RedScale Film Technique

ClaremontPhoto

ClaremontPhoto

Jon Claremont
Local time
5:06 PM
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
5,214
RedScale...


This is a new one for me.

Basically it is 35mm film respooled into an old cassette so that the emulsion faces the pressure plate, and the 'back' faces the lens.

The exposure seems to need to be longer than usual to allow enough light through the back of the film onto the emulsion.

Lomography are selling film ready for use; although rolling your own shouldn't be difficult.

Has anybody used this technique, especially if you've worked out the exposure needed? I'm guessing +2 stops, but that could be way off.
 
Only problem is that then you have to print by putting the paper with the sensitive side downwards.

ask me how I know :D:bang:
 
ClaremontPhoto said:
There's a Wikipedia article here.
Click to expand...

Thanks, now I understand what they are trying to do.

In fact, it seems like something I might like to try. After an almost-disaster of breaking off a roll in the camera a couple years ago, I picked up a couple of those reloadable 35mm cartridges at a camera shop's tent sale (they were like $.35 each), and it would be very easy to try, actually.

Just for giggles (I know this is cheating) I tried simulating this in Photoshop by using the channel mixer to turn the blue way down and turn the red up accordingly. Here's what I got, which is similar to some of the examples on the web:

4sxtty.jpg


(This is NOT a true redscale, it's a quickie simulation.)

This scene almost reminds me of the faux-color from the old Infrared Ektachrome which I tried once back in the early 70s. I've also tried crossprocessing E6 as C41, and this redscale technique is something I'm thinking of trying for real.

I don't want to call it "lo-fi" until I try it. Other than the bizarre colors, I think the prints could indeed be clean and sharp.
 
dmr: I think you're onto something there with digital manipulation, although i'd rather do it in camera.

I'm wondering about bright street signs at night, custom cars, and shop window displays of bright backpacks as subjects for this. Although market stalls with fresh produce could turn out nice and weird.
 
So, in effect, you are exposing the emulsion through the tinted film base. Kind of like placing an orange filter on the camera lens.

Sharpness would be effected, both by the diffusing effect of the film base, and by the displacement away from the focal plane by the thickness of the film base.

I suppose this technique can be considered a tool to achieve a particular effect, but personally, it sounds kind of gimmicky to me.
 
I'll try anything once, and twice or more if I liked it the first time.

Some people like toning in the traditional manner, and some are looking for new techniques and technologies.
 
I think more probably the effects would be affected.

FrankS said:
So, in effect, you are exposing the emulsion through the tinted film base. Kind of like placing an orange filter on the camera lens.

Sharpness would be effected, both by the diffusing effect of the film base, and by the displacement away from the focal plane by the thickness of the film base.

I suppose this technique can be considered a tool to achieve a particular effect, but personally, it sounds kind of gimmicky to me.
Click to expand...
 
I was worried about my post sounding negative, but I was being honest. For some reason, I am interested in the alternative caffinol effects posted by Keith, but not so taken by the backwards film effect. Maybe becasue it involves false colour, and I'm more interested in B+W. Sorry to be a wet rag on this. It is a viable alternative technique.
 
FrankS:


Thank you for taking it well. I was cranky at the time.

I actually think red scale is different from just an orange filter over the lens. It's about the order the color sensitive layers are stacked, and here we're sending light through 'the wrong way'.

Personally I can't see much difference between Lomo red scale and Ilford SFX in their own way (except one is color and one is B&W). Although one comes from Lomo and the other comes from Ilford, and some people love to knock Lomo.
 
Last edited:
I like to take 20 year old outdated Agfachrome and develop it for 5 months in a combination of horse urine and spoiled milk from a bowl of Frosted Flakes.

But no matter what I shot, when I print the photos, they always look like fat guys eating knishes:

 
I'm with FrankS on this. But hey, whatever a person likes. Sometimes it is fun to experiment with a different technique. I have done lots of things to experiment that others probably would think strange.
 
I read about this earlier today (I get the Lomo mailout).
It looks like a fun gimmick, but as a serious application? Can anybody see any uses?
 
This is just my personal bias: I like B+W. Colour is lower on MY preference scale. False colour is off MY scale altogether. For example, I sometimes like B+W infra-red results, but I really do not like colour IR results, again because of the false colour. But those are jsut my taste buds, YMMV.
 
sweathog said:
I read about this earlier today (I get the Lomo mailout).
It looks like a fun gimmick, but as a serious application? Can anybody see any uses?
Click to expand...

It is a technique/tool that can be used if it achieves the desired effect. It doesn't have to be used for every photograph or by every photographer. It's jsut a choice.
 
FrankS said:
It is a technique/tool that can be used if it achieves the desired effect. It doesn't have to be used for every photograph or by every photographer. It's jsut a choice.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that it is just a choice, Frank. I was asking the question about applications because I wondered if anybody had any suggestions, rather than as rhetoric.
I think it is a gimmick, but I can be converted, if somebody answers my question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom