What Else To Do?

Post by **drmoss_ca** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:00 pm

A windy, rainy weekend, with intermittent power (courtesy of Earl). What to do? Obviously, finish the roll of 120 Tri-X in the Bessa III, develop, scan it on the Nikon 9000 and print it! This was Thomas being interviewed by some journalist on the phone:

Medium format Tri-X and Diafine are simply splendid!

Chris

KAV · Post by **KAV** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:13 pm

Thomas needs to dress better for interviews.

Post by **drmoss_ca** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:32 pm

Mmm, and shave...

Chris
Though the T-shirt comes from an excellent webcomic.

KAV · Post by **KAV** » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:46 pm

"OMG, I'm talking like my father"- Billy Crystal

GregPQ · Post by **GregPQ** » Mon Sep 06, 2010 4:31 am

Three comments:
1. The depth of field is amazing: only Thomas is in focus, so the foreground chair isn't an 'issue'.
2. Interesting to think that Tri-X was a fast film at ISO400, in today's world of ISO6400 and up.
3. Complementing the retro look that B&W provides, Thomas is using a real telephone, so 'back in the day'.

Greg

m3m0ryleak · Post by **m3m0ryleak** » Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:29 am

I had forgotten how "real" film looks and I used to go through rolls of it.

KAV · Post by **KAV** » Sat Sep 11, 2010 10:40 am

What IS the concensus on wet film? I know Kodacrome was dropped, Polaroid is gone and I hear Digital everywhere.
I had a nice Canon in the military with 3 lens, some filters and a flash. I took some photos far beyond my talent.
Is it a dying art? I REALLY enjoyed watching SUPERIOR digital TEEVEE last night- broken signal, lime green dropouts and kaliedoscope bursts.

Gene · Post by **Gene** » Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:06 am

GregPQ wrote:Three comments:
1. The depth of field is amazing: only Thomas is in focus, so the foreground chair isn't an 'issue'.
2. Interesting to think that Tri-X was a fast film at ISO400, in today's world of ISO6400 and up.
3. Complementing the retro look that B&W provides, Thomas is using a real telephone, so 'back in the day'.

Indoor shot, no visible flash used...pretty much assures you that the lens is open quite a bit, so Depth-of-Field is going to be pretty tight.

I had to re-read this, and realized that Dr. Moss said medium format 120 film. Don't recognize the camera he mentioned, but I cut my photographic teeth with a similar film setup (this is similar, but I think mine was the Rolliecord...this is close, though):

Nicely sized negative, capable of larger, sharper prints than 35mm!