Weekly Photo Contest: 19–26 February: Retro

[NeGRit0]

OK, Thanks all for the effort you have put in. Some fantastic shows of talent here. Now lets get to the hard part.

@NeGRit0 - Fashionably late, pulling "a Laird Knox". Nice game changer there at the closing hour. Fabulous capture of old tech. Prime example of something that modern technology has yet to best for experience in joy of use. Fantastic colours and composition.

NeGRit0, over to you.

Wow, thanks! I was undecided between this one or a car photo, but ultimately came to the conclusion that this one fit the bill just a bit better. Some really top notch entries this week. Kudos to all who entered, and thanks again @kenoh for the nod. New contest will be posted momentarily.

Old style typewriters set my pulse racing - I love them, and love writing with them, so I also really liked @NeGRit0's picture. Very well taken.

Thank you for your kind words.

 

[anotherscotsman]

Congratulations to all of the entrants and to a worth winning entry @NeGRit0. Thanks Ken for the detailed commentary. I was going to take one of an old Singer sewing machine that belonged to my wife's grandmother but didn't get the time this week. I'll get around to taking it and post.


Cheers.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

Thanks @kenoh for the judging. Congrats to @NeGRit0 for the win this week! Well done to all entrants, too many favourites for me this week.

 

[Ish]

Congratulations to @NeGRit0 and to @anotherscotsman and @Laird Knox for the winning photos! Congratulations to @kenoh for a very well judged contest and thanks for all the feedback. Great job!

I was trying to upload a picture directly from my computer, rather than linking from my site, using the drag and drop feature then entering full image from the selection. Looked fine until I tried Preview to check everything and it just said [attachment …] Was going to ask but had to go away as my Mum had a fall and I didn't have an internet connection. Can anyone please tell me what I did wrong?

 

[kenoh]

Congratulations to @NeGRit0 and to @anotherscotsman and @Laird Knox for the winning photos! Congratulations to @kenoh for a very well judged contest and thanks for all the feedback. Great job!

I was trying to upload a picture directly from my computer, rather than linking from my site, using the drag and drop feature then entering full image from the selection. Looked fine until I tried Preview to check everything and it just said [attachment …] Was going to ask but had to go away as my Mum had a fall and I didn't have an internet connection. Can anyone please tell me what I did wrong?

Thanks Ish. Hope your mun is OK.

I am afraid I have no idea. The reason I have a flickr account in the first place was to link to here - shows how little I know...

 

[Apple fanboy]

Congratulations to @NeGRit0 and to @anotherscotsman and @Laird Knox for the winning photos! Congratulations to @kenoh for a very well judged contest and thanks for all the feedback. Great job!

I was trying to upload a picture directly from my computer, rather than linking from my site, using the drag and drop feature then entering full image from the selection. Looked fine until I tried Preview to check everything and it just said [attachment …] Was going to ask but had to go away as my Mum had a fall and I didn't have an internet connection. Can anyone please tell me what I did wrong?

Was it a JPEG? Also there is a file size limit. Can't remember off the top of my head, but it isn't that big.
Sorry to hear about your mum. Hope she is ok.

 

[Laird Knox]

@Laird Knox - ASCII art. I am assuming this one was tongue in cheek but made me laugh thank you... I used to sit and download these for a laugh and print them on dot matrix printers at uni. Thank you. I needed a chuckle yesterday after work so really appreciated the timing.

I was waiting for the contest to end so that I could post that one. Glad you enjoyed it.

@Laird Knox - OK, you need to tell us what this is. This is a superb construction. I have been looking at this image for days trying to work out what it is. The faded blue, the yellowing white, the subject matter, the softening of the focus all adds to a great effect. Well done but is it aliens or not?

This one was layered retro. It is a piece I just made for an Alternative Process class I am taking. The assignment was cyanotypes but I did a little experimenting.

I started off a few weeks ago in Death Valley with my 8x10. It is a King model made by the Rochester Optical Corporation between 1897 and 1903.

This was my first real outing with the camera so I didn't know what to expect. Last spring I did a quick test shot but nothing since. I stopped at Mushroom Rock and setup the camera.

I tilted the lens a bit and shot wide open at f6.3 so that I could get the rock in focus and the blur the background. I was using a 12" lens which is approximately the equivalent of a 45mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera.

I shot the image in landscape but I preferred it cropped to portrait. I scanned the 8x10 negative at 2400 dpi so even though I cropped out a significant amount of of the image it would still print 40x60" at 300 dpi. You have to love an 8x10" sensor. That comes out to about 460MP when scanned at 2400 dpi.

