taylan
Street Dog
How can I get a frame like this:
Perforated frame around wet print
- Thread starter taylan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 29
- Views 4K
benlees
Well-known
Just get a spare film holder and take a file to it. Takes about 10 minutes.
MartinP
Veteran
Hi Taylan, better to use a medium-format glass carrier with some careful masking. Also, it may be better to print the "film perforations" in a second exposure (with adjusted masking in the carrier but without moving paper or neg) while covering the main print-area with a piece of black card, in order to reduce veiling from the huge amount of light bouncing around the place.
If one files a glassless 35mm carrier to show this much of the negative then it would be essentially unsupported, and probably not flat. It is quite different to the frequent small black border effect.
I can't remember if that Kaiser has a glass or glassless carrier?
If one files a glassless 35mm carrier to show this much of the negative then it would be essentially unsupported, and probably not flat. It is quite different to the frequent small black border effect.
I can't remember if that Kaiser has a glass or glassless carrier?
Last edited:
taylan
Street Dog
Hi Martin
At first I thought as you wrote, but how can I get the white perforated holes? I am confused 🙂
At first I thought as you wrote, but how can I get the white perforated holes? I am confused 🙂
taylan
Street Dog
BTW Kaiser's carrier has changeable inserts and convert it both glass or glassless
Never Satisfied
Well-known
Without a special mask, you can't.
I would say that print was made digitally.
Andrew.
I would say that print was made digitally.
Andrew.
MartinP
Veteran
Oops, I see what you mean. Too late in the evening here! Indeed, with a straight print of the neg the perforations would be black and the filmbase would be "almost black".
One could achieve this effect by contacting a black piece of developed 35mm film onto a piece of sheet film (orthochromatic to make it easier under safelight) then trim the sheet to fit the carrier and do a second exposure, after covering the main print-area and adjusting column height etc.
Even then you would have to fiddle around with another negative to get any text in to the mask. These days I suppose it would have been done digitally, as suggested by our Australian colleague, above. Sighhhh. . .
Edit, You could always use a piece of transparency film to make the interneg, that would give you text in the mask directly, though you would have to choose a part that didn't say "Ektachrome" of course.
One could achieve this effect by contacting a black piece of developed 35mm film onto a piece of sheet film (orthochromatic to make it easier under safelight) then trim the sheet to fit the carrier and do a second exposure, after covering the main print-area and adjusting column height etc.
Even then you would have to fiddle around with another negative to get any text in to the mask. These days I suppose it would have been done digitally, as suggested by our Australian colleague, above. Sighhhh. . .
Edit, You could always use a piece of transparency film to make the interneg, that would give you text in the mask directly, though you would have to choose a part that didn't say "Ektachrome" of course.
Last edited:
Never Satisfied
Well-known
Hi Martin, exactly!
When you think in reverse it is obvious that you'll just end up with big black blobs where the sprocket holes are. You could photograph the neg on a light box and the print that as a type of copy neg, but is a lot of mucking around.
Cheers Andrew.
When you think in reverse it is obvious that you'll just end up with big black blobs where the sprocket holes are. You could photograph the neg on a light box and the print that as a type of copy neg, but is a lot of mucking around.
Cheers Andrew.
taylan
Street Dog
Thanks guys for your brilliant ideas. I think it is hard to do, but it looks great and deserves a try.
MartinP
Veteran
I just looked in my cupboard . . . I have some normal panchromatic sheet-film (Foma 100, should be contrasty enough in print developer) and some exposed ends of slide film. I think I'll try this idea out this weekend 🙂
Forunately I don't have any negs as shocking as the one made by Mr.Ut (and the 16mm film shot by an ITN newscameraman at the same time shows the scene), but we will see how the graphics part of the picture works out.
Forunately I don't have any negs as shocking as the one made by Mr.Ut (and the 16mm film shot by an ITN newscameraman at the same time shows the scene), but we will see how the graphics part of the picture works out.
VinceC
Veteran
Some enlargers have adjustable masks on the glass carrier. With a thin to fairly correctly exposed negative, there is no need to adjust for extra light at the sprocket holes, but if you start buring/dodging much, you can get bad spillover. Thicker negs with longer exposure times end up with glare/spillover.
MartinP
Veteran
With a direct print, the perforations are going to print black, not white, on the positive image - this is what we realised above and is the reason for the interneg (to reverse the perfs to white and the rest of the 'filmstrip' effect to black, on the print second exposure).
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
This would be the result of a black and white slide printed to reversal paper - rather unlikely to be real. The real question would be whether the Polaroid outer frame is fake as well.
shimokita
白黒
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
This is how they got that print....
You make a contact print of the negs like you would normally...then take that print and make another neg of the frame wanted on a Copy Camera (think Graphic Arts classes)
Now you take that continuous tone neg and print it...If you have the capacity to do so you can make a neg large enough on a copy camera to do a contact print of it...
Or it can be done digitally basically in the same way...
You make a contact print of the negs like you would normally...then take that print and make another neg of the frame wanted on a Copy Camera (think Graphic Arts classes)
Now you take that continuous tone neg and print it...If you have the capacity to do so you can make a neg large enough on a copy camera to do a contact print of it...
Or it can be done digitally basically in the same way...
ddutchison
Well-known
Bullseye.
It's a fake effect and it's untruthful to the process of photography - in this case a photograph that helped end a war.
I gotta say that it's a little weird to be discussing, in detail, the rendering of the sprocket holes around one of the greatest photographs of the last century.
blue4130
Well-known
The polaroid boarder is real. It is Tim Mantoani's work for his book "Behind Photographs - Archiving Photographic Legends" all shot on 20x24 polaroid film.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2139052762/behind-photographs-archiving-photographic-legends
taylan
Street Dog
MartinP
Veteran
I will indeed -- I'll even make a quick digi-pic of the results and a step-by-step list of what I did . . . and also the things which I (re-)discover that I shouldn't have done, as I haven't made an interneg since I moved to Holland (what a terrible admission 😱).
The exposure and development times for the film, which I remember from the last time I tried this, will need to be found again as I have a different enlarger and a different film in this country. That will also be different for your Kaiser of course.
jaredangle
Photojournalist
For the look of the photograph that he is holding, definitely a medium format negative carrier or a large format glass carrier w/ masking.
The other style, as benlees put it, is to file the edges of a 35mm carrier. You can file quite a bit and get roughly half of the sprockets but your film will be trickier to keep in the carrier, or you can file past the frame but not quite to the sprockets, to get a crisp, thin line around your frame.
Here's one that I did.
The other style, as benlees put it, is to file the edges of a 35mm carrier. You can file quite a bit and get roughly half of the sprockets but your film will be trickier to keep in the carrier, or you can file past the frame but not quite to the sprockets, to get a crisp, thin line around your frame.
Here's one that I did.
