in the bottom of the bottle and any developer mixed up from it lasts around 2 sessions at the most.

In the past (and you'll laugh) when I've noticed developer/print emergement time starting to slow and not wanting to have to exit the darkroom and make up some more chemicals, I've adopted the guerilla tactic of (cue embarrassment) squirting neat developer into the tray.
What can I say.
IT WORKS, noticably upping the emergement of the image and also, to a flat image, adding a tad more contrast.
You should try it.
Anyway, there I was with the above print, and (given the high silver content of the Adox) it was taking forever, to start to cog - I think I was on near enough 4 mins - luckily I had the safelight off - but enough was enough.
I tried to squirt some Polymax into the tray and discovered the fecking solids jammed the mouth of the bottle tight!
Oh the drama, and in the dark too! 
What did squirt out, missed the tray altogether and splattered me.
And then it hit me - a thought once spotted somewhere - using Kodak's HC 110 as a paper developer.

I haven't used it as a film developer in a good few years now, but I still had some in a well-sealed air-tight bottle, and seeing as it seems to be a glycol-based developer, I thought it should still be OK, so (still in the dark) I found the bottle, whipped the top off and dumped a bit in the tray.
And it worked.
Using my wee safelight torch (Jings they're expensive these days) I saw the image proper, emerge tout suit.
I was, to say the least, chuffed.
Jabber ✔✔

Whether the HC 110 has made any difference to the tonality of the print or not, I know not, but it did bring the image to completion.

Anyway . . . extremely pleased that I'd got way more than I was expecting, I piled more meat in the mincer . . .

 . . . Next! . . .

March Of The Seed Heads
Nikon F, 24mm f2.9 Nikkor-N, FP-4, Pyrocat-HD

The eagle-eyed will have seen this one before.
It was a lovely hot day in Fife and me and t'missus were on a picnic - the seed heads looked utterly manic to me - even though they're still, there's enough movement to make them look like they're on the march.
I wish I could have got that lower bit of hedge out of the way, but that would have involved tearing my trousers on barbed wire.
I love the feeling the single-coated Nikkor has given to the scene - it is a very fine lens.

Print notes:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 28 sec, f8, + 6 edges. HC 110

I was a happy bunny ✔✔ actually - spurred on, with a quick visit to the living room for a cup of java, I continued.

 . . . Next! . . .

Dreams Flow
Nikon F3, 28mm f2.8 Ai-s Nikkor, Tri-X, Pyrocat-HD

Sometimes (as seems to be my experience of 35mm) you use a whole film . . and only one image strikes you as worth printing, and such was the case with this one.
It was a heck of a windy day and me and the wee one were out for a walk in lovely Perthshire. I saw this pool coming up, dodged off the path, slipped a bit in the mud and took the photograph.
Little did I realise that the water movement, wind movement and happenstance would dress the frame in such a way as to give it a dream-like quality. 
Look at those leaves on the right bit of water . . they look like they've been carelessly strewn by a Faery Queen. 
The 28mm Nikkor has done a sterling job - pretty good levels of detail for a fast film.

Print notes:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 36 sec, f8, + 6 edges. HC 110

To paraphrase Nigel Molesworth's Christmas Present list:

Happy bunny again?
Oh YUS! ✔

  . . . Next! . . .


Fay's Pool
Nikon F, 24mm f2.9 Nikkor-N, FP-4, Pyrocat-HD

Ah, the mighty Fay - I never intended to copy her, but, well what else can you do with a similar day and the same subject matter?

MY Print notes:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 26 sec, f8 base, + 6 edges + 4 lower right quadrant. HC 110

And now how it should be done:

Fay Godwin, Belstane, Druidic Gathering Place, Fife
She probably wasn't using a Nikon though . . . and to be honest, her photo knocks mine into a cocked hat!

When was the last time you saw someone wearing a jaunty tifter, cocked and ready for action?
Hmmmm . . . . . thought not.

Still I wasn't going to let this put me off.

Happy ✔✔

 . . . Next! . . .


All Welcome In Europe
Nikon F3, 28mm f2.8 Ai-s Nikkor, Tri-X, Pyrocat-HD

You know, for a free standing, relatively prosperous European nation, the subject of racism isn't too far from the forefront in Belgium.
Blame it on the oldies blaming the EU for free movement; blame it on a past that saw 15 million Congolese murdered . . the sudden departure of Belgian Imperialism throwing Congo, Rwanda and Burundi into chaos . . . whatever.
The society wears its social divides on its sleeves, unless you're young, in which case you see all races mingling properly and with good nature.
It's changing slowly . . . well maybe that's stretching things a bit.

