Bronzing

A photograph of my  daughters printed on Kodak RC paper in the early '90's. Seen clearly in the upper right is the

unwanted deteriorating effect known as bronzing.

©PN Parsons

This past summer ago I decided as a project to print a selection of 35mm family negatives for posterity but was flip-flopping on whether to print on my favorite paper (Ilford RC) or to use a fibre-based paper as recommended by paper manufacturers when archival longevity is of importance.

The above photograph was originally printed on 11x14" paper, matted in a passe-partout frame and hung in a hallway near a north facing window for several years. 

I had begun to notice the slowly increasing presence of bronzing (a yellowish stain) about three years ago and was aware of it being a rare bugaboo with RC paper but this was the only photo of mine which had been effected.

Thinking maybe there  might be technological improvements to resin-coated black and white papers in recent years I sent an email to Ilford in which I described the bronzing effect in my picture. A short time later I received a reply from Ilford Canada saying bronzing was a rare occurrence in both RC and fibre paper and was most likely caused by improper fixing or washing, chemicals leaching from framing materials, display environment etc. 

I am embarrassed. When I took the frame off the wall to take a picture for this blog I noticed the photograph was not on an Ilford paper but made on one of Kodak's. I remain an idiot. Apologizes to the nice person at Ilford.

Anyhow when I do get around to editing and printing the negatives I plan to use fibre paper and now recommend  to the darkroom printer to use fibre-based paper, fresh fixer along with a good washing and selenium toning for your archival work. After you are gone you don't want your children to say 'Dad's pictures are turning yellow!'

For the record here are the highlights from the  Ilford Canada:

Bronzing is an effect that shows yellowing or more typically when worse - as a metallic silvery or gold-like appearance on the surface of paper. It can affect RC and FB papers - but is slightly more common on RC papers.

It takes time for it to show - it never arises after paper has been processed. Sometimes it might arise within several months, but other times - it literally could take several years (as in your instance).

It can show in small/localized areas or overall, but typically it always starts in a limited area, and then it spreads. At its worse - as mentioned above, a print can look like its got a silvery, or bronze or gold - mirror appearance.

Its presence is due to a print not being archivally stable - and the print degrading. ie The effect arises if a print hasn't been fixed effectively - or washed for long enough (to remove the residual silvers etc). The image can then get attacked (even if behind glass) to oxidizing agents such as peroxide, paints, varnishes, air pollution.

If a print hasn't been processed correctly and is not archivally stable - I've certainly known bronzing arise such that a print has remained totally good/normal in a glass frame for 1- 10 of years, but then suddenly shows the problem when the room the picture is hung in - has been decorated (paints, glurs etc), or new carpet is laid (glues etc), or a floor has been varnished. It can happen very speedily after those pollutant triggers.

Once the effect has arisen with a print, its not possible to reverse it unfortunately.

 

 

 

The Value of a Print

A pigment inkjet print on fine art paper.

© PN Parsons

Beyond the occasional Mama Mamiya blog post there is also my desire to produce a fine black and white print. A print that has value well beyond its production cost. A photographic image which can be framed and hung on a wall, given as a gift or if I'm really lucky can be sold. The fine print is considered the cumulation of one's efforts.

Producing work which reflects one's vision and creates a feeling of satisfaction also requires diligence and care. To quote David Bayles and Ted Orland in their book Art & fear, "Vision is always ahead of execution, knowledge of materials is your contact with reality and uncertainty a virtue."

Renowned American photographer Ansel Adams (1902-1984) is quoted to have said something akin to 'anything which is easy to produce often has little value.' 

Using an 8x10 view camera Adams is best known for scenes of western United States. He was no doubt reflecting on the major effort required to create a fine image, where the value of the print itself often reflects the artistic vision, skill and tenacity of the photographer.

One way to reach that feeling of artistic accomplishment and to create a fine print (the end goal) is to have a consistent work flow. 

To that end a consistent work flow is perhaps the best way to make fine images. A work flow which has a specific goal and avoids a willy-nilly random approach to creative photography.

Producing a collection of negatives has for me become an ongoing practice. It is better to be out there shooting consistently than waiting for a worthy subject to appear. Just shooting with the TLR often can be rewarding enough. The end goal of the making of a print can be put off until actual photographs are needed. 

In my work I use the Mamiya C220 TLR system. I avoid experimenting with different film, oddball developers, plastic cameras and gadgets and use Ilford HP5 film and Kodak D-76 (diluted1:1) as my developer and Kodak powder fixer. The primary photography focus is the subject. This is what I like doing. It is my goal.

This is not to say a photographer cannot try different equipment and lenses, films or developers, if their work is of an experimental nature. 

A younger or new to film photographer has to experiment to get use to equipment and materials. Every photographer's goal is unique.

The ease at which a digital photographer can produce work has in my opinion cheapened the value of the digitally created image for the digital world compared to film photography in which the goal is to create a fine print. 

While many are creating good work digitally they are perhaps not being as well paid or rewarded as their old school film brethren or not being paid at all. (I make the assumption that the reader hopes to be able to sell their work or at least benefit from it)

The resurgence of traditional emulsion photography is no doubt a backlash caused by the soulless nature of digital photography. It is just a feeling that you have when working with film. A kind of cachet.

Getting back to producing a fine print the TLR photographer has the choice to make a traditional silver print in a darkroom or scanning the negative and making a pigment print on archival paper. Both approaches require a consistent work flow with a knowledge of equipment and material. 

Current practices and production workflow at Mama Mamiya is fairly consistent: 

- A clear idea of subject reflecting the vision and feelings of photographer.

- Knowing the workings of the Mamiya TLR camera, lenses and accessories. (find out what the exposure adjustment scale on the camera body really means) If you have the resources get the shutter  on your lenses cleaned and checked for accuracy. 

- Use the same film type all the time and get to know its quirks and quarks. In our case it is Ilford HP5.

- Use an incident light meter and select the most appropriate exposure for the subject and lighting. Use a filter to reflect your vision. Ansel seems to have been fond of the red filter as witnessed by the black skies in many of his pictures.

- Develop film using D76 or equivalent. I like Kodak Fixer with hardener and not Ilford's non-hardening varieties. A hardener cuts down on scratches when water is wiped from washed film with a squeegee but requires a longer wash time.

- Scan negative and make light/dark/contrast adjustments and do dust spotting. Send scanned file or negative to a photo lab for printing on traditional silver paper or to a digital lab for printing on archival paper using pigment inks. Alternatively you can set up your own darkroom and make silver prints or buy a photo printer. I recommend outsourcing in both instances as the do-it-yourself methods each come with their own  can of worms and can be both expensive and frustrating.

Like everything in life nothing is set in stone. This approach to TLR photography works for me. All photographers live and work in a myriad of situations often with limited resources. In my case I like to shoot as much as possible and amass a negative collection. 

It is very difficult for art photographers to exhibit, sell or have their work published. Maybe it is better to produce several really good fine prints a year for your own walls than giving up prematurely due to limited commercial success or lack of artistic fulfilment.

Following a consistent path has its own rewards. In the end you will have a large or small collection of fine prints. Your artistic vision and desires have been met in the value of the prints both to yourself and hopefully to others.

Fall Hosta

Fall hostas take on a lovely yellow hue which while stunning in colour also make a nice subject in black and white,

Mamiya C220 with 80mm lens. HP5

©PeteParsons

Majorette

 

Going through my old negatives I came across this  studio photo taken in 1978 of my friend Christine in  her majorette costume. Christine loved having her  picture taken and I used her as a model several times afterward until we lost contact.

I was using my first Mamiya C220 with an 80mm  lens as it was the only medium format camera I had at the time. Tri-X and D-76

© Pete Parsons

A Perfect Negative?

An older man enjoys reading his crumpled newspaper while sitting on a park bench in Halifax, Nova Scotia in 1976.

Tri-X and D-76 

© Peter N Parsons

When I was a beginning photographer I was always experimenting with different films, developers, filters, photographic papers etc. I spent days pouring over photo supply catalogs, magazines and books looking for the magic bullet that would make me a better photographer. 

In a way I was not unlike today's digital photographers who are always on the lookout for the latest cameras and lenses to make them a better photographer, hoping technology will produce better photographs. 

