Donald Traxler's Poetry

Tuesday, April 5, 2022

New Quatrains of Our Lady - III

For twenty gave birth to seventeen,

the seas to sail,

and thence eighteen took birth,

and sixteen wished to rule the earth.

New Quatrains of Our Lady - II

The water is roiled,

the lobster is boiled,

with blood, with blood

the earth is soiled.

Sunday, April 3, 2022

AGING: A Photographer's Record

Preface

I am a 79-year-old naturist, home nudist, and lifelong photographer. My goal in writing and photographing this project is not only to show the laws of entropy at work, processes with which we are all too familiar, but also to at least hint at the beauty and dignity that is there in agèd bodies.

This will, I think, be an ongoing effort. I have, so far, only myself as model. Volunteers are welcome. If you enjoy or find inspiration in these photographs, you can comment directly on this blog entry, or send your words (hopefully of encouragement) to me: exolinguist at gmail dot com. I'll do my best to reply to all.

Donald Jacobson Traxler

Just a few words on the photography: While the photo above is digital (and the Postface illustration as well), all other photographs were shot on film. The cover photo was shot with the vintage 1965 Mamiya C33 Professional that you see above. The photographs in the body of the article were shot on 35mm, with a Canon AE-1 and Canon FD 50mm f1.4 lens. I used a single LED light, covered by a diffuser. All negatives were scanned on an Epson Perfection V600 Photo, at 2400 dpi. The film was Ilford HP5 Plus, rated at ISO 400 and developed normally in D-76 stock.

We carry wrinkles, marks of time, battle scars, like body decorations. They recite a history of long years and decades.

The hands, when seen in the right way, are among the most beautiful parts of our aging bodies.

Every part has earned our respect.

We decorate our bodies with things that have meanings for us. Life and time do the same.

The marks of time on our aging bodies are like the Nazca lines: they are best appreciated from a distance. All have meanings, which are often mysterious.

Naked bodies are often compared to landscapes. Sand dunes are a common comparison. These lines and shapes have more permanence than wind-wrought ones, yet they are also impermanent.

The muscles or our bodies, made strong through use, are testimonials to a vigorous past. Life is made strong through living.

We carry the past with us, more generations of it than we know.

We often decorate these aging bodies with symbols of our traditions, religions, and philosophies. Such symbols may bring us comfort, but they are not necessary. We have already shown the world who we are, and what we believe.

Postface

One may wonder how I can be naked nearly all the time, even in February. It helps a lot that I live in Pasco County, Florida. My wife and I keep our house at a comfortable 77 or 78°F (about 25°C). Fortunately, we can do that at very little expense. Environmentally, what I save in textile-manufacturing and laundry probably makes up for our small expenditure of fuel. Not only that: it keeps me comfortable and happy.

I have been retired for many years, and am not accepting photographic assignments. Whatever I do now, I do purely for the love of it.

Shoot film, if you can!

Life is short--play naked!

--Don

Friday, April 1, 2022

We See Different Realities / ᎢᏧᎳ ᎪᏩᏔᏎ ᏄᏓᎴᎿᎥ ᎤᏙᎯᏳᏄᏍᏛᏗᏁ

My Return to Film Photography - XVII

I recently shot some tests with Ilford FP4 Plus, one of my old favorites now newly rediscovered. I shot a roll of 35mm, and a roll of 120. As far as the 35mm is concerned, these were tests not only of the film, but also of a newly-acquired Canon AE-1 body, a Canon 50mm f1.8 normal lens, and a Tokina 80-200mm f4 zoom lens. I am pleased to say that all passed with flying colors.

Here are a few samples of the 35mm tests:

The above was shot with the Tokina zoom, at 80mm. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the Tokina. I shouldn't have been surprised--it was always a good brand.

Tokina zoom, at 200mm.

This one was shot with the Canon 50mm f1.8. I like it, but I'm a bit partial to my f1.4. Good to have both, though.

This is with the 50mm f1.8 normal lens.

Believe it or not, this is our backyard. I'm a naturist, so lots of trees for privacy. Shot with the normal lens, obviously.

