Dead eyes

[focalintent]

Ilford HP5 with a Hasselblad 500c, 80mm f/2.8 lens - found while I was taking shelter from the rain under an awning. I didn't even notice the dead eyes graffiti until i developed the film!

Newest camera in the fold. The Hasselblad 500c. The one that I have is 3 years older than I am, but it feels and looks like it's still in great condition (barring what appears to be a minor light leak in the film carrier - easily enough fixed). I'm still learning my way around this camera, as well as paying more attention to film and results in diafine. I think i'm slowly starting to see what i do and don't like about various films with diafine, and have a better understanding for what i'm going to do in the future.

The biggest complaint i've had with my home developed film of late has been the grain structure. I think some of that is just what one gets with 400 and 3200 speed film. I also think that some of it is my developer of choice, diafine. Diafine works really well with slower ilford films - like panf (50) and fp4(125). With hp5 (iso 400), i go back and forth on whether or not I like the grain structure. I think my next few rolls of hp5 i'll have developed by a lab, and see what I think of the output. Diafine also works really with with kodak's tri-x family of films - and because of its properties, allows me to shoot those films at nearly iso 1600!

After spending most of the past few months shooting with ilford films, I think I should play with kodak a bit more. In the meantime - some more shots from my test roll:

Found behind a Farmer Joe's store in oakland


One of the trees in our apt. complex


The fire control valves outside of our apartment complex

Comments

[sol3.livejournal.com]

Thank you! And yah, i'm really enjoying film. (Don't get me wrong, i love my digital - but i really like working with film, still, too).

If you miss film, why not get back into playing with it? Film medium format cameras are dirt cheap - I develop using Diafine, which means I can be sloppy with timing and don't have to pay perfect close attention to water temperature - and i'm not printing at home, I'm just scanning - and going from there. (I figure if i want to do darkroom prints, I can always rent darkroom time at looking glass)

[mooflyfoof.livejournal.com]

It's more just that film itself is expensive, and developing & printing it is time consuming (and expensive)... Plus I don't have a scanner (negative or otherwise). Not to mention the fact that I just haven't been taking many pictures lately. Haven't really been wanting to. I dunno, though! The ASUC darkroom here at UC Berkeley has always treated me well. Maybe I'll pick up a membership sometime again when I'm not trying to save the hell out of my money...