From Hasselblad…
First in a two-parter. I recently sent my faulty Hasselblad film magazine to David Odess for repair. Very not-cheap, but I sold a friend my Canon AE-1 to help pay for it. Why would I sell my AE-1 you ask? Well, when I bought it I had definitely NOT done my research and thought it was a mechanical camera. Turns out it needs a battery to function, and I’ve had a beef with it ever since I bought it. And I was sick of it sitting there asking me why I didn’t love it properly with it’s accusing eyes. Anyway.
The problem I was having was the occasional overlapping frame on whatever roll of film I’d put through the Hasselblad. I noticed that this happened once or twice, so I stopped using the camera until I had the cash (more than a hundred, but not quite two hundred) to get the magazine fixed. Fortunately, a call to David confirmed that the film back was all that I needed to send in – the problem is apparently never with the camera body.
Well, I got the magazine back on a Friday and shot a roll of film in it that night. It was a poker night in Stormstown, and I hadn’t had the pleasure of a poker night in a long time. Much to my dismay, however, the frames were still closely spaced. Not overlapping, but closely spaced. I even took the time to measure them, the average being 3.7 mm, translating to a 1.85-mm border for a roughly 60x60mm image. In my opinion, that’s too close for comfort. My latest camera, a Yashica Mat-124G, produces a much more comfortable frame spacing.
So I e-mailed David and he explained that he replaced some parts that ensured the frames wouldn’t overlap. But unlike the old Kiev camera I performed surgery on, there’s no adjustment for spacing the frames farther apart. You have to start replacing parts at that point, and it can get very expensive. Since the original frame overlap problem was fixed, I’m going to just consider the matter settled, even though I thought the frames were going to have a bit more of a buffer between them.
Of course, I’m going to keep my eye on the film that comes out of this camera, and hopefully there won’t be any problems.
Shots from the first test roll, for which I finally used my Unicolor C-41 kit:
Changes in what I’m up to
Just a quick update on what I’m doing right now, in bullet list form:
- I’m giving the photo lab review series a bit of a break. I still have a load of labs on my list, and I want to keep at it, but the money just isn’t there for me to keep sending off film around the country and ordering scans and prints so that I can judge their quality for both C-41 and cross-processed E-6.
- I’m instead testing some lower-ASA black and white films. This was brought on by the idea of finding a B&W film that is as sharp as Kodachrome was. Tonight I’ll be developing my first rolls of Efke KB 25 and Kodak Plus-X (ASA 125). After that, I’ll be shooting some Ilford FP4+ (125) and Pan F (50). It’s funny since most photographers consider 100 ASA to be “medium” speed. I started learning on a digital camera, where 100 was the lowest possible ISO setting you could have…
In the interest of being consistent, I’m going to develop everything in Rodinal, maybe even at the same dilution, and I’m shooting every roll in my Konica S2. This has the added advantage of further improving my technique of focusing with the viewfinder. Unfortunately, I started the endeavor by shooting hand-held, so in the interest of fairness, I think I should keep at it. And I have 36 shots per roll, so it should be reasonable to compare the sharpest frames from each roll.
- My Hasselblad needs fixing. The frame spacing is very off, leading to a razor-thin strip where I can cut my negatives. This means I’ll have to hold off on buying more supplies and possibly narrow my 100 strangers project down to something a bit more reasonable, like 50. My 50 dogs project, which I really would like to make into a book, may have to take longer. For both of these, I’ve resolved to only shoot the Hasselblad, which is easily the best camera I own.
Now that I think about it, since my TLR’s viewfinder hood is busted, the only medium format camera that’s working as it should is my Holga. YIKES, you guys!
- I think I’m not getting enlargements that are as sharp as they could be. I’m investigating the potential causes and am going to be getting a Nikkor lens to replace my Beslar. Hopefully that will fix the problem. Then I can work on my crooked borders, perhaps by getting a better easel.
- Crap, I’m sure I’ll have to get more paper soon. Maybe I should go Glossy next time instead of Semi Matte.
- I’m interested in trying cyanotypes, but since I shoot 35mm and 120, I’d need to enlarge to ortho/litho film first… twice!
What are you guys up to? (Or: who even reads my blog?)
Sharpness
A quick post to (hopefully) improve the sharpness of your film photos.