In Photoshop I masked out the background, added a small border and colorized it to a bit of a gold tone. I printed this out at 12x18 on 13x19 inch paper. I used Epson Ultra Presentation Matte paper. Arches watercolor paper is much better for cyanotypes but I wanted to test this paper out.

I printed the image using a Canon Pixma Pro 9000 Mk II. This is a dye based printer and while pigmented inks work better the dye is still pretty good. The dye inks can bleed slightly if you aggressively brush the cyanotype fluid over the ink. For the most part I avoided the inked areas but I wasn't perfect.

I also printed a digital negative on Pictoricho Premium Transparency Film. This is simply the full image inverted and flipped horizontally. The flip is simply so that you can put the emulsion side face down on the paper. If you didn't flip it the image would be separated by the thickness of the transparency and this can introduce some blurring.

I brushed the cyanotype sensitizing fluid on with a one inch wide foam brush. After drying the negative was aligned on top of the print and sandwiched under a piece of glass. It was exposed on a UV light table for 13 minutes. After exposure the printed is washed under running water for about five minutes. This washes out the unexposed cyanotype fluid. The exposed areas become permanent.

One of the problems with using inkjet paper is that they are designed to suck up inks so they can often be stained by the cyanotype not washing out fully. About a year ago I used some Moab Entrada Rag and it left a yellowish stain on the paper.

Once the print is fully washed you dip it in a water bath that contains some hydrogen peroxide. This speeds up the oxidation of the print and it turns an intense blue. Next I bleached the print in an ammonia bath. This knocks down the density of the print so that you can tone it without blocking up the shadow detail.

After another quick wash it went into a tray of coffee for toning. A final wash and it was hung to dry. Once it was fully dry I put it in a heat press to flatten it out.

I did a second print where the inkjet part was a straight black and white print. Then after the initial wash I used the following baths: ammonia -> coffee -> ammonia -> tea. The created some interesting color casts that showed up in the print.

I also used a rolled up piece of paper towel to brush on the cyanotype fluid. I did this because I did not like the edges between the print and the background on the first print. The toning helped mask the first print and I preferred the gold tones in that one. The paper towel brush made for some interesting brush strokes.

While I like these two prints they still weren't what I was looking for. Some of the prints from the other students had some wonderful toning. The printer paper held onto the cyanotype blue too tenaciously to get a nice chocolate print.

So there you have it - retro, retro.

 

[kenoh]

Congratulations to all of the entrants and to a worth winning entry @NeGRit0. Thanks Ken for the detailed commentary. I was going to take one of an old Singer sewing machine that belonged to my wife's grandmother but didn't get the time this week. I'll get around to taking it and post.


Cheers.

Is it one of the ones in the built in table? With the pedal to operate it? If so, get shooting they are great. There is a shop in Glasgow called All Saints (a chain) and they have walls floor to ceiling decorated with old singer sewing machines in glass boxes... Keep meaning to shoot it..
[doublepost=1456647580][/doublepost]

Was it a JPEG? Also there is a file size limit. Can't remember off the top of my head, but it isn't that big.
Sorry to hear about your mum. Hope she is ok.

Used to be 3.8mb... Dont know if that has changed.
[doublepost=1456647980][/doublepost]

I was waiting for the contest to end so that I could post that one. Glad you enjoyed it.


This one was layered retro. It is a piece I just made for an Alternative Process class I am taking. The assignment was cyanotypes but I did a little experimenting.

I started off a few weeks ago in Death Valley with my 8x10. It is a King model made by the Rochester Optical Corporation between 1897 and 1903.

This was my first real outing with the camera so I didn't know what to expect. Last spring I did a quick test shot but nothing since. I stopped at Mushroom Rock and setup the camera.

I tilted the lens a bit and shot wide open at f6.3 so that I could get the rock in focus and the blur the background. I was using a 12" lens which is approximately the equivalent of a 45mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera.

I shot the image in landscape but I preferred it cropped to portrait. I scanned the 8x10 negative at 2400 dpi so even though I cropped out a significant amount of of the image it would still print 40x60" at 300 dpi. You have to love an 8x10" sensor. That comes out to about 460MP when scanned at 2400 dpi.

In Photoshop I masked out the background, added a small border and colorized it to a bit of a gold tone. I printed this out at 12x18 on 13x19 inch paper. I used Epson Ultra Presentation Matte paper. Arches watercolor paper is much better for cyanotypes but I wanted to test this paper out.

