Bigger, Better, Faster, More!

Morning folks - I hope you are well!

Today's FB has a title that not only quotes an album by 4NonBlondes but also, I think, is at the root of what is currently wrong with photography.

Oh I know, chuck your coffee at the screen, drop your phone down the toilet, etc etc . . I know.

You see, to cut a long story short, megapixels, print size, formats, fps, USAF resolution charts, pixel size, face recognition, blah blah blah, you know, all the bollocks that (apparently) define a current photographer . . it's all, well, mostly, er, bollocks.

That new Sony camera that stops motion blur being a thing? 

What's the point in that? 

Someone dig up Jacques-Henri Lartique and tell him his photos of racing cars were crap.

For that matter, someone tell the ghost of Michael Cooper, that his autosport pictures were crap too. He was a hell of a photographer, with nerves of steel, a Pentax and a steady eye. I met him many years ago (he was a friend of my brothers) - to be honest you've not lived until you've stood with someone like Mike OUTSIDE the crash barriers at Brands Hatch on a F1 day . . . 

Anyway, back to the real meat and potatoes.

My friend and erstwhile blogger, Bruce Robbins of the Online Darkroom, has surprised me recently. Due to an overwhelming amount of 'crap' in his darkroom (OK, he has two dogs . . go figure) he has been unable to print anything. 

Fair enough. 

When life gives you crap, get the doggy poo bag out. 

In this case though, it has been the resurrection of his ancient Nikon D700 - a camera that is nearing prehistoric in digital terms - introduced in 2008; well regarded at the time, but still laughable in today's terms at a mere 12 MP. 

Even my Sony A6000 (which I have no fondness for) is 24MP . . read 'em and weep big boy!

But the thing is, as they said back in 1939, "'T'aint What You Do, It's The Way That You Do It  . . " because, to my eyes, with that and his cheapo Epson printer, he's producing prints that are every bit as good as what I am producing in the darkroom from a set-up that in current terms is around twelve times the price of his! 

Add into that, material costs, and, well, you don't have to be a brain surgeon . . . 

Yep - full print, borders and all.
Ilford's MGRC 'unusual' size.

Of course that's a gross simplification. I use my set-up because I love it. 

I love the fact that I really am limited to a roll of film. 

I love the fact that I can go and stand in a red room for a few hours and work away. 

I love printing. 

I love photographing with film. BUT, for how much longer can this continue?

I was saddened to hear that Newton Ellis the famous camera repairers in Liverpool will be shutting their doors this year. Wow. There's really not that many people left who can deal with repairing these lovely machines we still lug about. 

Yes, I know electronics can go on 'modern' cameras, but mostly camera electronics are pretty (relatively) reliable. 

Can you find anyone willing to have a go at your beloved Contax II from the 1930's these days? 

NO (or at least not very many who understand that camera). 

It's a big thinking point.

Allied with this, we have the cost of materials - yes I know it is all relative - as longterm reader and FB friend Julian said recently:

As I was a-meandering through my paternal plan chest, I came across a Silverprint catalogue, dated 2002. In it so much stuff we can no longer buy. And Silverprint - whither went they? Sniffs and gazes rheumy-eyed into the distance.

The cost of a 100 sheet box of 8 x 10 Ilford Multigrade IV RC then...

(including VAT @17.5%) is given as £38.04 crossed out, or, to you guv, £27.26.

I think the crossed out price is probably RRP and Silverprint could offer a good discount.

Putting that through the mills of https://iamkate.com/data/uk-inflation/ to compensate for inflation:

We'd expect that to be £82.17 full price, or to you guv £56.88

There's the small matter of VAT now being 20% and I really can't be bothered with the calculation to find out that it adds a couple of quid!

Going into ilfordphoto.com and checking their prices for Multigrade RC, 100 sheets of said paper comes in at £84.09, which is surprisingly close to the crossed out price with a couple of quid for the extra 2.5% VAT. Nowhere near the "to you guv" level sadly.

So basically,  Ilford MGRC is currently probably bang on the money with regard to inflation and so on. BUT, does that make it affordable? 

Well that is hard for me to judge as someone who has come to the end of their 'usable' working life - I don't earn a wage, so I don't know. 

