14
   

When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school...

 
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 09:56 am
@shewolfnm,
Back in the olden days everyone took a bazillion photos. I shoot a roll of film in less than a minute. I bought it in hundred foot rolls and cranked it into cassettes. I could easily go through a hundred foot roll in a week.

The reason you did that is because you didn't know if you'd got the right image because you didn't get immediate feedback. The camera didn't set your exposure or your focus so you had to bracket and crop and do everything when you took the shot. In school they often required us to print the full frame -- no editing at all. The purpose was to train you in how to see.

Now you can see right away whether you got it right and you can easily crop out, remove, and change anything you want.

It's made me lazy in that I don't look as hard. I don't try to manipulate the image in my head as much. Lazy thinking on my part.

I miss the surprises and happy accidents I had when I shot a lot of film.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 09:56 am
My first real job, at sixteen, was taking mini xrays of patients either entering or leaving our hospital. Part of that was developing the film in the xray department dark room.

Knowing now about my rp (my dark adaptation time, last tested, was 45 minutes), I imagine it was less dark for others than for me, a real (reel) shock in entering through the cloaks and orienting myself. The problem was that the unreeled film from the canister had to be wrapped around and clamped to regular 14 x 17 steel (I think) contraptions with which to dip the film in the various baths. Then find the timer and set it. It was a kind of baptism/challenge.

Years later there was a photo lab a block from my apartment and you could rent the dark room for not much money for an hour or so. The photo papers (stock?) was pricey though, to me, for 8 x 10's. They taught you how to process and print the film - I loved it... watching the photo paper turn into pictures. I did that on several occasions. I never had my own dark room.

Cameras - I had a Brownie, an Instamatic, my father's Argus that I really learned with (exterior flash and light meter) which was later stolen, sob, with film still in it; two Nikkormats, one Nikon 70 (it's in a rest phase now), and presently my now obsolete but fine for me Canon Power Shot 3 digital camera.
I've gotten stupid about the new fangled maneuvers with it.

I loved kodachrome, using it for urban photos, and used fugi for a lot of my (1000's) plant photos. I also loved black and white. Last time I used that was in italy. I should probably scan one of those, but they're framed and up in the living room. Those were developed and printed by my business partner's husband, a hobbiest/excellent photographer. Not that my shots are anything to write home about, but the mere sight of even an average b & w is a delight to me.
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:00 am
@ossobuco,
Quote:
watching the photo paper turn into pictures


God I loved that. I mean I LOVED that. The closest to magic that I've ever come.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:02 am
@boomerang,
Yes, calling it a high isn't good enough!
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:12 am
@boomerang,
i had a deal with the local photo-lab. i did all their custom printing in exchange for free time in their darkroom where I processed usually 8-10 fuji chrome and kodax X pan film as well as all my printing ( I paid for my own printing paper) Still have my prized Canon F-1. gave away my 2 Pentax 5 x7 bodies with a case on lenses and filters years ago.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:12 am
@ossobuco,
too true

I'll be back later to rhapsodize about cameras, photography, the high school darkroom.

I'll just mention my first camera - a second-hand Agfa Silette that I bought in Germany in either 1972 or 1974 with saved allowance money. I loved that camera. A friend dropped it in Loughborough Lake during a canoeing trip - bought me another, newer, camera. It wasn't the same.

http://www.thecamerasite.net/07_Viewfinder_Cameras/Images/Agfa-Silette.jpg

We'll have to get hamburgboy to come tell about his wonderful, tiny, 35mm. It was just lovely. And all the attachments in their little leather cases.

<sigh>
Region Philbis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:20 am
@ehBeth,

mine

http://www.collection-appareils.fr/yashica/images/yashica_fx2.jpg

had a tripod, zoom lens, filters, the works.
got pretty good at making adjustments for shutter speed/F-stop.
rarely had to use the flash...
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:23 am
@dyslexia,
What a sweet deal!

One of my personal heros is an old guy, then, probably dead now, named Sam who worked at Engler's Photography shop in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He knew I was poor so he always held back the cool used equipment for me to look at first. He'd let me lay-away things. I think once in a while he'd intentionally nick or ding something he knew I was longing for but couldn't afford straight off the shelf.

I've kept my Canon F-1 too! What a great camera. Mine still works but the shutter's a bit crumudgeonly.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:24 am
@ehBeth,
<sigh>

Such a very Cartier Bresson sort of camera.

Love it!
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:28 am
@Region Philbis,
Neat!

Look at that shutter release button! Beautiful!

What's so cool about these cameras is that they have one dial and it did two things and that's all you needed.

