Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,197   Posts: 1,531,434   Online: 825
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: 'Ordinary' film

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    889
    I'd suggest using ortho sheet film, which should be easily available by order if it isn't in stock, as that is still made by Ilford, Agfa (branded Maco or Rollei) and Foma (probably, depends on the importer).

    Loading and development could be done as you are working now, using the changing tent and the Paterson processor. Last time I was in the UK was a few months ago, but I recall it getting dark every evening - this will be a great help in blocking light from some small room or other, if you wish to set up a temporary darkroom. There is no need for running water or a drain in a darkroom as these can be in an adjacent, normally lit, room without much trouble (I have produced up to 16x20" prints in my darkroom with this arrangement).

    Another alternative would be to use a paper negative, choosing a fixed-grade paper which is pretty much orthochromatic. Pre-flashing can assist you in contrast control if necessary. You might also look at the direct-positive paper from Ilford. The paper negs could be developed in your Paterson processor after minimal experimentation, if you have no alternative.

    Final prints could be by contact-printing frame which you are probably already using for your salt-prints. Slow speed contact-paper is still available from (for example) Foma, so you could use the temporary darkroom idea and expose on to this material, or even ordinary paper, using a lightbulb as a light source.

    It sounds an interesting and fun project. Good luck

  2. #12
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,627
    Images
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    Don't forget that with your examples the opacity of the filter (though limited) and the high in-sensitivity of the emulsion add up.

    (maybe weird wording; but I guess very understandable for a geek...)



    By the way, you refered to colour conversion filters. Colour separation filters are much steeper.
    Fair enough. I'm not familiar with color separation filters, but it makes sense that they would be steeper given their function. I just used an 80A as an example since it is generally available in a variety of sizes.

    I just looked at the Ilford site and the response dies around 570nm for Ortho and 650 for Delta 100. I think the folks who are saying to try Ortho Plus are on the right track if the OP can use 4x5. That combined with a blue filter (separation if you can find it, 80A otherwise) might be the best in the end.
    Your first 10,000 pictures are the worst - HCB

    www.markjamesfisher.com

  3. #13
    kintatsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    350
    Images
    2
    You could use a number 47 or 47B Wratten filter. Both transmit blue light, cutting off everything above 500nm, the 47B is sharper at 500. Both will simulate the original blue only film look with panchromatic films that you desire. B&H carries both filters in various sizes.

    I got this information from the old "Transmission of Wratten Filters" book.

  4. #14
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,486
    A book anyone interested in these matters should have at hand. Actually it doesn't matter what edition.

  5. #15
    kintatsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    350
    Images
    2
    I found it online, and printed out the pages that have the info I need for my work as a reminder for filter factors and exposures. Another handy one is Kodak's Reference Handbook. I found the 1 from 1946, it includes images showing the range of several filters. I found both in a photography forum, unfortunately, I can't remember which one.

    By using the first one, I can use it to calculate out proper exposure with my filters. As you said, no one using filters should be without one! (At least, when starting out, like me!)

  6. #16
    paul_c5x4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ye Olde England
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,445
    Images
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Fisher View Post
    It means that a blue camera filter will only get you part way there, but it may be far enough for the look you want. To really mimic the spectral characteristics you'd need a bandpass filter like those at Edmund optics.....the off the shelf filters tend to be small and very pricey.
    A blue dichroic has a pretty sharp cutoff around 470nm. For something a little shorter, perhap the Hoya B370 would be better - The dichroic filters would be around £18 for a 25mm Ø unmounted, a B370, expect to pay upwards of £35 for a one off.

    I've used UQG in the past, and they can cut custom sizes out of a range of specialist glass, but expect to pay accordingly.

  7. #17
    kintatsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bavaria, Germany
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    350
    Images
    2
    I just looked in Ansel Adams' The Negative and several other websites, and found that the spectral response of blue only film matches almost perfectly to the 47B filter. The film died out at 500nm, which is where the 47B cuts all light. The response of the filter suggests that at 430nm a 1 stop adjustment in exposure is required, getting higher as the color shift away from its "center," allowing only 0.17% of light at 500nm. The 47 is sharper cutting at the 340-430nm end, but higher over the rest of the blue end.

    I hope this will help. B and H has the filters reasonably priced, and I'm sure you can find it elsewhere cheaper!

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sussex coast, UK
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    48
    Images
    18
    What a great and varied response, thanks to everyone with their input and suggestions. APUG rules.

  9. #19
    Jim Noel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,828
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    To me in this context ordinary film would mean unsensitized film, thus blue-only sensitive.
    To achieve that a blue color-seperation filter would be best.

    As you are busy with large format a X-ray film of the unsensitized kind could be an alternative if at hand.
    If the film is unsensitized it will not record light at all.
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Films NOT Dead - Just getting fixed![/FONT]

  10. #20
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,486
    Yes, my wording was nonchalant: Of course I meant film with an emulsion not spectrallly sensitized

    It will record in the blue and a bit in the UV (hampered by the gelatin) region due to the inherit sensitivity of the AgX.
    This sensitivity is enhanced by adding so called chemical and spectral sensitizers.
    Last edited by AgX; 11-24-2012 at 11:28 AM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin