How Low Can You Go? Mr Brown Low ISO 6 Speed Film from the Film Photography Project

Reading some of my postings, it doesn't take too long to realize that I'm a fan of slow speed films.  I rarely shoot 400 speed film, and actually like to stick below 100 if at all possible.  

Still, there are times when even Rollei RPX 25 is too fast for me: when I'd like to open up the lens fully on a sunlit day and get some fun shots with limited depth of field.  I've managed to try a few super slow speed films with speeds near 1 and 3, but there are times when these are admittedly just a bit too slow.  I lamented that there was nothing in that middle ground between 6 and 12 speed.  Sure I could shoot 25 speed film with a polarizer to slow it down, but shooting with a quaint old camera that would require hand-holding an SLR-designed polarizer in front of the lens is admittedly something of a hassle.

So when I saw the Film Photography Project offering an affordable limited edition film with a speed of ISO 6, I just HAD to snap some up to try!  

Mr. Brown Low ISO film comes in a 24 exposure roll for just under $3.00 a roll.  It is listed as being a thin based, high contrast film that develops well in most typical developers.  I had no idea just what to expect from this film, but elected to put it to work in one of my favorite "adapted" cameras: my Kodak Bantam RF with the 24mm square mask.  

I took the camera along with me on a couple of errands, stopping for photos at the Rose Hill Manor in Frederick, as well as a few other locations around town.  I kept my expectations minimal, and they were exceeded.  GREATLY exceeded! 

Fun with Film: Portra 160 Slowed Down

Sometimes a limit of choices is a good thing. 

I've never been terribly good with making quick purchasing decisions when confronted with something unpredictable, particularly that I hate going out to spend money for something only to not find it and having to settle for an alternative. 

Such was the case a few weeks ago, when, as I made my way up to the counter of my favorite Brick and Mortar photo store to buy a couple of rolls of Ektar 100 in 120, one of which I'd hoped to cut down to 127 to shoot through my Bell and Howell Electric Eye camera.  Turns out, they were out of Ektar.  

"I've got Portra 160" stated the shop owner.  Hmm, I figured this trip was a total bust since I try to shoot brighly colored landscapes instead of portraits with restrained saturation, but since time was ticking for me to do my photo run, and since I always like to support my local stores, I elected to pick up a couple of rolls to give it a try anyway.

However, the Bell and Howell is not geared for the speed of 160 and tips the scales at about ISO 80. I knew this going in, but hoped that the one stop speed increase wouldn't present too much of an issue. Upon reading a bit of reviews of Portra, I surprised to see that more than a few people said they had their best results with color saturation with the stuff at speeds between 50 and 100. As it turned out, my gamble might actually pay off.

I cut down the roll of 127 film, loaded up the Bell and Howell and went out shooting during lunch on a photo perfect day of lightly cloudy blue skies.  I didn't spend a great deal of time composing, but rather sought out colorful scenes to put this "saturated Portra" idea to the test.  Upon developing and scanning, I was delighted to see that Portra is indeed a great and colorful film when given a stop of extra exposure.

Under blue skies but shadows, Portra delivered a nice palette of colors, but its real saturated strengths emerged...

$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 

A Highly Unlikely Kodachromic Experiment

If you have ever perused the entries of  this blog, it is readily apparent that I have a huge reverence for Kodachrome film.  And this reverence is particularly strong for the first stable emulsion that was produced between 1938 and 1962.  The colors rendered by this "Red Border Kodachrome" tend to really favor the often nostalgic settings they are used to portray.

At times, I have gone through various efforts to replicate this look, either through attempts of digital manipulation or through carefully selecting my subject matter to try to exclude as many tell-tale modern anachronisms as I can.  The results have shown hints of promise, but were largely lacking to me, and as a result, I tended to shelve the efforts.

My conclusions of my first attempts were that the best starting point to replicate this nostalgic look was a film image taken on a vintage film camera.  However, my attempts on the few other transparency films left did not render a palette close to the Kodachrome hues that I'd seen.  In fact, I'd only seen one current film that gave me a hint of a Kodachrome look.

A little while back, I tested a new camera which, despite its operational quirks, did deliver a very retro looking vignetting in its results, while still giving off a sharp central image.  I was at least impressed with this aspect of the camera, and wondered where else I might use this to my advantage.

Which leads me to this - another completely blind stab at replicating the look of Kodachrome using the following as my ingredients:

• A film not made by Eastman Kodak
• A film that is not even a transparency film
• A camera using a format for which Kodachrome was never made.
• A significant amount of foolhardy faith. 
• A limited amount of digital intervention in case the above doesn't pan out.

My film for this experiment is Fuji Pro 400H, the last color negative film made by Fuji in the 120 format, and one pretty well known for its rendering of nice green tones.  In my usual oddball way, I'm not even using it in the 120 format.  Rather, I am cutting this film down to 127 format instead.  The traditionalist in me would have cut this down to 828 instead since it was technically the first format for which the early Kodachrome was made.  However, since this is a 400 speed film instead of a 10-12 speed film like the original Kodachrome, I need to use a camera with adequate enough of a top shutter speed to accomodate such a fast film.

And just which camera might that be?  Why the Foth Derby of course, somewhat appropriate for the course since it was in production when Kodachrome was first released in the late 1930's.  The 1/500 top speed will allow this fast speed film to be used in full sun with the camera stopped down to f/16, something that would not have been possible on a Bantam. Besides, since the Foth is a half-frame 127 camera, it has a 30x40mm image size nearly identical to the 28x40mm image size of the Bantam 828 format.

A couple of lovely days over the Fathers Day Weekend in 2016 delivered some picture perfect weather, so I brought out this classic camera with its unusual film choice to see if I could get results that resembled the Kodachrome of decades past.  Here are some of the better results:

Lots to Come

I realize that posts have gotten to be erratic, but I can assure you that my enthusiasm hasn't waned, or that I'm not working on material.

In fact, I'm in the process of one of my most ambitious projects: namely that to develop color negative film myself, and it requires a lot of shooting, batching of rolls and processes to make as cost effective as I want.

The good news is that my initial attempts at it have met with success, and once I finish up this mega batch of film, I'll be able to give quite a bit more dimension to camera reviews, film reviews, and I've got a nice bit of truly quirky stuff up my sleeve that this project will help me in as well.  

For now, a sample result of self-processed film, taken on the Argus Argoflex Forty on Ektar 100.  

Stay Tuned! 

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.