Print notes:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 22 sec, f8, + 4 edges. HC 110

The poster was on a large wall behind our hotel - I quite liked the fact that all the 'blackness' had been picked away by someone with too much time and energy on their hands.
It niffed terribly of urine next to it, so maybe it was some post-beer leisure time.

Bunny ✔✔
Jabber ✔✔✔✔

 . . . Next! . . .


Does Your A-i Love You?
Nikon F3, 28mm f2.8 Ai-s Nikkor, Tri-X, Pyrocat-HD

I took this in Atomium (in Brussels - it's an extraordinary place - really, you should go - you'd have a blast!) and rather liked the fact that this mirrored surface turned everyone coming up the escalators into some strangely formed bulbous robot.
Well, you can't beat your brain for entertainment.
My poor wife stood by whilst I was doing this - I truly believe my photographic actions baffle her sometimes.

Print notes:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 24 sec, f8 base, + 6 top and bottom, + 10 left and right. HC 110

Look at the contrast on that - it's got that polished stainless steel look perfectly (to my eyes).
Happy ✔
Bunny ✔✔

 . . . Next! . . .


Leaving Time? 1
Nikon F3, 28mm f2.8 Ai-s Nikkor, Tri-X, Pyrocat-HD
Ah, Train World (again in Brussels) - one of the world's most extraordinary museums.
It describes itself as a "An Opera To The Train" and it is. 
I won't even begin to describe it, save to say, GO (if you can) - it'll explain itself when you're there.

Print notes:

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M, 24 sec, f8, + 6 edges. HC 110

This is one of my favourite 35mm photographs ever - I love the light and reflections in it.
The eagle-eyed might spot some lightness at the far left of the frame - this isn't a printing mistake - it's an edge effect caused by less than usual agitation during development.  - if you look into the photo it is also apparent where light meets dark in certain parts of the photo.
(Actually, every print on here exhibits some sort of edge effect - tis on the negative, it's nothing to do with the printing.)
Whatever - it doesn't detract from the photo to my eyes, and certainly beats digital perfection.

Big 
Happy 
Bunny 


 . . . Next! . . .


Leaving Time? 2
Nikon F3, 28mm f2.8 Ai-s Nikkor, Tri-X, Pyrocat-HD

Again, Train World - a ticket office with some examples of ticket collector's uniforms. I deliberately printed this slightly darker because it complemented the sepulchural reflections of the windows which make the print quieter than usual. The clock just sets it off to a tee and again I am a you know what.

Adox VC, GR 3 (?) 40 M,  22 sec, f8, + 6 edges. HC 110

Great 
Big 
Happy 
Bunny 


And that as they say is that. Of course there were a couple, well 3, spoils and sadly the last of their herd.
I have 3 sheets left - and I'll try and do something decent with them.

Oh and the one thing I forgot to mention is that printing these, I used an old Joe McKenzie technique which he called "setting the print"
You see those bits where I say "4 edges" (sic)? Well that means an extra 4 seconds exposure to each edge of the print. It's quite a tight burn margin, maybe a couple of centimetres in from where the image of the film rebate sits on the paper in the easel (I always print with the rebate showing - it is rare for me to crop anything).
Joe said that he felt it made the eye settle itself into the print rather than looking at the edges - i.e. your eye is drawn into the print and doesn't search around for something to settle on. This was especially so when anything was mounted with white card.
Where the eye goes when it's in the print is another matter - at least the eye is looking at something and the brain is trying to interpret what it is seeing. 
Of course in the corners where the two exposures meet, you'll be getting an intersection with 8 seconds exposure . . . I'll bet it is noticeable now I've pointed it out 😉

It's all terribly esoteric isn't it!

Anyway, whether you agree or not, it's not often you get handed something from a master printer (and he was) - so try it if you like and if it works to your eyes, raise a glass to the memory of Joe McKenzie.
As far as I know I've not read about this technique being used anywhere before, but it's funny you know, sometimes, when I'm printing I can sort of feel the presence of Joe goading me on and keeping me right.
He was an exceptional educator and master craftsman - and yet again, I thank fortune for having been in the right place and at the right time to have learned the small (really very small in the pantheon of printing) amount of technique I learned from him. 
Worra bloke.

