Technical perfection

I should analyse all the variables that might have contributed to this fuck up of a photograph. There are many things that could be to blame. Not the camera - it's old but I know the lens is good (although soft at the edges, which creates a nice natural low key Lensbaby look). Possibly the film. I know it might be about five years past its best before date. I used a roll yesterday that expired in June 2006 and I know I bought the Delta 400 after the pile of HP5 so today's roll is older than yesterday's.

I know it's been hanging around the garage for most of that time so subjected to extremes of temperature. Not stored in a fridge like a good film should be.

It could have been the developer although I used the same bottle yesterday and although it's getting on a bit, yesterday's film was good.

I might have cooked the film. The chemicals were the right temperature. Maybe the waterbath that the developing tank sits in was too warm. I judged the temperature with my fingers and they're not too sensitive to heat. I can take things out of the Aga's low oven without a towel.

Probably not the fixer but maybe I didn't give the film long enough to dry before I put it in its plastic sleeve and them sandwiched it between a tray and a chopping board before putting it on top of the Aga to warm up and flatten so it would be easier to scan. I think that's where the "texture" comes from. I'm sure I've seen it on contact sheets printed through the plastic sleeves.

I don't know where the lines come from.

Whatever. I'll maybe try all those things again to see if I can reproduce it. I quite like it. I'll maybe scan the frame with nothing on it and keep the texture in case I ever get a notion for that kind of photoshoppery.

I should say, for those that like this sort of thing in Photoshop, that what gives the game away, what makes 'shopped textured and aged old photos obviously phoney, is the lack of gross imperfections like the big line across the middle. You'd be unlikely to choose that. Also, the underlying image is often perfect - too sharp to have been taken on the old camera with its dodgy lens and with the film that the software is trying to emulate. Also, the imperfections are too consistent. Look at how, for some reason, there's no texture to the left of the lighthouse. Odd but you wouldn't create that deliberately so it has to be a genuine error/artefact of the film processing. And the grain structure from software is often all wrong. Much as I like Silver Efex Pro, it's grain emulation is dreadful. Anyway, it's quicker and more exciting to just to get the old camera and some film and take the photo. Take the digital along as backup but the beauty of film and hand-processing is that you don't know what you'll get and that's what makes it more interesting than instant photography.


**************
Details:

Camera: Zeiss Ikon
Film: Ilford HP5 (expired)
Exposure: 1/50s @ f8
Development: Monochrome Prescycol (10 mins @ 25C maybe)
Scanned and processed in Silver Efex Pro (dodging sky, coffee toning and vignette)