Wednesday, 15 February 2017

Tuesday 28th February is 'Take Your Box Camera To Work Day'

Keen to keep this camera-themed day going, and with just under two weeks to go, this year, Tuesday 28th February is 'Take Your Box Camera To Work Day'. Looking back at previous years, it's frequently been on the 28th (or 29th February), so it may be good to define it simply as the last week day in February each year. The concept wasn't mine, but I have intermittently attempted to promote it in recent years, as camera- or film-themed days have become popular; it's just another excuse to shoot film. Of course, there are a number of considerations around shooting a box camera in a work environment: not all work situations are amenable to such behaviour; and, with most work generally being inside, the fact that box cameras are designed for exterior daylight shots, one needs to adopt strategies for achieving a decent exposure, often involving either using fast film (or push processing), or 'B' settings for long exposures, or both.

For those posting on Flickr, in the Box Camera Revolution Group or elsewhere, including Twitter, the tags 'TYBCTWD' and 'TYBCTWD17' will help identify shots from the day. Although I've taken it upon myself to promote the concept, I don't intend to adjudicate if photographs were shot at work, or on the day itself, still less to define what precisely constitutes a box camera: the spirit of the day is what counts for anyone willing to participate.

Kodak No.2 Brownie with Rollei RPX 400

Tuesday, 31 January 2017

The Image Circle

Jupiter-8 50mm lens with Ilford FP4
“All lenses, regardless of format, project a circular image, and the rectangular film format must fit within this image-circle. With a small camera, a high-quality image is required within the film area, and the remainder of the image circle is disregarded. A view camera, on the other hand, requires an image-circle considerably larger than the film area, to allow freedom to use the camera adjustments. A lens’s covering power or coverage refers to the total image-circle; it is a fixed quantity, regardless of the film format, and is not a function of focal length.”
Ansel Adams, The Camera
The rectangular photographic image is a convention derived by the historically existing relationship to painting and other graphic arts (note, for example, the use of the term ‘print’ for the photographic image on paper), and this frame is built in to the technology itself. The rectangle has much to recommend it, but it is not inherent to the photographic image. The image that a lens forms is circular; the rectangular frame is ultimately a legacy of architecture via the portable easel painting (tracing this legacy further back, cave paintings and rock art do not have definable edges: organic surfaces and surface decoration are essentially integrated). Of course, many photographs have been framed in a circular fashion - the first Kodak camera used a circular mask to make round images, and for Polaroid cameras, the Impossible Project make an instant film with a round frame - but these are a vestigial reminder of the fact that an image produced by a lens is circular - again, it is as likely that this alternative convention of the round frame is derived from painting (the portrait miniature, as many daguerreotypes were originally presented) and architecture, and perhaps also the experience of viewing images produced by other lens-based technologies such as telescopes and microscopes, around long before photography. Given the construction of the eye, specifically that the eye has a lens analogous to the photographic lens, there is a direct relationship to human vision, in which one can never really perceive its edges; with binocular vision this becomes an awareness of a squashed oval visual field, where beyond the edge is simply an infinitude of nothing.

In Ansel Adams' quote above, the must in "the rectangular film format must fit within this image-circle" was something I wanted to challenge. In photography, the circular image is only generally seen in extreme wide angles, such as the fish eye lens, and begins to announce its presence in the vignetting that accompanies simple lenses on cheap cameras (as with the Diana and the V. P. Twin). I wanted to achieve something other than a distorted image, which would obscure the object of this exercise: the distorted image would be remarkable for those qualities, not merely for being circular.

Demaria-Lapierre 75mm Manar Anastigmat lens
The first photographs used a 75mm f3.5 Manar Anastigmat lens, which originally came from a Dehel medium format folding camera, of which I converted the body to make my 127 format film cutter. Although the Dehel camera was 6x4.5, a 75mm focal length lens would equally be used for a square 6x6 format; the lens itself just happened to be the right size to fit on a conical lens board for the Micro-Technical Mk VIII. I used the Mk VIII as the folding bed can be dropped to two different positions, an important factor if this is not to intrude into the picture itself with such a wide angle lens (the angle of view itself being a relationship of focal length to image size - on the 6x4.5 negative format, 75mm represents a 'normal' angle of view). Although the edges of the image circle can be seen with the 75mm lens, the whole circle is too large to fit on the 4x5 negative. I had assumed that, as a fairly cheap triplet lens, the Manar's coverage would not be very good, but this was better than expected.

75mm Manar Anastigmat on Kodak Plus-X
75mm Manar Anastigmat with Ilford FP4
As part of this exercise, I did also photograph a white wall, unfocussed, in order to see the effect more clearly. I began with the assumption that a small aperture would provide better coverage but found that this was not the case (this was something I'd read about coverage in relation to using camera movements in large format; I wanted as small an image circle as was possible, hence using wide apertures); in the shots taken with the Manar lens, the clearest circle is that taken at f32, fairly obvious in the two comparisons below - although it is true to say that the definition at the edges is better and therefore a smaller aperture may describe a larger usable image circle, without the circle itself being any larger - indeed, the circle appears slightly smaller.

75mm Manar Anastigmat at f5.6 on Ilford FP4 film
75mm Manar Anastigmat st f32 on Ilford FP4 film
When extending the lens to close focus, the image circle expands to fill whole film area, as below, with only very little distortion visible in the corners; focussing even closer could have made this distortion fall outside the area of the film completely.

74mm Manar Anastigmat with Ilford FP4
Although the photographs shot at small apertures produced a fairly clear circle, it was larger than the 4x5-inch film format; to produce a complete circle, with a sharp image and clean edge, I used the Jupiter-8 f2 50mm lens from my Kiev-4, as this has a protruding, narrow rear element - a function of it not having a focussing helical built into the lens. This meant that it was relatively easy to fix it into a lensboard, improvised with card retaining rings (holding the red infinity tab) and rubber bands. Unlike the Manar lens, the Jupiter-8 does not have a shutter, which meant that exposures had to be made by the simple expedient of removing then replacing the lens cap. This created some problems in terms of exposure: I was still working on the assumption that smaller apertures would give better coverage.

Jupiter-8 50mm lens
The first photographs with both lenses I shot on Ilford FP4, which, even rating at 64 to compensate for age (the film has a date hand written on the box 11/4/78, with the label printing dating to June 1976), made it difficult to attempt exposures of less than 1/2 a second by hand, and, in addition, the weather was sunny and bright. I did also take some photographs on Rollei ATO 2.1, rated at 6, which did provide long enough exposure times, but the high contrast images did not really convey the effect I wanted to achieve clearly: again, I wanted the circular image to be the distinct feature of the photographs. I shot a second set of images on Kodak Plus-X rated 25, on an overcast day, which made it easier to shoot with the Jupiter-8 lens relatively wide open. As well as not having a shutter, the 50mm lens also had a problem in that it could not be placed far back enough into the camera to achieve infinity focus, which is the reason for the images below being close focused: with the front standard racked back into the camera body as far as possible, I moved the camera and tripod forward until the image came into focus. In order to place the lens further back, a recessed lens board would be required (this should also, in theory, make the image circle smaller).


50mm Jupiter-8 lens with Rollei ATO 2.1
Jupiter-8 50mm lens with Kodak Plus-X
The Jupiter-8 lens made a circular image onto the film with surprisingly little distortion, except at the very edges (a side effect of using smaller apertures is that both lenses appear to show some form of internal reflections in the camera, visible as rings around the image circle itself). With edge distortion being affected by aperture, further tests at smaller apertures with a recessed lensboard might provide even crisper, clearer circular images. Although this was simply an exercise to work through - in practical terms - some ideas about the intrinsic edge of the photographic image, I do think that there is something remarkable about the idea that, in almost every photograph you have ever seen, the image formed by the lens has been cropped by the camera.

References
Ansel Adams, The Camera, Little, Brown and Company, New York 1980, twelfth paperback printing, 2005.
Alan Horder (editor), The Manual of Photography, sixth edition, Focal Press Limited 1971

Sunday, 29 January 2017

127 Day January 2017

Zeiss Ikon Ikonta 520/18 with Agfapan Agfa APX 100
For last Friday's 127 Day, I shot just the one roll of film, cut down medium format Agfapan APX 100 with a 'develop before' date of January 2009. I used the Baby Ikonta again; given the weather conditions and short daylight hours, a number of the shots were long exposures on the 'T' setting. With smaller apertures, generally around f16, the Novar lens performs well, against the hand held shots three or four stops wider; I rated the APX 100 at box speed, being less than ten years past its 'develop before' date, although ideally a faster film would have been more appropriate for the day.








