# I decided to try black and white.... I think I'm in love.



## AFarhat (Sep 3, 2014)

I finally got a roll of black and white film developed. Just some random photos that I took to get use to my camera. I really like how some of them turned out, let me know what you think. 

1.



2.



3.



4.



5.



6.


----------



## limr (Sep 3, 2014)

For just playing around, they look pretty good! The kitty picture is a tiny bit out of focus, and the pup is a bit underexposed, but I really like them anyway, especially the shallow depth of field. Plus the cuteness!  Otherwise, my favorite one is #5. I like the gradation from light to dark and the dappled light in between. Nice comp.


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 3, 2014)

limr said:


> For just playing around, they look pretty good! The kitty picture is a tiny bit out of focus, and the pup is a bit underexposed, but I really like them anyway, especially the shallow depth of field. Plus the cuteness!  Otherwise, my favorite one is #5. I like the gradation from light to dark and the dappled light in between. Nice comp.




Thank you very much for the feedback.  I'm working on trying to get my exposure right, but with only having a film camera it really takes some practice.  My dang cat has been giving me a hard time and I keep missing the proper focus point cause he moves all the time.


----------



## snerd (Sep 3, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> Thank you very much for the feedback.  I'm working on trying to get my exposure right, but with only having a film camera it really takes some practice.  My dang cat has been giving me a hard time and I keep missing the proper focus point cause he moves all the time.



Good luck with the cat............ mine runs off as soon as she sees the camera!! Grrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 3, 2014)

snerd said:


> Good luck with the cat............ mine runs off as soon as she sees the camera!! Grrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!



No kidding, right when I get the shot I want, he runs away! At least I know its not just me.


----------



## terri (Sep 3, 2014)

B&W film is kind of addictive, so we'll see you soon in the Film forum, asking how to develop your film at home for pennies.       It's very empowering to realize how cheaply it can be done.

You have some nice exposures up there!   Keep shooting.    Remember that filters are the friend of B&W film, especially outdoors.   

<--   Oh, and Odin says "woof" to your friend in #3.   :razz:    Pugs are camera hams, so you might have more luck with the dog than the cat!   (But keep trying, he's a pretty kitty!)


----------



## limr (Sep 4, 2014)

Oh, cats will totally drive you nuts 

Exposures can definitely be tricky. You're using the K1000, right? Remember that sometimes the meter might be fooled by a lot of dark- or light-colored things in the frame. Gauge the scene and don't be afraid to nudge that needle a little bit off center. And you can bracket, too.


----------



## timor (Sep 4, 2014)

terri said:


> B&W film is kind of addictive,


Especially when you will start to develop own film. So


terri said:


> so we'll see you soon in the Film forum, asking how to develop your film at home for pennies.       It's very empowering to realize how cheaply it can be done.


Basic development is very easy. Of course it requires a bit of preparation. Like everything else. . Soon I hope you will discover, that b&w film development is a one big variable and there is a gozillion ways to do it resulting in somewhat or much different results. Finding own way might be an exciting journey.


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 4, 2014)

terri said:


> B&W film is kind of addictive, so we'll see you soon in the Film forum, asking how to develop your film at home for pennies.       It's very empowering to realize how cheaply it can be done.
> 
> You have some nice exposures up there!   Keep shooting.    Remember that filters are the friend of B&W film, especially outdoors.
> 
> <--   Oh, and Odin says "woof" to your friend in #3.   :razz:    Pugs are camera hams, so you might have more luck with the dog than the cat!   (But keep trying, he's a pretty kitty!)



Thank you, I do plan on figuring out how to develop pretty soon. What kind of filters are you talking about, like a ND filter? 

also, your pug is very cute!



limr said:


> Oh, cats will totally drive you nuts
> 
> Exposures can definitely be tricky. You're using the K1000, right? Remember that sometimes the meter might be fooled by a lot of dark- or light-colored things in the frame. Gauge the scene and don't be afraid to nudge that needle a little bit off center. And you can bracket, too.



Yes, the K1000. Although I don't have a battery in it because I can't get into the battery compartment, so I have not been using the spot metering function.

