# Fueling Deterioration



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

See it bigger here


----------



## Big Bully (Feb 12, 2008)

Very nice! It looks really good in.. Is that cepia? Or mono?
Is this an abandoned gas station..


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

Big Bully said:


> Very nice! It looks really good in.. Is that cepia? Or mono?
> Is this an abandoned gas station..



The film I used for it is Kodak BW400CN, It's supposed to be B/W but often times it has a red hue to it, especially with my kit lens.

Yes one of the abandoned gas stations in town


----------



## Big Bully (Feb 12, 2008)

I like it.. The red hue actually adds feeling to the picture.


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

Big Bully said:


> I like it.. The red hue actually adds feeling to the picture.



Actually that is one I sucessfully pulled it out from, if anything it's blue, but I fave a few failures as well.

I am seriously thinking about just scanning them BW see if that helps any.


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

Link to larger file added


----------



## LaFoto (Feb 12, 2008)

Your town has a good many abandoned things just standing around, doesn't it? Such things would not be "around" in my country for long. Some company would come, pull it all down, and then another would build something new!

Nice one ... you are making me want to bring my film cameras back to life with your photos, but now that they are loaded, I find I know way too few still unexplored spots in my surrounding to test them/use them. I get the feeling I have by now photographed about each and every leaf, twig and blade of grass around here... :roll:


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

LaFoto said:


> Your town has a good many abandoned things just standing around, doesn't it? Such things would not be "around" in my country for long. Some company would come, pull it all down, and then another would build something new!
> 
> Nice one ... you are making me want to bring my film cameras back to life with your photos, but now that they are loaded, I find I know way too few still unexplored spots in my surrounding to test them/use them. I get the feeling I have by now photographed about each and every leaf, twig and blade of grass around here... :roll:



Ah, but this is not the first time this fuel Island graced the pages of TPF. Post #4 picture #4. :thumbsup:


----------



## LaFoto (Feb 12, 2008)

Ah, it's that one!  
Looks better in this sepia coloured photo! (Mental note: must drive around more in search for abandoned things or places... ).


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

Some times I find it hard to plan a return visit, often times I get there and finds my self at a loss as to what to do. Truth be told I was on my way home from a return trip to the East Railroad Station when I got this. I got to the station and found a train in the way and headed home, not wanting to have made the trip a complete bust I stoped here and took two shots and headed home. I need to reprocess the other one but I liked both shots.


That is in camera composition too, only croping done was to ensure no white edges.


----------



## Helen B (Feb 12, 2008)

Battou said:


> The film I used for it is Kodak BW400CN, It's supposed to be B/W but often times it has a red hue to it, especially with my kit lens.



I don't understand. What has your lens got to do with it? It sounds like it is just a scanning problem rather than a lens or film issue. Try scanning B&W film in greyscale if you want to start off with neutral tones. What scanner and software are you using?

Best,
Helen


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

Helen B said:


> I don't understand. What has your lens got to do with it? It sounds like it is just a scanning problem rather than a lens or film issue. Try scanning B&W film in greyscale if you want to start off with neutral tones. What scanner and software are you using?
> 
> Best,
> Helen



It's the lens, this occurs regardless of film type, make and scanner settings. I noticed this reasently in this series of pictures. The first four were taken with my Sakar 135 the last two with this lens my Canon 50mm 1.4, all scanned at the same time with with same settings and the same post procedure of minor shaprening. If this where a film or scanning issue it would not be this wide spread and clear or effecting all shots. And yes it does appear in the prints.

I mis-worded that post


----------



## Helen B (Feb 12, 2008)

You said that this picture was taken on BW400CN. There is no way for the colour of the lens to affect the colour of the image.

Best,
Helen


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

*EDIT*

I'm going to take this oppertunity to redirect this and go back to the picture at hand
http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111633


----------



## Big Bully (Feb 12, 2008)

I definately like the macroish shot better vs the wide angle shot. This one has awe factor, I guess you can call it.


----------



## Battou (Feb 12, 2008)

Big Bully said:


> I definately like the macroish shot better vs the wide angle shot. This one has awe factor, I guess you can call it.



??? some one else said something similar to that to me about a different picture, again it's proximity not macro of any sorts, same lens just a step to the left and turn to the right. It's odd to me that this has happened twice to me on two different sites. Either way this was the one of the two I preferred of the two, I still like the other as it has both pumps and some perspective, something is missing but I liked it none the less.


----------



## jwkwd (Feb 13, 2008)

I have used that film (BW400CN) and had a roll turn out with that same reddish tint. The person at the place it was processed said it was because of the age of the chemicals in their machine. The girl who worked there said to hold off and wait until they changed chemicals for the next roll I had, which I did, and had good results.


----------



## Helen B (Feb 13, 2008)

I'm reluctant to discuss this in this thread after Battou sensibly started another thread.



jwkwd said:


> I have used that film (BW400CN) and had a roll turn out with that same reddish tint. The person at the place it was processed said it was because of the age of the chemicals in their machine. The girl who worked there said to hold off and wait until they changed chemicals for the next roll I had, which I did, and had good results.



Don't worry about it. BW400CN _normally_ has a reddy-orange colour cast to it. It looks reddy-orange exactly like colour negative film, but without the coloured images.

A red cast to the film would not show up as a red cast in the positive image.

If a tinted lens produced a red cast to the scanned image, then the image would have colour information from other sources.

If Battou can get an understanding of what is actually causing the different image colours during the scanning of BW400CN, he will be able to apply that to the problems with colour film.

It might be better if jwkwd's post and this one were moved to the other thread.

Best,
Helen


----------



## Big Bully (Feb 13, 2008)

Battou said:


> ??? some one else said something similar to that to me about a different picture, again it's proximity not macro of any sorts, same lens just a step to the left and turn to the right. It's odd to me that this has happened twice to me on two different sites. Either way this was the one of the two I preferred of the two, I still like the other as it has both pumps and some perspective, something is missing but I liked it none the less.


 

*adjusts collar and clears throat* Well what can I say... Great minds think alike.. :mrgreen::lmao:


----------

