Tag Archives: Film Photography

Holiday Travel Alert: Airport CT-Scanners will Destroy Your Unprocessed Film

Airport_CT_Scanners

I first became aware of these new CT Scanners through a Popular Science Article.  Of course, they loved it!  But having spent a lot of time recently in CT Scanners for medical reasons, and knowing the radiation risks, I had some concerns.  So I contacted TSA:

TSA2

 

Eventually TSA referred me to their website information regarding Computed Tomography (CT).   The information provided in the email response was less than useless.  And their email response only contained the information for the OLD X-ray scanners:

TSA_Response

A recent Petapixel article provides the best source for relevant information regarding the CT Scanners and Your Film. Basically IT WILL DESTROY YOUR FILM!  So this is my Holiday Travel Warning.  You are permitted to ask for a hand search.  Do So!  Here is the current list of US airports with CT Scanners, with 300 expected by the end of 2020:

  • Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL)
  • Baltimore-Washington International Airport (BWI)
  • Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD)
  • Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG)
  • Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW)
  • Houston Hobby Airport (HOU)
  • Indianapolis International Airport (IND)
  • John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
  • Logan International Airport (BOS)
  • Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
  • Miami International Airport (MIA)
  • Oakland International Airport (OAK)
  • Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX)
  • Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA)
  • St. Louis Lambert International Airport (STL)
  • Tampa International Airport (TPA)
  • Washington-Dulles International Airport (IAD)

 

In addition to the safety of Our Film.  I am also concerned about the calibration of the machines, regular maintenance and the safety of the TSA operators.  What do they know and what are they being told about the radiation risks?  Lets give that some thought too!

 

My Kodak E100 Experience: Hot or Cold?

I waited with baited breath, as they say, for results from early E100 Film Testing.  Always reliable, I delved into the EMULSIVE Review, which compared various exposures, by processing at EI 100, 200, 400 800.  At first glance I like the EI200 images, so I started by comparing EI 100 vs EI 200.  The Cameras, my nearly identical Minolta X-700 with Tamron 28-200 zoom lens, which I’ve used for a number of side by side film tests:

 

Two_X-700

I took a second look at the EMULSIVE results after reviewing my own tests, and can’t believe that I didn’t see the EI 200 images were colder.  Also, the example scenes were not typical subjects that I would have photographed (the exception being flowers).  I had fears about the new E100 because I new that it was based on E100G, which I had always found to be too cold.  I always used a warming filter with the old E100G.  The long gone warm tone balanced E100GX had been my favorite.

So my results, E100 @ EI 125 (following Galen Rowell’s recommendation) on the top and EI 200 on the bottom.  All of the photos are the original raw scans with no adjustments of brightness, contrast or levels and no warming filter:

E100_125_MeteredE100_200_Pushed

The Cathedral Rocks in Arizona,  I tried to get the same perspective, but there is a slight difference. Below viewed from a distance:

E100_125_Metered2E100_200_Pushed2

And zoomed in:

E100_125_Metered3E100_200_Pushed3

Note the color of the Red Rocks and the Soil.  Since I frequently shoot Red Rocks, I’d like them to have the truer Red of the EI 125 images.  Below I’m showing the EI 125 exposed a +1 stop.  It probably offers a truer color rendition:

E100_125_TrueColor

It’s probably time for me to test E100 with a warming Filter vs. Portra 400.  I’ve found Portra 400 to be an acceptable color film for my current use.  I’ve also been spoiled by the wide latitude of exposures that a C-41 film allows.  Since I mostly shoot B&W now, I’m not sure that E100 has enough zip to bring me back to E-6.  But I’ll wait on a final E100 choice after the 120 is available.  I’ll test that vs Portra 400.