What I do know, is that in pocket money terms, it is a huge consideration.

Bruce pointed out that Ilford Portfolio in postcard size costs me approximately 70+pence per card - that's quite a lot of money; an average session with postcards elicits 12+ images . . a not inconsiderable  amount of money for a morning's work. 

Were I to inkjet them on 'premium' Hanemuehle postcard paper I'd be well under 50p; use a different paper and I would be considerably less. 

It's quite a thought, because with my costs, stack them across the numerous film formats I use and differing paper sizes, chemicals, storage, time (and also the sheer outlay in cameras and lenses) etc, then I really am living up to that term "Luxury Photographer".

Maybe Luxury Photographer, should be replaced with Financial Masochist. 

And not just financial either as I am about to recount. 

Again that thorn in my side Mr Robbins has shown me a different side.

We recently had a mini-road trip to a setting we've been to before . . however this time is was dreich. And I mean proper Scots Dreich. 

Misty; damp; warm and cold at the same time; humidity levels through the roof; constant rain - not heavy, but a proper Scots Soaker (believe me, you need to experience it to understand that it is quite different from just 'getting wet').

 

I had the 500 C/M and 40mm Distagon; an A16 back and Panoramic Mask set . . on a tripod . . with my old Gossen Lunasix 3S and a cable release all housed in a giant shoulder bag. 

Fortunately, I had the rain cover from a Think Tank Urban Disguise on hand, for without it, my camera would have melted away to nothing. 

The large rain covers often supplied with most bags, are not pieces of annoying shite (as I used to think) but actually superb at stretching over a really large camera set-up.

As a counter to this, Bruce had a tripod, his Ona manbag, the D700 and 2 lenses . . . and that was it.

His camera, is a bit weather sealed - not up to modern standards but good enough. 

He didn't seem particularly worried is what I shall say, whereas I was completely paranoid about trying to stay dry. 

As for my stuff . . well, when I got home this is what I had to do:

Lens off then take the camera apart: remove hood; remove Acute Matte; clean water marks off of mirror where the rain had funnelled through; thoroughly dry camera body including removing wind-on crank to remove water which had seeped behind it.

Film back: kitchen towel dry; remove film; remove insert; remove dark slide; pop whole lot in Ziplock bag with silica. 

Lens: kitchen towel off the worst of the moisture; remove hood; filter; dry threads of both; pop lens into large Ziplock bag with silica in it for four days . . . and twiddle thrumbs.

You get the drift. 

And of course the shoulder bag was soaked too with no cover. 

Tripod - saturated, so: set, fully erect in a warmish room for a couple of days . . . 

Finally, reassemble camera and lens only to discover that you've just fired the lens before mounting it on the camera and have encountered for the first time the Hasselblad lock-up.

Look up how to sort it - quite simple really with a good long screwdriver and some care.

Breath at last.

So, nothing short of a pain in the arse really. 

Although his lenses got wet too, I don't think they got quite a soaking as mine did. 

And I bet he didn't have to take his camera apart!

This being said, it was an experience and has given me a number of pointers to situations like that in the future. But at the end of the day I could have brought home the same bacon with his set-up.

That is quite a consideration.

The film was FP4+ developed in Pyrocat-HD. 

I printed the images on 11¾ x 8¼ paper; the image size is 10½ x 5¼". 

They look good and I am happy with them, but like I say, I could have achieved the same with much less. 

I will say (amazing what experience can teach us) is that the nominal 6x3cm image size of the panoramic mask using this film (and camera) combo, is probably as good as I could have achieved with a 6x12cm back on a view camera. 

Had I been in the same circumstances with just a field camera and a 6x12 back, I simply wouldn't have bothered getting anything out of the bag. It is as simple as that.

Anyway, here's the images.

Strangely, looking at them as scanned objects make them look better to my weird eyes.

But where does this lead me?

Remember what I said about bollocks up above?

Well, Bruce has proved to me that in modern terms, using something that is, in actual digital terms, as dead as a Dodo (and if you are careful and ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING) then you can produce work that stands up with anything. 

I hope he writes a post about this, because the prints are really good - I was impressed. 