1. Use a tripod. This is probably the best thing you can do to make your photos sharp. Your hands are always moving, and that means your camera is always moving if you’re not using a tripod. Remember that a photograph always represents a “slice” of time, so you should do whatever you can to ensure that the camera is motionless during that time if you can. If a tripod is unfeasible, a monopod is also an improvement. Otherwise, hold your camera as steadily as you can while you shoot.
2. Use a cable release. More vibration is introduced when you use your finger to push the shutter button. With a shutter release cable, the button is pressed off the camera body and transferred either through a mechanical cable extension or electronically. Thus, there is virtually no additional movement when the shutter fires. An added bonus is that virtually all cable releases feature a lock in case you want to do very long exposures. (E.g., fire the shutter, go eat some pizza, come back, and end the exposure.)
3. Use f/8 or f/11. These are allegedly the sharpest apertures to use for lenses that narrow down to f/22. Sadly, I don’t know enough about optics to tell you why. I imagine it might have to do with diffraction being minimized. Anyway, assuming your subject is stationary, use a longer exposure time so you can use this optimal aperture. Note that a large format user once told me that f/22 is sharper for large format photography. I think both optima are toward the middle of the respective aperture scales for their particular lens.
4. Use the mirror lock-up. When you release the shutter, the mirror on an SLR camera flips up to let light pass through to the film. This introduces very small vibrations to the camera, and you’ll lose a small bit of sharpness. Most SLR cameras have a lock-up function that you can activate before opening the shutter so that you can alleviate the vibration before your image capture. The downside is that you can no longer use the viewfinder, so be sure to compose beforehand. Alternatively, you could use a TLR or rangefinder, neither of which use mobile mirrors.
5. Use medium format or better. Ok, this doesn’t improve sharpness as much as it does resolution. 35mm film can only capture so much detail due to its size and the size of the grain on the film. (35mm still offers way better resolution when scanned than most consumer-grade digital cameras.) Medium format or even large format has a much larger image area, thereby allowing more details to be recorded on the film. It’s sort of like upgrading from a 640×480 monitor to a 1600×1200 monitor. Slower film also improves resolution, as the grain is finer.
6. Use a super-sharp lens. I’ve seen sharpness tests using Rolleiflexes, Mamiyas and Hasselblads – all medium format cameras. The sharpness didn’t vary much at all. However, I can also say that my 50mm f/1.4 on my Canon EOS camera beats the living hell out of the kit lens that originally came with it. This, however, is the most expensive option I’ve mentioned in this list. (Assuming you already have a camera that shoots a larger format than 35mm, of course.)
Example photograph: This was shot on Kodak Portra 400 film. The camera was a Hasselblad 500 C/M with a Carl Zeiss 80mm Planar CF f/2.8 lens. I probably used f/11 or f/8 as the working aperture. The camera was on a relatively inexpensive Slik tripod. The mirror was locked up, and I used a mechanical shutter release cable. I’ve included the overall image, as well as one that shows a 100% zoom in to the 3200 dpi scan.
Clara, Tired – First Haselblad image
Camera: Hasselblad 500C/M
Film: Ilford Delta 100 developed in HC-110
My first Hasselblad image – or at least the first I bothered to scan to a final image. I traded in a telephoto zoom lens, a flash unit, and a battery grip to get half off a 500C/M outfit. I decided to shoot a test roll of Delta 100 around the house.
The Hasselblad (named after Swedish creator Victor Hasselblad) was arguably the premier medium-format camera of the film era. A version of the camera was taken to the moon. The most popular cameras were the members of the “V System,” which in included interchangeable bodies, lenses, viewfinders, winders, film magazines and holders, and other accessories. The first camera in this series was the 500C, followed by the 500C/M.
A downside to the camera is that new lenses are pretty expensive, especially when comparing the system to a Mamiya RZ67 or 645. What made me purchase the Hasselblad was the lighter body and the 6×6 square format. The Mamiyas (which I’ve tried) were heavier, and featured either 6×7 or 6×4.5 images. If you’re making prints, then these aspect ratios are probably more friendly for photo paper, requiring less of a crop. However, I usually only scan my photos. The Hasselblad system features a 6×4.5 back if you really want one, and 6×7 images are a pain to store in my plastic PrintFile negative carriers.
When looking for Hasselblad images, look for unparalleled sharpness, and the two signature notches in the left border.
Color negative and transparency film test shots will be coming soon!
