Nous utilisons, ainsi que nos partenaires, des technologies comme les cookies pour vous reconnaitre et vous montrez plus de choses que vous appréciez. Consultez notre politique de protection des données pour en savoir plus. En visitant ce site internet vous acceptez l'usage de ces technologies.
J'accepte.
House - unaltered original negative - C22 stand development E4 film
#Kodak#ektachrome#E4 1977 vintage #Stand developed in #C22#homebrew. Gnarly #BromideSlide at times. Stand process borrowed from C41 stand - Color Developer - 45 minutes w/initial 30 second agitation, stop 4 min, wash, potassium ferricyanide bleach - 45 minutes, wash 4 min, fix with ammonium thiosulfate fixer (Ilford Rapid 1+4) 8 minutes, wash 8 minutes, hang. This is a new 1970s Nikkor ai 35-105mm (possibly earlier converted). Love this lens it is NOT this soft. Softness is probable caused by C22 benzyl alcohol causing the colors to run, etc. C22 needs the BZA to access the color in the emulsion, supposedly but it drifts as it goes, so stand probably isn't the best way to go, unless the artistic effect is worth it. Or changing either the dilution of the developer or the BZA in the developer. Good news, moving the potassium alum and the sodium thiosulfate out of the stop and the fixer seems to have alleviated the deposits and streaks on the film... however this film REALLY needs a hardening bath.... thanks, hope this is interesting!
@charliedontsurf here is the original negative as scanned. I use "Control My Nikon. I feel like it gives me just a bit less control over my Nikon than I have over my kids.
I'm surprised how decent that negative looks, it's looks like a pretty normal exposure, I've no idea why its soft but its well worth the effort, you can be really proud of yourself. You know, this is lomography, supposed to be the home of experimentation/ alternative processes and no-one except me seems to give a stuff. You're here going through all this, working it out as you go along, completely open, no secrets, anyone can learn from you. Lomo would do a feature on this if it was one of their favourite sons or daughters but alas you have to buy their tat to be one of them. Its the what's in it for me attitude. I detest it.
@charliedontsurf I'll never be anyone's favorite son - except my mother's of course... I need to just set up a webpage where I can share this for whatever it's worth. Funny how Lomo went from being gritty, improvise, get some images on some paper, to underwater redscale photos of naked models. I just read some stuff from a couple years ago on how to put 120 film through an old polaroid roll film camera. That's the shit I think is cool and way more lomo-stic. I GET the people that want photographs to be 100% accurate representations of what appeared before the camera - every time with 1000 archival safety - there is purpose for all that, but they don't belong opening a 60 year old roll of film or a box of paper from World War II hoping to get ANYTHING out of it and being disappointed only enough to try harder the next time - rather than judge the outcome where, for those people, they had no expectations to begin with.... But I do dislike the constant Bauhaus, art school, avant garde, posed bullshit people put up here. Some of it is very pretty and very interesting but it isn't lomography. I get tired of models - hey if your kid wants to pose in front of the Eiffel Tower - that's lomography, if you pose a model in front of the Eiffel Tower, that isn't really. Where was I going with this... oh yeah, now I'm REALLY going to fall from Lomo-Favour.... lol!
4 commentaires