Saturday, 31 December 2016

Photographic Objects

"A forward-thinking young man"
For my last post of the year, I wanted to reflect on some work that I exhibited during 2016; I have only very rarely exhibited photography (other than online) but this year I made a number of 'photographic objects' for exhibitions to which I was invited to contribute. As these were all created with chemical photography, the work falls under the remit of this blog.

Invited to contribute to the exhibition Art:Science:Life by Dr Lucy Lyons at the Ipswich Art School Gallery, the brief was to respond to an object in the adjacent Ipswich Museum's collection, and make a piece of work which could take the original object's place in the museum, while the object itself would be displayed in the art gallery next door, along with the information about the artwork, under the banner of 'Curated Responses', alongside a number of other invited artists.

Curated Responses
I chose the two aircraft recognition sheets from the Ipswich at War gallery in the museum. These were printed on some form of translucent material, which provided the initial inspiration to form my response. A number of years ago, I had read H.G. Wells' novel The War In The Air and was struck by its prescient qualities. My first thoughts were to use this, the book itself, as an object to make a painting, but on reflection, a much more apposite approach was to echo the material qualities of the objects I had chosen. To this end, I used Kodak High-Resolution Aerial Duplicating film to make contact prints of the cover and colophon of my paperback of the novel: not only did the film have a similar look to the aircraft recognition sheets, it was also manufactured to duplicate aerial reconnaissance photographs. Asked to write a statement for the 'Curated Responses' room, I provided the following:
H.G. Wells' novel The War In The Air was first serialised in 1908. Written before Louis Bleriot's successful cross-channel flight, it imagines a war in the near future in which flying machines are decisive; the use of aircraft in the two World Wars, renders aspects of Wells' speculative future prophetic. Taking the cover and the title page (with the reverse showing the original publication date) from a paperback edition of Wells’ book, I made contact prints on Kodak High Resolution Aerial Duplicating film. This high contrast film is designed to make positive and negative duplicates from high resolution aerial photographic negatives; its transparent qualities mimic the aircraft recognition sheets from the Second World War that Wells would live to see.

"A forward-thinking young man"
I called the piece "A forward-thinking young man" from a quote in the book about the protagonist that could equally be applied to Wells himself.

At the Doomed Gallery in Dalston, for the London Pinhole Festival in April to coincide with Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day 2016, I showed a small set of pinhole images, shot two years earlier, presented as positives on glass, appropriate as the original negatives were made with glass plates.

“Talking about pinhole photography with security guards in the park”

I titled the piece, “Talking about pinhole photography with security guards in the park” to relate it directly to my experiences of taking the photographs, rather than what they might show. The work was accompanied by a statement which read:

Related to an ongoing series of photographs using previously unexposed vintage photographic glass plates, for 'Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day' in 2014, I shot a number of photographs using homemade pinhole cameras around the London 2012 Olympic Park. The photographic plates used in the pinhole cameras were Ilford Special Lantern plates, designed to make glass slides for projection, coated in 1965. These were developed as negatives and then contact printed on Ilford N.50 Thin Film Half Tone plates (from 1957) to create positive transparencies on glass for display. The title is a reference to the photographer’s aberrant behaviour and its being outside the sphere of reference of those in authority.

For the positives, created simply by contact printing the original pinhole glass negatives, I used orthochromatic plates so I could work under red lights and develop by inspection. As the physical qualities of the plates themselves seemed important, especially their fragility, I wanted to display these in such a way as to allow the viewer to inspect the plates closely. I could have shown the positives on a light box, but I felt like this would have diminished some of those qualities that I wished to emphasise, so I constructed a shelf which would hold the glass plates upright, projected a short distance from the gallery wall. The lighting was not entirely sympathetic, but this did have the effect of making the viewer look at the plates all the more attentively in order to comprehend the images.
Prototype for a Photographic Object
I returned to using the Kodak High Resolution Aerial Duplicating film for an exhibition called Machine Flight at the Pictorem Gallery in November. Close to the gallery in Walthamstow, there was the ideal source material in locations on Walthamstow Marshes. I took an initial set of photographs on 'Expired Film Day' of the railway arches where A. V. Roe built and then flew the first British aeroplane on the marshes in 1909; I shot the photographs on 4x5 film with a lens that could have been used at the time, a Rapid Rectilinear. I returned to take a second set of photographs of an adjacent feature on the marshes, known as 'bomb crater pond', less than a couple of hundred metres from the railway arches. This pond was created by the impact of a V2 towards the end of the Second World War. It seemed too appropriate a coincidence that within a generation from the first heavier-than-air powered flight, the space age was born, and that this would come together on an otherwise unremarkable patch of north London.

