What Filters?

By the way (and I didn't see it stated here - apologies if it is) Ilford Multigrade IV is grade 2 if unfiltered with a new bulb in a "standard" condenser enlarger.
 
rogue_designer said:
if you use 8x10 paper in the pinhole - you get a negative image. You can print to a positive by making it a "paper negative"

If you use 8x10 sheet film you get a negative, that you can then contact print on paper to a positive (nice because it's already easily reproducible).


If you are enlarging color slides, you have to use reversal paper and processing (cibachrome, fuji type R, etc.) Which you could theoretically use in the pinhole, but the processing is a pain in the ass to do on a small scale unless you're already set up for color lab work.
Click to expand...

How to you print from a positive by making a "paper negative"?
 
JeremyLangford said:
How to you print from a positive by making a "paper negative"?
Click to expand...
Expose a piece of paper in a view camera in place of the film. Experiment to find the ISO, it will be near 6. Develop it normally, it will be a 'paper negative'. Then place a piece of unexposed paper against the paper exposed in the camera, emulsion to emulsion, and expose it to white light through the paper negative. Then develop the second paper, it will be a positive.

It was a common practice for Mexican street portraitists of the mid-20th century, to have a box attached to their field cameras that they could use paper negatives to make positive prints in a matter of minutes, right on scene.

Who needed Polaroid!
 
Chris101 said:
Expose a piece of paper in a view camera in place of the film. Experiment to find the ISO, it will be near 6. Develop it normally, it will be a 'paper negative'. Then place a piece of unexposed paper against the paper exposed in the camera, emulsion to emulsion, and expose it to white light through the paper negative. Then develop the second paper, it will be a positive.

It was a common practice for Mexican street portraitists of the mid-20th century, to have a box attached to their field cameras that they could use paper negatives to make positive prints in a matter of minutes, right on scene.

Who needed Polaroid!
Click to expand...

I had no idea that this was possible. I guess there is no enlarging to a bigger size with paper negatives.

But won't the final print still be horizontally flipped backwards?
 
Last edited:
JeremyLangford said:
I had no idea that this was possible. I guess there is no enlarging to a bigger size with paper negatives.

But won't the final print still be horizontally flipped backwards?
Click to expand...

No enlarging - it's a contact print. But those can be awesome.

No - it's not still flipped. Since you're doing an emulsion to emulsion print, you end up flipping it back.

Make sure the paper you use doesn't have a printed watermark on the back of the paper. Or it will end up being a print element in the finals.
 
rogue_designer said:
No enlarging - it's a contact print. But those can be awesome.

No - it's not still flipped. Since you're doing an emulsion to emulsion print, you end up flipping it back.

Make sure the paper you use doesn't have a printed watermark on the back of the paper. Or it will end up being a print element in the finals.
Click to expand...

O yea thats right. Its emulsion to emulsion.

This makes me want to buy a box of 8x10 paper and try a ton of pinholes.
 
I need to order my B&W film for my photography class and start taking pictures. I think I'm going to get 3 rolls of 400 speed 36 exposure Tri-x. I am also going to get a red filter so I can experiment some with it. Right now, I'm looking at the B+W filters because you guys seem to like them the most. Theres one thing I don't understand. What is a Wide Angle Slim Mount filter?
 
You might try 24 exposure rolls, it will mean more developments. Therefore, more learning: quicker. Thin, slim, wide angle filters are just thinner as not to give interference with a full frame image taken with a wide or very wide lens. I went to see 'Gran Torino' this afternoon and I thought of you. If you are old enough go see it. But be thinking about your photography and how we learn from experience.
 
charjohncarter said:
You might try 24 exposure rolls, it will mean more developments. Therefore, more learning: quicker. Thin, slim, wide angle filters are just thinner as not to give interference with a full frame image taken with a wide or very wide lens. I went to see 'Gran Torino' this afternoon and I thought of you. If you are old enough go see it. But be thinking about your photography and how we learn from experience.
Click to expand...

Ok. I'll try to go see it. The previews make it look awesome.

The widest lens I will be using the filter on is 28mm. So I won't need the wide angle slime filter right?
 
I haven't used a slim filter on my 28mm lenses, and I have three of them (over 40 years with 28s and filters). Don't get too caught up in the awesome part of the movie, try to see the learning from someone else's experiences part of the film (which is actually a definition of culture).
 
Stay away from slime filters! :eek:

As for slim filters, they usually cost more, so unless you need one, get a regular filter. Also you will want to be sure that you can put a lens cap and/or hood on any filter you use, or you won't use it often.
 
I got my B+W dark red filter and 3 rolls of Tr-X. The filter factor is 3 stops. I have TTL metering but is the best way to meter through the filter going to be to meter without the filter setting the right exposure and then putting the filter on and slowing the exposure down 3 stops?
 
best method? use a hand meter and adjust for the filter factor.

Barring that, go ahead and use the TTL, just keep an eye on it. A predominantly yellow/red scene will meter as lighter/faster than a predominantly green/blue scene, so your metering will swing a little bit.
 
Jeremy, you can use your camera meter as you have said. But be sure that you have an 8x red filter. I have a 5x red filter that is 2.5 (approx) stops not 3. You have B&W so the 091 is 8x and the 090 is 5x.
 
So the reason TTL metering could be wrong with a red filter is because the filter will do the same thing to the light meter that it does to the final picture (blocks out cyan). And so if I point the camera at a red wall and a cyan wall that would have the same reading with a hand meter, my camera with TTL metering and a red filter will view the red wall as brighter than the cyan wall.

Am I understand that correctly? I have never taken into account the exposure problems that arrive with filters before. Maybe I should start carrying around a handheld meter like most of you guys. It just seems like taking a reading with a hand meter and then transferring that to the camera could take a longer time than the person I am trying to photograph takes to move into a completely differently lit place. I like the convenience of setting the exposure while looking through the viewfinder in my Minolta SRT-101. But I do realize that when I get a Leica one day it may not have a meter.

How did someone like Cartier-Bresson meter light for his Leica?
 
That's OK, use your on board meter. Just do like you said; take a reading without the filter and then put it on, and open the aperture the required stops. Handheld meters are nice but your on board meter if you learn to use it, will be just fine. As a little exercise, when you have taken a shot with a lot of blue sky, go back and check the exposure with the meter on.
 
Your SRT should meter accurately through your red filter, without any problems. BTW if you still have that 16mm Rokkor, it has built-in yellow and orange filters you can play with. SRT's meter works good with those, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom