I own a great many cameras. In fact, I have only ever sold some F2 cameras that I had purchased to do a CLA and sell to friends (the CLA was free) never making a single dollar on the sale. I love photography and cameras are the essential tool to practice my hobby. Yesterday I took the wife and our youngest to the beach, not really planning on staying too long, just a simple walk along the beach and let the little guy play in the sand and jump in the water. 

I decided to take a camera that I had not used in a very long time. That is to say, I dusted it off, I had replaced batteries, test fired and put back on the shelf for the past few years. Time to have a little fun and shoot another roll through the film. I checked and the latest battery was put in around January of this year so it should be good to go.

The camera selected was a Nikkormat EL. A beast of a camera that represents Nikon's first tentative steps beyond mechanical shutters. After a few hours of shooting, a single roll put through it, I decided to do a little write up on it for my site. You can find it HERE. While writing about the camera I began thinking what makes for a good film camera?

The answer we keep hearing is "the camera you have with you"...ok that makes my cell phone a good camera...which it is but is it really what I am looking for in a camera? No, so there must be more to it.

What is a camera?
A black box that holds the film the right distance away from the lens to ensure that the image is properly captured on the film. It may have, not always, a shutter that helps you control the exposure through the speed that a traveling curtain moves. It may have a viewfinder to show you or give you an approximation of what you will capture.

That is it. The rest is usually done by the lens. So a black box that might have a curtain...simple. Anything more is luxury. If you don't believe me, grab yourself a box camera, load it up with film and take it out using the sunny 16 rule for exposure (it is something special to capture an image with something made in 1902...believe me). You are now completely simplified. This set up is little more than a pinhole camera and it removes all the bells and whistles for you to just focus on your subject and composition.

What is a good camera?
So what makes for a good "black box"? Here I have shot complex cameras such as the Nikon F6, still one of my favorite cameras down to the simplified box camera experience I described above. I believe a good camera boils down to one question...What do you want to accomplish?

If you are experienced and are looking for a camera that allows you to move around on a walking tour of a new city to capture some nice shots along the way...then you are after something that will do allot of the thinking for you...a point and shoot up to a Nikon F6. If you want to really focus on your photography, want complete control and to live in the moment of the capture of the image...then you want a no frills black box.

But frankly an experienced shooter knows the rig they want for their occasion. The ones that need help are those entering into photography. For that I say buy less camera and more film. A camera like the Nikkormat EL is perfect. You can buy one for under USD 100, modern batteries work on it, it has a light meter and it can use a wide variety of Nikon F mount lenses. Spend the USD 200 you are saving to buy 20 rolls of film. Now go out and shoot.

I hate to photograph people on the street. I understand people who get ashamed, scared or like me, just don't want to bother anyone. Why would I risk ruining someone's privacy just so I could practice my hobby? Well here is the problem with that approach...photography is about people.

I can take wonderful photographs of a vase, sitting in a perfect beam of light and allowing the shadows to tell a wonderful story. I can print that to perfection in the darkroom, dodging, burning until the message is clear as a bell. But the photographs that keep pulling me into them are the ones of people. 

People doing what people do, riding bikes, waiting for friends, playing or even sitting on their phones looking at instagram. But at the end of the day, it is about people.  I keep forgetting, I keep hoping that the photograph I took of that empty doorway is better without people...that I should wait for people to clear the area for me to photograph it. But what really drew my attention was the people in the doorway. 

It is about people, stupid. 

I came across this thought exercise in "Overcoming Imposter Syndrome in Wedding photography with Trevor Dayley" in the Beginner Photography Podcast. Here Trevor Dayley speaks to an article he wrote where he explores the delicacy of the photographer's confidence versus the need of a great deal of confidence to take a photograph.

While listening I began to realize the amount of ourselves we put into a photograph and in showing this to strangers, does indeed require a great deal of confidence because it is such a part of us. We all take pictures that we do not like, just as we admit that there are facets of us that we do not like. We wish we could be different, we wish we could take different photographs. 

