#1 – Adventures with Lab-Box and 35mm Film

Retirement means I have time. So, I have decided to try my hand at developing my own film once again. My low level of patience and tolerance for frustration makes a film bag, reels, and a Paterson tank something I don’t really like. When the Lab-Box came out, I thought it looked pretty good, and bought myself one with both the 35mm and 120 film modules.Image result for lab-box

Do you know what the Lab-Box is? Well, it is a day-light loading and processing box system for 35mm and 120 film. Learn about it in this video below.  What is good about this particular video is that it links to “how to” videos on how to assemble the bits and pieces of the critter.  There are a lot of other videos out there, too, so if you are curious, head over to YouTube.

Right up front, I got a bunch of crappy pictures. I had hoped for better using the Lab-Box and black and white 35mm film (Tri-X 400). However, I also really did not expect much as film processing and I have a history of disliking each other it seems.  I had a problem rolling the film onto the reel. If the reel is not properly put together, there are problems, which may be why I had the issues I did.  As a result, I plan to check my rolling of film with a canister of 35mm play film

The developing itself went okay. The images that did develop were at the beginning and at the end of the roll, but the ones in between must have gotten squashed together as I rolled the film in the box.  I also did not attach the crank properly at the beginning of the processing development, and probably had a light leak along with a loss of some chemistry.  The reel may also be improperly assembled.

I am going to continue using the Lab-Box.  Practice is necessary for this kind of stuff.  I will re-check how I assembled it.  For processing the film, I used a monobath, an archival rinse, and PhotoFlo 500 before hanging the roll up to dry.  The steps I used to process the film seem to be okay, but the light leak, chemistry leak, and so on all need to be sorted out.  Others have gotten great results with their Lab-Boxes, in both 35 and 120, and I see no reason I shouldn’t either!

Light

The other day I was putzing around, looking at photography books, thinking about painting and drawing and photography, and something I read about Galen Rowell hit me.  He was always looking at the light – how it worked, what it looked like, what it was doing to the scenery.  Of course I have read about it – we all do – and thought about it a bit now and again.  However, that moment seems to have one of those clarifying moments in my creative life.

Last week I went out with my newly CLA’d Yashica D TLR camera (beautifully done by Mark Hama) and took some pictures, just to use the camera and see how it was working.  It was great – I had a serious issue with using it as the focusing screen was full of crud.  Anyway, I used Fuji Pro 400H as it has wonderful colors, but I had never used the 120 film.

When I went out with the Yashica, I thought about contrast, the differences between light and dark, but not specifically light itself.  I got some good images, just thinking about contrast, really obvious contrast, and more subtle contrast, perhaps in smaller areas.  While the processing was done in a local lab, my own post-processing was done by scanning the negatives with VueScan, my V600 scanner, and a new-to-me software, Negative Lab Pro (more about that in a later post).  I always increase contrast in post anyway – maybe it’s just my poor eyesight – because I like to have a clear picture.  Here are some of the images from that roll.

Because I was limited to 12 pictures at the most with the Yashica, I took my time.  I thought about contrast.  Plants against the sky, light coming up between the trees, backlit leaves – all of these are easily evident when contrast is considered.  More subtle color contrast, such as leaves on the same plant, some in shadow, some in sun, required more analysis prior to making the shot.  Other thoughts on contrast consdered were the contrast of light flowers against a darker background, or the light bark of the sycamore against the darker fence and foliage behind it.  In general, things worked.  DOF also adds to a sense of contrast when softly blurred items allow things more sharply in focus to come forward.

The same ideas of contrast came out when I decided to shoot a bunch of black and white images using my Canonet GIII QL17 and Kodak Tri-X 400.  Here are some of my more successful photos from that roll, again with the idea of contrast (not light) as a foremost thought – light against dark, dark against light.

Contrast, for me anyway, is not a subtle thing.  Short scale (less shades of grey) is really easy to visualize because the difference between light and dark is evident.  The images above are strongly contrasty, and to increase the contrast, I asked the lab to push the film +2 (whether they did or not, who knows!).  Long scale is more subtle, with variations between light and dark far more.

Yesterday, I went out with my Yashica D and a roll of Ultrafine Extreme 400 black and white film – only looking for light before taking a picture.  The idea of light – not contrast – was in my mind when I went out last week.  I looked for the play of light on the scene, not just contrast. This created a very different mindset.  I saw contrast quite clearly, but in looking at the light itself, and its nuances, made me look much more carefully.

It may be a bit before the roll is processed, but hopefully not.  We are planning a little road trip / photo shoot today up in the mountains north of us.  I want to use up film in the Yashica, as well as the film in a few other cameras.  Mountain road driving in a sports car with stops for a picture (or 2 or 3) is not a bad way to spend part of a day.

Film

Lately I am shooting a lot of film.  Hopefully I will be processing some once I master the Lab-Box, first in black and white, and then later in color if I find the frustration level not frustrating!

Anyway, here are a few pictures taken with my N90s and 60mm macro lens, which I dropped, but do not seem to have damaged either.  The film here is Fuji Pro 400H, which is great for color.

If you take a look at the camera in the pictures above, you will see it is a Contax IIIa ca. 1953. It has a rather amazing lens, a Zeiss-Opton Sonnar 50mm f1.5. It’s sharp and lovely when I nail it. Being a rangefinder and a new-to-me camera, I am still learning to “get” the focus. The following images were taken using the camera along with Fuji Super 200. Some pictures I did with the Sunny 16 rule, a light meter, or the suggestions from the camera’s readout.

Editing film certainly beats breathing smoke and listening to sirens!

The Next Day

It seems as if the worst of the fire in our area (the Easy Fire if you want to look it up) is under control. Part of it is that the wind has dropped. Mandatory evacuations in many areas have ended, power has been restored, and all might be right with the world. The air is cold and smells fresh, just a tang of wood smoke in it, unlike yesterday morning when the house was filled with it. We went for a walk last night, finally able to get out of the house without howling winds, and the sky was clear and bright. Yesterday was surreal. I can only imagine what it might be for people who return to neighborhoods devastated by fires, or those who live through an invasion of their country and find their lives totally overturned.

We spent yesterday morning packing things up. Josh doesn’t have the collections I have, so his packing was pretty straightforward. On the other hand, I had to sort through things, deciding what to take, deciding what to leave. Making those choices is actually rather draining mentally. It forces you to think about what you value. Luckily, nothing happened, but what if? Very strange in my rather settled life.

Fires and natural catastrophes are unavoidable, but the older I get, the more I am sick of the winds and fires of California. I talk about moving, but the fact is, I won’t. We are settled here with family and friends and a job (Josh). In some ways, we are lucky we chose where we moved 13 years ago, but it was luck, not careful planning around potential natural disasters. We are in the middle of a suburb far enough from open land and mountains and canyons to avoid the worst of the fire potential, and have underground utilities. There is a natural gas pipeline (or some kind of major pipeline) not too far from where we live, which could explode and cause a bit of damage, but in general, we are okay. Fires have been on all sides of us over the years, but it seems we have enough distance to be bypassed. Much as I would love to live on a mountain top, I am glad that I am flatlander!

I plan to keep things boxed up for a bit.  Josh will work from home all day,  We will monitor the fire potential, but get on with daily living.  I made moussaka last night for dinner, and this morning I want to get out in the brisk air for a walk and some photography and some badly needed exercise.  Air quality looks good as the wind is up, but particulate matter is hard to assess.  Painting, reading, and drawing also sound good!  We have been pretty fortunate altogether, and while I am at it, those of you who wished us well, your messages were truly appreciated!