St. Peter's Church, Thorpe Salvin

@FishyFishArcade I really like the tonality in this one. At least on my monitor, the midtones really pop - and that where the "grab your attention" mostly lives.

I do have a possible gentle suggestion to improve an otherwise very fine image. To my eye, there seems to be some left to right convergence as well as a slight amount on the vertical. A gentle application of swings and shifts might have corrected this. Then again, I might be seeing things. A lovely image in any case and well done.
 
thronobulax said:
@FishyFishArcade I really like the tonality in this one. At least on my monitor, the midtones really pop - and that where the "grab your attention" mostly lives.

I do have a possible gentle suggestion to improve an otherwise very fine image. To my eye, there seems to be some left to right convergence as well as a slight amount on the vertical. A gentle application of swings and shifts might have corrected this. Then again, I might be seeing things. A lovely image in any case and well done.
Click to expand...

Thank you, and thanks for the advice. I still have much to learn with this format.
 
FishyFishArcade said:
Thank you, and thanks for the advice. I still have much to learn with this format.
Click to expand...

Yes, learning view camera movements takes a bit of time. I found "View Camera Technique" by Stroebel helpful when I was starting out, though I am sure there is much to be found on line.

There is an old fisherman's saying that I think applies here: It's called 'fishing', not 'catching'. While we all want to produce wondrous images, the process itself is important, instructive, and, frankly, delightful in it's own right. Even after nigh on 50 years of doing this, I still routinely go photographic 'fishing'. I shoot things I may not much care about just to keep my technique sharp (or learn new technique) and put myself in the position to find that magic image. Every now and then, you catch a fish ;)
 
I'm rather envious of the contrast & range of tones you've been getting with Foma film. Did you experiment with exposure & development much to achieve the result ? Perhaps something in the Yorkshire air contributes !
 
nickl said:
I'm rather envious of the contrast & range of tones you've been getting with Foma film. Did you experiment with exposure & development much to achieve the result ? Perhaps something in the Yorkshire air contributes !
Click to expand...


Yes, it would be interesting to know how this film was exposed and developed.

In general, mid tone local- or "micro" contrast is what makes an image pop. There are several ways to achieve this:

  • Reduce Increase nominal ASA when computing the exposure and then increase development time. This is called "expanded" development or "plus" development in Zone System parlance. The more you develop, the more you have to lower raise the ASA (within reason). This works really well to expand the middle tones and hold shadow detail but risks blowing out the bright highlights because you can develop them to the point where highlights no longer hold any detail. This can be managed with compensating developers like Pyrocat-HD or D-23, or use a so-called "split" development bath.

  • Use a very dilute developer and leave the film in the developer for a very long time, agitating only a few times. This typically gives you full shadow detail, expanded mid tones, and controls highlights so they don't blow out. The downside of this technique is that development takes a long time - 60 minutes is not uncommon - and it's very fiddly to get right. Since you are agitating only very infrequently, it's common to see streaking and other nasties on the negative if you don't suspend the film perfectly or use a special container for this. This is called Semistand (2 agitations) or Extreme Minimal Agitation (3 or more agitations). Not recommended until you have a good grasp of ordinary development methods. (It DOES work and I use it all the time, but it's a steep learning curve in the beginning.)
Either of these will produce negatives that can either be split printed on VC silver paper or have their scans fiddled with curve manipulation. Either way you can get great results with patience and practice.

Relevant references of interest:


P.S. Zone System tells us to expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. I'd suggest that you have to expose for the shadows, develop for the desired midtone contrast, and use some means to rein in the highlights (if necessary).
 
Last edited:
nickl said:
I'm rather envious of the contrast & range of tones you've been getting with Foma film. Did you experiment with exposure & development much to achieve the result ? Perhaps something in the Yorkshire air contributes !
Click to expand...

thronobulax said:
Yes, it would be interesting to know how this film was exposed and developed.

In general, mid tone local- or "micro" contrast is what makes an image pop. There are several ways to achieve this:

  • Reduce nominal ASA when computing the exposure and then increase development time. This is called "expanded" development or "plus" development in Zone System parlance. The more you develop, the more you have to lower the ASA (within reason). This works really well to expand the middle tones and hold shadow detail but risks blowing out the bright highlights because you can develop them to the point where highlights no longer hold any detail. This can be managed with compensating developers like Pyrocat-HD or D-23, or use a so-called "split" development bath.

  • Use a very dilute developer and leave the film in the developer for a very long time, agitating only a few times. This typically gives you full shadow detail, expanded mid tones, and controls highlights so they don't blow out. The downside of this technique is that development takes a long time - 60 minutes is not uncommon - and it's very fiddly to get right. Since you are agitating only very infrequently, it's common to see streaking and other nasties on the negative if you don't suspend the film perfectly or use a special container for this. This is called Semistand (2 agitations) or Extreme Minimal Agitation (3 or more agitations). Not recommended until you have a good grasp of ordinary development methods. (It DOES work and I use it all the time, but it's a steep learning curve in the beginning.)
Either of these will produce negatives that can either be split printed on VC silver paper or have their scans fiddled with curve manipulation. Either way you can get great results with patience and practice.

Relevant references of interest:


P.S. Zone System tells us to expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. I'd suggest that you have to expose for the shadows, develop for the desired midtone contrast, and use some means to rein in the highlights (if necessary).
Click to expand...

Thanks.

There's no Ansel Adams-style skill going on, I assure you. :)

Just devved in a Stearman Press tank at 20 degrees C with Ilfotec DD-X (1+9). Inverting gently for the first full minute, then for ten seconds at the top of each subsequent full minute. I pre-wash Fomapan for a minute in water before starting the development as it produces a right old witches brew of green liquid!

I don't have the facilities (or, at present, the time) to print my photographs, so they are just scanned. I used an Epson V700 with Epson Scan for these, using the histogram to set the white and black points and get a full range of tones. Then I edit further in Adobe Lightroom - this is where most of the difference is made. I tweak highlights, shadows, blacks and whites, and add a bit of Clarity (around 15-20%). Sometimes, but not always, I'll also adjust the exposure and perhaps add a bit more contrast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top