curb and glare

This is an old film shot I just scanned. As I start developing film, I'm comparing density with my old negs. I'm still off a bit with the new rolls. The funniest thing - after going back to film, is this powerful desire to click a button on the back of the camera and see the image. Where is that button? On the other hand, I don't find myself trying to change film speeds... or white balance...

Podcast

My neighbor keeps insisting that Podcasting is the "wave of the future" and that I should start a Podcast. I can just imagine it:

Podcast: Today we're going to discuss film development. There are two important factors in film development: temperature, agitation, and timing -

Three things that are important --

Okay - that's Monty Python adapted to Film Development.

What I could do is Podcast the blog. Find something that translates text into a voice and put it up for you to download and enjoy while you're stuck in traffic.

Are there machines yet that can pronounce (without sounding computerish) text? What do they do when they run into words that aren't in their database? Change them to what they suggest?

"Dear Listeners,
Today we're going to talk about Poe Casings. Poe Casings began a few years ago with the popularity of the eye pod.. "

Or does it stop and ask what word you meant? How does it pronounce "tomato?"

35mm film to 4800 output

"Would you consider sharing your film-to-digital workflow with us? I am keen to understand your process of scanning from b&w negs."

Very straightfoward.

Film: HP5. Developed in HC110B according to manufacturers instructions. Usually shot at ASA 400. I may want to try it in TMAX developer. I generally do two rolls at a time in a plastic patterson tank.

HC110, if you pour it into a couple of dark small air-tight bottles lasts forever (not diluted). If you are not using it as a "stock" solution, you are dealing with very small amounts: two rolls takes about 20 ml of the concentrate. I like it this way. I'm always using fresh concentrate.

I have a nice "Gravity Works" film washer. The whole thing is very low tech. I sit in the bathroom, in the dark - the various pieces are setup next to me on the edge of the bathtub. A couple of minutes loading film and then lights back on.

This is the only difficult part because the cat wants to come in and check things out so sometimes I need to spritz some water on Buddy to keep him out of my hair.

Cut into strips. I can make a very quick contact sheet for the screen, i.e. at 96 dpi with my Epson 1600 flatbed and go through them on the PC in Photoshop marking the ones that look interesting.

Scanned with the Dimage 5400 at 16-bit, 2x passes, auto-focus on, resolution for output is 240 dpi.

If the negative has been developed / exposed properly, there isn't much post-processing in PS at all. Maybe a levels adjustment or maybe a touch of soft-blending. Any retouching is done on the full-sized image.

Sized down to print size. (As Markus suggests, it's best to do this in steps).

If the negative is thin or there's some effect I'm looking for - then I may sit and work it over in Photoshop. My guess is that is about 10% of the time with a difficult negative. These are usually the same negatives that I had trouble printing in the darkroom. When I say trouble, I just mean there was a substantial amount of dodging and burning. This is of course much easier in Photoshop and once you have the file saved away - you don't need to do it for each print.

The finished "production" files are saved in one or two places.

It really isn't very complicated so long as you are starting with a "good" negative.

Digital Rebel sold

I do think the 20D will go next. I know this seems drastic - and it might be useful for certain projects - but how often do they come along? Once a year? No, I think it's going to go. Lenses all stay. I still want to be able to shoot with the Canon SLR.

Other than that - continues to be busy for me (good!). Haven't been able to work on the book layout during the last two days. Still matting and packaging.

Kids on Corner (film)

First two rolls of HP5 developed last night - and I may have messed up a little because I didn't have the right graduate for measuring the small amount of HC110.

That being said - I have no doubt (as of this writing) that negative b&w film gives me something I haven't been getting (at least not very often) with digital capture.

This is a small example where the street was in bright sunlight, and these guys were in the shade. (As I say, most probably the film was under-developed a bit). I also did a touch of sharpening for the web image. But with digital - the left corner which is in direct sunlight would have been completely blown out. And if you had underexposed, you would have lost the kids in the shade.

So that's part of it. What else is it about b&w film? I am tempted to say something like - digital capture is lacking soul - or something poetic like that. But that may just be age-related and what we were brought up on. After all - I was around when the first b&w t.v.s were becoming popular. How does that effect my taste?

The current generation will hopefully find great expressive digital every bit as "soulful" as those from our generation find negative film. Maybe.

And maybe the so called mythical average person wouldn't know the difference. That doesn't matter to me at all. You don't shoot for that mythical audience out there - you shoot for yourself. (Careful not to hit your foot when you do that).

The camera does matter - but not as much as you think.

This was with the 7N.

I shot a roll with the stealthy Hexar Classic and honestly - was just as noticed taking pictures on the street as with the 7N.

Big difference between the two of them: the viewfinder on the Hexar is beautiful. The one on the 7N is just okay.

Another thing - this was shot with the 28mm lens. It looks like a 28mm lens. I don't have the cropping effect that I'd have on the 20D.

