How can i get images simmilar to Black Opal_2005?

[Ko.Fe.]

Very interesting. How can you tell specifically that some are half/medium? Im more on the new side to film. But isint medium format used for the use of quality? Yet lith scanning is the opposite to quality. Am i missing something?

Lith scanning? I'm missing something for sure.
As for MF, I wrote it already, but if you missed it, check Opal's data of Flickr,
It is in the tags, I think.

 

[jsrockit]

I don't think its lith printing. The texture looks more like paper negatives.

I`d have to agree with Chris. Though I`m sure he is using multiple tricks at every step of the way to get to his end product. Basically, he is having fun in the darkroom and experimenting a lot.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I don't think its lith printing. The texture looks more like paper negatives.

Yeah, I think Chris has got it. Lith film records no greys, or very few. Look at the texture in the highlight areas of his pix. That suggests a rice paper negative or something similar. Note that the preset filters in something like Silver EFX 2 (or similar) for distressed or antique finish produce exactly the same effect on every picture to which they are applied. This has always felt boring to me, but to each his own. The pix at the link though have a unique look to each picture. Excellent sense of mystery, I think (check out photos of Marina Berio if you like this sort of style). (e.g. http://www.marinaberio.net/untold-stories )

I like the pictures. They successfully convey both a heightened sense of anxiety, and a well developed style. It is very different than what I do with a camera, but thank heavens we are not all the same.

[Edit: technically I think you could do this by coating paper with an emulsion, and exposing it in the dark room . . . then use it to make a contact print in order to get your paper negative. Or, digitally, you could invert the image to get a negative on screen and print it to rice paper or similar. Then use the paper negative to make a contact print. You'd have all the tonalities of the print-out, plus all the texture inherent in shining light through the paper.

Or it could be something else I am not nearly clever enough to reverse engineer. 😉 ]

 

[santino]

I think it is not lith film but printing from normal negatives on baryta paper with special lith developer (two process developing for lights and shadows).
It's somnething I did quite often...

something like this...?

 

[rangefinderlove123]

[..........]

This looks like it might have been treated with omega no? what paper?

 

[santino]

fomatone mg cahmois. No omega.

 

[rangefinderlove123]

split tones in the highlights... bonkers

 

[mcfingon]

Some of the shots look like they have been made from a scanned backlit print, treating it like a slide, or as Chris says, effectively a paper negative.
John Mc

 

[rangefinderlove123]

this maybe?

 

[PRJ]

Very interesting. How can you tell specifically that some are half/medium? Im more on the new side to film. But isint medium format used for the use of quality? Yet lith scanning is the opposite to quality. Am i missing something?

You can tell by the prints with adjoining frames, although that could mean he is using a movie camera as well. Wouldn't be surprised if a lot of them were shot on 16mm looking at them again.

The most recent ones were probably on Washi film or whatever it is called.

They are lith prints too with a lot of them probably done on old fogged paper. Been there, done that.

Here is a recent lith print done on pretty terribly fogged paper in the darkroom. Aside from the lack of grain, since the neg has no grain, look familiar?

But then again, you could just ask him. He'd know for sure.

 

[provoke1968]

Greatly appreciate everyone's opinions and tips. this community is amazing!