[alt-photo] Re: Ultra Long Exposure Reciprocity Failure?

Gordon Holtslander gjh at shaw.ca
Fri Jan 20 19:57:24 GMT 2012 

Hi:

Yes this is a like a lith  film.

Gord

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Viapiano <viapiano at pacbell.net>
Date: Friday, January 20, 2012 12:13 pm
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Ultra Long Exposure Reciprocity Failure?
To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>

> Gordon,
> 
> Is that similar to lith film...?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon Holtslander" 
> <gjh at shaw.ca>To: "The alternative photographic processes 
> mailing list" <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 9:58 AM
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Ultra Long Exposure Reciprocity Failure?
> 
> 
> Try one of these films:
> http://www.ultrafineonline.com/lhsulifi.html
> 
> I use them for my pinhole cameras. with something like 
> Soemarko's LC1
> http://shelbyvilledesign.com/LC1.htm
> 
> It doesn't appear to have significant reciprocity failure
> 
> Printing paper when used in a film situation has an ASA of 6, - 
> the ultrafine in LC1 has an effective ASA of 1, with long exposures.
> 
> Gord
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Francesco Fragomeni <fdfragomeni at gmail.com>
> Date: Friday, January 20, 2012 10:11 am
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Ultra Long Exposure Reciprocity Failure?
> To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list <alt-
> photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
> 
> >Hi Diana,
> >
> >We're on the same page. I know that week and month long
> >exposures can and
> >have been done but to my knowledge this is mostly done in
> >pinhole cameras
> >with paper rather then film. I'm particularly interested in how film
> >reciprocity behaves at such long exposures. The Osterman's did
> >indeed have
> >their show and the work was related to what I'm doing. In
> >reality they were
> >doing something more closely related to whats typically done with
> >solargraphy i.e. long exposures which print out the paper which
> >is then
> >immediately scanned (only one chance to so this because the
> >scanning light
> >further exposes the image) and then the rest of the process is
> >completeddigitally. I'm clear on how that particular process
> >works. I'm curious
> >about making super long exposures on film and dealing with the
> >reciprocitythats involved.
> >
> >-Francesco
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Diana Bloomfield <
> >dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey Francesco,
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm still not clear on what you're asking, but I know
> >they're have
> >> been a lot of pinhole photographers who have set cameras out
> >for weeks and
> >> months at a time. Greg Kemp, for one, has done that-- months long
> >> exposures-- don't know if he used film or paper, though.
> >I'm sure there
> >> are plenty of others out there (mostly pinhole photographers
> >that I know
> >> of) who could give you their experience. Somebody here
> >might have Greg's
> >> current email address, too. The last time I wrote to
> >him, the old email I
> >> had bounced back. (And didn't the Ostermans just have
> >their show at Tilt,
> >> from Lacock Abbey, where they had their cameras out for a long
> >period of
> >> time (weeks?), or am I mistaken??
> >>
> >> Diana
> >>
> >> On Jan 20, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Francesco Fragomeni wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the information and insight. I wanted to offer a quick
> >>> clarification so that everyone is on the same page as I am
> >when I say
> >>> "ultra long exposures". I'm talking about exposures well
> >beyond hours. I'm
> >>> referring to exposures in the duration of weeks, month, and
> >even years.
> >>> The
> >>> extreme nature of such exposures is what led me to believe
> >that there may
> >>> be a possibility that reciprocity failure behaves differently
> >or becomes
> >>> irrelevant entirely with such long exposures. I've done
> >pinhole exposures
> >>> and lensed long exposures into the hours before without much
> >problem>> (mainly based on the times that others have provided
> >or basic guesswork
> >>> based on manufacturer datasheet info) but I'm talking about
> >going into a
> >>> whole different realm of long exposure.
> >>>
> >>> Michael Wesely's work work documenting urban development such
> >as the
> >>> re-building of the MOMA building in NY were indeed ultra long
> >exposures>> and
> >>> not time lapse. The MOMA images were 34 month exposures
> >through 4 pinhole
> >>> cameras. MOMA invited him to do this project and authorized
> >designated>> areas for his cameras so that they could be insured
> >the cameras would not
> >>> be disturbed during the ultra long exposures. In some of the
> >images where
> >>> the sky is visible you can see the progression of the sun.
> >These images
> >>> would in fact be considered Solargraphs on film I suppose.
> >The progression
> >>> of the sun's path is continuous and you can see the changes
> >in season as
> >>> well as when weather was clear vs overcast. It is textbook
> >Solargraphy.>> Other images do not include a view of the sun and