As for l'il ol' me, well, despite the obvious merits and pocket money friendly benefits of squirting (inkjet printing) I shall probably carry on printing with gritted teeth. 

One thing is for certain though. I want to print a fibre-based archive and that means 10 x 8" WILL HAVE TO BE my maximum paper size. 

I simply can't justify paying £95 for a box of 50 sheets of 9.5 x 12". 

Of course if anyone would like to send me some larger fibre paper, I will happily receive it and send you back an archival Sheephouse print of your choice 😄 

As another aside though . . who prints 20 x 16" in fibre these days? 

Its current price is £256 for 50 sheets - that's a fiver a print, plus very quickly exhausted chemicals . . and the sheer space involved to deal with the prints.

If the shitake hits the fan as I think is going to happen, I can imagine that the larger paper sizes will go first.

There really can't be many people doing big ones now . . surely?

But if you are out there (and you're reading this) my hat is tipped to you - you're both brave and masterful (and either professional or quite a bit well-off).

Anyway, that's quite enough from me for another post - if you've been reading for as long as some of you have, Bless You. If you're new to this malarkey, Bless You Too.

I am now off for a haul around town, sporting (wait for it) .  . the Sony A6000 and 16-50mm OSS E kit lens. Bruce said I'd probably get more out of it, if I put as much care into using it as I do with a film camera. 

Personally I can't see it, but we shall see.

The older I get, the more I think, Feck it . .WHY NOT?

Over and Oot.

H xx

Two Men In A Boat

Morning folks - well not entirely Two Men In A Boat, but there were boats in the vicinity if you know what I mean . . . .

How are you all? 

It's been a while I know, but life can be quite full at times can't it, and so it has been for me.

Anyway, today's tale is that of a head-to head between two equally weighted opponents - on one side:

H. Sheephouse Esq. 

and on the other:

The Thunder From Down Under

The Slaughter From Across The Water

Yes ladies and gentlemen, none other than . . . . T.O.D!

Well, something like that. 

Oh alright then, it's Bruce from The Online Darkroom - an Enigma In His Own Lunchtime. King of the Midget Gem. 

And then me, Sheephouse - Obscurity Personified.

In reality, two men of a certain age, one with a Hasselblad and 60mm lens, the other with a Rollei 2.8F [I was actually surprised how light the Rollei was - it seemed to me to be on a par with my Rollei T. I always thought the 'proper' Rolleis were overbuilt, but had never handled one, but no, very similar indeed. And as for handling, well if you've handled one you've handled them all] on a day trip to nowhere.

So there we were on a very lovely Summer's day (unusual over here this year) a nobblin' along the lanes and braes of the Carse Of Gowrie. 

Bruce's knowledge of said area is absolutely extraordinary - he knows the place intimately and can point out things and take turns that mere ordinary humans would balk at. 

In other words, if you're in the Carse and you need a taxi to take you the quickest way from Ardgaith to Knapp .  . he's the man to call.

We had a place in mind (well, he did; I'd never been there) and so we parked up and rattled down to an extraordinary spot, full of peace and beauty, right on the banks of the Tay. 

The swans were out and the light was gorgeous; a decent wind had set in though and the reeds were moving all over the shop. It was landscape heaven.

Now never being one for the obvious, I decided I wasn't going to include any horizon in my photos. 

No way.

Why? Well, this has been pointed out to me (by Bruce) - I don't take traditional landscapes. 

I think it all boils back to when I first started and could never capture what I saw in my mind's eye; y'know, you've got your wee 35mm, and everything you see through the VF looks marvey and you get home, develop it, and the negs look sort of phhhhhhh. 

I've always found it a problem.

So, horizons were OUT.

Anyway, what do you do on a clear day that would have Ansel weeping for joy? 

Yep, that's right, you get a Medium Red Filter and combine it with a 0.6 ND filter, bung them together and dial in -5EV on your meter! 

A tripod helps too. 

And a soupçon of excitement, because you simply do not know what you are going to get. 

This to me is one of the key essences of photography and one I feel has been largely lost in this digital era.

Anyway, then you plonk the tripod down and get counting those seconds. 

Some of these were pretty long exposures . . up to three minutes . . . I know!

I can however think of worse ways to spend a sunny day.