I'm assuming the small button on the side of the lens was a depth of field preview but I'm stumped by the bigger button on the bottom of the lens. Do you recall what that was for?
Region Philbis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:34 am
@boomerang,

the small button is lens release, the bigger one is depth preview.
holding it, i'd forgotten how heavy it is...
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:45 am
@Region Philbis,
Yeah, but those heavy old cameras didn't break very easily.
Tripods - I'm now sorry I gave mine away to a friend's son. But I shouldn't be, my brother in law had given his away to me. There seems to be an underlying photography help culture..
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:53 am
@ossobuco,
Yep. My dad was a serious photographer for a while with a darkroom and everything and I would accompany him occasionally (not often). I also was into photography at some sort of artsy summer camp that gave out REAL cameras and gave us access to a darkroom, that was amazing. And some experience in high school too. That's just the best thing.

I do still have a film camera, I don't develop it myself but I still enjoy the happy accidents, when I take 24 photos and some are amazing and some are just OK and they never seem to be quite the ones I expected. I definitely take different pictures with digital vs. film. (I have both, now.)

My film camera is a bit messed up I think, not sure what's wrong with it but there is a crispness missing that no amount of fiddling with the settings can fix (and I got it new, so I was getting crisp photos somehow early on, it can't be just user error). (Maybe photolab error? They don't do much film anymore I don't think.)

I also got a handmedown large-format film camera from my dad, who mentioned that he never used it anymore. I haven't given that one a whirl yet, it requires special (expensive!) film and is kind of intimidating. I do want to try it though.
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 10:54 am
@boomerang,
I only worked in a darkroom for one photography class in high school. The school could only afford to teach black and white film development.

I kind of regret not ever taking advantage of my learned (and later forgotten) photography skills. Would like to restart this passion and that's my New Year's resolution for 2011! http://i52.tinypic.com/2n0vmsx.jpg
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 11:01 am
@sozobe,
That reminds me, when I was seventeen I was give a Rolleicord by a hollywood cameraman my father worked with, and shot quite a bit of film with it; in my twenties I gave it away (dang it) to a friend who was all hepped up with her photography classes.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 11:02 am
@tsarstepan,
Go for it!
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 05:37 pm
@boomerang,
I could be off-base but perhaps you don't mean fixer but actually mean stop bath (acetic acid) which is a close cousin to vinegar (or even lemon or lime juice). Fixer would be not a good thing for a human to ingest.

Since being a serious photog from 1971 while in the USAF, I developed my own b&w. When I finally went digital, I scrapped my heavy enlarger in 2003 as it had collected dust since about '94. The only time I went to use a wet darkroom after that point was for my medium format 2-1/4 inch negs. I loved the tonality that is renderred with the larger negs. Also my workstation (scanner) at home couldn't scan the larger sized negs. My printers (up until a few years ago) also couldn't print the tonal scale I wanted either.

Now since about 3 yrs ago, I own a printer that can print all the dynamic range and tones that a medium format negative converted to a files has in them.

FWIW, my cameras that use film negatives have been collecting dust except for that awesome Rolleiflex medium format TLR.
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 05:51 pm
@Ragman,
No. I meant fixer.

I just used water for stop bath because I was always broke.

I wouldn't think that fixer was acceptable as food and that's why I always sniff the lettuce.

What kind of printer are you using? (I was watching the movie "The September Issue" the other day and drooled over the printer they used.)

I have all my files printed at a lab.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 05:55 pm
@Ragman,
Rags, I somewhat understand you, but I think you need to have a good website.
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 31 Dec, 2010 05:59 pm
@boomerang,
But at the risk of belaboring this point ... acetic acid (more appropriately lemon juice or vinegar) is most likely what is used to keep lettuce and other fruits from browning - NOT fixer. Trust me on this. Fixer is toxic and is likely not something any salad bar or supermarket uses. Sodium thiophosphate is the chemical name of what fixer is called and the toxicity report (OSHA?) can be seen when you google it. It's something that can be used as a pesticide.

I stopped trusting photo labs to give me the results I demanded for my 'serious' photos. I used to have to find a custom lab printer that I could trust and then follow them if they migrated to another custom lab..sort of like a groupie. That got old quickly so I took back the control. Now I get the results I want and it keeps me off the streets unless it's to shoot more fun images.

Water is a reasonably decent stop bath when you don't have $$$. Glacial acetic acid is a bit quicker but stinks like very strong vinegar, which it basically is.

I use an Epson Stylus Photo R2400. It prints 13 in prints, uses archival inks, and gives good tonal range to my B&W prints in conjunction with Adobe Photoshop.
 

Related Topics

Beautiful Animals - Discussion by Roberta
Aloha! - Question by boomerang
Photo lovers -- take a look at this.... - Question by boomerang
Michael Belk's modern Jesus photographs - Question by boomerang
LIGHTHOUSES OF THE WORLD. - Discussion by farmerman
Is taking his picture legal? - Question by aquestion
Amazing History Photos - Discussion by hopelessjoe
Poor travel pictures, well loved. - Discussion by ossobuco
Just a Photo - Discussion by Pitter
Knockout landscape photos - Discussion by ossobuco
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/11/2022 at 02:29:23