> >this confirms that such
> >>> long exposures can be made without view of the sun. Remember,
> >in my
> >>> original post I was wondering if the extreme brightness of
> >the sun played
> >>> some role in the exposure of paper in Solargraphy. Wesely is
> >using film I
> >>> believe but I haven't been able to confirm that. He might
> >have used paper
> >>> which would have made reciprocity irrelevant but the images
> >look more like
> >>> film then paper to me.
> >>>
> >>> -Francesco Fragomeni
> >>> www.francescofragomeni.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Diana Bloomfield <
> >>> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Francesco,
> >>>>
> >>>> I've only used very long exposures with pinhole cameras as
> >well. Of
> >>>> course, there are published reciprocity charts out
> >there. (Check Eric
> >>>> Renner's 'Pinhole Photography: Rediscovering a Historic
> >Technique').>>> Although his published charts include only
> >pinhole F-stops, I still think
> >>>> you could glean something from them. And I do think
> >that the information
> >>>> that comes with film (or used to?) is fairly accurate-- at
> >least for me.
> >>>>
> >>>> But from my experience, I agree with Gord here that some
> >films "don't
> >>>> seem
> >>>> to vary significantly past a certain duration of
> >exposure." That's
> >>>> certainly been my experience (and not just with this high
> >contrast film).
> >>>>
> >>>> I will also add that the published reciprocity charts I used
> >never seemed
> >>>> to offer all that much help to me. I typically base my
> >long exposures on
> >>>> the type of film, the type of (pinhole) camera I'm using,
> >and the
> >>>> available
> >>>> light-- basically calculated guesswork, erring on the side of
> >>>> over-exposure. (Quite scientific!). But with the
> >right development, I
> >>>> never seemed to have a problem.
> >>>>
> >>>> Diana
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jan 19, 2012, at 11:53 PM, Gordon J. Holtslander wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I can't offer any mathematical insights, however the
> >pinhole camera on
> >>>>
> >>>>> film work I have done usually involves long exposures.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I started doing pinhole work with large format high
> >contrast contact
> >>>>> printing film and processed it with Dave Soemarko's LC1
> >developer mixed
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> minimize contrast in order to get a continuous tone negative.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> When used with this developer the film has an effective ASA
> >of 1. Shots
> >>>>> taken outside on a cloudy day would need an exposure of 1/2
> >hour. I
> >>>>> also
> >>>>> took a series of indoor photos where the exposure time as
> >in the range
> >>>>> of 6
> >>>>> to 8 hours. As long as I metered accurately my
> >exposures were
> >>>>> consistent
> >>>>> regardless of the exposure time - from 15 minutes in full
> >sun to 8 hours
> >>>>> inside.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Used in this way the film (at the time Kodak CGP) did not
> >seem to
> >>>>> exhibit
> >>>>> any reciprocity failure, or perhaps the reciprocity failure
> >did not
> >>>>> vary in
> >>>>> the range of exposure I was working with.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My point is that perhaps with extremely long exposures the
> >sensitivity>>>> of
> >>>>> this film is consistent, and does not vary significantly
> >past a certain
> >>>>> duration of exposure.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It was possible to get reciprocity compensation data for
> >certain film. I
> >>>>> don't think is was calculated, but done by empirical
> >testing of each
> >>>>> type
> >>>>> of film.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Try doing some empirical testing and see if your film 
> shows a
> >>>>> continually
> >>>>> increase in reciprocity failure, or if it stops or
> >decreases after a
> >>>>> certain.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Photograph a grey scale in dim conditions and increase the
> >exposure time
> >>>>> and see what effect it has.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I also read that when electronic flashes were first used,
> >some films
> >>>>> suffered from reciprocity failure due to extremely short
> >exposure times.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hope this helps.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Gord
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> ______________________________****_________________
> >>>> Alt-photo-process-list |
> >http://altphotolist.org/****listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo>>>> <http://altphotolist.**org/listinfo <http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ______________________________**_________________
> >>> Alt-photo-process-list |
> >http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>>>
> >>
> >> ______________________________**_________________
> >> Alt-photo-process-list |
> >http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo 
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>

More information about the Alt-photo-process-list mailing list