HOME | DD

zandrfoo In reply to gnj [2005-03-29 00:34:29 +0000 UTC]

thanks

and also, let me explain. way back in highschool i used to use a dark room but sadly i dont have access to one now and im too broke to buy all the equipment even if i COULD set one up in my dorm room. so now i get my film scanned at CVS and put on cd (soon ill be able to use a scanner that one of my friends has) and then i try to do digitally what i would have done in a darkroom.

so no, i didnt do that in a dark room. back in highschool though i experimented a lot with different filters, aperture stops and exposure times but frankly i dont really remember what combination worked best to get that kind of result. (in fact im looking at a print now and i still cant for the life of me figure it out) if i had to guess though id say a very high contrast filter, a large aperture and a low exposure time... im sorry i cant be of any more help.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gnj In reply to zandrfoo [2005-03-29 00:56:26 +0000 UTC]

i think u can never reach that contrast with only filters diaphram and low exposure... that's why i was asking you that, this is an exxxxtreme contrast lol

im sorry for you... same story here. ill finish school in 2 months and then i'll not be able to print anymore in darkroom... but i own a little enlarger, so i think ill buy all the rest and start printing in my bathroom...

dont give up man, buy the equipment... darkroom is 10000 times fun than photoshop

cya!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zandrfoo In reply to gnj [2005-03-29 01:12:29 +0000 UTC]

oh i agree 1000000% !!!!!

as for the the contrast thing, i have a photo i did in highchool right in front of me with nearly the same level of 'bleached out' that this one has. i cant remember how i did it but it's definitely possible. i was SO into high contrast (still am i guess )

good luck with that bathroom set up! should be a blast.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gnj In reply to zandrfoo [2005-03-29 03:18:38 +0000 UTC]

scan it, i wanna see!

im in 'exxxxxtreme contrast' period too.. i tried printing 10 times the same photo growing with contrast more and more... and still saying 'more contrast, more contrastttthashaksdas!!!!"

bathroom darkroom will be a mess... i havent thought how to set it up yet... and i dont wanna.. let's wait the next year

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zandrfoo In reply to gnj [2005-03-29 05:49:05 +0000 UTC]

haha, good idea, prolong the inevitable and maybe you can reduce the consequences.

i have so much older stuff i wish i could scan but i dont have a scanner... again, the financial situation dictates that i wait till the summer for anything like that.

i can see whether theres any decent scanners at school i could use though... hmm... yeah, im gonna check that out.

i actually noticed a couple photos in your gallery that have a very similar contrast to "immersed". "01" and "dont be afraid" in particular. so it seems to me you've already achieved that affect or close to it.

01 especially, i just love that bleached-out quality it has.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gnj In reply to zandrfoo [2005-03-29 09:43:17 +0000 UTC]

all depends on money, unfortunatly... :/

im trying to buy a Nikon F4 (price as fallen since F6 has been released) to replace my old-broken-sucky Olympus om10... but it's 450€, ill never reach that amount :/

yeah the photos u noticed are extremely contrasted.. but the negative was high contrasted too, i think there's no way to get this effect with a 'normally exposed' photo.. i would like to get it, i tried millions of tricks but it's no way... maybe it can be done by doing something during film developing... but i never tried, im afraid i can fuck up an entire roll

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zandrfoo In reply to gnj [2005-03-30 03:36:19 +0000 UTC]

my highschool didnt have the equipment to process the film itself so ive never done that but the film i used (Ilford xp 100) tended to yield some nice contrast. maybe if you ask some one at a camera place the does a lot of black and white they might be able to tell you how to get a higher contrast negative so you dont have to mess up a roll figuring it out. i also tended to over expose my shots a lot too so that might help.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gnj In reply to zandrfoo [2005-03-30 20:22:17 +0000 UTC]

i followed your tip today, i shot a roll of 3200tmax in an abandoned industrial complex, overexposing it 1stop... let's see how it will be

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zandrfoo In reply to gnj [2005-03-30 22:26:05 +0000 UTC]

increased aperture size... hmm, i didnt think of that... i usually decrease shutter speed... but hey, it probably works that way too cant wait to hear how they turn out.

what speed is that film? 3200 cant be the speed can it... that would be pretty damned high...

wether it is or not... i find low ISO films yield a better high contrast negative as they have less grain (course you gotta have lots of light and its harder to overexpose...)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gnj In reply to zandrfoo [2005-03-31 00:48:46 +0000 UTC]

3200TMAX is 3200iso...
and i love it. i love grain.

ull see what came out from that roll soon (i hope)... tomorrow ill send it to lab (i no more develop films by myself cause my darkroom sucks and it's full of dust, i fucked up tons of negatives with dust... just look at the two 'Pride' photos) and ill print em next week or so

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zandrfoo In reply to gnj [2005-03-31 01:29:49 +0000 UTC]

sweet cant wait.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

zandrfoo In reply to isuandrew [2005-02-10 22:18:55 +0000 UTC]

thankyou

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

isuandrew In reply to zandrfoo [2005-02-10 23:01:05 +0000 UTC]

no problem

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

zandrfoo In reply to intradescant [2005-01-03 06:11:22 +0000 UTC]

yeah, i bleached that pic out on purpose, made it more 'innocent' (if you know what im trying to say...)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0