[drphoto]

The plastic window screen sandwich deely is the way to go on the cheap. But they still won't be completly flat. I had a big ass dry mount press, but you can get creases if your prints are too curly to start with.  I  also had an electric drum dryer, but it had a nasty habit of eating prints.

 
 The best solution is the dryer with the heated platen and the canvas overlay w/ the spring loaded arms, that dries one or two at a time.Fairly cheap in the day, and probably next to nothing now. I dunno try ebay.

Try to find a used vertical print washer. The best by far was the one sold by (you guessed it) Zone VI. They were crazy spendy new, but I bet you could get one cheap. Shipping would be high as they are quite heavy.


I probably had about $10K in all my darkroom stuff and sold it for $1K or something about 8 years ago. 10K sound crazy, but this was bought new, and was the best stuff going. Short of a Zone VI varible contrast head, this was as good as you could get for up to 4x5. (although I did have a contact print frame for 8x10.....didn't get used much 

[nathanm]

I don't think I'll worry about the gear too much unless I can start shooting stuff I really think is worthwhile and thus more worth all the fuss.  Actually a good five or six extra hours of daylight per day is what I need.  Anyone know Superman's phone number?  It would seem that one key to being a successful photographer is not to have a day job.  The sun does not shine on the working man. *grumble grumble*  These stories you read about "Yeah I was in death valley for six days waiting for the perfect light..."  Hmph.  Must be nice.

[drphoto]

Yeah, I hear you. I'm a pro photographer, but I don't have the time to take the picture I really want to do.

No matter what you think of his work, Lord Ansel worked his ass off to get the images he made. (I think he's a god of photography BTW....some people want to dimiss his work because a) a lot of 'regular' people know it, and b) it's pretty.

 Well damn right it's pretty. Believe me this guy didn't just record what was in front of him, he made very smart decisions to show the scenes as he saw them in his mind, not as he saw them with his eyes. The "Monolith Dome" and "Moonrise_Hernandez" images are among the best photos ever made IMHO.

Equipment doesn't matter. I had good stuff, because it was how I made my living and good tools made it easier. I still have good stuff for the most part, but I'm dying for a digital back for my view cam, but I can't talk my jagoff business partner into letting me buy one.

[nathanm]

I think "Tetons & Snake River" would be the money shot for me.  I think the only way that one could be better is a physical imposibility; a higher elevation so that you could see the complete "S" shape of the river.  I admit I haven't really seen a whole lot of his work, but the fact that a few people I knew had a poster of his photos on their walls speaks to the huge reach he had.  There's not too many "household names" in photography but I bet the average joe on the street would know who Ansel is.  I suspect seeing the actual prints in person would be phenomenal.  The reproductions in the books are kind of average.  Not that it's supposed to be a coffee table book of course.

Plus the guy had a great market-friendly name.  Kind of uncommon first name, alliteration with the As, both names five letters...it rolls off the tongue.

[JohnR]

Youse guys are scaring me

I would like to learn how to at least develop my own B&W negs though. If you happen to have a handy link handy, that would be very handy...  For me, a shopping list and instructions would be perfect. I don't have a darkroom but I read that you can use a changing bag (whatever that is, doesn't sound all that pleasant).

[nathanm]

If you use a daylight tank where you pour the chemicals in the top you can load the film onto the reel in a bag.  I've never done it myself, though.  I just stuff a t-shirt under the door of my bathroom (no windows) and it's blacked out.  But since I do my 4x5s in an open tank I need a darkroom.  It's kind of nice though, just me and the dim green glow of the timer.  There's also changing tents out there which seems to me like it would be preferable to a bag in that the fabric isn't draped over your hands while you're working.

Basically it's just four steps: Developer, Stop Bath, Fixer, Wash  You just have to make note of the temperature, time and agitation.  Usually the stuff works at room temperature so you don't have to worry too much.

http://www.photogs.com/bwworld/bwfilmdev.html

Also try YouTube, there are a few film developing videos available there.

