The scotopic vision idea is interesting but, as we generally view b&w photographs in relatively high light levels, I wonder. Something that has always interested me is the scale effect. When I look around me I never observe colour until I think colour, if you get what I mean!
In viewing colour landscape photographs however, I'm immediately forced to see saturated colour especially where large colour areas are concentrated in a small print. Maybe the concentrated colour, tone, texture etc. are just too much to relax with and enjoy.
that's what I call real Math! I need to learn from you man. I bought 2 Graflex holders and they came without the slides! Then I bought a 65mm sekor lens and had to get serviced CLA for $130!! Not everything is bad, I got good deals as well, lenses for $9? Yesterday I click again "Watch this item" and a message came up! "You pass the limit of items you can watch" please delete some items.
Anyway, I think you have your G.A.S under control. You scored on the P/N 55 for $40.00.
Interesting, isn't it, how much tone manipulation is now routinely added to digital colour work.
Honestly I didn't get the concept of "literal colour" until I tried some digital stuff myself and then it dawned on me: hold on! The reason why I like colour film is not because it shows me the world precisely as it is. Rather, colour film shows me the world as I want to see it (just like somebody once said).
What if colour photography were merely a literal capture of what I see... would I still care to do it? Probably not, honestly. So I personally do not see colour as inherently more literal than b&w, though literal colour certainly does exist and has its own distinct artistic force... e.g. Eggleston.
I think that with the rise of digital imaging where color is the de-facto norm, and that creating black-and-white imagery from it requires a removal of color which produces a distinct look from imagery made with black-and-white film, color imagery will become more mundane and less "artistic" in some ways. When color imaging became affordable to the masses, and adopted as the primary means of image-making for the general public (really starting in the 1950s), it separated itself from "artistic" photography because of the proletarian nature of color image-making.
There are certainly enough people doing color photography as an art form that you can't assert it is NOT accepted as an art medium (Cindy Sherman, Alec Soth, William Eggleston, to name a few), but it is definitely a minority medium. Interesting exploration.
Not yet. My room is getting walls though! I am still haveing fun with the camera and feel like I'm learning lots. Only a couple of pictures turned out on the first 2 rolls as far as I can tell. I didn't realize that you had to wait to use the chems after you mixed them! Oh well, lesson learned! I figured I'd give my husband a little more time before I take over the laundry room with my mess. Mabey a couple more weeks? I am getting impatient though!
Its now the last day of Feb. How did it go? I know you developed your film. Did you get anything in print?
About stop, just use water, changed frequently.
Here's a shot from the excursion:
Sounds like you had a great day of photography. Sure, the images may not be breath-taking, or blow even your own socks off, but you got out there, had fun with your camera and will remember the day for a long time coming, I'd bet.
Thanks for posting this, I enjoyed reading it, even as I sit in sunny San Diego after shooting beach/surfing pictures yesterday in shorts and a t-shirt. I grew up in the northern Midwest and sometimes miss the vast changes in climate and scenery that came with the seasons. North Shore of Lake Superior is a sight to behold, and Duluth, MN is beautiful in it's own way in mid-winter.
Depending on what part of Montana you are in , you may have better luck ordering the film you want from either B&H or Adorama. B&H is only place I get film anymore. Once in awhile I'll find some bargain film on ebay.