Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,322   Posts: 1,536,878   Online: 1108
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36
  1. #11
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    This is super easy with b&w film. Just use POTA developer. 20 stops of range. No muss no fuss.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    103
    So, as a starting developer, b&w is a good start? Mind you, right now I have no darkroom. I have a room that can be completely dark and it's got a decent size table. Is there some kind of 35mm developing starter kit?

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,951
    OK you have 2 frames at different exposures how do you combine them to make an HDR image without resorting to digital techniques like scanning? If you use scanning and combining in photoshop I have found that I can do that with 1 single frame on color negative film. Just need to make 2 or more scan of the same negative at different exposure.

  4. #14
    dasBlute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    164
    Images
    21
    Yeah, get a patterson tank, some Kodak D76, some Ilford stop-bath, some Photograper's Formulary TF-5, some Kodak photo-flo.
    Take a local course at a community college, get a steve anchell book, or ansel, or ralph lambrecht, read everything you can, it's not too tough.

    That said, trying to replicate digital work with film is a fool's errand -in my opinion- and misses the essential qualities of film that people around here love so much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven L View Post
    So, as a starting developer, b&w is a good start? Mind you, right now I have no darkroom. I have a room that can be completely dark and it's got a decent size table. Is there some kind of 35mm developing starter kit?

  5. #15
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Yes b&w is a very good place to start. It's very easy and you certainly don't need a darkroom. You might visit Freestyle Photo's website and look for a b&w starter kit- you probably find film and developer, stop, fix etc in one kit. If not then you can ask and they'll guide you through.


    POTA is a "special" developer but it's not at all complicated to use. You can get it from Photographer's Formulary. If you want lots of dynamic range then look for the extended range version of POTA.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,638
    Modern films can record a long luminance range without even resorting to special procedures. The attached example is Delta 100 processed in plain old D76 1+1. It might be difficult to see in this crap scan, but there is detail even within the black windows and transom, as well as in the lightbulb. This scene had a 13 stop range.

    For some reason when I tested this post, I needed to click on the attachment, and then click on it again after it opened. Strange. When it opens it is pixelated and then click it again and it looks fine. Apologies for the crap scan.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Doorway.jpg  

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,381
    Film is high dynamic range, just as it is. You can't print it though, because the paper has a shorter range than film. If you want to experiment with the line drawing look, try whatever lith or microfilm emulsions are available. You might like solarisation, too.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    103
    Again, a lot of usefull information. About the DIY developing, I have to look into that and translate it into Dutch (and Dutch suppliers).

    At dasBlute, my intention was not to replicate a digital work. My thoughts were that HDR was originated in analogue photography. After all, all you digitally would have to do is put multiple images with different exposures. No elaborate digital filter or technique.

    Chan Tran has got a good question. How do you combine 2 negatives onto one print? Is it as easy as placing the two negatives on top of eachother?

    Would the outcome of an analogue version of the digital HDR technique give the same painted/unnatural look?

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,638
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    Film is high dynamic range, just as it is. You can't print it though, because the paper has a shorter range than film. If you want to experiment with the line drawing look, try whatever lith or microfilm emulsions are available. You might like solarisation, too.
    You can most definitely print it. It just takes burning and dodging.

  10. #20
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven L View Post
    Chan Tran has got a good question. How do you combine 2 negatives onto one print? Is it as easy as placing the two negatives on top of eachother?
    Yes, you can do that. Just have a look at Jerry Uelsmann's work, you'll see that all manner of surreal things are possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven L View Post
    Would the outcome of an analogue version of the digital HDR technique give the same painted/unnatural look?
    Well, the look from film is far more natural in general, two reasons being the inherent nonlinearity of the tone curve and the compensation that you can get in the developing process. On top of that is the nonlinearity of the paper's tone curve and all the chemical magic that permits us to tune the tones to suit the image. And all of this is done without pushing pixels or jumping from one bit or colour space into another, i.e. the methods are more global and less local.

    All that said, if you like the digi-HDR look, you can certainly produce similarly hideous results if you want to I have seen plenty of horrid film results, to be honest! We all start somewhere.

    Bottom line is that almost everything you can do with photoshop you can also do in a purely analogue way. I'm not going to say that it's as fast, easy, or convenient... some things are and some things aren't so easy for beginners. But the final results can be very impressive. remember that most of what you have in photoshop was inspired by what was already possible with film. E.g. although few people realize it, the terms "dodge and burn" and "unsharp mask" come from an old film techniques....
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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