And what do you mean by "bracket" 

Thanks!


----------



## timor (Sep 4, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> What kind of filters are you talking about, like a ND filter?


 He is talking about yellow, orange, green and red filters.


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 4, 2014)

timor said:


> AFarhat said:
> 
> 
> > What kind of filters are you talking about, like a ND filter?
> ...



Oh, that sounds cool.  I don't think I've seen any B&W with filters like that.


----------



## PWhite214 (Sep 4, 2014)

Black and white film Is addictive, at least to me.  You did very well with your photos.  No. 2 is my favorite, followed by 1 & 3.  Take a look at the film section, there is a lot of info there.  Film Discussion and Q & A  What film did you use?  

Phil


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 4, 2014)

PWhite214 said:


> What film did you use?
> 
> Phil



TMax 400


----------



## timor (Sep 4, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > AFarhat said:
> ...


They are sometimes called contrast filters, but really the idea is in blocking unwanted light waves like blue from reaching the film or changing the film "perception" of certain colours in your subject. There is also matter of eliminating the haze in landscaping shots.
Look here:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photo-themes/3433-landscapes-3.html
post #38 and #40
Tmax 400 (TMY) reacts very well to filtering.


----------



## limr (Sep 4, 2014)

Bracketing is taking more than one exposure of the same scene. You'd take one at the suggested exposure, then ideally you'd take two more: one "over" and one "under" the suggested exposure. I don't always do three shots, but I'll often take a second one either over or under depending on what I think is "fooling" the meter (or my eyes - I don't always meter my shots but will often use Sunny 16 rules. The Ultimate Guide to the Sunny 16 Rule - Part 1 - AndBeThere.com)  It takes up more film, but it'll help ensure that you get a good exposure because it might turn out that the light meter you're using is suggesting the wrong exposure.


----------



## terri (Sep 7, 2014)

timor said:


> AFarhat said:
> 
> 
> > What kind of filters are you talking about, like a ND filter?
> ...



Yes, that is exactly what She meant.     :razz:


----------



## timor (Sep 7, 2014)

terri said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > AFarhat said:
> ...


:lmao: Sorry Terri, too many guys around me with the name "Terri". I didn't think.


----------



## terri (Sep 7, 2014)

timor said:


> terri said:
> 
> 
> > timor said:
> ...



No problem!    It's one of "those" kind of names, isn't it?


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 7, 2014)

Just got a red hoya filter. can't wait to get some photos back!


----------



## timor (Sep 7, 2014)

terri said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > terri said:
> ...


Yes. What's the full version ?


----------



## timor (Sep 7, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> Just got a red hoya filter.


Very well. What weather did you have while shooting ? What time of a day ? That, post #38, was shot in July around 3 PM with orange filter:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photo-themes/3433-landscapes-3.html
The same setup, April, around 4-5 PM


Action of a filter depends on few factors, but basically it goes down to the amount of blue light in the spectrum.


----------



## terri (Sep 7, 2014)

timor said:


> terri said:
> 
> 
> > timor said:
> ...



That IS the full version - not short for Theresa, or anything like that.   Just plain ol' Terri.


----------



## timor (Sep 7, 2014)

terri said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > terri said:
> ...


Well, I found this regarding your name:
Terry - meaning of Terry name


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 8, 2014)

timor said:


> AFarhat said:
> 
> 
> > Just got a red hoya filter.
> ...


 Mainly sunny mid day shooting. just random stuff... buildings, tress etc. I just wanted to get a feel for what it will do with my own experience.  I hope to get a orange filter soon for something with a little less contrast. 

I will post when I see them.


----------



## timor (Sep 9, 2014)

Orange or red as I said their action is not written in the stone formula. Here for change all with red filter:

A bit mixed up upload. Church is shot in April, daytime around 3 - 4 PM, street shot is from February around 2 PM.


----------



## timor (Sep 9, 2014)

I don't know, why this fourth picture is an Attached Thumbnail. How you can see, the angle of the camera has an influence. (Mea culpa, I like to point 20 mm lens upwards. )


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 9, 2014)

timor said:


> I don't know, why this fourth picture is an Attached Thumbnail. How you can see, the angle of the camera has an influence. (Mea culpa, I like to point 20 mm lens upwards. )



Very cool, I really like the photo of the church with the power lines. I am surprised( but not upset) that it is not as consistent as I was expecting. Why would the angle of the lens make a difference?


----------



## timor (Sep 9, 2014)

The most of blue light is just above the horizon, the least above your head.

Another one with red filter. You can see, where was the sun. 3 PM.
The amount of blue light is inconsistent and I don't know any practical method to discover that beforehand. Even direction if the sun could be fluid. Here shot right into the sun, red filter:

(Don't mind the quality of this pics, they are quick scans from prints only)


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 9, 2014)

Were these shot with the 20mm as well?  I really want to get a wider angle lens but am having a hard time finding one, realizing that I have the spotmatic, not the K1000. and lenses seem to be difficult to find.  where is a good place to look?


----------



## limr (Sep 9, 2014)

Timor, I love seeing all your pictures in this thread! We don't get to see your work very often


----------



## limr (Sep 9, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> Were these shot with the 20mm as well?  I really want to get a wider angle lens but am having a hard time finding one, realizing that I have the spotmatic, not the K1000. and lenses seem to be difficult to find.  where is a good place to look?



Try keh.com


----------



## timor (Sep 9, 2014)

limr said:


> Timor, I love seeing all your pictures in this thread! We don't get to see your work very often


 My scans suck. It is pointless for me to scan negatives for purpose of presenting shots here, as for me the neg is just a middle of the work, like here:


Scan from the negative is not the picture I want it to be.  It is just preparation.


----------



## limr (Sep 9, 2014)

It makes sense - I don't wet print, so any adjustments I make are done on the scans of the negatives, so it's easier to present those here. But yes, scans of prints just aren't the same as the prints themselves.

But it's still nice to see the rare picture from you


----------



## timor (Sep 9, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> Were these shot with the 20mm as well?  I really want to get a wider angle lens but am having a hard time finding one, realizing that I have the spotmatic, not the K1000. and lenses seem to be difficult to find.  where is a good place to look?


Yes, all the pictures you see here are made with ultra wide angle lens; 19 or 20 mm. My basic lens is Mamiya Sekor 20/4 or ViVitar Series 1 19-35. Sekor is a M42 mount, same like Spotmatic, Vivitar is in Minolta SR (manual focus, not A, AF, mount). Find first the lens and then look for matching body, as body is easier to get.


----------



## timor (Sep 9, 2014)

limr said:


> It makes sense - I don't wet print, so any adjustments I make are done on the scans of the negatives, so it's easier to present those here. But yes, scans of prints just aren't the same as the prints themselves.
> 
> But it's still nice to see the rare picture from you


 How you can see, I am in "crazy" cityscape photography. I am afraid, that my ideas will draw a lot of fire from "by the book" photographers. I just try to convey, what I feel about the subject, not how I see the subject.


----------



## gsgary (Sep 9, 2014)

I'll be wet printing in about a month been given 2 enlargers so soon I'll be scanning prints


----------



## KyleC (Sep 12, 2014)

Black and White photography can be addicting, enjoy and have fun!


----------



## Elie (Sep 12, 2014)

AFarhat said:


> 1.



Haha love the cat! Looks calm but intrigued. Been there too, done that too:


----------



## limr (Sep 12, 2014)

That cat looks... not amused, Elie   Very cute!


----------



## kdthomas (Sep 16, 2014)

The cat and the stairwell really work for me, but the cat's the winner. I like the curve of the furniture with the curve of the cat's back, and the table/chair legs in the BG. Just enough focus so that you know what they are, but not so much that it's distracting.


----------



## AFarhat (Sep 16, 2014)

kdthomas said:


> The cat and the stairwell really work for me, but the cat's the winner. I like the curve of the furniture with the curve of the cat's back, and the table/chair legs in the BG. Just enough focus so that you know what they are, but not so much that it's distracting.



Thank you.  I like both of those the most as well.  I think I want to get the stairwell printed.  But I'm not sure what kind of print I should do.


----------