So much of modern photography is predicated on the search for our voice, our style, our unique mark in an ocean of wonderful photography. It is very similar to our own search for identity in the social media obsessed world...and why should we not be obsessed, is not social media a window into the world beyond our front door? 

Why does any of this matter you might ask? Because if we put a piece of ourselves in the photographs we take, is photography not the search of who we are? As we dig into technical information, the physics of lenses and light, are we not looking for better ways to tell the world about us? When we capture that amazing image, not by luck but through careful planning, so we not feel a great deal of pride?  Pride in what?  In the physics that bent the light into our sensor? Or because we feel that the image can transmit what we are trying to say about ourselves?  

Look at the opposite scenario...imagine that you go the New York City, and while on the plane you start looking through social media to get ideas on places to go shoot.  You start to see a reoccurring image that is absolutely wonderful so you mark it on the map, you note it in your notebook and schedule a morning to go out and photograph it yourself. 

You wake up early on the day, happy to see it is a clear and beautiful morning.  You walk out of the sleepy hotel lobby, and start the walk to the Brooklyn Bridge.  As you cross the bridge you take pictures of the bridge and the early morning joggers crossing it with you.  You keep walking and finally get to DUMBO where you can see the Manhattan Bridge and the iconic shot of the Empire State Building through its base.

If you had stumbled across the site, and seen the photograph, taken the photo you would see your imagination come through. But that is not what happened. You took a photo through another persons eyes. You may as well ask AI to create the image for you and sleep in.

So what drove you to take that picture? It is safe, it requires no courage as it says nothing about you.  All the photograph says is that you have the technical skills to take the same picture so many others have done before you. Nice, safe, pretty and empty.

We photographers have a choice to make. We can decide the photography is a transactional art, where we create what people want to see, or photography is an introspective art, revealing things about us as well as the subject and place we photograph. Once we understand that what we aim for is indeed introspective, then we start to ask a whole different set of questions.

Instead of mimicking the photographs we see we begin to ask ourselves what do we want to capture? What image can help tell the story we want to tell? With our current technical skill set, what can we produce that would communicate? 

"If your photographs aren't good enough, you are not close enough." The famous line by Robert Capa takes on a different meaning if we are creating introspective art. "Shoot what you know." starts to make more sense. All of a sudden photography starts to be about us, our mood and what we are wanting to say. When we trip across the image that speaks to us, is it not telling us something that we relate to? Do we not feel that kinship with the photographers and is this not our ultimate goal when we press the shutter?  

Take your Eiffel Tower photo, shoot the iconic shots because sometimes they can be fun but in the end, these will not make your favorite list. That quick snapshot you took with that old camera of the scene that just cried out to you...that one...the one that speaks of tradition, motion and a bygone area that you never really knew but always felt a part of...that image...

A new page on my website under Darkroom Lessons is my experience with the AGO Film Processor.  You can find it at the link HERE.

"Correlation indicates an association between two variables, meaning they tend to change together. Causation, however, means one variable directly causes a change in another."

Thanks AI, but in Film Photography we are very used to the difference between these two things.  You hear the debate about Correlation and Causation all the time when looking at two sets of data. But the real battle between these two are very known to photographers. When we have been developing film happily for years but then, all of a sudden one of our rolls comes out with a spider web type noise all over it.

We look at our chemicals, our development temperature and our care of the film. We change out our chemicals and try again.  Again we see the noise.  We go to Facebook and reach out to fellow photographers and we get a splatter of possible things that went wrong.  

We order new chemicals and once they arrive we try to develop another roll.  And still we see the same impact.  We change over to distilled water, because we remembered that we had our home water filters changed out. And agin we have the noise.

At our wits end, we look to our changing bag.  We try a different bag in a dark room worried that we have some odd light leak.  We develop another roll and again it appears. Just when we are at our wits end, the film manufacturer reaches out to tell us that a small part of their film had issues with the backing paper.  We curse and laugh at ourselves.  

This is the life of a film photographer.  We have an issue and we have to find out where the issue is coming from. It is frustrating but part of what we have to deal with in film photography.  The problem really is not this scientific process of eliminating one variable at a time, the problem is that we are lazy (some more than others).  This is how odd photography rituals creep up.  So some people like to use a film squeegee to remove some water before hanging film to dry.  Others swear that this causes scratches to the emulsion.  

So what happens when a non-travel photographer, travels and shoots film?  Their concern will be the X-ray machines (mine certainly was).  But what can really happen to our film if it goes through the X-ray machine?  Are we paranoid about this impact because some film photographer in the past had a haze on his film and blamed the X-ray when really it was caused by a faulty thermometer?  

Well I tried a test.  I ran some rolls of film through two different X-ray machines and only ran it once through each machine.  Neither of these were CT scanners.  One was in a museum X-ray machine and the other was in CDG Airport in Paris. The security personnel were happy to hand check my film (they were amazingly nice) but I left a roll in my bag unprotected to test it out.

A simple real life test.  I will past later this weekend with the results.  Will this be definitive on the impact of X-ray on film?  No.  It will be my personal test, to see with my own eyes what impact it can have. If I see an impact I will continue with my paranoia.  If I do not, I will continue to ask for a hand check but will no longer stress about a pass or two (?) through an X-ry machine.

I have a rule when I travel, I always ask for a hand check but if the answer is no, then I just accept it. People's security is more important than my hobby.  But I end up sitting on the plane thinking of all the wonderful shots that are now destroyed.  But after processing I often find it difficult to see the impact.  This test will hopefully help me enjoy those flights a bit more...or maybe just prove that my paranoia is well worth it.

Here is the post that inspired my test.  See it HERE. 

The wife and I just came back from a couple of weeks in France. The above shot was taken on our last day in Paris when, on a whim, we bought last minute tickets to the Louvre. We have been there many times before, so we stayed away from the popular art items and focused on a few of the million other works of art that they display.

As we walked past the Mona Lisa, we felt for all those people. If you have never seen it, having to push through those crowds in order to catch a glimpse seems an awfully high price to pay. But that is more and more the norm. The post covid world has embraced travel like never before, and from some city residents splashing tourists with water, or even the famed Louvre shutting its doors due to too many people, we are beginning to pay the price for it.

How does that affect those of us who love photography? In the digital world, this has become easy with new Post Processing capabilities that allow you to remove people.  Ten years ago, I had to wake up at 5:00am and crawl my way to the Spanish Steps in Rome to capture it without people. Today, you can show up at 7am and click a button.

But for film photographers that just is not an option. The only solutions I see is either go to places where tourists don't go or stick to street photography (this last one a bit tongue in cheek). Let me explain...

In France we spent a few days in Paris and then took the train south. We went through a bunch of small towns in the southern part of France and did not see any tourists at all. English was a no go but people were friendly and happy to see a foreigner. If you dream of shoot the sights of Paris, you have to get up very early or do it in the rain. 

The other option is to go with street photography.  I say this is a bit of a joke because while we love to take pictures of people on the street we want to photograph locals. Part of street photography is about capturing the people who call that city home. I have no desire to take pictures of some Florida couple, with bright shorts, white hat, and a selfie stick in tow. I want to capture the man carrying a baguette home for lunch...or a local riding a bike to work or a small wedding group...

Here is a capture so real that it looks unreal. Again this was taken far from Paris, on the streets of Arles. There was a local wedding and these were the early arrivals waiting on the rest of the guests. What caught my eye was the young lady in the white hat. You can see how she is grabbing her skirt with tight anxiety, but her look is of confidence. Again I love these images of the street as long as I get locals in them.  But tourists are not as much fun to capture. They are out of their element and it shows. These, are locals, in their element wondering why I am taking their picture!

Summer. Hot sun, break from school and family vacations. What a wonderful time of the year!!

For photographers it is a chance to pull out some gear, overpack and try to sneak some photography into that family vacation. I should know, I have been doing it for over twenty years and have learned a few things along the way.

When you have a dedicated photography vacation, you can take everything you like with the only limitation being the weight you can carry. On a family vacation you need to find a balance. And this is where my years of experience comes in.

When I was young...
I would carry a DSLR with the 14-24mm, 24-70mm and the 70-200mm Nikon lenses. These pieces of glass were very expensive and I was proud of them and the quality of images they would take. Lightroom changed that...let me explain how.

Upon returning from a trip a friend taught me that Lightroom can organize your photos based on lens used. When I did this I found that 80% of my images were shot on 24-70mm with another 15% on the 14-24mm leaving a 5% in my 70-200mm range. So much weight for so little use!!! But what if I missed that shot because I did not have the right lens?!? This would be catastrophic!

As I grew older...
I began to understand that I am not a professional photographer. No one is paying me for that shot that I missed. So if I miss a shot, no one will know and I began to care much less. I also began to feel the weight of all those lenses on my shoulders and back. Yes I love the photos I captured over the years, but a good photographer changes the way they shoot based on their years. 

So I went to prime lenses and then I went to the Leica system. The goal was smaller, lighter but good quality glass and cameras. Plenty out there, I chose Leica due to a childhood dream but Fuji can do just as well. 

So now I sit in my office planning yet another trip. This one is just as unique as all the others. We need to travel light (that seems to be a constant), as we will be taking trains, cars and a ship. The goal is Paris, then to the South of France only to take a riverboat up to the middle country, followed by a train back to Paris. So I will go with a Sling camera bag, a 120 Film Camera and probably just my Leica Digital camera. I might through in a Leica film camera as well depending how everything feels.
​

   2.  I put the film in a ziplock bag inside the Domke file bag. This makes it easy for TSA to pull them out and inspect them. 
  3.  Sometimes when you arrive at your destination there is another x-ray machine in place of customs inspection. I have seen this in Colombia, Argentina and Peru. Might be a Latin America thing. Point is that I keep this bag with me and will hand carry it around these x-ray machines. When asked I pull out the ziplock and show the film. Never been an issue so far.

The point is the keep the film with you, not in checked baggage, keep it in a Domke film bag and ask for a hand check.  In many countries this is not allowed. Don't fight it, don't lose your cool.  Just pass it through in the Domke bag and hope for the best. I have not had an issue with this.

In short, I have had more photographs ruined because of bad backing paper than I ever have due to X-ray following the above process. 

The Gear...
Key question...no I won't take a tripod. This trip has too many movements to justify carrying it. So I will just take my Rolleiflex 2.8F, Leica M10 and possibly a Leica M6 or M4. The key two cameras is that M10 for daily shooting and the medium format film camera for those really special shots. I will take a Sharpie to take notes on the film once shot and will use my iPhone for light meter readings.

Our ability to interpret our work in an independent and objective manner is essential for our "improvement". For me, photography is a hobby, one that does not require any income what so ever. Being a non-professional gives me a massive amount of freedom that I enjoy. Would I like to sell my work? Yes but not for the money, for the simple knowledge that someone likes my work enough to part with their hard earned money.  But do I need the money? No.  I am lucky and have a good paying job that keeps me in hypo and paper.

But I do have a desire to improve my craft. I want to become a better photographer than I was last year. I want to be a better printer than I was last year. I want to be better. The hardest part of this process is knowing what you did wrong...or how you are falling short of your own expectations.

Enter the self critique.  I have a very simple three step process.  Why three steps? Because I am an uncomplicated guy who likes things in three because it helps me remember things.