Back when I became a newspaper photographer in the early seventies the film of choice was Kodak Tri-X with a blazing ASA (later ISO) of 400. Tri-X was available in both 36 and 20 (later changed to 24) exposure rolls. We used the 20's for everyday work but carried the 36's for sports or big assignments The camera of choice was Nikon or maybe Pentax. At my newspaper the photographers were required to use their own equipment. I had a couple of Nikkormats with 35mm, 50mm and 105mm lens. The paper graciously provided a Metz flash and pool equipment including a 200mm lens and a Nikon F with motor drive.

We had two film developers, Kodak D-76 and fixer for everyday work and a developer called Acufine which allowed shooting Tri-X at 1000 ISO. We were always shooting hockey and basketball as well as other indoor sports in dimly lit arenas and gyms. To stop the sports action a shutter speed of at least 1/500 of a second combined with a wide open lens aperture was needed.  Acufine was a godsend for sports photography however picture were grainy, contrasty and with little detail in the shadows and highlights. But it did not matter because pictures in the newspaper were grainy, contrasty with blown out highlights anyway.

As stated we used Kodak D-76 and Kodak Rapid Fixer for our everyday developing. A new batch of developer was used at full strength. Development was the manufacture's recommended time and temperature using a chart. At first the developer was too strong and produced negatives that were both over developed and contrasty. Corrections were made, usually by adjusting the developing time by eyeballing your previous negative. The gallon size of developer was used until it was exhausted producing thin negatives which were hard to print.

We used a Kodak Ektamatic print processor which gave a quick, if not permanent print which was great for newspaper work.The Ekamatic prints could be also be fixed, washed and dried if a permanent photo was required

I found from time to time, but not often, I would produce what I believed was a perfect negative, sharp with a full range of midtones without blown out whites, good shadow detail but without any objectionable grain in an 8x10 print. Hard to get with 400 ISO speed 35mm film.

At first I believed it was a result of a good subject with a nice range of midtones and subdued contrast, ideal for skin tones with Tri-X. But a lot of subject had these attributes yet my negatives were not always excellent. I came to think bad negatives were because of often poor location conditions with which newspaper photographers worked.

Over time I became more consistent in my darkroom habits and bad negatives became rare. I am more careful with time/temperature and agitaion, using the D-76 1:1 and dumping it. D-76 has become the only film developer I use. (I have switched from Tri-X to Ilford HP-5 as it is very similar to Tri-X, more easily available and cheaper)* 

I am far from the best photographer in the world but I have become pleased with this film/developer combination as I believe it reflects my aspirations as a photographer.

Since I am no longer a newspaper but an enthusiast photographer I now have the  luxury of choosing my subjects carefully. I recommended rejecting subjects which are overly contrasty or may not photograph well (bright white skies) and being aware that camera exposure and film developing are at the heart of successful black and white film photography.

Another benefit of consistency in film choice and development is that it no longer becomes an issue. The photographer can then focus on subject selection and camera work and goals without much thought to what is now referred to as post. 

*As I have stated before here at Mama Mamiya we are only concerned with the use of the Mamiya TLR camera system with Ilford HP5 (exposed at recommended ISO 400) as our favorite film. Our developer is Kodak D-76 diluted 1:1 and dumped after every roll. We use stainless steel tanks and reels. We use the recommended developing time and agitation by gentle tank rotation every minute. I only get 16 rolls out of a gallon of D-76. A lot less than the old newspaper days but our negative are a hell of a lot more consistent.

Daunting Tasks

Photos with descriptions.

One of the most daunting tasks many photographers neglect is to record serial numbers and take photos of their equipment for insurance purpose. Most professionals have to do this tedious chore as part of their business insurance package as gear is expensive and often financed.

The enthusiast Mamiya user usually collects their equipment, one piece at a time, sometimes over a period of years. They hope their camera stuff is insured through their home or tenant's insurance. 

If you stuff is stolen or lost it is a good idea to have ready for the insurer a list of your gear with serial numbers and photos. Please note: it is very difficult to put a value on used lenses and cameras which have been out of production for many years. You might have to pay a camera store to make valuations based on your photos alone.

Depending on the value of gear you might want to speak with your insurance agent anyway.

Think about it!

A Brief Historica

Mamiya C220 with 135mm lens

©PeteParsons

At Mama Mamiya our primary concern is the use of the C-Series twin lens reflex (TLR) camera.

It may be of some use for those readers who are considering obtaining a Mamiya TLR to know a brief history of the camera's production lineage and the various models.