Oh - and the camera cost $350.

Digital and Film

I'm writing this after doing about 20 prints (today and yesterday). And I have to tell you - I have to confess - that as much as I hate to say it - the majority of the film shots have a better presence - oh - let's just say it out loud - look better than the prints from digital capture.

I'm not able to explain it - in any scientific way. I could say things like: the dynamic range is greater with film, but that can be countered with sandwiching techniques with RAW images.

You could say it's the smoothness of digital - but I've pushed some of the captures through GrainSurgery with sampled grain - and it just ain't the same.

There is absolutely no doubt - digital is much more convenient, and I won't count the ways. You know that.

But honestly, I can see myself beginning to work in both worlds again. I wouldn't give up digital for what I'll call "assignments" which come along once in a while. I would probably use it for "events" where I'm going to be shooting a lot.

But I may just go back to film for my usual walking around no direction known work. Most probably the Canon Elan 7N.

Don't start some big flame over this - because it is just my personal (what else could it be) opinion (after a year plus of digital capture). Plus - I'm only talking about for b&w. If I do get the urge for color - once in a blue moon - that would still be digital.

Barrett - do you have any of my HP5 left?

Publishing 2

Yeah. I would not expect to see any new images in here for a while. I'm deep into the publishing thing now - trying to get the bricks together for the building. The last piece of this puzzle right now is trying to get the output to look right in the PDF and fooling around with what exactly the Acrobat Distiller is doing to my images - i.e. it seems to be pixilating them right now.... some setting somewhere...keeping the size of the PDF down... and like that...

The layout, in terms of creating "master pages" is pretty much complete for the picture part of the book. The size is set: it is going to be a square 7.5 x 7.5

I like the way that both vertical and horizontal shots fit in this format.

The gutters have been cleaned. The bleeds have been staunched.

And on top of that - orders are continuing to drop by for a visit. Summer is a good time to do all this since I rarely get anything shooting in this heat /light / humidity anyway.

I notice in the Gibson interview that he sold 22,000 books the first year. I hope to exceed that.

Publishing a Book

What a headache. Literally. I plunged into InDesign. Great program, but of course I had to keep looking up lots of stuff. But I've got the basics down.

As I may have mentioned, I'm starting off with the simplest layout you can imagine - and I'm going to call the book and organize it into 7 "chapters." Each chapter will have a roman numeral to separate it from the others. What the 7 chapters mean - what these groupings mean - I'm not sure yet. It is like tossing down Tarot cards at this point.

The name: VII Photography Groupings

That is as obscure as you can get without leaving the title blank. I wonder whether there has ever been a book called, "untitled." Sort of like the "white album."

I've been reading as much of the Lulu.com stuff as I can. Some of the usual "my book looks horrible" in the discussions; and others very happy with the results. Talk about "what color space" is Lulu using with their printers etc. That seems a mystery.

I've already created a couple of test PDFs with sample pages - and of course they look great with the inkjet - but what they're going to look like from Lulu - time will tell. I decided that it doesn't make sense to order someone else's b&w book from Lulu because whether it looks good or bad, I won't know who to blame. I'm just going to have to take the plunge myself. And there is a proof mechanism (I'm pretty sure) where they send you a copy before you really print up a batch.

And even if I'm not happy with the result - I will have a hardcopy at the end of all this - man - I'm pessimistic. I do have a way of anticipating all the things that might go wrong. I suspect that is leftover from my computer days... No - can't blame it on computers - it began when I was about eight years old... Lot's of responsibility as a kid - that's what did it.

Lulu (On Demand Printing)

Okay. I have my work cut out for me. I began to design The 11th MAN (photography by me, story by A.G.) with InDesign yesterday. At the same time - started to look at print on demand sites. You don't (as far as I can tell) give up any rights to your work, and frankly - the process looks straightfoward. I can sell them from my site, from their site, and depending on which plan you have - there is a chance to get them into some distribution channels.

Lulu looks like it may do the trick - at least to get me started. Sizes, prices, workflow - all look clear and there really is no money up front - just my labor (what else is new).

I will do the book (yes all black and white) with four color process (which is much more expensive than grayscale) but the paper is better, as well as image reproduction of black and white.

I'm seriously thinking of doing a simpler book than the 11th MAN first with them - to get a feel for the quality and the whole process. Maybe: 50 IMAGES - VOLUME 1. I still have the Bronx Book on the backburners (3 years plus) but that I also seeing as having a lot of text.

Anyway - the more pages, the more expensive, and for me, something without a lot of text editing will be a simpler layout. I'll just model it after some photography book that I like - say Apres Paris by HCB and see how it goes.

That will get me up-to-speed with InDesign and help me determine whether Lulu is the way to go for the 11th Man which I can see will be a much more complex / creative endeavor.

If anyone out there has used Lulu for a b&w photography book - well - let me know how it came out.

Times Square, Tourists

Dancing Statues, Central Park

Union Square 727