Comments on: Dec 17, 2009

By: alkos

alkos — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:41:41 +0000

I am developing paper to completion… on the other hand, I like this look :-P It presents much better on the print itself :-)

By: Ivan

Ivan — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:22:39 +0000

try using 2 and thoroughly developing the paper(!).
This makes the shadows deep, but does not mess with contrast, nor the midtones.

I dont think you’re underdeveloping – shadows seem to have enough detail.

By: alkos

alkos — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:59:53 +0000

I use 3,5 to 5, depending on the scene.. maybe I’m underdeveloping…

By: Ivan

Ivan — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 04:17:19 +0000

What grad do you use?
I as well have next to 0 experience in the dark room, but a good deal there of in developing film. When I push “old” emulsions like APX, TriX, HP5 to 1600, they usually tend to look just like a “native” 1600 film (neopan 1600 for ex.), and the prints tend to be far less contrasty than yours.

But I use grad 2.

By: alkos

alkos — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:36:10 +0000

juz poprawione :-)

By: beanow

beanow — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:11:57 +0000

fajne, magiczne takie…:)

By: bawgaj

bawgaj — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:10:26 +0000

coś mi sie czcionka na biało wyświetla i mało widzę ?
fajna fota

By: noncyh

noncyh — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:10:28 +0000

he ty chyba 90% dnia spędzasz na ulicy:) – gdzie ty to znajdujesz??:) – dobrze jest:)

By: alkos

alkos — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:31:19 +0000

believe or not, they are 400@1600… its just my lack of darkroom skills probably – it was waaay easier to scan pushed ones :-P On the other hand, they are merely proofs… I’d spend considerably more time on a final print, dodging&burning.

By: Ivan

Ivan — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 04:54:47 +0000

all your recent B&Ws look like delta 1. Meaning you’re pushing the heck out of your films. asa 3200 @ 12800? ;-)

By: rafalr

rafalr — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:49:30 +0000

nie wiem czemu, lecz tutaj najbardziej pasuje mi to ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2fDUb57_xk