The Mamiya TLRs were first produced as the Mamiyaflex with fixed lenses in 1948. In 1956 the Mamiya C series with interchangeable lenses and other accessories aimed at the professional user were introduced.

The current Mamiya user main source for equipment will most likely eBay or Kijiji and it may be helpful to have an idea of when various models were produced:

Mamiyaflex Junior (1948)
Mamiyafex Automat A  (1949)
Mamiyaflex 1  (1951)
Mamiyaflex II  (1952)
Mamiyaflex Automat B  (1954)
Mamiyaflex Automat A II  (1955)
Mamiyaflex Automat B II  (1956)
Mamiyaflex Automat A III  (1956)
Mamiya C  (1956)
Mamiyaflex PF (1957) police model
Mamiya C2  (1958)
Mamiya C3  (1962)
Mamiya C33  (1965)
Mamiya C22  (1966)
Mamiya C220  (1968)
Mamiya C330  (1969)
Mamiya C330f  (1975)
Mamiya C220f  (1982)
Mamiya C330s  (1983)

The C/C2/C3/C33/C330's were produced for the professional photographer. The C3's has a film advance lever which also cocks the shutter. Almost all accessories fitted these cameras.

The more economical C22/C220 was targeted toward the semi-pro and amateur photographer who did not need the wide range of accessories as a pro. The C220 required the shutter to be cocked manually either before or after film advance.

The lenses for the C models are matched twin lenses.The top is the viewing lens, the bottom contains the shutter and aperture blades.

There are three versions of lenses. The original were the chrome series with shutter speeds of 1 sec. to1/400 sec. The second series were also chrome with shutter speed extending to 1/500 sec. plus bulb. The last black series had improved shutters and more extended lineup.

The so-called blue dot lenses were the last to be produced and the most desirable but I can find no mention of them being produced in the complete range of lenses.

The following is a list of lenses which may be of benefit to the buyer:

55mm f4.5 (black,Seiko shutter)
65mm f3.5 (chrome,Seikosha-MX shutter)
65mm f3.5 (chrome,Seikosha-S shutter)
65mm f3.5 (black,Seiko shutter)
80mm f2.8 (chrome,Seikosha-MX shutter)
80mm f2.8 (black,Copal shutter)
80mm f3.7 (chrome,Seikosha-SLV)
80mm f3.7 (black,Copal shutter)
105mm f3.5 (chrome,Seikosha-MX)
105mm f3.5 (chrome,Seikosha-S shutter)
105mm f3.5 (black,Seiko shutter)
105mm f3.5 D (black,Seiko shutter)
105mm f3.5 DS (black,Seiko shutter)
135mm f4.5 (chrome,Seikosha-MX)
135mm f4.5 (chrome,Seikosha-S)
135mm f4.5 (black,Seiko shutter)
180mm f4.5 (chrome,Seikosha-MX )
180mm f4.5 (chrome,Seikosha-S shutter)
180mm f4.5 (black,Seiko shutter)
180mm f4.5 Super (black,Seiko shutter)
180mm f4.5 Super (black,Seiko-SLV)
250mm f6.3 (black,Seiko shutter) manual cocking only*

*while most lenses auto cock on the C3's some of the latter models may not auto cock on earlier bodies.

A number of accessories were also produced including for the C3's interchanging backs which allowed for single sheet films.  Different viewing screens were also available for the C3's but not the C2's.

Other accessories including the complete lens lineup, paramender, lens hoods, eye level viewers etc. could also be used on both bodies.

Mamiya stopped production of the C series in 1994 as the 645 and RB cameras became more popular.

Getting Good Negatives

Careful use of a light meter is the essential first step for getting good negatives

©PeterParsons

Getting a correct exposure by careful use of a light meter and adjusting for bellows extension, the Mamiya TLR black and white photographer is still faced with a number of developing choices to obtain a good negative.

Darkroom printing is an art unto itself and requires skills developed over time, along with a thorough knowledge of equipment and materials.

I will assume most current black and film users will want to develop their own film.

Negatives can then be scanned for internet use and to make prints using a printer.

Outsourcing digital files to a lab is also a great way to get excellent enlargements from your black and white negatives.

The most inexpensive and quickest way to get good negatives is to develop film yourself.

Normally we arrive at a film/developer combination based on a recommendation or through experimentation.