[nathanm]

Excellent shot!

Ansel Adams would be pleased.

For sure!

That could be in a portfolio of Ansel Adams' photos and I don't think I would notice any particular difference, except that I might like it more than some others!

Does this help?



Sorry, couldn't resist.  In all seriousness, this particular Ansel poster treatment does put a nice bit of polish on any B&W photo.  Like so:



Hey it works...   Now where's my $4000 to $100,000?  What?  I have to first be super smart, get famous and then die?  Aww shit!  Oh well, it makes for a nice poster anyway.


The possibilities are endless...

[JohnR]

Heh heh heh

Your's works really well, in all seriousness - I thought you were ready to publish your first book already!

[drphoto]

Man, you guys are making me nostalgic for the good old days of analog printing, which I never thought would happen. See, back in the late 80's/early 90's when I first went out on my own as a photographer, I didn't have enough of a client base to survive. Being a good darkroom tech, I started a lab business. I was the only custom B/W shop in town and it was quite successful. But it meant up to 12 hrs a day in the dark for weeks at a time. It got to the point were the smell of fixer would make me gag.

At the time, I was in this awesome loft studio downtown. One evening, I noticed the streetlights were sodium vapor, which means they were safelights for B/W paper. So after that, at night, I started leaving the darkroom door open.....cranked up the Magnepans, and life was much better.

Almost makes want to find some dektol or rapid fix scented candles.....(need a weepy eyed emoticon here)

[Levi]

Awesome Nathan!

[nathanm]

Just to be clear, 95% of these shots I've posted here are scans\digitally processed work of analog negatives, not scans of analog prints from analog negs. I do have BW prints around, but my skills there aren't good enough to publish IMO, and besides if you're finishing on the web it's unnecessary.  Kinda like making a dub by miking a speaker.  I dunno how this will affect drphoto's nostalgia one way or the other, but I just wanted to clarify that part.

Thanks Levi!

[nathanm]

All right, no more being an idiot I've gotten with the times now and got me one of them high-falutin' zeeclay thingers: aa



I haven't had a whole lot of time to print with it, but what's come out so far even with the stock profiles is really good!  Well, a smidge dark, but color-accurate.  But it reminded me of having good loudspeakers and how you need to "play back" your image with proper lighting.

I'm surprised I never heard of it before, but I just found out about the existence of "digital negatives" (not the Adobe DNG thing) wherein you print your inverted digital image on clear acetate on the inkjet printer and then make a contact print with it on silver paper in the darkroom.  It sounded a bit nutty and convoluted at first, but I'll have to give it a try.  I guess if that were an album the code would be: ADA, or with a digital camera DDA, er DA.

As expensive as this beast was, it was just too painful to think of paying $100-$200 at ImageKind.com just to have a print of my own work.  What really hurts is the price of a sheet of non-glare acrylic.   Almost makes a person say to HELL with atmospheric contaminants!

[JohnR]

What model is it?

I've read about the digital negative thing before. Seems interesting. Have you contact printed from your 4x5s?

A friend of mine showed me some old photos the other day - when I showed her my TLR, she said she had some square photos somewhere. They were tiny - I think they were contact prints from 6x6 negs!

[nathanm]

Epson 7880

No, I haven't done any contact printing yet.  It would be a rather unsatisfying size, though.  Although the hardcore film guys think the contact print is a panacea of quality.  An 8x10 isn't bad, but it's still too small for me. I like to have 'healthy' sized prints.  I made a 22x30" of an image which is a very nice size.  I like being able to walk up to something fairly large and inspect it and still be able to appreciate it from across the room.  I was also impressed at how smooth a big blowup looked.  I tooked one of my abstract pieces and made it 22" square where the effective resolution was 157ppi, but it doesn't look chunky or anything.  Not too shabby.  I suppose it depends on the nature of the content too.

I went through a box of my grandma's photos last week and her older BW prints look great.  But the color stuff from the 1960s-70s looks like hell.  The professional studio B&Ws look REALLY impressive.