Results of Film Expertise Survey and My Personal Thoughts

I have my favorite films and I ask myself whether it is worth the time to learn about new films?  My favorite B&W: Kodak T-MAX 400, Ilford SFX-200 and I when I want less contrast Ilford Delta 400;  I also want to spend some more time with Ilford Delta 3200 My Favorite Color film for now is Kodak Portra 400;  I am presently testing the new Kodak E100.  So I have 3 main films (bold); one that I use under certain conditions (bold italic and posted image below); and two that I am experimenting with (plain text italic).

Fern_Canyon4

So I posted a Survey on Twitter and asked the followers of both of my Blogs to add their comments.  The Twitter Survey ran for a week with the following Results:

Survey_Results

Most of my blog followers are also on Twitter, so their votes are included above.  I agree  with the survey results: 48% of you say 3-4 films and 23% say 1-2 films.  Total for less is more: 71%.  So most of us agree that you cannot be an expert with dozens of films.  My husband said that his answer was 5+ films.  He really likes to find special films for special circumstance and does more experimentation than I do, which is a film multiplier.   @donkittle on Twitter wrote to me supporting different films for different situations also.  I typically shoot 3-4 different types of scenes/subjects.  So following this approach may explain why I only need/use 3-4 film types.  And I think that most photographers in that 71% are doing the same, typically shooting select films for their preferred subjects and no more.

I am open to experimentation on a limited basis, or using a certain film according to the conditions if I know that it will perform better (Delta 400) than my usual B&W (T-MAX 400).  We should all consider new films from time to time.  But film testing is time consuming, and I think that my days of trying new films are pretty much over once I’m done testing Kodak E100.  If I like the new E-6 film, then it will largely replace Portra 400, since ISO 100 films are better for travel (i.e. they survive possible airport X-ray mishaps better; also some film travel tips here and more here).  But since I already understand Portra 400, I can pull it off the shelf when I need it.  And although I don’t like the color balance of Portra 160 for my landscapes in general,  I can recommend it for Pinhole Cameras.  So another case of a special film for a special case.

Now lets consider some Favorite Films of Famous Photographers.  I’ve tried researching this on the WEB.  Lot’s of discussion of gear (cameras, lenses, etc), but very little on Films used by the Famous.  So isn’t Film part of your Gear?  Isn’t that why we choose certain films for certain circumstances?   Hey, if you become famous, please include preferred Film Types in your Gear……..  Here’s what I found after a few hours of searching for a some of my Favorites who considered the Film a part of their Gear:

I realize that it may be harder to find this information for deceased Photographers. But if you are still alive, please let us know what type of film you most recently used (even if you have switched to digital).

A Final Thought from the Weston Interview linked above:

“…..If you use a film long enough, you get to know its characteristics. I don’t use a meter, I just know the light…..”

 

 

 

 

 

The Story: Shooting Digital Like Film

LongCanyonTree_FinalCrop

First the Quote from Frank H. Wu on 35mmc:

“The lesson to be learned about life is that we, or at least I, do not appreciate as much what I have been given as what I have had to bargain for. I earn my film photos. I have to be able to afford it. That means repeatedly. Each and every satisfying click and whirr is a few pennies, which must be in the pocket. I am automatically averse to waste.”

The conclusion is that His film photos are always personally more satisfying (and often objectively better) than His digital images.

My best photos are definitely film.  One of last year’s successes IS digital (shown above), but I planned and captured the image like it was film.  I saw the potential image, walked around the scene looking for the best angles, made three images; taking into consideration how I might crop the final images as well.  And THINKING like a film photographer avoids Waste.  For a digital Photographer, the “waste”  is all that time you spend in front of the computer sorting through hundreds of images that you would never use. For any given scene, when shooting film I have at most 4-5 images to sort through.  If you think film is expensive, what is all that time you spend in Lightroom or Photoshop worth?  The most I do in Photoshop is adjust the contrast and brightness for posting online.  In the (real) Darkroom  I do the film tests and adjust the Contrast using filters.  Of course, if I have used the proper contrast filter and exposure when capturing the image, adjustments will be straight forward.  Hmmmm……I’m feeling that I need to write a post on Contrast Filters,  coming soon!