Anyway, that's all folks - remember to remove your teeth from that mug - they need it for afternoon tea.


Saturday, February 04, 2017

(Elephant Gun) An Interesting Session

Morning . . I know, but it's a metaphorical one, not a literal one.
I am an elephant fan having been raised on a steady diet of Babar and more Babar . . especially that bit in "The Travels Of Babar" where the elephants paint eyes on their bottoms, colour their tails and use wigs on their rear-ends and reverse to the crest of a hill to put the wind up the oncoming rhino army! It's pure gold.

I'd had a number of negatives from April 2016 that I needed to print. I'd sat on them and sat on them and actually wondered when I was going to get a chance. You know how it is - other things get in the way and before you know it time has flown and you're no further forward.
Anyway, frustrated by my lack of photographing in the latter part of last year, I was (over the Festive period) determined to go and see what I could do. 
So, Hasselblad loaded with expired TMY 400 I went out late on one gloomy Monday and came home with an elephant. Now this wasn't in the slightest apparent to me at the time. It was only when I made the prints that it struck me.

More of that in a minute, but firstly back to the negatives from April. As mentioned in FB from last year I'd had the opportunity to photograph at a place I knew very well. It was a childhood playground and exceptionally dangerous, being as it is, a crumbling 15th Century Tower. 
Health and safety would have kittens these days - but back in the early '70's Steve crawled into long lost barrel-vaulted cellars, accessible from a wriggle through old grass and a tiny gap in the masonry, and together we part-climbed the crumbling stonework and just generally footered around. 
In the 1990's when my Mum was still alive, we climbed the 'renovation' and had a lovely flask of coffee and some sandwiches looking out from our vantage point over a part of forgotten Scotland.
These days however it is fenced off all around and literally falling apart thanks in part to the over-use of CEMENT to patch a place that would only have ever known LIME.
(S'cuse me whilst I get my Hi-Viz jacket on)
Lime is a sacrificial binding material and allows movement of the substrate and the passage of moisture and frost and time through masonry; cement is a solid lump of impermeability - fine and solid yes, and initially maybe it looks like the perfect answer, but when frost gets in behind it, the original stonework "blows" and so starts the slide into oblivion. 
It's definitely not the sort of thing you'd use on ancient stonework - just ask Historic Scotland.
It was this (albeit well-intentioned) use of cement that has caused the Tower to age quicker in the past 30 years than it ever did in the previous 300.
I'm not even a builder, but you just have to read about it, and before you know it you can see how totally wrong it is.
Anyway, surrounding the Tower is a wonderful Oak wood - it is quite small, but some of the Oaks are around 500 years old, so entirely comensurate with the age of the Tower. 
I've walked through this wood my whole life from the age of 7-ish and I love it deeply, as one can only love the familiar landscape of one's childhood.
I've only partially photographed it before, and then not seriously and have always wanted to go back with the skill and the gear to do it justice . . and . . . I'm still not there.
How does one capture atmosphere?
Especially an atmosphere leaden with history, dark deeds and a slumbering peace bought by blood and death?
Damn near impossible if you ask me.
You'll see what I mean from the following:




Wilderness Garden
This incredible, dense patch of wildwoodedness grows on the site of formal 17th Century gardens







View From The Motte
The stonework you see is the 'refurbishment' - it is all falling apart now.




I think, in reviewing them, I need to go back again (what an excuse) and expose more than 1 roll.
On that day we were there, we were beset with cloud and snow showers and a rare glimpse of sun  - the below shows the view from the car whilst a shower was on. The snow isn't apparent as it wasn't lying, but it was baltic. The 'flare' is actually a sleet shower passing through.




I was desperate to capture the feel of the place, but have failed I think. 
Never mind eh!
Also. and it has taken me a while to realise this, the Distagon is very prone to flare. I have the correct Hasselblad hood for it and use it all the time, but if you look at the second print, the flare is obvious as 'sun spots' - pentagon-shaped grey smudges. I was shooting into the light there, but I need to be more careful.

The prints were my usual Adox Vario Classic (until I get it finished). Grade 3 to compensate for its age. The negs were Pyrocatted. Meow, Yeow, Mo-o-o-o-w!


And forward 8 months - that time machine is amazing, but it needs new mud-flaps.
Anyway, here's a tip. Unless you are feeling REALLY inspired, think twice about loading your camera late on a Winter's afternoon and going and seeing what you can find with not a lot of time to spare till it gets dark.
You'll come home with mostly shit. 
Well that's what happened to me - basically it was too late out, too little time to execute things, and my eyes and compositional nuance had decided they were going off on holiday to some sunny spot . . at least that is my excuse.
They were a dreadfully disappointing bunch. Film was expired TMX 400 and developer, W-o-o-o-o-W, Yowl . . you've got it.



Weird Day
DOJCA Architecture Building Front Door (And Me)
This would look a thousand times better if the door wasn't double-glazed.




Elephant?

You see what I mean? 
This was round the back of the Art College, just step over the nearly new Marrut film drier, now on its side and in the rain (honest) and slide in beside the knackered and thrown out print cabinets. See that grey/white object on the right? Darkroom sink - decent condition. 
I fecking hate what they've done to photography at Duncan Of Jordanstone - Joe would be turning in his grave.
Anyway, I was unaware of capturing an elephant until I started printing. 
When I saw it, it was just a bit of fake nylon fur draped over a table and that's sort of how it looked on the contact too.. 
I could probably selectively bleach the 'eye' and the highlights on the fur just to make it more obvious. And look, there on the fur, another flarey grey smudge, courtesy of the light at the top of the frame. 
Och well, them's the breaks - it's not every day you get to "shoot" an elephant though is it?


And that's it again folks.
Printing is fun - I urge you all to do it, even if it is making contacts from 35mm film onto tiny bits of paper. You have to do it if you call yourself a photographer - it's the whole point!

TTFN - and remember, if Noddy had paid the ransom, the elephants wouldn't still have Big Ears.

Saturday, January 07, 2017

Dark Weather And Darker Deeds



Morning folks and a Happy New Ear to all of you - goodness knows I could do with a couple - age is proving to be a pain as my upper levels of hearing are fading - damn good job I didn't get myself into hock with that Stax Ear-Speaker set I was hankering after!
At least for the time being I can still see, though to be honest, in Scotland in the Winter all you can see seems to emerge out of a fug of gloom - it's tripod weather most of the time, but you know what, what did I say to that concept in a recent Hasselblad outing? Bollocks! that's what I said.
Oh yes, tripods are cold and cumbersome and rather marvellous, but, when all you want to do is get out and use a roll of film . . ahem . . the first roll since June . . well, you'll understand why I said Bollocks.

OK, so I've waxed long and lengthy about the 60mm Distagon and how much I like it, but, till now, all I've done with it is use it quite well stopped down, erm . .
"just so's everything can be nice and sharp" 
and what did I say to that concept on a recent Hasselblad outing?
Yep, you guessed it . . Bollocks!
You see, what I didn't fully understand with a Zeiss/Hasselblad lens is this . . apart from the fact that they never were cheap, that mucho-expensiveness was there for a reason.
Quality of image.
They are stellar optical performers at all apertures and this seems to be par for the course across most of the lenses (of all ages).
Yes I know the pre-FLE 50mm and 40mm's get a bum-rap some times, but I do wonder how much of that is down to operator error.
From my own point of view, I gave myself a bloody good kicking, and, shock, exposed most of my frames at f3.5, f4 and f5.6.
This was really hard for me to do.
It went against everything I know and I think that is visual immaturity on my behalf and it has taken me this long to realise it is such.
But don't get me wrong, I am certainly not one of those
"Oh GOD, the bokeh at f1.4, Jings it's gnarly and fizzy, but look at that central sharpness"
type of bods.
In this recent expedition, light and only light dictated my choices.

The Hasselblad has a large whackety-thwack mirror.
I'd said Bollocks to the tripod and I'd misplaced the Leitz TTT as back-up, so that was out too.
I had an endlessly gloomy day to enjoy.
It was approaching 3 in the afternoon . . . batten down the hatches time in Scotland in the Winter . . . 
I was using expired (06/2015) TMY 400 at EI 200 (a speed dictated by the use of Pyrocat-HD) .

So what could I do apart from balance shutter speed against possible shake?
The olde dictum of try not to use a speed lower than your focal length in low light was being shouted loud in my head, so, ergo, this dictated that the speed of my lens ruled the day.
F3.5?
It's hardly a high-speed lens is it?
I was super-careful in the way I held the camera - in fact the olde CCS bag balanced against my hip and the Hasselblad rested on top at times, softlee softlee catchee monkee . . .
And you know what, I think it worked - see what you think.