T-Grain films such as Kodak T-Max or the Ilford Delta range are the most recent in film technology before the digital tsunami and they are still available along with their recommended chemistry.

My favorite film/developer was and still is Kodak's Tri-X and D76.  I used this combination for many years as a newspaper photographer before colour in newspapers became dominant.

For my current Mamiya work I use Ilford HP5 Plus film which is similiar to Tri-X, but less expensive.

Digital Truths Massive Developing Chart is also a good source for different film/developer combinations: https://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php

I still have a good stash of Kodak powder chemicals developer D76 and Fixer left from a large purchase made several years ago and will use these until they run out before turning to Ilford.

My 120 film is developed at home in the laundry tub using a 16 ounce stainless steel tank and film reel.

I do not recommended the adjustable reel plastic tanks such as the Paterson for 120 films. They do a great job for 35mm films but I have found the 120 reel size does not allow for good flow of developer during agitation, often leading to uneven negatives.

Air bubbles, overdeveloped edges and underdeveloped central areas of the negative are most common complaints using these reels which are adjustable for both 35mm as well as 120 films.

Other required items are a film changing bag so you can load film onto reel in daylight. You can however find a completely darkened room.

Loading film on a metal reel is the most daunting of tasks for the novice developing their first films.

Sacrifice a roll or two of unused film so that you can practice (by visually observation) before loading your exposed film onto reel inside the light proof changing bag.

I use D76 diluted 1:1 for film developing and this is dumped after each roll. The stainless steel developing tank holds 16 ounces. The one gallon size of 128 ounces will develop about 16 rolls of film.

The gallon size of Kodak fixer is used full strength and returned to its jug after each use.

Do not use the fixer beyond  manufacturer's recommended capacity as scratching negatives during squeegee use is increased.

A thermometer is needed to mix the developer and water to a working temperature of 68 degrees F.

Try to always use the same temperature of developer/water mixture by carefully adding small amounts of either warm or cool water along with the developer in a container (8 oz each of developer and water) until the 68 degree temperature is obtained.

Careful and consistent agitation is the key to evenly developed negatives.

Pour developer into tank and give it a couple of good raps to dislodge any air bubbles which may be attached to film. Every minute slowly invert the capped tank gently a couple of times. After 13 minutes are up dump the developer.

Fill the now empty tank with water for a 30 second quick rinse and then add fixer. Agitate fixer in the same manner as the developer. Kodak's powder fixer requires a soak of at least 10-12 minutes at 68 degrees.

Wash in running water at 68 degrees for at least 30 minutes

A wetting agent such as Photofo can be used after wash but is not necessary. Carefully wipe film with a film squeegee. Be careful not to scratch film. Hang to dry using film clips or clothespins.

Examine you negatives. If the side edges and central areas look even your agitation was successful.

Darker looking edges are a sign of overly aggressive agitation. With under agitation the edges look good but central areas are too underdeveloped looking.

Good luck! It may sound relatively straight forward, but it may take a number of rolls before the goal of consistent results are obtained.

Filters for Black and White Film

Add caption

The top picture was taken with no filter, the middle one with a light yellow and the bottom with a R25 red filter.

Notice the difference in the sky, the water and dark areas between pictures.

Shot with a 55mm lens on my C220. Ilford HP5 film developed in D76, 1:1, 12 minutes at 68 degrees.

These are straight scans from an Epson 4490 scanner with no adjustments in Photoshop.

©PeteParsons









Although the use of filters in black and white film photography seems like a good way to get better pictures through improved tones, most film photographers do not bother to use filters.

The two main reasons are that filters requires an increase in exposure from one to four f-stops depending on the selected filter making a tripod a necessity .

The second is that the tonal change is universal. A yellow filter may darken a blue sky but lighten foliage. A green filter may lighten foliage to the extent it may appear odd to the eye.

As we are primarily concerned with the use of the Mamiya twin-lens cameras and with films like Tri-X and Ilford HP-5 (our favorite film) it is to these combinations or to the interested film user to which this post is addressed.

Filter sizes for lenses manufactured by Mamiya TLR use a 46mm or 49mm filter:

   46mm filter for the  80, 105,& 135
   49mm filter for the 55, 65, 180 & 250

The use of a 46-49mm step-up ring is recommended to avoid having to buy both sizes.