So without further ado, here's what came back from the chemists:

They're all straight scans off the image area of the actual prints - no Lightroom or digital jiggery-pokery; just scanned, imported into 'Photos' and cropped and churned out again.

I'm rather happy with them - they're not typical landscapes, there's more of an air of dream about them, which is exactly what I wanted.

It is quite easily achieved with a ND and a red - when you look through them combined like that, it is like staring into the heart of an uncooked slice of black pudding, minus the oatmeal. 

The film was the ever reliable FP4, rated at EI 80 and developed in 1+3 Perceptol; oh and that is a Hasselblad A16 back at work. 

I've taken a liking to Perceptol again after many years - if you treat it gently it can be very compensating and it works well with these really rather long exposures, the longest of which (the picture at the very top of the page) as I said, was around 3 minutes.

What might really surprise you is that they were all printed on Grade 4! 

Strangely, it has weirdly balanced the contrast inherent in using a red filter, with the flecks of sunlight coming through the gloom. 

They were all toned in selenium too, which just added to the overall feel of the scenes.

I was a happy bunny, as apart from Print 1, all darkroom exposures were guessed. 

I did a test strip for the first one, made a print I liked and then, because everything else was pretty similar in exposure, winged it from there by eyeballing the contact sheet. 

Happy days and all in a morning's work.

Anyway I'll leave the final image to the spirits and hooded monks, that I'm sure the Victorian creators of this folly were willing to inhabit it . . . sadly what they got, were the Chuckle Brothers.

BTW, the camera was level, the building has a lean. Honest.

The Leaning Folly

And that's yer lot for this month - keep on enjoying the Max Bygraves records . . .

TTFN

H xx

Sadly No Spirits Involved.
He Was Driving.

Clash Of The Titans

Morning folks - hope you are well, I am, and I'm not sure about Herman but I think he might be too.

Long term FB readers (Hellooooo! Coooey!!) will know that over the years I have had regular commenters, who I've always been nice and polite to. 

None of this keyboard angst around here, oh no . . .

One of these is Bruce from The Online Darkroom - an erstwhile, well-written, intelligent and informative blog about all things photography. 

We've communicated now for nigh on 11 years . . but weirdly, despite living close to each other (at one time less than a couple of miles) we have never met. 

Until now . . . well, not now, but a few weeks back.

They always say, try never to meet someone you've only ever 'met' via the internet don't they - I was a bit trepidacious! 

F'rinstance, was it going to be like: 

King Kong vs. Godzilla? 

Alien vs. Predator? 

Ali vs. Frazier? 

Possibly even:

Heidecke vs. Victor??

Was he a:

Nutter?

Conman?

Murderer?

White Slaver?

Down-To-Earth Nice Bloke?

Friends and neighbours held a sweepstake. 

This could be a ding-dong meeting of minds; a grudge match; a decider; the ultimate battle; a terrible mistake; a . . . oh I know, I'll shut up.

Fortunately he was the latter . . . 

Ancient Gate

. . . And what it did turn out to be was a lovely trip around local countryside with a friend. 

Truth be told, I had a wonderful time and we talked and laughed and I got to see Bruce in action. 

It was an interesting juxtaposition actually; I had my big Gitzo with Arca ballhead, and then the 500 C/M and a 40mm Distagon in possibly the world's largest shoulder bag. 

Bruce had his Nikon F90X, an AF lens and a small, road-worn Domke bag.

Whilst I planted myself firmly on the planet and took varying readings, he wandered around observing, moving in quickly and getting what he wanted. 

I don't think he knew I was watching, but I was - it was fascinating actually. 

And so the day was whiled away and I don't know about him, but I felt such a sense of ease and good natured bonhomie that I can't wait for the next one. 

And there will be, he just needs an eye problem to resolve itself.

So without much more guff, and without further ado, here are the photographs. 

They're not stunners, but it's hard sometimes to take in new places and photograph them in a satisfactory manner. 

Maybe next time, though the wild garlic will be gone by then.

Ancient Wall

Ancient Caravan

Ancient Dusty Room

Ancient Dreams 1

Ancient Dreams 2

Ancient Dreams 3
(Actually the camera was level)

Ancient Gate

Film was fresh Delta 400 at EI 200 in HC110 Dilution B, gentle agitation for 30 seconds, then 2 twirls (with the Paterson twirler) every minute to 7 minutes and then let it stand to 10 minutes - gives really lovely results. 