1. Impression. What does the image make me feel?  I will often ask my kids this questions and get odd looks. But that first impression, that emotional connection is critical for me and one of the hardest things to nail down. No amount of darkroom magic can make up for this shortfall. What is the subject? What is the message? What is the emotion? Is it a slap you in the face or a slow burn? 
2. Distractions. What is pulling the picture in the wrong direction?  I often times put the picture upside down and look for what draws my eye. I count the items that draw my attention and then look for the ones that are not pulling the viewer in the same direction. What is the composition and is it the strongest way to see that particular image. Here I will challenge myself to imagine different crops to see if I can make it more powerful.
3. Print. Does the print help or distract from the image? Here is where I look for differences in tone, contrast and detail. Do I have a deep black and a bright white? If I have a white that is as white as the paper, did I lose detail? Did my print dry darker than I expected and, in so doing, have I lost detail in the shadows. Is the contrast subtle or does it "cut" the viewer? This is about workmanship, quality and overall aesthetics. 

I like the color work, perhaps the blues are a bit too saturated but a small detail. The birds are a bit distracting especially the ones on the right. But overall a great capture but here, while technically well executed and overall acceptable display, the problem is that it is a postcard. Technically well executed but of little emotional value. The lack of a developed sky to balance the image is what kills this image. Not the photographer's fault but it is your problem. 

The Hit: All is Balanced
Let's walk through my three step system.  
Step 1: Impression. So here we have a dark print, this is giving a sense of the rainy, foggy weather that South England is known for. We have a sense of winter, cold and dark. A sense of aloneness. The bear trees, wet ground, foggy weather, dark tunnel and the leading lines of the fence gives this a wonderful balance.
Step 2: Distractions. Here we have a clean image. Nothing is pulling the viewer in a different direction. The tunnel effect (created by being in a tunnel :) ) focuses the viewer. The dark edges and brighter center pulls the viewer into the image. The emotive feeling aligns with the visuals. Nothing moving, nothing distracting. 
Step 3: Print. This is both a digital and film shot (I had both cameras with me) but this one is a digital version. The conversion is clean, the contrast fades as we move through the fog but is sharp through. The aperture was wide enough (f8 if memory serves) to give us a deep area of focus. Consider the blocks in the very center (remnants of a dock made from stone) is in focus but soft contrast due to the fog. The bare tree that helps frame the shot on the right side is clear and in focus but has some elements of the fog effect. The trees on the left have a deeper impact of the fog. All of this image is about depth. All the way to the foreground where we have the wet walkway and the fence and finally darkness. 

Overall this image works. It is emotive, well constructed and the subject was captured well. I am happy with the image. The one constructive argument I would made is that the foreground calls for something. A dog, a bike, an umbrella...something to make it whole but as it is it is a fine image and a good print. 

I struggled in a dead zone, a time in my darkroom journey where I was beyond the basics but not an expert. That "prosumer" category that camera companies coined years ago for those photographers that were not professional but were beyond a point and shoot. 

My journey began where everyone's starts....with a YouTube video that taught the basics. I bought a basic enlarger on Ebay for USD 100 and the seller through in two packs of old Ilford paper. No multigrade here, just basic photography paper from 1985.  And that is how I began. My first print the paper was upside down. Once I figured out which end went up I began to learn how to improve. 

The journey was fun but I needed to advance a bit. So I paid for a private class with a more experienced darkroom artist. I still wanted to learn and improve. But it began being more and more difficult to find things to learn. I purchased a number of books and found that many of them, printed before the Digital Revolution, were using commercial supplies I could not longer purchase. 

10 Print Challenge:
This dead zone has lasted about a year and then my mindset changed. I began looking to see how I could make my own chemicals, I began to print in larger formats than I had before and finally, I began looking at a single negative and gave myself a challenge to make 10 prints successively improving it from one print to another. This is 10 prints after the time for the print is selected. 

This 10 print challenge, pushes me to overlook the investment I am making (paper keeps going up in price) and forces me to really nitpick my photograph. I don't stop with a good print, I look for the perfect print. This then pushed me into niche concepts including making my own tone, split toning prints and hand bleaching portions of the print. 

The result is that now I am looking at details I otherwise would have overlooked. I am pushing my equipment and knowledge to the limit and beyond. I am using equipment that had been collecting dust in my darkroom again. I am using more trays as I resort to more chemicals to get the desired look. 

​Give it a try and let me know how it goes!

The Importance of Archival Printing for Longevity

In the world of photography, especially with film, the magic of capturing a moment can easily fade if not properly preserved. Archival printing methods serve as a protective shield against the very elements that brought a photograph to life. Over time, exposure to environmental factors—chemicals, air, and light—can compromise the integrity of a print. 

For instance, the silver in silver gelatin prints is inherently reactive; it can oxidize when exposed to air, leading to a gradual degradation of the image. By using archival printing methods, we not only safeguard our images from chemical deterioration but also ensure their aesthetic vibrancy for generations to come. 


Must All Photographs Be Archival Printed?

Absolutely! The cost of implementing archival printing is negligible compared to the potential loss of an image that could have been preserved. Think of it as a small investment in your creative legacy. The additional time and steps involved in this process cultivate a habit that prepares you for when you create a print that demands preservation. After all, every photograph has the potential to become a treasured keepsake.


The Detrimental Impact of Residual Fixer

Residual fixer, primarily composed of sodium thiosulfate ((Na_2S_2O_3)), plays a key role in the development process. However, if not adequately washed off, it can lead to image deterioration. The fixer not only stabilizes the image but can also cause fogging and discoloration over time if left on the print. 

Yet, over-washing can be just as detrimental. While it’s crucial to remove fixer, excessive rinsing can strip the gelatin layer of necessary elements that enhance image longevity. Striking a balance is essential; a well-timed wash can ensure that residual fixer is minimized while preserving the integrity of the print.


Protecting Silver Gelatin Prints from Light and Air

Exposure to light and air can lead to oxidation of the silver particles in silver gelatin prints, resulting in fading and discoloration. This is where toning comes into play. For instance, selenium toner (sodium selenite) converts the metallic silver in the print into a more stable form, reducing the risk of oxidation and enhancing the tonal range. 

By toning your prints, you’re effectively providing a protective coating that enhances longevity. The selenium not only acts as a safeguard but can also add a beautiful richness to the image, thereby elevating its aesthetic appeal.


The Archival Printing Process: Your Steps

1. Developer (3-5 minutes): The choice of developer will affect the contrast and grain of your print. Aim for a time based on the appearance of solid midtones, adjusting as necessary throughout your session.
2. Stop Bath (30 sec): A simple acidic solution, typically acetic acid, halts development and protects against contamination during fixing. A 30-second immersion is sufficient.
3. First Fixer Bath (1 minute): This bath, using sodium thiosulfate, removes unexposed silver halides, essential for stabilizing the image.
4. Fresh Water Bath (10 seconds): Helps to eliminate any residual fixer before the second bath.
5. Second Fixer Bath (3-5 minutes): A fresh fixer bath ensures thorough removal of any remaining unexposed silver, vital for the longevity of the print.
6. Washing (5 minutes): Running water helps to further cleanse the print of any fixer residues.
7. Baking Soda Bath (5-10 minutes): Using sodium bicarbonate, this step neutralizes any remaining acidity from the fixer. A 10-minute soak in a 1-liter solution with 1 teaspoon of baking soda is ideal.
8. Rinsing (5 minutes): Another rinse in running water ensures that all chemicals are sufficiently removed.
9. Selenium Toning (2 minutes): A toning bath in a 1:4 ratio will convert silver to selenide, offering protection and enhancing the print’s character. If a subtler effect is desired, a 1:19 dilution can be used.
10. Final Wash (1 hour): A comprehensive wash is crucial for ensuring that all chemicals are eliminated, setting the stage for proper drying.

Conclusion

By investing in archival printing techniques, you’re not just preserving photographs; you’re safeguarding memories and artistry for future generations. The science behind each step reinforces the importance of careful handling and consideration, ensuring that your prints remain vibrant and intact for the next century and beyond.