I shot the photographs on FP4 and Plus-X from the 1970s, and contact printed these negatives on a continuous strip of the High Resolution Aerial film, eighteen images, the whole length of positive film being around 2.5 metres long in total. Given how this aerial film would have been originally used, I made a device a little reminiscent of a microfilm reader, allowing the viewer to scroll through the images sequentially, forwards and backwards; I titled this a prototype, as its Heath Robinson construction would ideally have been improved.

Thursday, 22 December 2016

127 Day December 2016


Two weeks ago, for December's 127 Day, I shot three rolls of Ilford FP4 Plus cut down to the 127 format, using my Baby Ikonta. I chose FP4 Plus to coincide with the 'shoot week' of December's #FP4 Party. Taking the same route as three (and four) years ago, I cycled around the boundaries of the London 2012 Olympic Park, shooting some of the same views. I developed all three films with RO9 One Shot at 1+50; the results, although generally good, demonstrate some of the limitations of the camera's Novar lens, notably in the vignetting seen across all the photographs.







Saturday, 17 December 2016

Kodak Plus-X

Kodak/Eastman Plus-X in 16mm, 35mm, medium format and large format sheet film
Eastman Plus-X was first introduced as a motion picture film in 1938, and shortly afterwards produced for still cameras in a number of different formats as Kodak Plus-X. The emulsion number for Plus-X as a motion picture film was -231, with Kodak's standard prefix codes of 7 for 16mm, and 5 for 35mm. As a motion picture film, Plus-X was available in both negative and 16mm reversal stock. For still camera film, Kodak Plus-X had the code PX for many years (with PXP for medium format 'professional' films; PXE for Estar-based 70mm film; and PXT for thick-based sheet film), but it was reformulated around a decade ago, and was then designated 125PX. A comparison of development times shows these to be broadly similar, but changed in many cases by 15-30 seconds in many developers. Kodak's technial data sheet for the new version states:
"To reflect our enduring commitment to black-and-white photography, black-and-white film production will take place in an even more advanced film-coating facility. New technology applied to these superior, time-tested emulsions will result in slightly different processing times for the film family. But the same great films—those you've known and trusted for years—will still deliver the same breathtaking results."
One notable difference between the two versions was the new Plus-X was provided with development times for a three-stop push to EI 1000, while the earlier film was only recommended to be pushed no more than two stops; both films' data sheets stated that a one-stop push to 250 could be achieved without a change to development times. In my own tests below, I did not attempt more than one-stop push, given that I was working with discontinued film, although the 35mm motion picture film was manufactured in 2010, not old enough to really be concerned with increasing exposure to compensate for a loss of sensitivity with age; in some other formats, the Plus-X film I shot was much older.

In the Kodak Reference Handbook from 1946 it is described under 'General Properties' for Roll Film and Film packs as being:
"High speed, fine grain, excellent gradation, wide exposure latitude. The speed and balanced color sensitivity make this film particularly suited to a wide range of outdoor conditions. It also has ample speed for well-lighted indoor subjects. The low graininess and high resolving power permit high quality enlargements many times the size of the original negative."
While for 35-mm and Bantam (828) films:
"High speed and fine grain. For general miniature camera work this film should be used unless light conditions are very adverse or unless a very high degree of enlargement is intended."
Plus-X was originally rated 50 ASA, but at some point in the 1950s this was increased to 80 ASA (this thread gives some information on Plus-X ratings). When speed ratings were changed for black and white films in 1960, Plus-X was rated at 160 ASA for a time, before gaining its 125 ISO rating, which it retained for nearly fifty years (Kodak's reference hand book implies the presence of the one-stop safety factor in the statement about Plus-X that, "When it is desired to reduce the exposure to a minimum, these values can be doubled with little danger of serious underexposure..." ). Additionally, the motion picture stock was recommended to be shot at a slower speed, 80 ISO in daylight and 50 under tungsten, which may just reflect the process of striking a positive from motion picture negative film, rather than a slower emulsion.

Eastman Plus-X was discontinued in 2010, with the notice for the still camera version announced the following year - although the production runs may have both stopped at the same time if the emulsion itself was the same. Incidentally, the Massive Dev Chart still has Plus-X on its main chart, not on its discontinued/unlisted page. Kodak's rationalising of the film stocks it produces in recent years has meant the discontinuation of many of its classic films. This does leave Kodak without a medium-speed traditional emulsion film (Ilford's FP4 Plus being the closest equivalent still available). Kodak suggests TMax 100 as a replacement for Plus-X; this film uses a modern T-grain emulsion. For most of the period that Kodak was manufacturing Plus-X, it also produced Verichrome Pan, another still picture film with a traditional cubic emulsion at the same speed as Plus-X, only discontinued in 2002; Verichrome Pan does appear to have been available in some formats (126, 127) that Plus-X was not, but both were available in the most common formats - 35mm, medium format and sheet film.

Minolta 16QT with 16mm Kodak Plus-X, develop before date Sept 1971
MPP pinhole with 4x5 Kodak Plus-X, develop before date July 1972
I had first used Plus-X in a ready-loaded Minolta-16 cartridge with a "develop before" date of September 1971. Around the same time, I also acquired a box of large format Plus-X from 1972 in a job lot, which I used for both this year's 'Expired Film Day' and on Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day, which I rated at 25 to compensate for the loss of the film's sensitivity over the more than four decades since it was made. Apart from this loss of sensitivity, the quality of neither film appears to have been much compromised with age. Unintentionally, I had begun to use Plus-X after it had been discontinued almost by accident; I subsequently bought a 100-foot roll of 16mm film for 110 cartridge reloads and other subminiature formats, after using up two rolls of Kodak WL Surveillance film, and finding the Photo Instrumentation film rather grainy. As Plus-X had been a motion picture stock, I wanted to use it for a separate project that I have been pursuing, looking at film locations; given how recently it has been discontinued, I found it relatively easy to find across Plus-X in 35mm and 120 online.

35mm Kodak Plus-X motion picture film latitude test
To test the film in 35mm, I bought some bulk motion picture Eastman Plus-X 5231. According to Kodak's guide, the date of manufacture for the 35mm Plus-X that I bought is 2010, which would mean that it was in the very last batches made before discontinuation that year, based on the edge code once developed. I tested the latitude of the film, as shown in the contact sheet above. For the first row, the film was exposed at indexes of 40, 80, 100, 125, 160, and 200. However, with the light changing due to quick-moving thin clouds, shooting manually, I couldn't be sure that I had a perfect set of exposures, so I repeated the latitude test a couple of days later. For the second row I used the same set of exposure indices, but the lighting on the day was more consistent. The film was shot with a Canon A-1 SLR and developed in Ilfotec LC29 at a dilution of 1+19 for 6 minutes at 20ºC. Both tests showed good latitude with a moderate amount of contrast over the fairly short range of exposures, and a relatively clear base, presumably being good for motion picture use, as well as possibly useful when scanning. Part of the reason for choosing these speeds was an attempt to be precise over whether any adjustments for age needed to be made, given that the motion picture stock is recommended to be shot at a slower speed (80 ISO in daylight) than the still camera version (125 ISO), which may just reflect the process of striking a positive from motion picture negative film.

Canon A-1 with Plus-X rated 40
Canon A-1 with Plus-X rated 200
Although I used a narrower range for the test than for other films I've tested, the results appeared to show the Plus-X has fairly good latitude; the two examples above from either end of the scale of exposures I used are both quite acceptable, in the lower image it might have been possible to pull more detail from the shadow areas. Other than the Plus-X from the 1970s, the last batches of 35mm motion picture stock and the medium format from the past decade were either shot at box speed, or generally rated at 100 rather than 125. I haven't tested Plus-X for push processing apart from one roll at 200, pushing one stop (or 2/3 of a stop) in Ilfotec DD-X. With the lighting conditions when the film was shot, the results were fairly high in contrast, I also shot the film with a yellow filter, which helped provide detail in the sky. As Plus-X has only been discontinued within the last decade, there's still a lot of the film around in different formats, although since I bought my last bulk roll, I have seen that prices have increased online. Perhaps Kodak Plus-X isn't significantly different from Ilford's FP4 Plus to make shooting it today anything other than a historical curiosity - I had never used the film before it was discontinued - although as a motion picture stock, it's a fortunate curiosity, appropriate enough to the ongoing project shooting film locations.

Mamiya-16 Automatic with 16mm Eastman Plus-X
Pentax Auto 110 with 16mm Eastman Plus-X
Agat 18K (35mm half frame) with Kodak Plus-X motion picture film, developed in Ilfotec LC29
Kodak Retina IIa (35mm) with Kodak Plus-X motion picture film, developed in Ilfotec LC29
Kodak Retina IIa (35mm) with Kodak Plus-X, rated 200, push processed in Ilfotec DD-X
Kiev-4 rangefinder (35mm) with Kodak Plus-X motion picture film, developed in Ilfotec LC29
Ikoflex Ic (medium format 6x6) with Plus-X, develop before date of 03/2006, developed in RO9 One Shot
Zodel Baldalux (medium format 6x9) with Plus-X, develop before date 02/2007, developed in Ilfotec DD-X

Sources/further reading:
Kodak's history of motion picture film stocks
Plus-X Pan (PXP) tech sheet on 125px.com
Plus X (PX125) tech sheet on 125px.com
Kodak Reference Handbook 1946
http://silverbased.org/plus-x-kodak-woes/
https://blog.jimgrey.net/2014/06/25/shooting-kodak-plus-x-pan/
http://adambhalalough.com/post/572281627/thoughts-on-kodak-discontinuing-plus-x-bw-film

Tuesday, 29 November 2016

Found Film 3


In a recent purchase of a bundle of mostly uninteresting 35mm compact cameras, two of them had part-used rolls of film inside. The cameras were a Polaroid PZ2001 and an Olympus Trip AF.  The films were both Kodak Gold consumer colour negative films, and possibly could have been in both cameras for a number of years, the Trip AF being older, but there was nothing to securely date the films in either. This generation of plastic point and shoot film cameras probably lost value quicker than any other type of camera with the rapid and subsequent replacement of their place in the market by digital, and apart from the odd exceptional model of their kind, these are largely quite forgettable.

Polaroid PZ2001
Both films were stand developed in Ilfotec LC29 1+100 for one hour for monochrome negatives, rather than have them developed as colour: there might be nothing on either film, but stand development uses a minimal amount of chemistry. The Polaroid yielded the most results, although almost all were out of focus, and many over-exposed. As the Polaroid film hadn't been used up, I did shoot a couple of frames with the camera myself (below) - and got better results than everything else on the film in terms of focus and exposure.


Of the photographs already shot on the roll, most looked liked a holiday somewhere in America, with a Seaworld-type of attraction, what looks like festively decorated holiday apartments - or possibly a church and the decorations are for a wedding, and somewhere in the mountains (this last series of photographs being very overexposed - I imagine that the camera did not possess small enough aperture settings or fast enough shutter speeds to cope with using a fast film in very bright sunlight, but I have attempted to pull all of the detail out of the scans that was there). There are also two close up shots, both out of focus, of a flower and a lizard.







From the Olympus Trip AF there were just three frames that had anything remotely worth scanning - and perhaps not even that - all very underexposed, possibly needing the built in flash which didn't fire. These looked like they were taken in a junk shop, judging from the first photograph, while the other two look like accidental exposures. Given the few shots on the Trip, it feels less precious, but clearly the owner of the Polaroid camera went somewhere special and shot nearly a whole roll of film, before never finishing the roll, never developing it, leading one the speculate as to what the circumstances were that meant they never saw the results; however, this might just be reflective of how photographs were taken by many people before digital: once back from holiday, with the film not quite finished, those last frames weren't to be wasted, and the camera was put away in a drawer to wait for the next special occasion,