The older I get the more I believe that agitation technique is a key part of developing film. 

I've written about it before, and according to a bunch of pundits, agitation has no effect, but from my point of view, were I to really shake it up with Fomadon R09, I'd end up with pretty dense negatives, so I keep it calm - it's like trying to keep a raging bulldog in its place . . both palms up towards it, calm down lad, calm down . . . 

I also use the Paterson paddle/twirler exclusively these days. 

Imagine you were twisting a spinning top, but very slowly, once to the right, then back to the left. 

That's one 'twirl'. 

My universal technique, is 30 gentle seconds of that, then 2 twirls on every minute.  

I'll also do a semi-stand job - maybe not agitate on the last couple of minutes, and then let the film stand for a couple of minutes over . . my theory being, that because developer exhausts itself on highlights quicker, it will; but then it will continue working on the shadow areas. 

I'd rather have more shadow detail that I can print down when printing.

Hey ho . . it works for me.

Also, I've found that Ralph Gibson's PRINT "Bromide Drag" technique works for a denser negative. 

You basically develop the print to a certain point. 

You'll find your highlights might still be really blank. 

Flip the paper over, turn you safelights out and go and have a breather . . . anywhere between 3 and 7 minutes. 

You come back, slip in, the highlights have emerged. 

You also risk slight fog with this, however in the case of of the print of the wonky frame and outside vegetation (Ancient Dreams 3) I rather like the effect. 

The negative of that was impenetrable - it's denser than a busload of denseness, but 68 seconds on f11 and left to twiddle its thumbs in developer for around 5 extra minutes (over and above normal 'completion time') brought the vegetation out. 

I've only started on this recently, but it probably deserves more research. 

It is though 'a thing' or should I say 'was'? 

Who prints these days?

Anyway, enough. I rather like the prints - to me they're almost a dream sequence.

Weird dream maybe, but a sequence nontheless.

Actually, they're a happy memory too - Thank You Bruce!

Oh and before I forget, the paper was quite old Ilford MGRC Pearl, developed in Adox/Agfa Neutol NE. They're all selenium toned.

And that's it folks - as always, thanks for reading, you've made an old man very happy, or should that be, you've made a happy man very old . . . .

It's An Affie Bonnie Day Fer Takin' Some Fotees

Morning folks - you'll have to get yer heed around the epithet of this one.

Y'know, for years I have railed against being 'Dundonian'. 

I don't know why . . . well I do actually, it is because I always wanted to get back to the country and I think that denying that I was actually settled here would, in some weird way, get me back where I belonged . . . wading through soggy vegetation, shouting at cows, listening to rivers etc etc . . you get the drift. 

But it never happened, and I think now is probably more or less unlikely to - the river of life runs its course and it isn't always the course you expected; however that course can be something far sweeter. 

That does make me a wee bit sad, however, never being one to dwell on things too much, I have accepted (and also been called such . . by 'locals' no more, no less) that I am now a proud Dundonian.

Proud?

Yep, you heard that right.

I had a really long wander this morning, from the part of the Hawkhill that used to be called 'Witch Knowe' up and along Annfield Road, onto Blackness Road (strangely [for what used to be a bit of a shithole] now morphing into one of the most culturally diverse streets you could imagine) and up to beautiful Balgay Park; thence the heavy climb up to Mills Observatory, then down, crossing the bridge and into Balgay Cemetery. 

All the way, I was looking at the light, and I realised, that the light here can be quite different to other places. 

It is often silvern, and I put that down to its sunny aspect (sunniest city in Scotland!) and the reflection of said sunshine off a mile wide chunk of river - the Tay.

My old mentor Joseph McKenzie, always said the light was different here, but it has only been in recent years that I have come to appreciate the profound truth of that statement. 

Sure it can be utterly grey for weeks on end, but when you get a morning like this morning, well, it is wonderful. 

But more to the point, excellent for taking photographs. 

With my new enforced leisure status, I am able to really appreciate the ebb and flow of morning light; at this time of the year the shadows are just beginning to climb back to brightness, so at times you have deep, deep shadow, and piercing sunlight. Overlay this with the moisture content coming in off the estuary and you have, at times, an effect quite akin to early, uncoated lenses.

It was this combo that I experienced last week, using an unfamiliar film and focal length, but a familiar subject. 

The film was Pan F.

It had officially 'died' in November 2009, but seeing as I now have 7 rolls of it (gifted by a friend - thanks Alan!) I thought it best to let it get up and get busy! 

The lens was the 250mm Hasselblad Sonnar - a lens I have used a few times, but still not gelled with, which is daft really as I often have wished for more distance-closing power at times. 

The subject was one of the most (to my eyes) beautiful pieces of monumental sculpture I've ever seen (and I've visited a few museums, believe me). I've photographed her before and you'll recognise her, but I felt she deserved the full portrait.

To directly quote the Zeiss literature for the lens:

Even at full aperture the 250 mm Sonnar@ T* f/5.6 lens features such excellent image quality that stopping down is not required. Despite its long focal length and remarkable telephoto effect, this lens is compact and allows hand-held photography.

The 250 mm Sonnar@ T* f/5.6 lens is used tor portraiture, long-range, press, sports and stage photography. In outdoor portraiture, the shallow depth-of-field range can be used to advantage to separate the model from an unsteady background.

So with this in mind I went and whiled away a happy couple of hours.

Despite the widely held internet belief that Pan F and HC110 are a complete no-no, things turned out fine, which was fortunate, because I had mis-metered two of the exposures (as I'll show you below) placing the shadows on Zone III . . . however I obviously read the wrong part of the scene. 

Fortunately I'd made more exposures with placing the 'skin' tones of the stone on Zone VI and it was from these negatives I managed to print (after wasting a couple of sheets of paper trying to print from the Z III ones.)

The results were printed on some handed-on Ilford MGRC, Pearl. I printed them at Grade 3 and toned them in Selenium. 

I was thinking far more contrasty in my head when I took them, but after weighing up the options, chose to print them more muted.

They were exposed at f8. The Sonnar is a f5.6 and I find it remarkable that you can quite clearly see cobwebs in the prints only one stop down from maximum.

I rated the film at EI50 simply because of its age and, as I said, developed them in HC110.

I used Dilution H simply because of the extreme contrast range of the day and it worked pretty well.

As you can see from the snippet from the contact print, I really ballsed-up two exposures - there is a lot of image on the negatives, but they are just too beyond-the-pale to get anything out of them. 

Anyway, here are the prints - direct scans from the print as per usual:

Contact Print Snippet

So I took my photos, and that was that.

I packed up, moved on and further along the way encountered a really cheery bloke, about my age, who said in pure Dundonian:

"Mornin'! It's an affie bonnie day fer takin' some fotees eh!"

And I couldn't have agreed with him more. 

He was dead friendly. 

I can't quite believe I am typing this, but it's that sort of place.

It's changing, in a big way for the better, but in another way sadly for the loss of some character - the proper Dundee auld wifies who used to troll about the town are dying off; the dialect is lessening.

Such is the way of the world.

Anyway, till next time, as always, thanks for reading, take care and keep on fighting the good fight.

H xx

Deep Woods And Soggy Pants

Morning folks - well, decorating and DIY were put aside for a brief four days of holidays in the Borders (of Scotland). It's an area we know well and love very much.

The feel is very different to the West side of the South Of Scotland, which is quite wild with less obvious history. 

The East Borders are easily distinguishable by the mark the Romans made in trying to conquer Scotia, that is, lots of forts, earthworks and a series of roads which span millenia. 

The main of these is Dere Street, which stretches from York all the way to Edinburgh and was a proper Shanks' Motorway for hundreds of years. 

It is now partly called "The Pilgrim's Way."

You can get a fantastic idea of the post-Roman period in history by reading Rosemary Sutcliffe's (ostensibly for 'children') trilogy: "The Eagle Of The Ninth", "The Silver Branch" and "The Lantern Bearers". 

They're largely dismissed these days as being historically inaccurate and a bit twee, however, as a lifelong reader I can honestly say, of any of the billion books I have ever read, these throw you full-on into the dung and stench of the early, post-AD period; you can feel the pain, terror and sheer excitement of battle; the smell of woodsmoke and cooking fires; the wear of daily travail; the clank of armour coming over a distant moor - you get my drift - they're Time Machines.

A remarkable achievement by a lady who was wheelchair bound for all her life and could only wander afar in her imagination. 

Highly recommended.

Anyway, back to the main monkey-business - you wanna banana Choppers? 

Yooz got it.

I've often found on country holidays that the easiest way to get anything satisfactory, photographically, is NOT to go for The Grand View. 

Fuggedaboudit. 

No point. 

Everybody's doin' it, doin' it, doin' it.

Pickin' their nose and chewin' it, chewin' it, chewin' it. 

(Sorry, you obviously didn't go to the same school as I did where the aforementioned ditty was much popular in about 1969.)

To me Grand Views leave me as cold as anything.

They're just foul interpretations of the immense beauty of nature. Granted it is hard to stuff all that wonder into a small lens and thence onto a sensor or film, but tbh, they've been done sooooooo many times, is there really any other point to them other than to prove you were there?

I think the Grand View really dilutes the power of Landscape Photography.

You have to feel a place before it can talk back to you.

My solution?

Immerse yourself in what is literally just outside the door of your cottage, caravan, hotel, tent, whatever.

Check the Ordnance Survey map of your locality. 

Bing Maps Aerial Views are pretty good too, but to my mind an OS can make sense of features you haven't got a scooby about.

See something interesting? (in the case of my recent holiday, an Iron Age Earthwork on a promontory on a very minor river) find it and photograph it and its environs.

It is far more satisfying to be able to say to yourself:

"I doubt anyone has ever taken a picture here before!"

Honest - try it and see.

So there I was, after an afternoon of really heavy, thundery showers, desperate to get the tripod and camera out and get out for a small photograph.

We had an earlyish tea, I donned suitable outdoor gear, and out I went. 

Full sundown was around 8 PM and I was out about 6.30.

I think I have described the gloaming before - it is a wonderful Scots word for that time when the world is just nestling down into darkness. 

It, to me, also encompasses the brief period before sunset when things start to quieten a lot. 

Birds set themselves down; small mists lift themselves free of grassland; rivers take on a loud rushing which is totally different to normal daytime. 

You can feel the peace coming on.

It is my most favourite time of the day to take photographs. 

Light changes quickly; aside from everything getting darker, you need to take into account that pretty much every frame will be different. 

You also need to work quickly and methodically. 

No farting about. 

Know Your Onions (as my Dad used to say).

Jane's Wood 1

As you can see from the above, despite the sun star, the light was falling fast - what you can still see of the sun was just cresting the woods on the other side of the gorge and literally I had minutes before the whole place settled itself into deep gloom.

I am happy with the print - it is hard to capture soft light like that without being underexposed or printing too heavily - you need a measure of low contrast just to keep things down a bit.

Film was FP4 developed in HC 110 on Dilution B. I printed it in Ilford MGRC. 

My camera was the Hasselblad 500 C/M and the lens was the newish and totally wonderful 40mm Distagon. 

Compared to the Biogon on the SW, it captures the same amount of detail (which is vast - easily the equivalent of 5x4 if not more so) but is slightly contrastier and doesn't have the same 'air' that the Biogon has.

I put this down to the coating and also that it is more than 10 years younger, and of course a different design. 

I love it though and for landscape it is far easier to compose with than the Biogon.

Jane's Wood 2

The small, overgrown path down to the gorge passed an iron age fort (as mentioned above - it was sited in a marvellous and easy to defend position) and entered a wood called 'Jane's Wood'. 

It was planted in memory of a young woman, Jane Thornton, who died in 1984. 

It is all small Oaks, though obviously they're growing, and the place has an air of total peace. 

Jane and I would be of similar ages, and I wondered to myself how she died. I also, felt entirely humbled by the fact that someone would plant a whole Oak Wood in her remembrance. 

What a beautiful tribute to a life cut short, and weirdly, it was almost as if her spirit imbued the place with a certain something. 

Of course that could just be donkey shite on my behalf, but I actually truly think I stumbled upon that spirit of place I always look for.

