Triple Take Thursday 2: Plates, Film, and Digital.

Variety is the slice of life.  While I continue to shoot traditional film stocks lately, I've been dabbling in some other mediums at the same time.  I've become increasingly involved in the use of dry plates coated by Jason Lane, that have allowed me to use a number of cameras designed for such plates, while also improvising their use into a many other roll film cameras as well. 

I'm also doing a little bit more with digital cameras, between early models with decent specifications and more recent ones with more bells and whistles.  While it's no replacement for a film camera, it does make a pretty easy tag along on my film (and now plate) photo outings.  

Here and there, as I shoot some plates, I'll be supplementing them with the same scene shot on both film and digital to allow for an interesting comparison between the blue sensitive media of the plates, the panchromatic, ortho, or color media of the film, and one or more settings on a digital camera that may mimic or differ from that of the non-digital media.  

Following are three takes of another scene in Baltimore, this time on a fascinating remnant of Linden Avenue, once a pretty vital arterial street that was almost entirely swallowed up to redevelopment beginning in the mid-1950's.  The 1700 block has managed to survive, complete with streetcar tracks that have been dormant since 1955.  Since the block is punctuated with an island in the middle, the east side of the street acts as auto parking, and the streetcar track remnants abruptly end, the vintage photo possibilities are somewhat limited in composition, but with careful cropping, an image of nostalgic nature is entirely possible with this scene.  

As a wet snow began to fall, I stopped past this favorite haunt one Saturday afternoon with three cameras in tow.  Instead of using a "proper" plate camera for plates, I was using the Kodak Bantam f/4.5 that I'd inherited from my father, with a pre-seated J. Lane "35mm" size plate as a recording medium.  Supplementing this was my newly rediscovered Yashica Electro 35MC stocked with Eastman Double-X film, and the Nikon J1 that I'd recently snapped up.  I fired off close focus shots of the scene using all three cameras, with the Bantam tripod mounted to accommodate the slow speed of the dry plates.     

Kodak Bantam 4.5: 36x50mm J. Lane Dry Plate shot at ISO 2, f/8 at 5 seconds, developed in HC-110 and scanned.

Darkroom Diaries: Mastering Microfilm with HC-110

Looking to shoot film on a budget?  How about this "All You Can Eat Buffet" deal of the film world! For the cost of about 2 rolls of film, you are supplied with enough film to make about 20 or more rolls of film! This film has a nice slow speed and fine grain to allow you to open the lens up on most cameras in full sun, and it comes free of perforations, making an ideal candidate to stock 828 cameras with film! 

So what's the downside?  Well, there's lots of contrast that needs to be tamed in order to get an image with a more pictorial feel.  And the lack of sprockets that makes this a great 828 film also makes it very difficult to use in 35mm cameras, with some models needing some degree of modification, with some other cameras entirely unable to use the stock.  

This bargain film stock is microfilm, a long established medium of Archivists for the preservation of print media. Though never manufactured for pictorial use, this fine grained stock can be adapted for use in 828 and many 35mm cameras with a few caveats.

The most inhibiting of these caveats is the lack of perforations (sprockets) in most microfilm stocks.  This is film that was designed to be fed through a viewer with direct wheel contact, rather than fed through a camera with sprocket gearing and teeth.  This works fine in an 828 camera, but will slip when fed through manual advance 35mm cameras.  Many of the more modern 35mm film cameras with auto advance use an IR sensor that counts the film sprockets in 35mm stock as it advances.  With non-perforated microfilm, these cameras have no sprockets to count, and will simply give up and return the film to the 35mm cassette after attempting to load it.

For manual advance cameras that use a toothed wheel to pull film onto the take up spool, an improvised solution is to apply a layer or two of painters tape to the this wheel to increase adhesion and avoid the slippage that would otherwise result.  Within two minutes of trying this with a Ricoh KR30SP that I have, I had a camera that readily accepted the Microfilm stock.

Two 35mm cameras that will accept microfilm without any modification are the Canon 10S and the original Voigtlander Vito.  Both of these use a contact wheel that lacks teeth to advance film onto the take up spool.

So this all established, what are the rest of the challenges to using this medium?  The first would be supply.  Microfilm isn't typically found in the same places that those of us shooting conventional film pick up our supply.  Neither B&H nor Freestyle sells it, but it can typically be found on eBay.  If lucky, one can find single (100 foot long) roll sales for under $20.  It may take some patience and scouring, but it is out there.

Somewhat less challenging is the process of preparing a length of microfilm for use in a camera.  With 35mm, this involves taking a reusable cartridge, and either loading it with a length of film in the dark, or using a daylight bulk film loader.  Either method should work, but I used the former method, limiting the length of film to about an 18 shot roll.

I also loaded some 828 rolls by simply doing the same process above, but instead interleaving it with 828 backing paper (that the film was taped to on its beginning side) as I wound it onto an 828 spool. It wasn't long before I had three rolls of film ready to use in a variety of cameras.

Shooting this film involves some additional challenges.  I found that rating the Kodak Imagelink 1461 film at about ISO 20 seemed to give the best results.  

I knew I would encounter the potential for a lot of contrast when developing, and elected to scale back my typical stand development time (using Kodak's HC-110 developer at a 1:99 dilution) from 30 minutes to only 16 minutes.  This resulted in some pretty thin negatives, but these scanned with no issues whatsoever.

Below are some samples from my first three rolls of microfilm - the "All You can Eat Buffet" of the photographic world. 

On a very sunny day, I ran a short roll of Microfilm through a Bantam f/8 828 camera.  This wound up working perfectly with the slow shutter of the camera, and delivered some particularly good images given the very limited capabilities of this basic camera. Contrast is a bit high still, but not in an overwhelming way.

Kodachrome 2017 - In COLOR!

As dusk descended upon the historic town of Frederick, the man set his trusty 1947 vintage Kodak Bantam atop his tripod facing a scene of increasing darkness along Carroll Creek and fired off his last shot of the roll of Kodachrome 828 film, experimenting with a setting of 10 secconds at f/11 and drew his photographic day to a close.  The day had been a long one, starting off with delays and disruption from livestock on the B&O Railroad line linking Frederick with Washington, DC, but had managed to improve quite a bit, turning out to be an unseasonably warm Winter's day with vivid blue skies.  Returning home, he unloaded the film from the Bantam and prepared to mail the parcel off to be developed in the hopes he had made the proper exposure calls through his sojourn of the day so as to get some rich color slides back from the 828 Kodachrome.

Reading the narrative above, one might think it depicts a time long passed in settings vastly different in appearance than they are today, but this in fact a condensed retelling of the events I experienced on January 25, 2017.

Yes, you read that title right.  Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, it is possible to shoot Kodachrome again and get results in color!

Just what is this you are looking at?  Read on! (Photo by Kelly-Shane Fuller)

$20, 21 Rolls. A Color Celebration!

The term "do-it-yourselfer" is pretty much a common part of conversational parlance these days, fueled to a large degree by the abundance of home improvement stores complemented by television networks devoted to featuring all of some of their programming to the "DIY" concepts.  Since moving a year ago, my weekend life has involved a oft-frustratingly expanding "Honeydo" list that only seems to grow as each project is finally completed. 

Given this, the thought of processing my own film had never quite appealed to me.  That was until I began to look at what professional developing was costing me.  Despite being a quirky guy with a camera, I'm also a frugal guy with a family, and thus, I began to develop my own black and white film, which proved to be a particularly simple enough exercise once I adapted my methods to something that works pretty readily around my sometimes involved home life. I'd figured that self-processing of black and white film would be as far as I'd venture, and that was fine, given that I'd expected color to be far less forgiving to my methods.

And then, as luck would have it, this all changed.

While perusing the Film Photography Project store, I stumbled upon an offer so good, I simply couldn't resist considering it.  For the measly sum of $19.99, I could get a Unicolor type color processing kit, in addition to 2 rolls of Vision 50T film.  I had just been considering picking up a couple of rolls of the film as it was, but it seemed the Rem Jet backing made it a tough film for which to find processing.  Not only would this address the need to find processing for such film, but it also tossed in the film I would have bought anyway as a bonus!

After a modest amount of online investigation into home processing with such a kit, in which pretty much every review stated that color processing with this kit was actually far easier than initially expected, and also reading that the stated yield of "8 rolls" from this kit had a great deal of elasticity if rolls were processed within two weeks of mixing, I figured that this small investment was certainly worth a try.  And I also figured that if I planned out my batches smartly. I could do as others had testified, and process at least 16 rolls of film from this 8 roll kit.

Without going into great detail of the process (there are already many resources that very capably detail the procedure far better than I could), I can unquestionably say that this was one of the best investments I've ever made.  Processing the first batch was both exciting and terrifying, but once I saw results from this, I managed to calm down to make slight revisions on future batches to make the process a bit more controlled and predictable.  

The ability to process so much color film so cheaply will enable me to really pick up the pace on postings, and has already enabled me to do things that I'd have been hesitant to do otherwise.  I've managed to test several "new" cameras, do a wider variety of things with many of my existing favorite cameras, try different film brands in a variety of ways, and of course do a quirky thing or two that I'd have likely passed up otherwise if it wasn't so affordable and accessible to process color film.  You'll begin to see some of the results of this vast experiment in the coming week.  

And in the meantime, it is only fitting that I provide some sample images from each roll so that you can see just a small fraction of what is to come!  For now, I'm keeping the film and camera of each a thinly veiled secret until I post the accompanying posts of content. 

Roll 1 

Film Fun Folio #27: Kodak Bantam Flash and Rollei Infrared 400

Periodically, I'll be posting scans of some complete rolls of film on here, showing both the good and the bad, and giving some basic information as well a little write up of the shoot as well as the reasons why I selected each camera and film.  Enjoy the trip! 

Feature #27:

Camera: ca. 1948 Kodak Bantam Flash with 48mm/f4.5 Anastar Lens.

Film: Rollei 400 Infrared

Locale: Frederick, MD.
First, let me be perfectly clear, Rollei does NOT make it's Infrared film in 828 format, but thanks to my methods, I quickly made a roll of 828 stock from a roll of 120 stock and dark loaded it into the Bantam Flash.  I took a first shot as Spring blossomed, and then the camera and film just sat, week after week, seeing no action whatsoever, until I just so happened to bring it along on a lovely day, and had about 20 spare minutes to shoot it in one shot as I strolled near Baker Park in Downtown Frederick.  Nearly all of the shots were tripod taken under an approximate EI of 12, which in this case meant a typical shutter speed of 1/50, and an aperture of f/8, (or 1/25 with an f/11 aperture) which as it turns out was usually decent enough to get a workable shot while holding the R72 over the lens.  

I hadn't quite worked out my filter holding method for this first shot. 

Square Shooter - Part II - Shooting 24mm shots on the Bantam RF

I have a tendency to like to interject idioms or expressions into my postings, and in this case, I feel the need to do a common intro theme to what is a natural pair of postings with the following theme: An Opportunity Lost is An Opportunity Gained.

Most hobby photographers (and many pros) are often well aware of the phenomenon known as GAS, or "Gear Acquisition Syndrome."  It's a tendency to want to constantly add to your inventory of photographic items, either with new cameras, new lenses, or even new accessories.  Even on a greatly reduced budget such as mine, there are cheap opportunities to add to one's collection.

When I first saw results on Lance Rothstein's "labeauratoire"site from the square format 35mm shooter known as the Minolta 24 Rapid, I had a lot of interest in picking one up when the opportunity might present itself.  However, due to some reluctance after a few too many bad rangefinder acquisitions, I dragged my feet when a cheap example popped up for sale, and someone else beat me to it.

Perusing the interwebs for other possibilities, I came across a striking suggestion to MAKE a square format camera from an 828 body.  As a huge fan of 828, the idea certainly struck a chord with me, and with some help from my buddy Mark at the Gas House, I managed to install a pair of varied mods to make this interesting idea a reality.  Each of these concepts has some uniqueness, and both have some advantages over the other. 

Have a look at this "creation" of a square shooter.

While it seems as though I've been shooting 828 cameras forever, the reality is that I've only been creating decent images from them for about 6 months.  Still, I've shot a decent amount in this 28x40mm format.  And while the film is no longer commercially produced, I'd yet to use the most common method to improvise 828 film, namely to tape 35mm film to an 828 backing, instead electing to mostly use cut down 120 stock, supplemented at times by expired "true" 828 stock.

Square Shooter - Part I - The Bantam Flash "282" Folding Camera

I have a tendency to like to interject idioms or expressions into my postings, and in this case, I feel the need to do a common intro theme to what is a natural pair of postings with the following theme: An Opportunity Lost is An Opportunity Gained.

Most hobby photographers (and many pros) are often well aware of the phenomenon known as GAS, or "Gear Acquisition Syndrome."  It's a tendency to want to constantly add to your inventory of photographic items, either with new cameras, new lenses, or even new accessories.  Even on a greatly reduced budget such as mine, there are cheap opportunities to add to one's collection.

When I first saw results on Lance Rothstein's "labeauratoire"site from the square format 35mm shooter known as the Minolta 24 Rapid, I had a lot of interest in picking one up when the opportunity might present itself.  However, due to some reluctance after a few too many bad rangefinder acquisitions, I dragged my feet when a cheap example popped up for sale, and someone else beat me to it.

Perusing the interwebs for other possibilities, I came across a striking suggestion to MAKE a square format camera from an 828 body.  As a huge fan of 828, the idea certainly struck a chord with me, and with some help from my buddy Mark at the Gas House, I managed to install a pair of varied mods to make this interesting idea a reality.  Each of these concepts has some uniqueness, and both have some advantages over the other.  

Have a look at this "creation" of a square shooter.

The 282 camera never really existed, but after "creating" one with only a minimal amount of effort, I'm at something at a loss in wondering why it didn't.

Bantam Bridgade: The Prince (Bantam RF) and the Pauper (Bantam f/8)

Every once in a while, good deeds are met with unexpected and unsolicited rewards.

I'd been collaborating with fellow collector/shooter/web documenter Mike Eckman to whom I'd sent some surplus and cut down 828 film, and who knew me as quite the 828 format enthusiast. I'd raved in great length about how much I had come to love my Bantam and similar Bantam Flash camera, mostly with the interest of encouraging him to make use of an 828 camera he had picked up a while back, and secondarily, encouraging him when he considered adding a very affordable addition to his 828 collection.

Still, imagine my surprise when he told me "Keep an eye out, as I have a package I'm mailing to you."  I didn't know what to expect, and thought maybe he'd stumbled upon a stock pile of 828 spools to enable more cut downs.  Well, indeed he had stumbled upon some spools that he was sending to me.  And to keep those spools safe, he enclosed them within A PAIR of Bantam cameras he had recently acquired, both for about a dollar.  He simply asked me to hang onto the spools in case he wanted more created 828 film sent to him, but that the cameras were mine.  And with that, I now had a Bantam Brigade at my disposal.

Innovation Station: Creating 828 film from 120 Film

Not too long ago, I featured a post spotlighting my use of an 828 Bantam camera, for which film hasn't been commercially available for 30 years, with the exception of respooled rolls of Tri-X using 35mm stock that is distributed by Film for Classics for sale at some film retailers.

But let's say you have a Kodak Bantam or other similar 828 format camera and want to use a stock other than Tri-X, or you want to use the format as it was originally intended, in 28x40mm fashion without sprocket holes being evident. Or perhaps you would just like to save money! 

The good news is that any film that is available in 120 format can be used in your 828 camera.  It involves a little bit of effort, but it can be done reasonably cheaply and without a lot for much in the way of specialized tool setups.  Even better, if you follow all the steps shown below, you will actually get the equivalent of TWO rolls of 828 film every time you do this, as the resulting roll of film will readily take 16 exposures, rather than the native 8 of the original format!

Here's what you will need to get started:

• An unused rigid bodied 120 camera, likely either a TLR or Brownie in style.
• Your choice of a roll of 120 film, plus spare 120 spool to be a take up spool.
• Two 828 spools, one to act as the supply spool, the other to take up the film.
• One 828 camera in which to enjoy shooting your extra long 828 film.
• One unused flat rigid plastic card, such as a Hotel Room Pass Card, Store Loyalty Card, etc.
• A couple of junk slides plus some permanent glue.
• One Utility knife blade that is SHARP!
• Some Electrical Tape.
• Scissors
• A completely dark room or perhaps a changing bag.

Following in My Father's Footsteps: The 828 Kodak Bantam Special.

It was among the first cameras to enter my hands that would rekindle an interest in shooting with film again.  And yet I am only now writing about it.  

Why you might ask? Let's just say the best laid plans do not always come to fruition.

It was quite possibly the most novel and quirky idea for this blog that I'd ever summoned up. It was going to be epic and a little bit amazing.  And it stalled.

In a nutshell, while going through items my mother had passed onto us, I encountered a remarkably small little camera of my father's that caught my eye.  After a little bit of investigation, I discovered it was none other than a Kodak Bantam camera that uses 828 film, a format discontinued in the mid-1980's that is slightly larger than 35mm.  Soon after, I found a batch of Kodachrome slides from the 1940's and 1950's that were clearly taken with this same camera, as evidenced by the larger transparency size.  Eventually a magnificent idea began to gel.

What if I took this camera and literally "followed in my father's footsteps" to retake the images from these perspectives today?  It seemed like the perfect "then and now" photo montage but with an interesting twist.  I'd not seen where anyone had done then an now images taken over 50 years apart with the exact same camera.  It was a flash of brilliance!