Expired TMY 400 - EI 200
Pyrocat-HD - 19 minutes 1+1+100, 20° C
Constant agitation first minute, then 2 inversions every minute to 17 minutes.
Stand development for an extra 2 mins to 19 minutes. 



1/60th, f4




1/60th, f3.5




1/30th, f4




1/15th, f4

You might be able to see that the daylight was sundering.
In the last frame, that's the sun just about gone over the Tay. It was a proper gloaming.
You can really see the plane of focus from the lens can't you - I have tried to get that happening in photographs before, but with little success - thankfully I have now found a friend in the Distagon that can show this peculiar effect well.
Amazingly to me, these are all straight prints onto some ancient Adox Vario Classic.
I've used filtering to bring them up to a Grade 3 equivalent (with the Adox, 30 Y in Kodak Units) simply because the paper is about 8 years old.
The really weird thing I have found with Pyrocat is that you can also print negatives from different films at the same time and aperture on the same paper.
In this case it is a straight 16 seconds at f22 using my Vivitar lens and this enlarger height which will provide me with a print with a 1.5cm border on 8x10" paper, so image size with rebate is 17cm square.
I've used a little tom-foolery in an extra 10 seconds burning here and there just to even up the edges a bit, but you could get away with just doing the 16 seconds.
They were developed in the under-appreciated Fotospeed PD 5 developer and stopped in Kodak Indicator and fixed in Fotospeed FX 20 Fix.
I've found this technique of consistent print timing/aperture also applies to other developers too, it's just getting your consistency of prcessing right. And I still wonder why people are prepared to spend half their lives banging on about split-grade printing when in reality it seems like an unneccesary bit of darkroom dark-artism (Hand me my cape serf, I am going to dazzle the populace!)
I think they've worked out fine and I would be happy to display any of them - it still surprises me what I can do with my make-shift darkroom.



Well, I've done this before, published the photographs, ended it and left you at the garden gate as it were with a bag full of petit-fours and the promise of a 'till next time' . . . . but this time I thought I'd make it possibly a bit more interesting by throwing in some back-up.
Oh yes, courtesy of a newly inherited ancient Ye PiePhone and a couple from my Sony, in the words of the great Jimmy Shand:

"Welcome to ma hoose, the drinks are o'er there!"

Yep, you've spotted it . . . this isn't the darkroom, but it is the place I do all my roll tank processing - it's my kitchen sink!
Nothing fancy, water from tap, thermometer (food grade!) for checking temps - they'll usually vary by a degree or two, or four (in the Winter) but it doesn't seem to make that much difference so long as you are above 20° C. The grey tub is an old washing up bowl - it is British made and has been a sturdy and reliable companion for years and years.


Ye ancient B&Q sink




Ye anxient washing-up bowl



So, after the film is processed and dried and wee contact has been made, we're all ready for some printing.
You've seen pictures of it before, but here is the maw of creativity after a recent tidy-up . . not much different!



Incredibly, this WAS after a tidy-up.
As you can see I really do have little space - I can print 9.5x12" but it isn't easy.



Hit the deck.
The cabinet holds my paper and paper safe.
That's the Patterson washer, and yes, two crates.
They've got beer in them and are actually quite valuable now!
You step down to the stone flags.



DeVere 504.
It's mounted on a piece of worktop on a kitchen cabinet which is on its side!
Like I said, space is at a premium.



OK, the flash went off . . . badly.
It is worth noting the Astrid Ioniser on top of the DeVere.
I don't know how you manage to print without an ioniser - it keeps dust and static down to an absolute minimum.
That's the DeVere switching unit and timer to the side. The timer is mechanical and totally accurate.


Ok, well that's my prayer-space - you know I kneel don't you, to print that is .  .  .


Jeez - who let the gnome in.
I am kneeling here, though it isn't obvious


Grist for the mill.


I've never shown these horrid, make-shift printing dark arts before, but needs must and all that.



The simplest most faff-free method I know for removing dust prior to printing.
Hold your fingers like scissors and lightly draw the negative through.
It shouldn't work but it does.
Got it from watching the person who prints H C-B's archive prints.




This horrible looking thing is the DeVere negative carrier.
The top aperture is for 5x4" negatives.
The lower plate is the metal 6x9cm carrier.
I've then taped the lower glass from a Meopta 6x9 glass carrier to that permanently.
And then hinged the Anti-Newton glass upper part above.
The negative sits between those



Negative ready to go.
It's flatter than a roadkill hedgehog.
No kinking or popping.
A light wipe with my index finger removes any dust that might have settled.
I haven't had to spot a print in years.


Ah, that's better - ready, set, GO!


I just like this.
The DeVere looks like some sentient being from a 1980's Dario D'Argento film.



And then the aftermath


The un-glam side of printing . . . washing them!



That's our bath - it might not look it, but it's bloody enormous.
The thing with the hose is my ancient and not brilliant Paterson print washer - it is a tempremental thing, but it does work in its own way and was by far the cheapest print-washer I could find when I needed one . . . £20.
The trays were for toning, but I discovered I had no selenium mixed and time was mucho-short, so I didn't bother. Toning can be done easily after the event (with a dried print and to no detriment - you just need to soak it first) if you can be bothered.
Prints were dried pegged (plastic, not wooden . . wooden mark prints badly and can become contaminated if you've not washed properly) from an old clothes line that hangs in the darkroom.


And that's it really.
It never ceases to amaze me that I can produce a piece of (Ph . . silent) 'Art' with such a basic set-up and that it'll outlast me unless someone chucks it in a skip.


The finished article.
Ignore the woodchip and marvel instead at the Leica Handbook!
The print has been squashed under a pile of books for a couple of days.
Omar Ozenir has a great method of drying which I might mention at some point - his prints are dead flat and put mine to shame.

And that's all folks - hope you enjoyed it!
Remember, if you keep picking that scab, it'll never heal.

Friday, September 30, 2016

4K Burning Moggie

Morning folks . . well, in an unprecedented move here's another post . . .and in the words of a disgraced TV personality from the 1970's . . "whacka, whacka, whacka . . . . can you tell what it is yet?"

OK, so that's enough mystery for one day . . . the title of this blog is deliberately obscure just because. But anyway, the more Cryptic Clue-minded amongst you will have worked out, that seeing as this blog is mostly about photography,  and seeing as yer Sheephouse is mostly not quite all human, then the title "4K burning Moggie" can only relate to one thing . . oh yes . . PYROCAT-HD!

Pyro-wtf? Eh? Wot?

Yes, Pyrocat-HD, Sandy King's wonderful and really rather rooty tooty developer, that's what . . . so all I can say is fasten your safety belts, get your rubber trousers on (preferably before the safety belt) take a good swig of tea/coffee and prepare to be amazed!

Now the well-read amongst you will know that I have long extolled the virtues of Rodinal/R09 - I have loved this developer dearly for many years now and for sheer convenience and longevity, there's little can touch it . . but you know what it's like when you've broken your arm, and there's a wee crawly thing, crawling away under the cast and you're enraged and want to scratch it and you cant . . . well photography is like that. What if I had a better lens or better camera, or developer?
Well seeing as I've explored the former rather too thoroughly, I thought I would explore the latter. 

Over the years I've used, D76, ID11, Rodinal, Barry Thornton's 2-bath, HC110, Rodinal, R09, D23 and did I mention Rodinal? But I dunno, one day I woke up and thought, I must try that . . the that being Pyrocat. 
And then I started looking around and discovered that I could only buy industrial-sized quantities of Pyrocatechin from Silverprint and seeing as I was going to just be trying it, why did I have to spend around 50 squid on chemicals?
And I nearly gave up, but then a thought occurred to me and I did a wee bit of ebay searching and sure enough a kit came up - this link will take you to an ebay shop:


100% feedback helped me make my choice, so I ordered some - it was very reasonable (this was pre-Brexit, so it was really reasonable)! 
OK - chemicals off ebay . . hmm, yes, however, Vincenzo, the vendor, was incredibly helpful (and thus comes Sheephouse-recommended) with my requests about mixing instructions, and when his kit arrived, I was really surprised at how well put together it was
It looked like it was meant to be used professionally if you know what I mean; everything was pre-measured in sturdy plastic vials and the instructions were clear and concise . . . in other words, apart from the fact it wasn't in a box, it looked like something you could have bought from a 'proper' manufacturer. 
Seriously - I recommend having a go with his kits!
Allied to this, I also made the executive decision to mix Part A in Glycol, which apparently extends the life considerably. Now I could have ebay'd that too, however having bought some dodgy borax before, and given that Glycol is now used in production of e-cigarette vape, I took another executive decision and bought it and some distilled water from a place called Darrant Chemicals. They're a 'proper' chemical distributor to labs and schools and so on but don't mind dealing with normal bods too!

And so, it came to pass one Saturday morning I started mixing. 
The hardest thing about the whole process was getting the Glycol hot enough to dissolve the chemicals in. I had to use a double boiler (in my case a jug in a pan of boiling water) which resulted in me over-heating it! My thermometer was reading a constant temp and then all of a sudden it jumped sharply - so if you are doing this, take care, CONSTANTLY MONITOR YOUR TEMPERATURE and try not to rush (which is what I was doing).
Rushing this is definitely not recommended, just because it'll take you a while to do it properly, and if you rush and don't concentrate enough you run the risk of spoiling all those lovely chemicals.
The second hardest thing was mixing the Potassium Carbonate in. It took a lot of stirring. But don't let me put you off - it is an adventure. And a worthy one!
When it was mixed, I think my overheating of the Glycol and the mixing in of the chemicals for Part A had partially oxidised the solution it had the faintest pinky/purple hue to it, but I had made it, and I was determined to use it, so ahead I went.

The first films (expired sheets of 5x4) I developed in it seemed awfully under-developed (based upon times found on the net) and the usual dilution of 1+1+100, so I moved to 2+2+100 which was good but very very contrasty. 
This set me back a bit, but after some convos with Ian (lostlabours on FADU) we concluded I must have oxidised Bath 1 . . . I still didn't want to give up, so I thought about it and came to the conclusion (based on his times) that I needed a new approach.
A quick word here - most times you find on the net these days are for scanned negatives - they can afford to be thinner. We are printing . . we need meat and potatoes, so if you are getting a time off the net, make sure someone has actually printed some negatives from it and not just developed and scanned..

Anyway, my first move was to cut box speed to half, and the next was to extend the development time massively (I figured if it was hard to blow highlights with it, then the only thing I was going to do was lift the shadows . . . same with the new film speed). 
Anyway, what this meant is that my new times for Delta 400 (which I have been using recently) are EI 200 and with PHD at 1+1+100 and 20 C, I develop for 19 minutes. This consists of continuous gentle agitation for 30 seconds then 3 gentle inversions every minute up to 17 minutes, then let it stand to 19 or even 20 minutes. 
This is longer than the old days of dilute Perceptol!!!!

So where does all this tomfoolery get us? 
In a new space where film development takes a lot longer, but where you'll struggle to burn-out any over-exposed highlights and where, with a modicum of technique tickling you can produce negatives that are just about damn near perfect. 
 Now you read about the perfect negative a lot - certainly the Reverend Sir Barry Of Thornton did his best to produce such things and I know he did, but some of them proved that you needed to be a little pernickity with your technique. As good as BT 2-bath is, I found that for all it's ability to even out exposure times into one homogenous whole, it somehow lacked contrast, whereas I can honestly say with Pyrocat, you'll regain that contrast, but also you'll gain balance.
Yes care is still needed - it's like giving birth (not that I ever have to a human, but there's things men give birth to that put women to shame . . .  anyway . . . hope you've still got some savour left for that croissant.
And how have I come to this conclusion about PHD? 
Well, go on, have a gander at this.





This is a straight print. 
No dodging or burning, just a print made direct from the negative in a glass carrier printed onto some ancient Adox Vario Classic (now long gone) paper - I filtered to a Grade 3 because of its age. 
Chemicals were bog standard: Fotospeed developer, Kodak Stop and Ilford Fix, a very light toning for archival purposes in Kodak Selenium and that was that.
Admittedly I am using one of the finest MF lenses ever made - the 60mm Zeiss Distagon*** which can do pretty much anything required of it, from pin-sharp detail, to easy to use hyper-focal measuring (very handy in the semi-twilight of an abandoned building) to wonderful, creamy out of focus stuff, to micro-contrast, to gorgeous greys and a massive tendency to flare, but all the same . . . .

If you look closely at the print, the lens (and developer) have managed to do a sterling job of capturing a really hard lighting situation: the wall at the right was in bright light, the wall to the left was in shadow and overshadowed by dense vegetation, and the bit at the end of that wall was in a half-light. 
It would have proved soot and whitewash with many setups, but this is balanced
Not only that but the Zeiss has somehow managed to capture pin-sharp detail and contrast and blended it with some of the nicest out of focus stuff I have seen, but that has been captured with less contrast and somehow lends an overall 'older' feel to the image whilst still retaining the sharpness and contrast of a modern lens. 
When I saw this as a negative I was bowled over - it looked gorgeous, and the same happened with the print too. 
CHUFFED is not the word . . add a FECKING to the start . .
 
