A couple of weeks ago, I wanted to test if a film
roll, expired 6 years ago, will still have enough sensitivity to capture
moments from a very dimly lit theater where a local band was performing. Adding
to the challenge, I loaded the film in my 1954 Leica IIIF Red Dial and put a
1948 Canon Serenar collapsible lens that was very fast for the period at f1.9.
Here is the combination and a close up of the lens:
The lens is a collectible, but a poor performer in
sunny situations. I have rarely used the f1.9 setting, as f8 seemed to be the
most acceptable setting for street photography. As for the Leica, I have owned
and used it for decades without maintenance. The speeds slower than 1/25th
seconds are now erratic, but 1/100th seconds and faster are still
perfectly acceptable. I knew I would need to test the 1/25th seconds
speed along with the “freshness” of the ASA 100 film.
But in the theater I encountered two new challenges
– the stage had spot lights on the musicians but the rest of the space was lit
with red lights! So, it was very difficult to even see the musicians through my
ancient viewfinder – I had to resort to zone focusing, hoping that someone on
that stage will be in focus!
When I developed the film, I was delighted that all
frames were well exposed. The film seemed still in fine shape even though I had
not kept it in the freezer like many rolls I have. And under the loupe, I could tell that the
zone focusing had worked with smooth tonal transitions and decent focusing.
Here is the frame I developed (no chemical contamination on the pellicule!) and a section of the developed film strip showing perfect development:
When I prepared the chemicals for printing a few
frames, I realised that the film developer solution was older than I like. But,
eager to see how the prints would come out, I was delighted to think that it is
only appropriate to have an “expired” developer solution while using an expired
film!
So, I chose a frame, exposed the photographic paper
for 45 seconds under my enlarger and let the white sheet into the developer
solution expecting that magic of a photo forming in a few seconds. When I took
the paper out of the solution pan, I realised that the developer solution was
too old as it was a bit syrupy over the paper.
So, I tossed the exposed paper in the trash bin
without going to the next two steps of dipping it in the “Stop Bath” pan, and
then into the “Fixer” pan. Since the negative was excellent, I decided to try
again when I mix a fresh Developer Solution.
And I forgot about it all.
Yesterday, as I was emptying my trash bin, I saw
that printed photo. Over more than 10 days, the chemicals in the expired
developer solution had run chaotically over that paper and crystallised in the
most delightful way! So, I took the
unexpectedly “artistic” photo to the sink, washed the crystals and hung it to
dry.
Too be honest, the photos I took were just to test
the equipment – pure curiosity by someone who always tries to get the most from
old tools, enjoys old methods of using the tools, and celebrates all surprises.
In this case, the unexpected touch of the developer solution’s chemicals made
the photo one I will remember.
And, to realise that really, I had no participation
in the process. All I had done was to throw the “half-baked” printed paper in
the trash bin. Now I learned a wonderful lesson – never disregard the ability
of the ordinary to, somehow, become extraordinary!
Maybe I will use this photo as one would use the Rorschach
inkblot test – see what people will see depending on who they were and what they have become. I sure have
my own interpretation about this band playing in an underwater cave surrounded
by aquatic sponges gently swinging to the New Orleans jazz rhythm and flow...
September 3, 2024
© Vahé A. Kazandjian, 2024
No comments:
Post a Comment