HOME | DD

photonig — Double Trouble

Published: 2010-02-10 19:57:04 +0000 UTC; Views: 443; Favourites: 19; Downloads: 30
Redirect to original
Description Accidental double exposure with my holga. I took a shot, got back in the car, and tripped the shutter. You can see the windscreen wipers overlaid with grass. I quite like it.

Holga
Fuji Neopan 120 @ 400
Fotospeed FD10

Still photographing my negs with my DSLR until I get a Medium Format scanner.
Related content
Comments: 33

HA91 [2010-02-17 03:44:23 +0000 UTC]

Looks awesome!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to HA91 [2010-02-17 15:48:57 +0000 UTC]

Thank you. Lucky accident.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

HA91 In reply to photonig [2010-02-18 02:26:58 +0000 UTC]

You're welcome, they're the best kind of accidents

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

deep--blue [2010-02-17 00:14:54 +0000 UTC]

awesome shot nig,

"Still photographing my negs with my DSLR until I get a Medium Format scanner."

how do you go about doing this? (stupid question? :S)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to deep--blue [2010-02-17 15:45:13 +0000 UTC]

I posted a journal about how I photograph old negatives of my kids that I don't have prints for. Here it is. It's fun and you can get some half decent results. [link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

deep--blue In reply to photonig [2010-02-17 21:56:09 +0000 UTC]

Ah great stuff I suppose it would work for positives too? I have a couple lying about

Im thinking of buying a flatbed film scanner, but im always wary that ill buy a low level £200 one, and want to upgrade

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to deep--blue [2010-02-17 22:12:53 +0000 UTC]

I have been looking for a flatbed that will do medium format scanning. I have been looking at the epson do a couple of good scanners, with the 4870 being the flagship. That will do 35mm 120/220 and 5x4. It is about £270 I think. It would suit me because I use larger format negs.
I have a little 35mm scanner that gives really good results.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

deep--blue In reply to photonig [2010-02-19 10:49:51 +0000 UTC]

[link] that one doesnt look too bad, £230 [from canon] too

which 35mm one do you have?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to deep--blue [2010-02-19 16:23:38 +0000 UTC]

That looks good. I have been looking for one that supports 120 because that is the film format I shoot in most. I may look at this one myself. Epson do the equivalent, but I don't think there is much in the price. Put it this way, if I had £230 to spend on one at the moment, I would get this.

I just use a little 35mm dedicated scanner. It cost me about £25 on ebay. They are about £70 in PC World. [link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MP08SMP [2010-02-14 20:17:54 +0000 UTC]

Amazing result even if a mistake

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to MP08SMP [2010-02-15 16:32:30 +0000 UTC]

I'm a bit of an old hippy,and sometimes results like this appeal to me. This one was sheer luck. Thanks, Mike.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

webworm [2010-02-13 16:21:30 +0000 UTC]

You need good luck with spontanious double exposures like this one! You were lucky Nigel!!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to webworm [2010-02-15 16:04:52 +0000 UTC]

I was quite pleased when it appeared. Lucky indeed.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

webworm In reply to photonig [2010-02-15 19:53:20 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

taramara [2010-02-12 09:44:02 +0000 UTC]

Makes for an interesting shot Mate !

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

R3D777 [2010-02-11 23:22:39 +0000 UTC]

Ghost road! As I said to Steffi, this would take ages in photoshop. I'd be doing them on purpose ALL the time if I wasn't financially bound to digital

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to R3D777 [2010-02-11 23:43:45 +0000 UTC]

This camera cost me £10, and the film I get for £2.50 a roll. It's a lot cheaper than going out and buying a digital. I just love doing the developing. It is such a fulfilling and theraputic experience.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

R3D777 In reply to photonig [2010-02-11 23:53:06 +0000 UTC]

I bought the Canon to get some photos of my dog because I knew she only had days left. That was July and I've already had 1000 photos out of it. I'd waste so much film on learning, the digital really does pay for itself

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pearwood [2010-02-11 02:44:20 +0000 UTC]

Worked out rather nicely.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to pearwood [2010-02-11 10:17:32 +0000 UTC]

Thanks, Steve. A happy accident.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Missy39811 [2010-02-10 23:51:12 +0000 UTC]

nice photo!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to Missy39811 [2010-02-11 10:17:03 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Missy39811 In reply to photonig [2010-02-11 19:26:37 +0000 UTC]

your welcome!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Evil-e33 [2010-02-10 20:45:12 +0000 UTC]

this accident is a blessed one! this turned out really cool!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to Evil-e33 [2010-02-10 20:53:51 +0000 UTC]

Thanks a lot, lovely.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Evil-e33 In reply to photonig [2010-02-10 21:03:18 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Esteficita [2010-02-10 20:08:13 +0000 UTC]

YES! Accidental double exposures are THE BEST!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to Esteficita [2010-02-10 20:25:58 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the fave, Steff. I was really surprised how this came out. Almost like it was planned.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Esteficita In reply to photonig [2010-02-10 20:29:08 +0000 UTC]

It's a fun shot!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

aerendial [2010-02-10 20:06:28 +0000 UTC]

interesting work.. like roads.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

photonig In reply to aerendial [2010-02-10 20:25:04 +0000 UTC]

Thanks a lot, and thanks for the fave. A happy accident.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

aerendial In reply to photonig [2010-02-10 20:27:28 +0000 UTC]

really is.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

davincipoppalag [2010-02-10 20:02:55 +0000 UTC]

A happy acxcident! Nice

👍: 0 ⏩: 0