every time i decide you're dead for sure, up you pop! nice to see you again.
these pics are quite nice. i wouldn't describe them as "drab," however i was a bit puzzled as to how they were made. i couldn't actualy tell if they were shot on color film or b&w. if on color, then i thought perhaps you had lowered the saturation until they were barely "pastel." i say this because the highlights have a definite pinkish cast on my monitor, but not seen in the shadows. if b&w, i thought you might have added a photoshop tone of some sort that accounted for the pinkish [not sepia]tinge. in either case, i wouldn't say "drab;" perhaps "subtle" or "understated."
in any case, they're nice pics, the second being my favorite. it's nice to see you back.
Thank you! There were times I myself doubted I'd ever return to LJ, but I decided I had too many pictures to share to turn my back on you lot for ever
( ... )
i should have known -- "black and white color film" -- the bane of archivists the world over. i have had so many go-rounds with subordinates trying to submit archival documentation on this crap. they all say, "but the lady at the drug store said this was black and white film." i just tell them if they see c-41 anywhere on the box not to buy it. the image is only colored dyes, not metallic silver salts, and in 30 or 40 years there may be no image at all.
of course, for artistic purposes perhaps it suits some need. even then, if you paid $50,000 for an ansel adams print, it would hurt to see it disappearing into thin air year by year. [of course this stuff wasn't around in his working years -- thank god.]
Hmmm. I have to admit I was pleasantly surprised with the quality of the XP2 negatives, but I guess I'll have to wait another forty years to determine just how good the film is. I'm not sure I'll be using it again, but it seemed worth the experiment; I'm not regretting it yet.
I'm trying to picture the nightmare of seeing an Ansel Adams print fade before one's eyes. The horror, the horror...
in archival work, i don't think the problem is particularly in the negative. normally kept in the dark it might last fairly well. the problem is with the prints -- that is, the c-41 clerks at the wal-mart print the color negative on color paper in the machine; the final print being normally in the light, fades.
i'm not sure what might happen if you printed a c-41 color neg on regular, archivally stable, black and white paper. i don't know if that would work or not, i've never tried it. i know you can print a regular color neg on b&w paper, sometimes with rather odd unanticipated results.
Well, I have darkroom access (even if I hardly ever use it), so who knows, I may give it a shot one day. Could be an interesting experiment...
I've printed regular colour negatives on black-and-white paper, and while I had to deviate from my regular black-and-white routine (I seem to remember using a high-contrast filter -- is that right?), the results were quite all right. In fact, I should probably print a few more pictures that way!
yes, you can get an acceptable print that way, and yes, it usually requires a boost in contrast.
the interesting thing is that all black and white photos are following a convention, dictated by the chemicals involved, of how various colors of the spectrum are interpreted as shades of gray. typically reds are nearly black, greens and blues lighter grays. what i meant by "unpredictable" results was that a color negative may render those colors in shades of grays that are different from the way panchromatic black and white film "sees" them.
a scene exposed simultaneously on color and b&w film in two different cameras may produce two black and white prints that are "fraternal" rather than "identical" twins...things that are black on one may be a lighter gray on the other and vice versa. it's an interesting way to achieve varying results.
Actually, on second thought...mistress_elaineSeptember 5 2007, 18:21:43 UTC
... the pictures are looking somewhat pinkish on my home monitor, as well. But yellowish, too. I didn't know things could look yellowish and pinkish at the same time, but apparently they can...
Re: Actually, on second thought...taotianoneSeptember 5 2007, 19:26:05 UTC
that's pretty funny...if the pink and yellow mix, perhaps you'll have "coral" photos.
i looked again too. the pinkish is strongest where the image is lightest, particularly the open sky. and sure enough, in the mid-tones there is a tint of yellow/brown. i see the most yellowish between the limbs of the tree in number one, especially just to the left of the branch on the right, and on the sand where the tracks are in number two. i think my monitor is calibrated correctly, so perhaps yours is as well.
you know prints made from that film also have a tendancy to be unpredictably tinted in various ways, often bluish or browish. i just never use it.
Sounds like you and I are seeing the same thing colour-wise. That's a relief, although it doesn't solve my brightness problem. I'm not sure how to go about solving that; I've already tried virtually every brightness/contrast/gamma setting in the book.
Oh, well. Guess I'll have to do some more experimenting this weekend...
I haven't made any prints from XP2 negatives yet. The scans look fine, though -- better than any of my recent Fuji colour scans. I'm not too happy with Fuji 35mm slide film. But that's another story.
these pics are quite nice. i wouldn't describe them as "drab," however i was a bit puzzled as to how they were made. i couldn't actualy tell if they were shot on color film or b&w. if on color, then i thought perhaps you had lowered the saturation until they were barely "pastel." i say this because the highlights have a definite pinkish cast on my monitor, but not seen in the shadows. if b&w, i thought you might have added a photoshop tone of some sort that accounted for the pinkish [not sepia]tinge. in either case, i wouldn't say "drab;" perhaps "subtle" or "understated."
in any case, they're nice pics, the second being my favorite. it's nice to see you back.
"mother of all hair experiments"?
Reply
Reply
of course, for artistic purposes perhaps it suits some need. even then, if you paid $50,000 for an ansel adams print, it would hurt to see it disappearing into thin air year by year. [of course this stuff wasn't around in his working years -- thank god.]
Reply
I'm trying to picture the nightmare of seeing an Ansel Adams print fade before one's eyes. The horror, the horror...
Reply
i'm not sure what might happen if you printed a c-41 color neg on regular, archivally stable, black and white paper. i don't know if that would work or not, i've never tried it. i know you can print a regular color neg on b&w paper, sometimes with rather odd unanticipated results.
Reply
I've printed regular colour negatives on black-and-white paper, and while I had to deviate from my regular black-and-white routine (I seem to remember using a high-contrast filter -- is that right?), the results were quite all right. In fact, I should probably print a few more pictures that way!
Reply
the interesting thing is that all black and white photos are following a convention, dictated by the chemicals involved, of how various colors of the spectrum are interpreted as shades of gray. typically reds are nearly black, greens and blues lighter grays. what i meant by "unpredictable" results was that a color negative may render those colors in shades of grays that are different from the way panchromatic black and white film "sees" them.
a scene exposed simultaneously on color and b&w film in two different cameras may produce two black and white prints that are "fraternal" rather than "identical" twins...things that are black on one may be a lighter gray on the other and vice versa. it's an interesting way to achieve varying results.
Reply
Reply
i looked again too. the pinkish is strongest where the image is lightest, particularly the open sky. and sure enough, in the mid-tones there is a tint of yellow/brown. i see the most yellowish between the limbs of the tree in number one, especially just to the left of the branch on the right, and on the sand where the tracks are in number two. i think my monitor is calibrated correctly, so perhaps yours is as well.
you know prints made from that film also have a tendancy to be unpredictably tinted in various ways, often bluish or browish. i just never use it.
Reply
Oh, well. Guess I'll have to do some more experimenting this weekend...
I haven't made any prints from XP2 negatives yet. The scans look fine, though -- better than any of my recent Fuji colour scans. I'm not too happy with Fuji 35mm slide film. But that's another story.
Reply
Leave a comment