Sunday, February 27, 2022

Уклоняйся от зла / Depart from Evil

«Уклоняйся от зла и делай добро;

ищи мира и стремись к нему».

Псалом 34, стих 14

"Depart from evil and do good;

seek peace, and pursue it."

Psalm 34, verse 14

Saturday, February 26, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - XIV

While I have no doubt about the superiority of film, I began to wonder whether medium-format was worth the extra trouble, as compared to 35mm. In many cases, the results look much the same. This is partly because a fast, normal lens (say, 50mm, f1.4) typically has six to eight elements, while the taking lens on a TLR need have no more than four. A prime lens for a 35mm SLR may actually be sharper than the corresponding medium-format lens because, with the smaller negative, it needs to be.

When you consider the above facts, and you take into account that the medium-format camera is heavier and bulkier, it is easy to wonder whether medium format is worth the trouble.

When you further consider that the medium-format camera gives you only twelve exposures (I am finding only 120 film these days; I haven't seen any 220, and don't have the special back that my camera would need for it), while 35mm gives you 36 exposures, then you really begin to have your doubts.

But my mind kept going back to those 2008 camera tests, made when I first got the Mamiya C33. I knew that they were the highest-quality images I had ever produced without using a 4x5 or 5x7 camera. Now, though, I find that the medium-format images I make are roughly comparable to the 35mm ones. I needed to get to the bottom of this.

Here is one of the 2008 images:

It's just a test shot, made in our garden, but it has the characteristic smoothness, luminosity, and rich tones that I associate with medium format. Unfortunately, the file size is quite large: 7.25 MB.

I decided to compare shots of similar subjects, made on 35mm and on medium format. Here's the medium format:

It's sharp and detailed, but I wouldn't call it anything special. The file size is 9.04 MB.

Now, here is the same subject, shot (at a different time of day, and from a greater distance) on 35mm:

This is also sharp and detailed. Actually, the two shots are of comparable quality. If I had to make my decision based on these two shots, I'd have to say that there is no good reason to lug around a medium-format camera that weighs 4-1/2 pounds (not counting the weight of the tripod) and gives you only twelve exposures.

But what about those medium-format shots from 2008? Here is another one:

Here, again, we have the superior image quality that we associate with medium format. Why do we not see it in my shots of backyard foliage?

When I looked at small versions of all four images at the same time, I realized what the answer was. The first shot and the last shot above were made on 100 ISO Ilford FP4 Plus; the two middle shots (the backyard foliage) were made on 400 ISO Ilford HP5+.

I don't think Ilford FP4 Plus is made any longer. I will look for it. Due to the decrease in demand for photographic film, some manufacturers are offering only one film in black-and-white, and that is usually an ISO 400 film. In some ways, this is a good decision. For example, it allows me to do existing-light photography in 35mm with an f1.4 normal lens. This isn't true in medium format, where my normal lens is f2.8, but it allows me to use modern light sources, such as LED and quartz-halogen.

Even if I can't get FP4, there are things that I can do. I can control grain, to some extent, by using a different developer dilution or a different developer (I am using D-76 stock solution). But I don't think I can control the film's latitude or depth of tonality. Any ideas on this will be welcome.

[NOTE: Ilford FP4 Plus is apparently still being made. I found it on Amazon, and have ordered some in both 120 and 35mm.]

Shoot film, if you can!

(to be continued)

Thursday, February 24, 2022

It Has Come to My Attention

It has come to my attention that for two or three weeks someone, in some country, was trying to use this blog to further their laughable online scam. To the perp: Don't f*ck with my blog. I may or may not be able to sue your sorry ass, but I can sure as hell embarrass you and deflate your pathetic scheme. The same goes for others. I'll be watching--diligently.

Wednesday, February 23, 2022

I Am a Son of Earth, Air, Fire, Water, and Spirit

I Am a Son of the Spirit

I Am a Son of the Earth

The Waning Light

The waning light

portends the night

and a diet

of memories.

Tuesday, February 22, 2022

The Laws of Entropy

The laws of entropy

never fail.

A closed system, with

a fixed amount of

energy

will tend toward

decay

and chaos.

Soon to fall from

the tree,

we shall feed

other phyla.

My Return to Film Photography - XII

OK, the first order of business today is something I promised about a week ago: I said that I would compare, as fairly as I could, a couple of digital images with their re-creations on film. Here is the first:

The upper image is the digital one, while the lower one was shot on film. I would have to go with the one shot on film. Here is the second pose:

Again, the upper image is the digital one, while the lower one was shot on film. Again, I prefer the one shot on film. It is also true that the digital images lack resolution. I shot them at 4 MP, which was clearly not enough to go up against film.

In my previous instalment in this series, I posted some selfies shot in medium format, using a 28" cable release. This limited the distance from the subject (me) to the film plane to about 38". I decided to try the same thing in 35mm, with the AE-1. Here are a few images:

Next time, we'll put the Canon EOS Rebel 2000 through its paces, with some general-purpose film photography. In the meantime, shoot film, if you can!

(to be continued)

143 Thousand Visits, and Many Selfies

A couple of days ago we passed the 143k milestone, but I was too busy to write about it until now. My busyness has mostly been due to my return to film photography, which has so far been covered in eleven parts in the series "My Return to Film Photography." I'll be adding another instalment of that series today.

On the poetry front, poems come when inspiration comes, and the Muse sleeps with whomever she chooses.

With regard to translations, I've phased out my translations into world languages, having decided to leave that to my readers. I will, though, be faithful to my Udugi roots.

My renewed interest in film photography is time-consuming, but I believe it will be an excellent source of inspiration.

Please don't forget that this blog is a two-way street: you can make comments, suggestions, and requests.

In conclusion, I would like to thank you all, once again, for your continued interest and enthusiasm. Wadó, ꮹꮩ.

Sunday, February 20, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - XI

I'm still shooting and developing film, but for this instalment 2-1/4 x 2-1/4" (6x6cm) medium-format shooting with my venerable Mamiya C33 is the focus. My promise to compare a couple of digital images to their 35mm film re-creations will have to wait until next time.

Since my 28" cable-release works so well with the C33 (much better than the 20 ft. air release, or my jury-rigged substitute for it), I decided to shoot some selfies using the cable-release. Doing this with a TLR with no internal metering or auto-exposure and (of course) no autofocus, presented some challenges. These would be direct, not mirror shots, and the distance would be limited by the cable-release and my arm. I measured the distance from my body to the film plane, and it turned out to be 38". I set this distance, as best I could, on the distance scale for the 80mm normal lens. With an 80mm lens, especially at this close distance, the depth-of-field would be quite shallow, and focusing would be critical.

I would be using the LED desk lamp for my main light, and had already measured its light with my two 35mm, auto-exposure cameras. With 400 ISO film, the Canon AE-1 gave me 1/30 sec. at f 2.8; the EOS gave me 1/30 sec. at f 4. I set the shutter of the C33 at 1/30 sec., and the aperture between f 2.8 and f 4. I also verified this setting with the Gossen Scout 2 handheld light meter (selenium photocell), which I had learned from previous experiments must be set for 150 ASA/ISO instead of 400, to compensate for the LED light source.

These were challenging conditions, thanks to the use of vintage equipment. As it turned out, though, all frames were well focused and properly exposed.

The film I would be using was Ilford HP5+, which is one of my favorites, just as it was many years ago.

In the course of this selfie shoot, which was pretty repetitive, I became overconfident and forgot that the cable-release holds the shutter button down until you unlock the release. This caused two of my twelve exposures to be wasted.

Development was very straightforward, and presented no problem. Ilford, of course, does not tell you what developing time to use with Kodak D-76, but their ID-11 is essentially the same developer. I developed the film for six minutes at 72°F, and got consistently excellent negatives.

Here are some results from the medium-format selfie shoot:

The framing of this shot was guesswork, based on the amount of the taking lens that was in my line of sight. After slight cropping, the file size of the scanned negative is 6.66 MB.

I often wish that I had a more youthful model. The angle of the single, LED light was unforgiving, but I like the honesty and accuracy of the shot. I also like its luminosity, which I don't think you would get in a digital shot. All scans were done at 2400 dpi. This is the full, uncropped negative, and the file size is 7.14 MB.

Apart from artistic considerations, one advantage of an extremely high-contrast rendition is that the file size of the scan will be much smaller than that of a normal, gray-scale version. This scan, which was also moderately cropped, has a file size of 2.47 MB.

Next time, we'll attempt some comparisons between film and digital, and between 35mm and medium-format. In the meantime, shoot film if you can!

(to be continued)

Wednesday, February 16, 2022

Photo: Torso at Seventy-five

Age is just a number, and mine is fully listed. Shot on May 6, 2018. I'd like to say that Torquato Torso has improved with age in the intervening years, but that is sadly not the case.

Tuesday, February 15, 2022

If You Were Going to Say

Text and image are by Donald C. Traxler aka Donald Jacobson Traxler, and are hereby given into the public domain.

He Lives in a Dream / ᎠᏨᏯᎢ ᎠᎴᏂᏙᎭᏎ ᎠᏍᎩᏘᏍᎦ ᎭᏫᎾ

My Return to Film Photography - X

I've continued to shoot and develop film, most recently in 35mm. I'm using the Canon AE-1, with the new (to me) 50mm f1.4 FD normal lens. This lens is extremely sharp, and the results are so gratifying that I really don't want to shoot with any other lens. Unfortunately, the Canon EOS uses a different lens mount, so I'll be stuck using the 28-80mm zoom lens with it.

Here are a few of my recent shots:

The tree was shot in deep shade, 1/250 sec. at f5.6. For all of these shots, the film is Tri-X, rated at ISO 400.

This shot, looking up into the trees, was done at 1/250 and f16. I think the lens begins to be affected by the diffraction (? don't remember if this is the right word) limit at f16.

I had some trouble with water-spotting with the TX film. I am using a Paterson squeegee that I haven't really gotten used to. For 35mm, I think I would do better using my two fingers. I wish I still had my Yankee squeegee, with the soft sponge pads.

My agèd face shows the sharpness of the f1.4 normal lens. The main light source was the 60W quartz-halogen clamp light, and the exposure was 1/30 sec. at f5.6.

For comparison, here are a couple of digital shots:

I don't think they hold up too well against the film shots, but in the next instalment of this series, I'll try to re-create them on film. Then we can do a more proper comparison. In the meantime, shoot film, if you can!

(to be continued)

Friday, February 11, 2022

This Body Is a Friend / ᎯᎠ ᎠᏰᎸ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎤᎾᎵ

My Return to Film Photography - IX

Since the last instalment of this series, I've shot a couple of rolls of Ilford HP5+ in the C33, developed them, and scanned selected negatives. I'm happy with the results, though I'm sure I will do better as I re-familiarize myself with the camera.

I am also re-familiarizing myself with the processing of 120 film. For example, the other night I was opening a roll of exposed film (in the changing bag, of course), and that simple step was made much more difficult because I had not folded under the tongue of the backing paper before licking and sticking the tape. Now I know why I always used to do this. I had a hell of a time, because I couldn't find the right place (or any place) to cut the tape. Under normal conditions (especially now that I have a larger changing bag), I can get the film loaded onto the reel and the reel securely in the tank in ten minutes. This simple omission when I sealed the exposed roll added five minutes and some stress to the process.

Having jury-rigged a long cable release, I shot a lot of nude (but modest) selfies, under controlled conditions. Here is a sample:

This is a tight crop, representing about half the area of the original 6x6cm negative. The main light was a 60-watt quartz halogen indoor flood (not very well directed). I believe the exposure was 1/30 sec. at f5.6.

The Mamiya C33 has no internal metering. My handheld Gossen Scout 2 light meter has a selenium photocell that overestimates modern light sources such as LED and quartz halogen. For this reason, I have to set the meter's ASA/ISO at only 150 when I am using ISO 400 film with these light sources. Outdoors, in sunlight, I would set the meter's ISO normally, but I have less need of a light meter outdoors.

Here is a photo of our dog, Betty:

This was a spur-of-the-moment grab-shot (not easy to do with a TLR on a tripod). I panned and hastily focused. I had to act fast, so I left the exposure settings as they were from the previous shot (1/250 at f5.6, for deep shade). This was open shade, so f8 would have been preferable. HP5 has plenty of latitude, so not a problem. Betty's hair needed brushing, and she had some leaves stuck in her coat, as usual.

Since a regular cable release works just fine with the Mamiya, I decided to do a mirror selfie with the C33 beside me. Again, this is a tight crop, representing a relatively small part of the negative:

For this type of shot, one has to double the distance from the mirror to the camera's film plane. This I did, making the effective distance about nine feet, which I set on the distance scale for the 80mm normal lens. I must have stepped back a bit, though, since the camera seems to be more sharply in focus than I. The exposure was 1/30 at f4, so the lens is quite sharp, even at f4.

Until quite recently, all of my film cameras had maximum apertures of f2.8. Now, though, I have an f1.4 normal lens for the Canon AE-1 (two stops faster). This will make it possible to do some interesting shooting, which I'll share with y'all next time. In the meantime, shoot it with film, if you can!

(to be continued)

Monday, February 7, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - VIII

The camera in the photo above is my venerable Mamiya C33, introduced by Mamiya in 1965, just five years after I graduated from high school. It is built like a tank, works great, and produces images of super quality. As I said before, it looks impressive as hell when sitting atop a nice, sturdy tripod.

The problem was that the C33 had no self-timer, and my wimpy air release just couldn't cut the mustard. I tried all sorts of things to make the shutter action more hair-trigger, but those remedies prevented secure cocking of the shutter. I thought about getting one of those vintage mechanical self-timers that you screw into the cable-release socket, but the world has changed in some quite inconvenient ways. On Ebay, those little devices are now collector's items and cost a bunch, plus about US$21 additional for shipping. One Ebay seller had a collection of forty-seven of them, which he was trying to unload for over a thousand dollars. I'm not making this up. I decided to forget Ebay.

Finding a solution was just a matter of more flexible thinking. Instead of trying to work with the cable-release socket, it occurred to me to just attach some kind of wire to the thumb-release knob, threading the wire downward and outward. The camera is plenty heavy, even without the tripod, so I would be unlikely to pull it over. I found just the right thing, attached it, and voilà! I'm now almost finished with a roll of Ilford HP5+, which I'm hoping to develop tomorrow. Needless to say, I'll share some of the results with you.

(to be continued)

His Body / ᎤᏤᎵ ᎠᏰᎸ

ᎤᏤᎵ ᎠᏰᎸ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎧᎵ ᎥᎴᏂᏙᎲ ᎠᎴ' ᎤᎸᏌᏓ ᎬᏙᏗ,

ᎤᎸᏌᏓ Ꮎ ᎨᏒᎠᏎ ᎤᏤᎵ ᎤᏕᏅ-ᏚᏳᎪᏛ.

ᎤᏤᎵ ᎢᎦᏗ ᎡᏆ-ᎡᎶᎯ ᎾᎿ ᎨᏒᎣᏎ ᎦᏅᎯᏛ,

ᎠᏨᏯᎢ ᎪᏩᏙᏎ ᎤᎪᏗᏗ ᎢᏤ ᎢᏳᏍᏗᏗᏁ.

ᎠᏨᏯᎢ ᎧᏃᎩᏍᏙᏎ ᎢᏤ ᎧᏃᎩᏍᏗᏁ.

His body is full of life and light,

light that is his birthright.

His days on the earth will be long,

he will see many new things.

He will sing a new song.

Sunday, February 6, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - VII

There have been some positive developments in my return to film photography. One of my favorite films, Ilford HP5+ (ISO 400), is being produced and is easily available. I now have an adequate supply in both 35mm and 120, and I just ordered some more in 35mm.

Why, you may ask, did I not also order some more in 120? Although I am especially interested in medium-format, due to its superior quality, I have been frustrated by one problem after another in trying to get it going. At first, I didn't have an adequate way to scan 120 film. Now, though, I do. I bought an Epson Perfection V600 Photo scanner, and I love, love, love it. To illustrate what I'm talking about, here is a test shot from my Mamiya C33, scanned on the Epson at 2400 dpi (it is capable of much higher resolution, but this is sufficient for present purposes):

Now, here is a small detail from the same scan:

By way of comparison, here is how that same detail looked when I scanned the test shot on an ordinary printer, at 600dpi:

There is simply no comparison. So that medium-format problem has been well solved. Now, though, I'm struggling with the lack of a self-timer on the C33. I do have a 20-ft. air release, but it's pretty wimpy. Under certain conditions (whether related to the distance setting or to the shutter speed, I'm not sure), the air release simply will NOT trip the shutter. I've tried what seems like jillions of times, and tried for hours to jury-rig a solution with clips, shims, clothespins, elastic bands and whatever, without success. There is, however, a vintage accessory for this vintage-camera problem. I used to have one, and will try to get another. In the meantime, the camera looks impressive as hell on a nice, sturdy tripod.

The Epson scanner also works wonderfully with my 35mm negatives, and here is a sample, also scanned at 2400 dpi.:

In the interest of honesty, I have to explain that the photo above is of me, forty-nine years ago, Those days are not coming back, at least not in this lifetime.

What would you do if you had two great 35mm SLR bodies, taking different lens mounts, one with a 28-80mm zoom lens with a maximum aperture of f3.5 and the other with a 28mm, f2.8 lens. Your mileage may vary, but since I really, really like existing-light photography and really, really hate flash, and mostly use ISO 400 film, I got a used Canon 50mm, f1.4 normal lens for the camera (the AE-1) that previously had the wide-angle on it. Now I'm back in business, happily shooting pics around the house of my wife and our dog. The dog doesn't mind, and my wife is too engrossed in playing Scrabble on her Kindle or watching TV to hear the clank of mirror and shutter. All is well.