This was taken whilst on holiday in June and is a looong story that involved me walking countless miles to try and reach an old Norman Motte and being defeated every time, by fences and walls, bulls, rain, crops, more walls and some of the tallest, wettest bracken you have ever seen, so I gave up. And then before you could say bunga-ahomogenius-tomato I came across a sad (yet wonderful) semi-derelict cottage. 
At least, it could be even more beautiful were it not hard up against a road and if someone had taken it in hand a couple of decades back rather than let it slide into disrepair.

Here's some more pictures.














These exposures ran the gamut from 1/15th at f5.6 (the first print) to 145 seconds at f11 (the third, interior shot) . . BUT they're all on the same film. Now do you see what I mean about a near perfect developer.

Yes I know, they're hairy scans and there's a few rebate mistakes, but on the whole what do you think? 
They were easy as anything to print. No messing. No SP**-GR***. Nothing like that.

A Little Sheephousian Aside:
You know, I read some of my printing books and look at split-grade this and split-grade that and think, you know what? in 3 decades of printing (pretty much, minus the 15 year gap, but it does sound better than in a decade and a half's printing . . ) I've never seen any point in split-grade - it just seems like so much faff to achieve a print that really, could be done with a lot more basic techniques. yeah dodge and burn, selective bleaching and selenium or any toner you fancy. 
Seriously, printing is a craft skill that can be achieved by anyone with an eye for tone and quality.
The caveats I would add to this are try and make it fibre paper if you can, though to be fair the RC papers that are left are pretty decent, but there's something about a fibre print. Also, dare I say it, try and find graded paper - that narrows your options down massively, but if you don't feel confident, go MG paper. 
To be honest I have never used Ilford's ubiquitous MG in fibre. I used to use it a fair bit in RC and never really got on with it - maybe I am missing something. 
Ilford's Galerie on the other hand is probably top of the heap for paper quality these days - yes you have to re-mortgage to buy it, but honest, there's nothing like it anymore. 
At the end of the day I believe the cost to be worth it.
Another paper I do really like is Adox's take on Agfa MCC - it is pretty close, though not quite. The original Agfa papers were outstandingly beautiful AND kind to the printer, seemingly producing decent prints from even the most cack-handed of efforts.
How long have we got left as printers and printmakers? I really don't know. It all depends on the young and whether they feel they can justify spending nearly £90 on a box of 100 sheets of 8x10"!
How sad it has come down to this - in a world awash with imagery, does anyone care anymore about handling a physical print? Or are we at the narrow part of the pass - the vintage prints will carry on and be lauded, the work of the concerned and talented amateur, and I am talking to any of you out there who have cared enough about printing to actually make your own are destined for the skip of eternity. You know what it is like:
"I see your Uncle Ernie died . . I was sorry to hear that"
"Yeah, thanks. He was a funny old fucker really. Had all this old school photographic stuff and boxes and I mean boxes and boxes of pictures, big ones of all sorts of shit - trees and signs and strange things - it was so much to look through. In the end we didn't have the time 'cause we had to clean his house out and get it on the market before Winter. We chucked the whole lot in the skip. All that work of his. The only thing I saved was this picture he made - it's about 6x6" square and it's of a dog in a hat and the dog is looking right at the camera and I dunno . . it just makes me laugh. Ernie liked that sort of thing."

Back To The Point:

Anyway, where were we . . . ah yes Pyrocat-HD. 
Bloody marvellous stuff.
They say a picture is worth a thousand words . . so I'll stop now.
If anyone wants to know more, please leave a message at the bottom, or do some trawling - there's a lot of stuff written about it.
Suffice to say, I can see myself using this for a good while yet . . and next time I might even mix it with more care!

TTFN, and remember, around the ragged rock, the ragged rascal ran, until his trousers fell down

*** Why do I say this? Well, renowned Rollei fan, Helmut Newton. Now I like his photographs so I was rather surprised when I visited his museum, in Berlin that in a case with his other cameras, was a Hasselblad with a 60mm Distagon . . . food for thought!