Images of mistakes - good or bad..

[Bill Burk]

David Lobato,

It's beautiful.

[Emil Schildt]

Yes David. it has a strange beauty!!

I had a new model yesterday - used old Pol 665 - the first reacted strangely: strangely unsharp and with a (nice) dry out part... The rest of the negs were fine...

[Digoy]

It was a beautiful morning so I decided to take a photo . I saw a bottle and set it up by the window, made the necessary adjustments and when I was about to trip the shutter my wife called me and we talked for some time. When I returned the light was so much better and brighter and due to my eagerness I forgot to measure the light again. I overexposed it but I think it made it look more pictorialist. Now I'm planning on gum printing it.

4x5 Ansco | 21cm/6,3 | Paper negative | 1+50 Rodinal

shot at f8 with a minute of exposure

[alexn]

Thought I cocked the shutter... Apparently I didn't... theres 2 minutes 45 seconds of exposure time I'll never get back..

[Leigh]

You exchanged the hypo with the developer, souping the film in the hypo first.
That results in totally blank film.

Acros has edge printing applied at the factory.
That will always appear with proper development regardless of your exposure.

Yes, I'm sure. Acros is the only 4x5 film I shoot, and I've done many hundreds of sheets.

- Leigh

[rco3]

The list of flaws is embarrassingly long. It is, despite and because of this, a remarkably successful representation of the subject.



Pacemaker Speed Graphic FP shutter, CHS25 Art in Rodinal, Dallmeyer Pentac 8" f2.9 WFO.

[alexn]

Leigh - I have no doubt that you're right with regards to the results of souping in hypo first.. however the other 5 sheets in the jobo drum that I developed this sheet of film in came out fine.. All have the exact density and tonality I planned at the time of exposure, and each has since been printed... This single sheet was completely blank, and it was Fomapan 100, not Acros..

I forgot to cock the shutter, resulting in me pressing the release, holding it for 6 seconds, then letting it go, however not having cocked the shutter, the sheet was unexposed, and being that I was shooting on the beach at sunrise, I didn't hear the if the shutter opened or not... Trust me - I'm quite sure

[Leigh]

This single sheet was completely blank, and it was Fomapan 100, not Acros..

Given that your sig says Acros, and there was no comment in the message contradicting that statement, it was perfectly reasonable to assume you were using Acros.

Chamonix 045N-2 - 90/8 - 210/5.6 - Acros100 - Rodinal.

We're not mind readers.

- Leigh

[Colin D]

I took this portrait of a reluctant daughter over 12 months ago thinking I had used Astia. So the other day off to Michaels Cameras i went and asked them to develop the film as E6. I got a call about a week later from a pensive young lass explaining that the sheet was in fact HP5. This is the result. Such a pity, then again not disasterous. One of my better composed shots, the delicate freckles on her nose are hard to see but a nice touch.

Anyway that's what happens when you leave undeveloped sheets lying around too long and the brain starts to fade.

[StoneNYC]

I took this portrait of a reluctant daughter over 12 months ago thinking I had used Astia. So the other day off to Michaels Cameras i went and asked them to develop the film as E6. I got a call about a week later from a pensive young lass explaining that the sheet was in fact HP5. This is the result. Such a pity, then again not disasterous. One of my better composed shots, the delicate freckles on her nose are hard to see but a nice touch.

Anyway that's what happens when you leave undeveloped sheets lying around too long and the brain starts to fade.

Was this the actual exposure or was it seriously off and you had to correct digitally? I'm asking also because I'm wondering if the white specs are dust from having to adjust the scan in post, or if the high heat of the E6 process made the emulsion lift off a bit..?