A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"1940s look" on B/W enlargement



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 12th 07, 01:33 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 212
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 21:14:59 -0500, pico wrote:


Does this have the look?
http://www.digoliardi.net/broken.htm


Is that you John ?
  #22  
Old March 12th 07, 01:34 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 212
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 20:57:00 -0400, Adam
wrote:

Thanks, David! I spent a while this afternoon looking through a binder
of new prints made from 1930s-40s negatives (for sale at the FDR Visitor
Center), trying to figure out what they had in common. Most were low
contrast, a few were high contrast. In general the whites were a very
light grey and the blacks were a dark grey. There wasn't much shadow
detail. Most were sharp, but a few weren't. I think one difference is
the range of greys -- modern images have all shades, but these had maybe
only five or six distinct shades of grey between the lightest and
darkest. Does this sound plausible? If so, is there an easy way to
simulate this?

Adam


Also condensor enlargers were the norm then and they caused a lot of
this type of look.

==
John S. Douglas
Photographer & Webmaster
Legacy-photo.com - Xs750.net
  #23  
Old March 12th 07, 02:39 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
pico
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

Adam wrote:
pico wrote:
Does this have the look?
http://www.digoliardi.net/broken.htm


Thanks! I'd say it does -- only maybe six or ten gradations between the
lightest and darkest greys, and not much shadow detail. Is that an
actual photo from the 1940s or 1950s? If it isn't, how'd you get it to
look like one?


Nikkor 105mm lens at F4, Tri-X at 320, FG-7 with 15% sodium sulphite
underdeveloped (I forgot how much).

1972.
  #24  
Old March 12th 07, 02:42 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
pico
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

OH, it has a bit more shadow detail in the original print. It is printed
down a bit but works well when viewing IRL.

Someone else help me here - it was printed on Agfa Brovira #111. I think
that paper had a brightener in it to enhance reflectivity. I wonder if
that's one reason I have trouble scanning such prints.

'course, I'm not very good at scanning anyway...
  #25  
Old March 12th 07, 02:43 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
pico
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

John wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 21:14:59 -0500, pico wrote:

Does this have the look?
http://www.digoliardi.net/broken.htm


Is that you John ?


Yes.
  #26  
Old March 12th 07, 05:08 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
pico[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

Here's another. Maybe.

http://www.digoliardi.net/warm.jpg



  #27  
Old March 13th 07, 03:12 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Adam[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

John wrote:
I've found that (depending on the paper) images that are given a
slight treatment in ferricyanide (Potassium Ferricyanide) first tone
much better. And it really is extremely simple.

Pot. Ferricyanide 50g
Pot. Bromide 50g
Water 1.0L

Now that's a stock formula that works quite well. If you bleach the
image back with this solution and then "redevelop" it with something
like a sulfide toner, you'll have an incredibly stable warm-toned
image.


I know nothing about toners yet... I assume those are after the fixer.
I don't even know if the college photo lab has facilities and
ingredients for mixing one's own. Remember, my darkroom experience is
only a matter of weeks and we are still doing things "by the book."

I have my father's 1951-1952 edition of CRC's "Handbook of Chemistry and
Physics," and it has nearly 50 pages devoted to photographic formulae.
One is a reducer for lessening density and contrast of heavy negatives,
Potassium Ferricyanide 35g, Potassium bromide 10g, Water to make 1000
ccs, which is a similar solution to your suggestion. If I knew what I
was doing, and the lab had the facilities and ingredients, this book
would be a wonderful source of period solutions!

In general the whites were a very
light grey and the blacks were a dark grey. There wasn't much shadow
detail. Most were sharp, but a few weren't. I think one difference is
the range of greys -- modern images have all shades, but these had

maybe
only five or six distinct shades of grey between the lightest and
darkest. Does this sound plausible? If so, is there an easy way to
simulate this?


It's called "soot and chalk". No good clean whites but also no good
highlight details. Same for the shadows. You can get a similar look by
shooting that TX400 at EI64 and shortening development by about 50%.


Well, this afternoon I decided to combine that with Laura's suggestion
about using period equipment. I wandered around another local college
that has many older buildings, and tried to get essentially the same
shots with my SLR (Tri-X @ ISO 400) and with an Argus C3 (Tri-X at EI
100). Unfortunately my college is closed this week (Spring Break), so I
won't be able to get into the darkroom until next week.

This will be the first time I'll be developing film at anything other
than standard time and temperature. The lab uses Sprint Standard film
developer (standard dilution, 1:9), and Sprint's FAQ says that for two
stops overexposure, subtract one letter from the chart recommendation.
They recommend letter "O" for normal Tri-X (e.g. 10:00 at 68F/20C) but
our instructor told us to use "N" (e.g. 8:30 at 68F), and subtracting
one letter would be "M", e.g. 7:30 at 68F. I guess I ought to use
something between 5:00 (half their recommendation for normal exposure)
and 7:30 (their recommendation for two stops overexposed), maybe 6:00 or
6:30 or the equivalent for the temperature I'll be using. Does that
sound reasonable?