When I shot this one, I still had not improved my lighting setup. I have since added another 60w quartz-halogen for the head. Even so, I have been getting consistently beautiful negatives from the FP4 Plus. I always preferred it to HP5+ or TX, and still do.

Now, here are a few samples of the 120 tests, taken with my vintage 1965 Mamiya C33 Professional and its 80mm normal lens:

With this shot in proximity to the previous one, we can compare the results with 6x6cm and 35mm. It's pretty clear to me that the 120 negative has the advantage. I also like the subtle quality of the 80mm Mamiya-Sekor lens. It's really my favorite lens, and when combined with the excellent FP4 Plus film, great results are possible (and probable).

It's a wonder that these exercise shots came out at all. My air release is basically unusable with the C33 (nor would I have had a free hand for the bulb), so I was using a makeshift wire release, threaded through the legs of the tripod and wrapped around my left leg. It had the potential to create camera movement, and may have done so, especially in the second shot. The things that we have to do, for the sake of art!

Well, we've come full-circle, to the tree with the thermometer. In this case, I prefer the 35mm version (shot with the 50mm f1.8 normal lens). But they were taken at different times of day, with different shadows, and the longer focal length of the Mamiya lens results in shallower depth-of-field.

Hope you've enjoyed this instalment of our series. In a future instalment, I'll be going back to the subject of infrared photography, which I quite like. In the meantime, shoot film, if you can!

(to be continued)

Monday, March 28, 2022

Why Are People So Afraid? / ᎦᏙᏃ ᏴᏫ ᎤᎪᏗ ᎠᏍᎦᎢᎲ

Sunday, March 27, 2022

My Return to Film Photography - XVI

Since the last instalment in this series (about four weeks ago), I've shot four rolls of film: two rolls of Rollei Infrared 400 (one 35mm and one 120) and two rolls of Ilford FP4 Plus (one 35mm and one 120). The subject of this instalment will be the infrared experience.

In the photo above you see my Mamiya C33, set up for infrared photography. The filter over the taking lens is a Hoya 25A, which is one of those recommended by Rollei, the film manufacturer. The filter factor is 8, so I divided the film's ISO 400 rating by 8 and reset it to 50. IR film focuses differently from normal panchromatic film because IR light has a longer wavelength. For this reason, most camera lenses have a small, red index mark on the distance scale for focusing with IR film (all of my 35mm lenses have such a mark). The first problem I encountered was the absence of such a mark on the distance scale of the Mamiya. My solution was to study those other lenses, particularly the 80mm setting of the zoom lens (which is also the focal length of the normal lens of the Mamiya), to see where the normal index mark would be for each distance setting according to the IR index mark. I made a table of these correspondences, which I then graphed for interpolations. This solution worked great. I did my test shooting at measured distances (mostly a single distance), which I set according to my graph. Such careful measuring of distances under controlled test conditions resulted in my 6x6cm shots being better focused than my 35mm shots, although there was no red index mark on the camera.

While we are talking about potential pitfalls in using IR film, I should mention that part of my 35mm roll was a bit fogged by light at the edges, due to my somewhat careless handling of the film cassette before developing. Apparently the Rollei cassette was not 100% light-tight. I was also sorry to see that the unexposed film was in a plastic can, not a metal one such as Kodak used to provide for IR film.

Here are a few images from my tests, first the 35mm, and then the 120:

In the shot above, you can see the typical IR "black sky and glowing foliage" effect.

Conclusions: I like IR film a lot, and I had forgotten how much I like it. Everyone know that it can give great special effects in landscape shots, but I find that it can also be useful for portraits. Due to its inherently higher contrast, it makes good use of low, indoor artificial lighting. It seems to be more sensitive than ordinary panchromatic film to modern light sources such as quartz halogen. For nudes, the heightened contrast brings out musculature.

I tried to test the "IR x-ray effect," by which certain types of clothing are rendered transparent, but determined that the filter I was using was not very suitable for that. I have ordered the most suitable type of filter for that purpose, but won't have it for about a month. It is interesting to note that Rollei did not include any of the "good" ones for the purpose among their ten-or-so recommendations. When I get the new filter, I'll test it on myself and share the results with you all. Until next time, shoot film if you can!

(to be continued)