I printed the image using a Canon Pixma Pro 9000 Mk II. This is a dye based printer and while pigmented inks work better the dye is still pretty good. The dye inks can bleed slightly if you aggressively brush the cyanotype fluid over the ink. For the most part I avoided the inked areas but I wasn't perfect.

I also printed a digital negative on Pictoricho Premium Transparency Film. This is simply the full image inverted and flipped horizontally. The flip is simply so that you can put the emulsion side face down on the paper. If you didn't flip it the image would be separated by the thickness of the transparency and this can introduce some blurring.

I brushed the cyanotype sensitizing fluid on with a one inch wide foam brush. After drying the negative was aligned on top of the print and sandwiched under a piece of glass. It was exposed on a UV light table for 13 minutes. After exposure the printed is washed under running water for about five minutes. This washes out the unexposed cyanotype fluid. The exposed areas become permanent.

One of the problems with using inkjet paper is that they are designed to suck up inks so they can often be stained by the cyanotype not washing out fully. About a year ago I used some Moab Entrada Rag and it left a yellowish stain on the paper.

Once the print is fully washed you dip it in a water bath that contains some hydrogen peroxide. This speeds up the oxidation of the print and it turns an intense blue. Next I bleached the print in an ammonia bath. This knocks down the density of the print so that you can tone it without blocking up the shadow detail.

After another quick wash it went into a tray of coffee for toning. A final wash and it was hung to dry. Once it was fully dry I put it in a heat press to flatten it out.

I did a second print where the inkjet part was a straight black and white print. Then after the initial wash I used the following baths: ammonia -> coffee -> ammonia -> tea. The created some interesting color casts that showed up in the print.

I also used a rolled up piece of paper towel to brush on the cyanotype fluid. I did this because I did not like the edges between the print and the background on the first print. The toning helped mask the first print and I preferred the gold tones in that one. The paper towel brush made for some interesting brush strokes.

While I like these two prints they still weren't what I was looking for. Some of the prints from the other students had some wonderful toning. The printer paper held onto the cyanotype blue too tenaciously to get a nice chocolate print.

So there you have it - retro, retro.

Wow! Just wow! Thank you very very much for posting a write up. I am sat here with my jaw on the floor. How on earth did you know that was what you needed to do to get to the image? That is incredible to read.

The camera looks fab too! Not exactly pocketable but the results are really impressive!

Fantastic thank you. So how long click to pic did it take?

 

[Apple fanboy]

I was waiting for the contest to end so that I could post that one. Glad you enjoyed it.


This one was layered retro. It is a piece I just made for an Alternative Process class I am taking. The assignment was cyanotypes but I did a little experimenting.

I started off a few weeks ago in Death Valley with my 8x10. It is a King model made by the Rochester Optical Corporation between 1897 and 1903.

This was my first real outing with the camera so I didn't know what to expect. Last spring I did a quick test shot but nothing since. I stopped at Mushroom Rock and setup the camera.

I tilted the lens a bit and shot wide open at f6.3 so that I could get the rock in focus and the blur the background. I was using a 12" lens which is approximately the equivalent of a 45mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera.

I shot the image in landscape but I preferred it cropped to portrait. I scanned the 8x10 negative at 2400 dpi so even though I cropped out a significant amount of of the image it would still print 40x60" at 300 dpi. You have to love an 8x10" sensor. That comes out to about 460MP when scanned at 2400 dpi.

In Photoshop I masked out the background, added a small border and colorized it to a bit of a gold tone. I printed this out at 12x18 on 13x19 inch paper. I used Epson Ultra Presentation Matte paper. Arches watercolor paper is much better for cyanotypes but I wanted to test this paper out.

I printed the image using a Canon Pixma Pro 9000 Mk II. This is a dye based printer and while pigmented inks work better the dye is still pretty good. The dye inks can bleed slightly if you aggressively brush the cyanotype fluid over the ink. For the most part I avoided the inked areas but I wasn't perfect.

I also printed a digital negative on Pictoricho Premium Transparency Film. This is simply the full image inverted and flipped horizontally. The flip is simply so that you can put the emulsion side face down on the paper. If you didn't flip it the image would be separated by the thickness of the transparency and this can introduce some blurring.

I brushed the cyanotype sensitizing fluid on with a one inch wide foam brush. After drying the negative was aligned on top of the print and sandwiched under a piece of glass. It was exposed on a UV light table for 13 minutes. After exposure the printed is washed under running water for about five minutes. This washes out the unexposed cyanotype fluid. The exposed areas become permanent.

One of the problems with using inkjet paper is that they are designed to suck up inks so they can often be stained by the cyanotype not washing out fully. About a year ago I used some Moab Entrada Rag and it left a yellowish stain on the paper.