As she had been raised on one of the nearby farms, I assume she must have loved the place too. 

The route down, was, as they'd say "A Well Ken't Road" as, at the bottom, there are the remains of a truly ancient bridge - I'd put it back to 17th or even 16th Century. It's tumbled and gone though.

I got to the bottom of the gorge and managed to finish off the rest of the film in difficult circumstances. I've not included them here because they don't have the same soft, gloamy feel.

I was pretty much soaked to the skin and deeply sweating too (it was quite a climb down through slippery wet vegetation) but being next to a river at dusk is just about my favourite thing in the whole world and I got the feel of this small, yet quick river, deep into me.

Certainly near where we were staying there was plenty of camera fodder, but in being careful and using maps and intuition to explore before setting out, I got lucky and chanced upon a feeling and an unexpected place I shall never forget.

God bless Jane, and thank you.

The above print, was another difficult one and I had to print on Grade 4.5, as, even though I'd compensated for reciprocity in my exposure, the light was outrunning that factor if you get my drift.

Again FP 4 in Dilution B and printed on Ilford MGRC.

And tha-tha-that's it folks - be good and watch out for those tripod ruts.

H xx

Broken Crackers

Morning folks - this is just a quick update on That Cream Cracker Feeling.

Well, the Mamiya C220 went back for an overhaul. Seemingly it was the lens unit that was completely out (as in, taken apart and fecked beyond belief by some wazzock) so I waited. 

And waited . . .

And waited!

A new lens unit was sourced, body was overhauled, screen adjusted properly (I had to  explain that one to them!) and 3+ months later, I got the camera back.

It looked lovely and squeaky clean, however . . . .

The Single/Multi button still moved with the breath of a gentle breeze, meaning it would need to be taped over for day-to-day use. 

The 'new' Sekor-S lens looked wonderful, but the shutter speeds were well out and worse still, the aperture lever was louder and less smooth than the Salt Mill in our kitchen. It made an intense grinding sound that felt as bad as it sounded - I dunno - it was like the ball-bearing had gone or else there were large chunks of sand in there. 

Man was I peeved, so. getting back on the phone, I let rip in a vaguely Sheephousian fashion, which is actually, fairly pleasant.

In all fairness to the vendor, there were no arguments, the whole lot was sent back and, to be honest, I have no desire to explore Mamiya stuff ever again, which I guess is a good thing in some ways.

It's a great shame though, because the C220 was fairly easy to use; however, having spent years with little wonders like a Rollei's considerably lighter weight and its lovely, moving parallax indicator, I can see in hindsight somewhere down the line, me and the C220 wouldn't have been pals. 

It's better off in someone else's hands.

I am quite sad about it on one hand - all I wanted was a small carry about MF camera, and, ostensibly, the 220 fitted the bill, but yeah, excuse me whilst I type, justify and think, the parallax thing would have  been really annoying. 

Bruce at the The OD says he rarely missed shots with Mamiyas due to parallax, however from my own point of view, I still do it with the SW, so I cant see it stopping anytime soon!

So, the hunt went on. I made enquiries about getting the T overhauled, and it seemed to approximate to £180, and no guarantee over the longevity of the rubber speed/aperture bands [If you're a camera restorer, I can really recommend for ALL rubber bits (older, pure rubber that is) a product by the French Welly manufacturer Aigle; it is called Swipol. All their boots are the highest quality rubber and Swipol suits pure rubber - this being said Bruce says he uses silicone spray on his car hoses (I had no idea such a thing was available). But anyway, Swipol. I've used it on Vulcanite (lightly) and it has been very good indeed.]

And then I decorated some more, and you know what - the feeling of G.A.S. went away and I came to think that really, maybe I had enough cameras - 13 serious ones at last count! - and I really should be making do with what I have. Phew.

Make Do
Hasselblad 500C/M, 40mm CF/FLE Distagon, Ilford HP5+

Been a loooong time coming.

This being said I can still see myself with a Rolleicord - I haven't quite given up on that!

And that is the end of that little tale. The old adage still rings true - Caveat Emptor.

It is especially appropriate in this day and age where a lot of people have no idea what they are selling, or indeed, even whether it is fit for sale.

Over and out.

H xx