Filter manufacturers use their own combination of letters and numbers to identify their own products but their color and the effect on panchromatic film are similar.

The filter factor is a number which these manufacturers use to tell photographers how much increase in exposure is required to get a good negative. A good idea is avoid filter factors altogether and mark on the filter's case the increase needed in f-stops. Most photographers would use a combination of increased shutter speed and aperture to get good results.

The following is a list using Hoya's website, for example, indicating the increase in aperture in f-stops for their filters:

Colour                  Exposure Increase   

Yellow                       1 f-stop              
Yellow-Green            2 f-stops            
Red                            3 f-stop            
Orange                       2 f-stops             
Green                         2 f-stops

As the yellow, red, orange and green filters are the most often used a brief description of each is in order:        

The yellow filter is often the first filter acquired. It is used to darken a blue sky on a sunny day, increasing the visual difference between clouds and darkened sky. Other colours such as reds, greens and yellow-orange are reproduced in slightly lighter tones. It will often give flesh tones a more natural look. Many landscape photographers leave permanently attached as it also improves penetration of fog and haze.

The red filter increases the effect of a yellow filter by making skies almost black. Photographs of buildings made of different materials are often improved with the red filters as tones may appear more interesting. A red filter is dark and will normally require an increase of three f-stops of exposure. A diligent photographer might consider the use of a tripod when using a red filter.
Infrared films such as Ilford's SFX 200 require the use of a red filter.

The orange filter is considered an all around filter like the yellow. It is stronger than yellow but not as dramatic as red. It too can be kept on the camera at all times spanning the effects of between the yellow-red range and lightening foliage tones. Haze and fog penetration are also improved as well as skin tones in portraits.

The green filter primary purpose is to lighten green tones as panchromatic film often will record foliage darker than they appear to the eye. Although limited in application the green filter can also be used in portraits by darkening lips and making skin tones more natural to the eye.

In all cases the use of filters should be considered experimental. Panchromatic film has nuances from manufacturer to manufacturer. Individual developers can give wildly different results. Scanning a negative is different from an enlarger print. Each photographer must decide if the use of filters is even worth the effort or cost.

It is my opinion however that the TLR user, always using the same film/developer technique, consistent scanning and printing will see better results by using filters.

Ilford Photo has a good introduction to filter use:
https://www.ilfordphoto.com/colour-filters/

Freestyle Photographic has a very detailed piece on filters for the more technically inclined:
https://www.freestylephoto.biz/black-and-white-filters-tutorial

Winter Bird Feeder

Winter Bird Feeder

Mamiya C220
135mm lens
1/250 at f8
Ilford HP5
Developed in small tank.
Kodak D-76,  1:1
12 minutes at 68F
Agitation once per minute
Epson 4490 scanner






I was hoping for a bird or squirrel to invade this bird feeder in my backyard after a spring snowfall a couple of weeks ago....no such luck, even after waiting ten minutes, which for me is a considerable length of time.

Snow is always difficult as it overexposes and make highlights appear muddy under flat lighting using black and white negative film. Attempting to compensate by reducing development time is hit-and-miss.

As exposure produces density in a negative and development contrast, changing either adversely effects the other.

Bracketing is the only option available other than shooting multiple rolls and developing each at different lengths of time. Expensive and time consuming.

Back lighting in full sun is perhaps the best approach to photographing snow scenes. Avoiding flat lighting completely, but not always an option.

I now develop film in a laundry tub and no longer have access to a darkroom where a contact sheet was always made to evaluate everything.

Eyeballing the negatives, sticking what seems the best into the scanner and hoping for the best is now my method.....Progress?

First Lake Foot Bridge

                                                                       © 2015 PN Parsons

First Lake Foot Bridge near my home in Nova Scotia

A non-Mamiya picture. Shot with a Zeiss Nettar folder.

1/200 second @ f8.0
Ilford HP5
D76 1:1
20 degrees C 12 minutes
Kodak powder fixer 12 minutes

                               

Silhouetted Spruce Trees

                                                                                  © PN Parsons

Spruce trees are silhouetted against a cloudy sky near Rainbow Beach in Nova Scotia in December 2015

Mamiya C220
55mm lens
Yellow filter
1/250 second @ f11.0
Ilford HP5
D76 1:1
13 mins. @ 20 degrees C.