Once the print is fully washed you dip it in a water bath that contains some hydrogen peroxide. This speeds up the oxidation of the print and it turns an intense blue. Next I bleached the print in an ammonia bath. This knocks down the density of the print so that you can tone it without blocking up the shadow detail.

After another quick wash it went into a tray of coffee for toning. A final wash and it was hung to dry. Once it was fully dry I put it in a heat press to flatten it out.

I did a second print where the inkjet part was a straight black and white print. Then after the initial wash I used the following baths: ammonia -> coffee -> ammonia -> tea. The created some interesting color casts that showed up in the print.

I also used a rolled up piece of paper towel to brush on the cyanotype fluid. I did this because I did not like the edges between the print and the background on the first print. The toning helped mask the first print and I preferred the gold tones in that one. The paper towel brush made for some interesting brush strokes.

While I like these two prints they still weren't what I was looking for. Some of the prints from the other students had some wonderful toning. The printer paper held onto the cyanotype blue too tenaciously to get a nice chocolate print.

So there you have it - retro, retro.

Interesting read. I did a photography taster day about 23 years ago where we developed our own film, but nothing as involved as this. Good to know your 115 year old camera is still going strong!

 

[Ish]

Thanks Ish. Hope your mun is OK.

I am afraid I have no idea. The reason I have a flickr account in the first place was to link to here - shows how little I know...

Was it a JPEG? Also there is a file size limit. Can't remember off the top of my head, but it isn't that big.
Sorry to hear about your mum. Hope she is ok.

Thanks for the best wishes. She's ok but hurt her ribs so she's on painkillers as there's nothing really they can do for that. Very uncomfortable but indomitable. She's come back with me so can look after her here.

Yes, it's a .jpg file and way below the limit for size. I normally link too but this picture was on my computer. I remember having a problem some time ago then all of a sudden I could do it. I had to go away before I could ask.

 

[0970373]

Great job on judging this, @kenoh. And a great choice for winning shot by @NeGRit0! Well done! That is a beautiful old typewriter.

I have been slammed with work and will continue to be too busy for at least the next few weeks, possibly all month But I do check the entries when I am able as this group always inspires me. Hoping to save enough of that inspiration for when I'm able to surface back into the world. lol

 

[kenoh]

Great job on judging this, @kenoh. And a great choice for winning shot by @NeGRit0! Well done! That is a beautiful old typewriter.

I have been slammed with work and will continue to be too busy for at least the next few weeks, possibly all month But I do check the entries when I am able as this group always inspires me. Hoping to save enough of that inspiration for when I'm able to surface back into the world. lol

Thanks for the positive comments. We will be here when you have the time.

 

[highdefjunkie]

OK, Thanks all for the effort you have put in. Some fantastic shows of talent here. Now lets get to the hard part.

@Alexander.Of.Oz - Gorgeous capture of the church, such a beautiful day to have take the picture by the look of it. The sharpness is lovely as we have come to expect from you and the composition is interesting in that the subject is a rangefinder-esque in that it is central. I like the Sepia wash over the image but the slope of the ground (which I suspect was actually the case) is making the picture feel a bit weird to my eye. Fabulous narrow yet tall chapel. Nice.

@applefanboy - Incredible construction in this image. I remember these images from before. Were they made from actually wrapping someone in brown paper? Such a unique way of representing the conditions that soldiers faced in war time. The detail is superb. The colour palette adds to the effect greatly.

@someoldguy - Old town America. I can almost see you standing there in top hat and tails, with the cloth and flash in your hand, standing behind the wet plate camera. Retro to the extreme. Like the construct of the photo. Only thing is it seems to me to be tilted to the left. Now I know you are not one to miss your horizons so I am guessing this is intentional to add conflict to the image and it certainly worked. Great use of negative vignette and sepia wash to make it look like it was from the western times.

@techgrunt - A picture of something very beautiful. I believe children should all go to a war memorial to appreciate the more emotional side of war. So they appreciate that war is not like Call of Duty. Nice angle though maybe a little tight to get the words nicely in focus. Maybe a smaller aperture to get the wording nice and sharp would have helped. I like the colour palette again, seems to be a thread coming through.

@Badrottie - Nice picture of an old underground entrance (?) I like the framing and the symmetry of the arches. Maybe would have liked it more if you has taken a few steps forward and got more of that mural on the wall threre? Nice tones and grain added to make it look older. Well done.

@Hughmac - This looks like an old photo from my childhood. The faded wash adds that 1970s polaroid feel to it nicely. The beach protection posts add a nice leading line to the image and the wash really does hit that childhood, finding the old photos in a box emotion. Nice.

@highdefjunkie - Nice. I go to Barcelona with work quite a bit and i have a few images of the cathedral too but mainly in the dark. It is a lovely example of that style of architecture (notice I dodged naming the style - is it gothic?). Anyway nicely faded to hide the modern brick building right beside it and again, nice use of the sepia wash.

@Laird Knox - OK, you need to tell us what this is. This is a superb construction. I have been looking at this image for days trying to work out what it is. The faded blue, the yellowing white, the subject matter, the softening of the focus all adds to a great effect. Well done but is it aliens or not?

@jkramerbob - Lovely, heavy engineering at its most beautiful. I adore old trains like this. I am not a train spotter, more I like the engineering aspects of how they worked. The thought process that took them from heating water to produce steam and turning it into a form of propulsion. Superb, just like this image. Very well composed. I like the angle with a less common tilt angle to it to give the feel of size. Very well done and not over done on the retro colour scheme.

@CmdrLaForge - Yosemite from days gone by and thankfully, from the pictures recently, not been ruined by he virus that is the human race. We really do need to maintain these locations for their immense natural beauty. I hope to see Yosemite for myself one way. Beautiful image all the more so because it is retro for real. Taken in 1994 on slide film. Ansel Adams style. Very nice.

@AlexH - oh here we go, influencing the judges. I love watches and I have a special place in my heart for this style of watch. I would like to go to a pawn shop at some point and buy a watch that has been on adventures before reaching me, to have one with a domed crystal and that exact expanding strap. Lovely lovely piece. I really like the image. Lovely capture of detail and reflections in the tabeltop. Fantastic composition.

@Illuminated - Nice picture of an absolute legend. Ringo star is one of the greats. Nice capture. Were you there working or stalking? He is such a nice guy. Nice capture.

@deep diver - I have to be honest, I am not a fan of selective colour images. but the rest of the image is nicely captured. Nice example of something nice from the seemingly mundane. I like the capture, maybe think it would be better if the lock was visible? just a thought but lovely light, nice capture of the texture of the wood.

@MacRy - another attempt to knobble the judging. I really liked this image the first time I saw it. Sat for quite some time smiling at some of the text on the boxes. I recommend you all take a moment to do it as it is quite the fun image. I really like the look of the distressed boxes and then way it has been assembled. Despite being a modern image, the effect of the 50 year old lens and the subject matter lends itself beautifully.

@CooperBox - Fabulous items to take am image of. Old cockpit dial which looks like the one the Bell and Ross BR-03 watches were based on. Love the pocket watch and the cards. Speaks volumes of air force pilots whiling away the time between sorties playing cards for possessions. Played on a canvas makeshift table in a camp tent. Lovely atmosphere.

@anotherscotsman - Yes, very very nice. Actually not what I was thinking when posting the comp but as the entries have developed (pun), it has drawn me to this style of image. Lovely use of a retro look to capture a modern cityscape shot of a factory. Cracking image with lovely leading lines and focal point on the chimney stack. Nice ccolour scheme.

@MCH-1138 - Amazing that something that revolutionised the way we enjoy music not more than 14 years ago, is now absolutely retro! retro to me was a manual naturally aspirated engined car now we have an iPod which is simultaneously the latest and oldest form of this technology. That has to be something to be admired. Nicely captured.

@NeGRit0 - Fashionably late, pulling "a Laird Knox". Nice game changer there at the closing hour. Fabulous capture of old tech. Prime example of something that modern technology has yet to best for experience in joy of use. Fantastic colours and composition.

@Laird Knox - ASCII art. I am assuming this one was tongue in cheek but made me laugh thank you... I used to sit and download these for a laugh and print them on dot matrix printers at uni. Thank you. I needed a chuckle yesterday after work so really appreciated the timing.

Now, to the moment you all are waiting for... drum roll please.

I am going to go for the standing as follows:

Lots of great images. Lovely to get such a great turn out thank you. So I am thinking that I would like to say a special mention to HughMac for the creative thought on the 1970s ruined film look. Nicely done.

However, my wonky logic mind says...


3rd place: Laird Knox for the Aliens - you need to explain it to us.
2nd place: AnotherScotsman for that seemless blend of new vs old
1st place: NetGRit0 for stealing the winner in extra time.

Well done everyone. I was honoured to be able to judge this one. Thanks for putting in the time and effort.

NetGRit0, over to you.

Feedback is very much appreciated! Thank you so much