Seeking High Contrast results.

[Greg Winterflood]

I'd certainly like to produce some High Contrast results. I've never been there and done that; but I'd like to be able to do it without too much experimentation as I have a limited amount of money with which to play around. There is only one photographic paper available to me in this isolated town, Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe

25 sheets cost me $29.20USD. Does that sound about right?

I do have some Multigrade filters. The one thing I don't have is a 902 Safelight! Can't buy one here for love or money.

[Wirehead]

So, Ornello? Some of us are quite acustomed to the standard results and would like to screw around with other directions.

And don't knock my grainy infrared nudes, either.

Dono. Slide film has a gamma of over 1. What's wrong with B&W negatives having a gamma over 1, especially with an eye towards better scanability? If I take quite a few of my correctly-exposed B&W negatives, I could double the gamma and not suffer blocked highlights or shadows. Sure B&W printing paper's not designed for it, but a CCD scanner will likely produce a better quality scan.

[Ornello]

"The high-contrast look is extremely trite, and was old hat by 1970."

In YOUR opinion.

Actually, it was old hat by 1966.

[Ornello]

I'd certainly like to produce some High Contrast results. I've never been there and done that; but I'd like to be able to do it without too much experimentation as I have a limited amount of money with which to play around. There is only one photographic paper available to me in this isolated town, Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe

25 sheets cost me $29.20USD. Does that sound about right?

I do have some Multigrade filters. The one thing I don't have is a 902 Safelight! Can't buy one here for love or money.

Use a #4 or #5 filter on your Multigrade paper and leave the negative development alone.

Get a Kodak OC filter for your safelight. It's the equivalent to the 902.

[Ornello]

So, Ornello? Some of us are quite acustomed to the standard results and would like to screw around with other directions.

And don't knock my grainy infrared nudes, either.

Dono. Slide film has a gamma of over 1. What's wrong with B&W negatives having a gamma over 1, especially with an eye towards better scanability? If I take quite a few of my correctly-exposed B&W negatives, I could double the gamma and not suffer blocked highlights or shadows. Sure B&W printing paper's not designed for it, but a CCD scanner will likely produce a better quality scan.

Development of the 35mm negative for optimum printing quality will call for a Contrast Index of about 0.35-0.40. This may or may not be ideal for scanning. Scanners generally perform best with color materials; the silver in a B&W negative reflects light differently than the dyes used in color film.

[Greg Winterflood]

I'd certainly like to produce some High Contrast results. I've never been there and done that; but I'd like to be able to do it without too much experimentation as I have a limited amount of money with which to play around. There is only one photographic paper available to me in this isolated town, Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe

25 sheets cost me $29.20USD. Does that sound about right?

I do have some Multigrade filters. The one thing I don't have is a 902 Safelight! Can't buy one here for love or money.

Use a #4 or #5 filter on your Multigrade paper and leave the negative development alone.

Get a Kodak OC filter for your safelight. It's the equivalent to the 902.

Thanks for that. I am watching a beehive Kodak OC on eBay for $15AUD. Someone is asking ~$200AUD for second hand Ilford 902 Safelight.

[Keith Tapscott.]

I'd certainly like to produce some High Contrast results. I've never been there and done that; but I'd like to be able to do it without too much experimentation as I have a limited amount of money with which to play around. There is only one photographic paper available to me in this isolated town, Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe

25 sheets cost me $29.20USD. Does that sound about right?

I do have some Multigrade filters. The one thing I don't have is a 902 Safelight! Can't buy one here for love or money.

Use a #4 or #5 filter on your Multigrade paper and leave the negative development alone.

Get a Kodak OC filter for your safelight. It's the equivalent to the 902.

Thanks for that. I am watching a beehive Kodak OC on eBay for $15AUD. Someone is asking ~$200AUD for second hand Ilford 902 Safelight.

Both are ideal for variable contrast papers, the Kodak is definitely a bargain at those prices.

[Ornello]

I'd certainly like to produce some High Contrast results. I've never been there and done that; but I'd like to be able to do it without too much experimentation as I have a limited amount of money with which to play around. There is only one photographic paper available to me in this isolated town, Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe

25 sheets cost me $29.20USD. Does that sound about right?

I do have some Multigrade filters. The one thing I don't have is a 902 Safelight! Can't buy one here for love or money.

Use a #4 or #5 filter on your Multigrade paper and leave the negative development alone.

Get a Kodak OC filter for your safelight. It's the equivalent to the 902.

Thanks for that. I am watching a beehive Kodak OC on eBay for $15AUD. Someone is asking ~$200AUD for second hand Ilford 902 Safelight.

