Tips for making photography look more vintage??

I have a photoshop process I use. If you look at vintage prints they are usually high contrast with no true whites, or low contrast.

This is what I usually do in photoshop to create a high contrast with no true whites effect.
auto contrast and levels
create and "S" curve in levels
bring the white down vertically

bang, it's done

For low contrast, make an inverse "S" curve

bam, it's done

here's an example
819041236_3c909d32d9_o.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-1.png
    Untitled-1.png
    188.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Nice kit. That auction will end between $250 & $400 though which is about half of the OP's problem I fear. And, yep, a true combat model will go for even more than this one.

People have rediscoverd the press cameras over just the past year or three. It's getting nearly impossible to find a sanely priced one as a result. Have one with a reall attachment to history? May well pay your first borns first year of college :bang:

William
 
A lot of it also has to do with the style of your subjects. e.g. you can't get vintage if they're dressed like in the 2000's, hair styles, makeup, attitudes, etc.
 
The Busch Pressman models are often cheaper. I'd find one of those. A 4x5 pressman just went for $55 plus shipping on Ebay. I was watching...jealous of the buyer. :D
 
This is a photo that I took with a Retina IIIc (small 'c'), and I added a sepia tone. The light source in the upper left part of the frame adds enough flare to give it an older feel. The other neon lights have a certain glow to them, which also adds to the look. This was shot on TMax 100. Exposure was something like 1/15 at f/2.8.


Wan_Chai-Night.jpg
 
landsknechte said:
I thought it was the other way around (Foma 100 vs. Foma 200), but I'm not sure.
Click to expand...
Fomapan 100 and 400 use "classic" crystals, Fomapan 200 uses "T"-style crystals, and so did the unfortunately discontinued Fomapan 800. That's why Foma offers different developers (Fomadon LQN and Fomadon Excel, the later being related to Xtol)

landsknechte said:
The Speed Graphic is on the shopping list, but I'll be running with 35mm for the forseeable future. WW2 vintage US Army Speed Graphics tend to cost about triple what a civilian equivalent goes for.
Click to expand...
You can always get a Zorki and an Industar-22 for a song. The lens is coated. If that bothers you, just rub it with a lens cleaning cloth for a while :)

Philipp
 
From what I've seen, there weren't too many non-military issue Speed Graphics in use by military photographers. All manner of smaller format cameras were in use however. The PH-324 (a repainted Kodak 35) was the only issue 35mm camera during the war, but oddly enough it's not seen very often in period photos of photographers. I've seen far more pictures showing Leicas, various 120 folders, and TLRs (amongst others) than the PH-324.

If I stumble across a bargain KE-12, I'll certainly grab it. In the mean time, I've got to get a darkroom of my own before I start messing with large format.

In 35mm, I'm good to go. I've got a 1946 IIIc that's close enough to a wartime camera to fool 99.9% of the folks out there. That's my primary camera for the hobby right now. I might just bring my 1936 Retina I (type 119) as a backup. Along with that, I've got a 1941 Argus C3 and a 1939 Kodak 35 that I haven't had a chance to run film through just yet.
 
Last edited:
Try using Rodinal as a developer. It is the oldest commercial developer still available, and has a look all of its own..

Regards, John.
 
#803410 is darn close. You might try working with some of the Forte 100 film. Has a definite unique look to it that strikes me as 'older' somewhat. Perhaps an old filter- a light blue might help to by introducing a bit more flare now and again- it is the bit of flare in the above image that makes it authentic for me. What size filter does your lens take- I may have some old filters kicking around you could try.
 
I know I'm bit offtopic, but I can't stand praising Foma films :)

Because I'm from former Czechoslovakia, when I started developing my films as 13 years old, we had only choice of 3 films: russian CBEMA (svema), domestic Foma and hungarian Forte - sorted according to crappyness. Svema is not worth talking about (I was happy to get the film from camera in one piece), Foma: very hard, milky and curly base, grrrrainy. Finally Forte, thanks for this, the most usable film from these (one-eyed king...)

I recently purchased Fomapan 100 Professional in 120 format - I wondered if something had changed with "Professional" suffix. Developed it and guess what, it was Fomapan 200 (had ULTRA 200 label printed) :-/ I won't touch it for next 15 years.
 
{quote}--get a speed graphic. use a yellow filter. print on single weight glossy fiber paper & ferrotype the prints. Find an old typewriter for writing the captions and cut them out and paste them on the back of the prints--

I am a little late to the discussion, but I wanted to add something about the Speed Graphic...

On e of my early cameras was a Speed graphic that had been used USAAF. It was black, with a black wooden lensboard. Most of the bright metalwork had ben darkened with black or brown shoe polish or paint, flaking off after 25 years of handling. I would avoid any cameras that had bright metal lensboards and bright metalwork.

My camera came with an Ektar 127mm uncoated lens, and it had a yellow green filter to counteract the extreme blue sensitivity of the film that was used then. Super XX, I believe. Black Speed graphics show up at tag sales dirt cheap, too!

Good Luck!
 
John Bragg said:
Try using Rodinal as a developer. It is the oldest commercial developer still available, and has a look all of its own..
Regards, John.
Click to expand...
Damn right. Adox APH09 is based on the pre-war recipe (if that makes any difference).
For film, there's Agfapan APX... if you can still get it. If not, Rollei Retro (reputed to be Agfapan APX anyway).

Good luck with the quest. :)
 
The Bergger 200 film is reputed to be like that 'much loved Super XX' in developing latitude- don't know about grain or 'look' another one to perhaps fool around with.
-Bergger is apparently not phasing out traditional materials- got this email today:

Robert,

Bergger Products is going through a transition to improve production and logistics. Our current darkroom paper and film sales have been from our US warehouse. Current stock is low in all items and this will affect current and future orders for a period of about 3 months.

We anticipate production on traditional products to resume in 4 quarter of this year.

Best Regards,

John Horowy
Bergger Products, Inc.
 
Hi, if you want to got the traditional route, look for some well out of date 35mm movie film. I got a 1000' roll of tri-x dated 1959 and then shoot it through old un-coated galss (a Russian Elamar coopy) and as suggested by most and use an old recipe developer like rodinal. A lot of classic looking vintage prints by todays standards appear to be under exposed and over developed and then be sure to mistreat your the negs a bit then soak your prints in a weak bath of black tea to yellow up the paper. Your other alternative, and forgive me for suggesting this, create the best negs you can and work out an ageing technique in Photoshop and create your vintage look that way.
Cheers Andrew
 
This thread got me started hunting around for ferrotyping related information. As is pointed out in the following link, ferrotyped prints look almost just like modern R.C. ones. So you could save yourself a lot of trouble there just printing on cheap paper!

Here's the link, from P-net:

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007XZ5

As for camera, I wouldn't think the format or camera are too important; 1940's era materials seem to have been a free for all. So anything with an uncoated lens should be useful for your purposes.
Film seems like it shouldn't be panchromatic. So a blue filter over pre Tri-x era films should fit the bill. I'd guess Foma 100 would be a good choice.
Rodinal may not be such a good choice- the stuff has a very distinct look, and was not available to members of the Allied side as far as I know. Stated as a question, was D-76 already in widespread use at the time? If so, that should be a reasonable choice.
Enjoy your project!
 
How about using a 120 folder or box camera ?? They were the point and shoot of this era and results can be surprisingly good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom