Author
|
|
Terry S
Friend
Registered: December 2011 Location: Southend on Sea, Essex, England, UK Posts: 3,797
|
Wed, 26, June, 2013 1:59pm
|
|
|
A nicely composed picture Richard but I am a little worried that if the borders are corrected to the colour white, rather than the grey that they are at the moment, the print will appear even lighter on my screen that it already is?
As someone who prefers a darker print it would appear much too bright then.
The print on the screen at the moment though, WITH greyish borders is just about right but I would still prefer it a little darker to darken the sky and beach tones = just a little.
But then again this is just my taste and as I say, I do like the composition very much.
Terry S
|
|
|
|
Richard Gould
Friend
Registered: December 2008 Location: Jersey Channel Islands Posts: 5,433
|
Wed, 26, June, 2013 3:16pm
|
|
|
Terry, it is just the way it scans, my computer skills are not the best, and the borders are white on the actual print, Glad you like it,
RichRD
------------------------------ jerseyinblackandwhite.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
Searcher
Friend
Registered: October 2009 Posts: 53
|
Thu, 27, June, 2013 7:14pm
|
|
|
As the recipient of the print I can say that the "levels" are just fine. The image on screen is a bit off in this regard, and does show it brighter than in reality, and I assume this is a factor of the uploading software.
The scanned image does however show off quite well the very apparent and attractive grain in the original print, particularly in the sky. Richard mentioned in his covering note that the film is rated at 320 and developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 18 mins. Is it a full frame print from the neg Richard?
Grain like this can be hard to achieve so effectively with modern films, and the result is well worth being aware of.
Thanks again for the print Richard.
Gerry
------------------------------ Gallery: irelandswildlandscape.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Irelands-Wild-Landscapecom/227802074030101
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/95254948@N08/
|
|
|
|
Richard Gould
Friend
Registered: December 2008 Location: Jersey Channel Islands Posts: 5,433
|
Fri, 28, June, 2013 4:55am
|
|
|
Gerry, this is a full frame print, but fomapan 400 is an inherently very grainy film, and developing in Rodinal 1/50 tends to enhance the grain in 35mm, It doesn't show up in every subject in the way it does on this print, but with landscape/seascape, with some burning, the grain of the film comes though, it is certainly one of the grainest films around, but I personaly like grain, and I find fomapan grain to be a ''nice'' grain
Richard
------------------------------ jerseyinblackandwhite.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
Terry S
Friend
Registered: December 2011 Location: Southend on Sea, Essex, England, UK Posts: 3,797
|
Fri, 28, June, 2013 8:47am
|
|
|
Thanks for those points guys.
Also interesting to hear about Fomapan 400, as I to like a bit of grain!
Terry S
|
|
|
|
Searcher
Friend
Registered: October 2009 Posts: 53
|
|
|
|
Richard Gould
Friend
Registered: December 2008 Location: Jersey Channel Islands Posts: 5,433
|
Fri, 28, June, 2013 4:17pm
|
|
|
Gerry, I use 6x6 120 fomapan in 120, develop it for 18 minutes in rodinal 1/50, which is more than the suggested time, (11 to 12 minutes) by a long way, but it gives me the negative I like, but with Fomapan there is not a huge difference between 12 to 18 minutes in Rodinal, also I find Fomapan is better at box speed, obviously with 120 you won't get the grain the same as 35mm, but with a big enlargement you can find grain, well worth, I use Fomapan as my main go to film and have done so for a few years now, I love it.
Richard
------------------------------ jerseyinblackandwhite.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
Searcher
Friend
Registered: October 2009 Posts: 53
|
|
|
|
|