Have a nice 1965.

[Greg Winterflood]

Have a nice 1965.

1965 is good. I graduate from Wyomissing Area High School, Reading, Pa. I take pictures of my girlfriend on my Kodak Retinette 1B. Well, the camera actually belonged to my mother but she gave it to me when I went off to live in the USA for a year. The light meter on that camera died so I gave it away.

In 2007 I purchased another on eBay which is in fine working condition. Is good enough to experiment with high contrast shots of my new girlfriend - except she is in Paris at present - which explains why I spend so much time on photo forums

[Ornello]

Have a nice 1965.

1965 is good. I graduate from Wyomissing Area High School, Reading, Pa. I take pictures of my girlfriend on my Kodak Retinette 1B. Well, the camera actually belonged to my mother but she gave it to me when I went off to live in the USA for a year. The light meter on that camera died so I gave it away.

In 2007 I purchased another on eBay which is in fine working condition. Is good enough to experiment with high contrast shots of my new girlfriend - except she is in Paris at present - which explains why I spend so much time on photo forums

I was in high school in 1965. The girls dressed much nicer then than they do now. How old are you?

You may find this book of interest:

High Contrast by J. Seeley

A copy is available from:

Wickliff Books
3527 North High St.
Columbus, Ohio 43214
614-263-2903

E-mail: wickliffbooks@iwaynet.net

[Greg Winterflood]

I was in high school in 1965. The girls dressed much nicer then than they do now. How old are you?

When I was 17 I looked at 17 year olds. When I was 40 I looked at 40 year olds. Now I am 59 I find myself looking at 60 year olds, and wonder what the heck is happening.

I'm not sure what 17 year olds are wearing these days - I imagine it is next to nothing. I must make a study.

If you click on the 'www' button at the bottom of this post and then click on the 'flickr' photos at the left, you will be able to see what a 59 year old Australian looks like

Also, Jim Appleyard might like to see there, a photo of the antihalation dye I retrieved from a pre wash of the first roll of efke film I attempted to develop. I botched loading it onto a Patterson reel in a foggy darkroom, but got some vague images. I've since improved the darkness of the darkroom, and now have a Hewes 127 Stainless Steel Reel, so now it is time to make some more exposures.

[pirateoversixty]

1965 , it was a VERY good year. I was safely released from active duty in the Army, and started dating my wife-to-be.
Jim

[Greg Winterflood]

1965 , it was a VERY good year. I was safely released from active duty in the Army, and started dating my wife-to-be.
Jim

That was the year I started to worry about being drafted - for we had the draft in Australia as well. There was a choice - you could sign up for the Citizens Military Forces - for 5 years of square bashing in Australia; or you could leave your birthday in the hat and risk Viet Nam. The method of choosing draftees was by pulling birthdays out of a hat. My birthday didn't come out - but I knew a guy who had signed on for 5 years who was born on the same day and in the same year as I was. He was ropeable, and really didn't like me at all after that!

Today is ANZAC Day. Our national day of observance of things military. Damian Parer is one of our famed WWII battle front movie takers. He went in with the commandos, armed with a movie camera, convinced that a bullet would never hit him. He took some amazing footage until he was proved wrong.

[Jim Appleyard]

[quote="Greg Winterflood"
Also, Jim Appleyard might like to see there, a photo of the antihalation dye I retrieved from a pre wash of the first roll of efke film I attempted to develop. I botched loading it onto a Patterson reel in a foggy darkroom, but got some vague images. I've since improved the darkness of the darkroom, and now have a Hewes 127 Stainless Steel Reel, so now it is time to make some more exposures.[/quote]

Yes, I've seen the dye from Efke films. Not a color found in nature!

[Ornello]

I was in high school in 1965. The girls dressed much nicer then than they do now. How old are you?

When I was 17 I looked at 17 year olds. When I was 40 I looked at 40 year olds. Now I am 59 I find myself looking at 60 year olds, and wonder what the heck is happening.

I'm not sure what 17 year olds are wearing these days - I imagine it is next to nothing. I must make a study.

If you click on the 'www' button at the bottom of this post and then click on the 'flickr' photos at the left, you will be able to see what a 59 year old Australian looks like

Also, Jim Appleyard might like to see there, a photo of the antihalation dye I retrieved from a pre wash of the first roll of efke film I attempted to develop. I botched loading it onto a Patterson reel in a foggy darkroom, but got some vague images. I've since improved the darkness of the darkroom, and now have a Hewes 127 Stainless Steel Reel, so now it is time to make some more exposures.

I am 57 and want nothing to do with women my age. Only those under 40 need apply.