Many thanks to you and to everybody who's shared suggestions here! I'm
pleased to see that my first post in this NG has generated such
interesting and knowledgeable discussion.

Adam
  #28  
Old March 13th 07, 03:12 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Adam[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

pico wrote:
Does this have the look?
http://www.digoliardi.net/broken.htm


Thanks! I'd say it does -- only maybe six or ten gradations between
the lightest and darkest greys, and not much shadow detail. Is that
an actual photo from the 1940s or 1950s? If it isn't, how'd you get
it to look like one?


Nikkor 105mm lens at F4, Tri-X at 320, FG-7 with 15% sodium sulphite
underdeveloped (I forgot how much).

1972.


Here's another. Maybe.

http://www.digoliardi.net/warm.jpg


I think your first example was closer to what I'm looking for. Your
second example seems to have a complete range of greys between its
extremes, which are admittedly low contrast. OTOH I am admittedly new
to all this darkroom stuff, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about!

I tried something different today. See my reply to John for the details
(to save bandwidth). Thanks for your help with this!

Adam
  #29  
Old March 13th 07, 07:39 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 450
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement

Adam wrote:
Well, this afternoon I decided to combine that with Laura's suggestion
about using period equipment. I wandered around another local college
that has many older buildings, and tried to get essentially the same
shots with my SLR (Tri-X @ ISO 400) and with an Argus C3 (Tri-X at EI
100). Unfortunately my college is closed this week (Spring Break), so I
won't be able to get into the darkroom until next week.


I'm sorry I can't remember how to remove and replace it without damaging
anything, maybe someone else can, but you can take the lens off of
the C-3 and use it as an enlarging lens. It's not as good as a lens
designed to be used for enlarging but it works and may give you more
of the results you seek.

As for using Tri-X at ASA (let's get into the terms of the period) 100,
I'm not sure it will do what you expect. You could try films that are similar
in design to period films such as Plus-X (how different is the "new" anyway?),
Ilford Pan-F (similar to the late Panatomic-X) and Adox/Orwo/Efke KB-25,
which was sold as KB-14 at one time.

KB-14 is Orthopanchromatic, so it has less red response than regular
panchromatic film. It may make a difference.

You could also try to find an orthochromatic film that works for general
subjects, I have no idea if they are still around. Most roll film cameras
in the U.S. in the 1940s used Verichrome (NOT the later Verichrome Pan)
which was orthocrhomatic. Possibly a green or blue filter will duplicate
the results on panchromatic film.

You could also try developing your film in dilute paper developer. I started
out with Kodak "Tri-Chem-Packs" which included Dektol, a stop bath and fixer.
Dektol is a paper developer, but it was in this case used for film.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 Fax ONLY: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at
http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
  #30  
Old March 13th 07, 10:13 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
David Nebenzahl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,353
Default "1940s look" on B/W enlargement: Suggestion

Adam spake thus:

Hi everybody! Would someone be able to help me with a darkroom
question? I've been "shooting pictures" for several decades but this
semester marks my first actual darkroom experience. I have one nice
shot (35mm Tri-X) of an old (restored) vending machine in an old
(restored) train station, and nothing in the image gives any clue that
it was taken recently. What I'd like to do is make an enlargement that
somehow looks as if it was shot (and even printed?) in the 1930s or
1940s... at least something that would fool a casual viewer at first.
Does anyone here have any suggestions on how to (inexpensively) simulate
that '30s/'40s "look"? As I said, I'm a beginner in the darkroom, and
my paper on hand is Ilford Multigrade IV RC De Luxe Pearl.


Adam, let me make a suggestion here. Rather than try any of the fancy,
esoteric solutions that people here have proposed (toning, etc.), why
don't you just do the following, which you can do with what you already
have: make a series of prints from your shot, using your RC paper, at
various contrasts and of varying density. (You do have access to a set
of contrast filters, don't you? If not, they're inexpensive.) For each
contrast grade, make a set of prints ranging from light to dark.

Be sure to mark each print with the contrast grade and exposure data.
When they're dry, you can spread them out and see if any of them have
that "30s-40s" look you're after.

It won't cost you very much, and you'll probably learn more about
darkroom technique than you bargained for.


--
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Friends are born, not made." !!!! By: "Henry Brooks Adams" [email protected] Digital Photography 1 February 1st 07 03:25 PM
Is this Alexander "Dink" Cain in "Warm Springs"? Jennifer Digital Photography 0 December 21st 06 03:44 AM
How to insert the "modified time" attribute in "date taken" attrib in batch mode ashjas Digital Photography 4 November 8th 06 10:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.