Images of mistakes - good or bad..

[StoneNYC]

Well it's my first 14x17 image from my home built camera, the mistake is some light leak, I did notice it and when taking the second image I THINK I corrected it, however I haven't developed it yet to know for sure.

By the way is there an ULF Landscapes images thread of some kind? With all the tiny format image threads there should at least be one or two ULF image sharing threads no?

iPhone shot if the negative converted to B&W since I can't scan it... Mind the reflection from the film, that's not the mistake, just the streak of light all along the left side.

[Jiri Vasina]

Another mistake, this one probably while focusing. (Or I could say, there was a gust of wind before exposure which left the flowers moved?)

Poppies

Shot with Chamonix 5×8" and Meyer Trioplan 260mm f:4.5 lens without shutter. Exposed on 4¾×6½" (half-plate) sheet of Fomapan 100, developed in Rodinal (Foma R09 variant). Full frame.

[macolive]

I didn't clean the water container...among other things

Arca Swiss 4x5
210mm Apo Sironar N
Tri-X 320
http://Nespresso by Michael Olivares

[Pierre 2]

8x10 Ektascan in 2D; Rodinal 1:100 (20ml/2l for 4 sheet in a tray 2 back to back, sides by sides), inversion of each pair every 2 minutes for 12 minutes, Water rinse in tray for 2 minutes - Boy did I disliked this experience. One neg in particular shows uniform fog on the negative side but not under the guide rail. Wanted to avoid uneven development but ended up creating a lot more problems (and scratches). One can recognize the wide ribs of my tray which affected development while the emulsion was resting against them (some mistakes I really have to do myself...).

For a small trivia question : There is actually a rather big stone multi-story building somewhere on that picture (even though only the upper levels are visible)

At late last, found out that the proper way to size export pictures in Light Room is by defining the long side pixel count (1000 here). Got frustrated as I could not reduce to 750k through the "define target size" function.

[Tin Can]

8x10 Ektascan in 2D; Rodinal 1:100 (20ml/2l for 4 sheet in a tray 2 back to back, sides by sides), inversion of each pair every 2 minutes for 12 minutes, Water rinse in tray for 2 minutes - Boy did I disliked this experience. One neg in particular shows uniform fog on the negative side but not under the guide rail. Wanted to avoid uneven development but ended up creating a lot more problems (and scratches). One can recognize the wide ribs of my tray which affected development while the emulsion was resting against them (some mistakes I really have to do myself...).

For a small trivia question : There is actually a rather big stone multi-story building somewhere on that picture (even though only the upper levels are visible)

At late last, found out that the proper way to size export pictures in Light Room is by defining the long side pixel count (1000 here). Got frustrated as I could not reduce to 750k through the "define target size" function.

Despite all explaining, I like the image for it's foggy mystery and bleakness. A certain je ne sais quoi...

[Pierre 2]

Despite all explaining, I like the image for it's foggy mystery and bleakness. A certain je ne sais quoi...

Thanks Randy : Despite the swirls induced by the developper circulation in the tray, or lack thereof, the clouds are in fact genuine and, in my own opinion, would have been sufficient to induce a degree of bleakness. At least, I wish the major vertical bands where not there.

Oh, and building is roughly 1 fifth from the right and 1 third from the top. I am going back next year...

Maybe by then, will have devised a method of emulating Jobo lack of turbulence inducing separators ridges in drum (or will stick with trays, or will have tried and liked tanks...).

Here is another one from the same lot of four. The offending bands are horizontal...

[pau3]

Here you have a example of long series of mistakes:

1) too much rise and tilt (although on purpose),
2) rollei ato under noon sun and normal dilution of developer it's not the
best way to control contrast, even if developer is 510-pyro,
3) kallitype emulsion not completely dry,
4) other unknown mistakes.

Anyway, this is the result:

[alanbutler57]

The great thing about a Grafmatic is having six shots to take. . . the bad thing about the Grafmatic is having six shots to screw up. . . Double exposures from this year's Waxahachie WWII re-enactment, one was mercifully too over exposed to scan. Speed Graphic w 127 Extar exposed over Graphlex Super D with 190 Extar. More mercy as I can only post four!

Wax 15-11 by Alan Butler, on Flickr

Wax 15-10 by Alan Butler, on Flickr

Wax 15-09 (opps!) by Alan Butler, on Flickr

Wax 15-08 (opps!) by Alan Butler, on Flickr

[AlexGard]

The usual rookie mistakes. Crawled into the river up to my waist with my 8x10 for these shots and didn't get anything worth keeping, really.
Try again soon. Having a big clean today and a bit of photographic meditation and see if that helps.

[ImSoNegative]

a shot I did yesurday with the c1 and 250mm 6.7 fujinon, the last time I saw this creek flooded like this was about 12 years ago, I was so excited about it I forgot which side of the holder I had used after I took the first shot, so I guessed, and you know what? I was wrong : (

accidental double exposure by john golden, on Flickr