lundi 11 juillet 2005

Images Revisited #1 Flight Path As part of my anticipated near-total clear-out of files, photos and ephemera in preparation for the "big move," I'm having to consider, very seriously, how or whether to preserve or dispose of many of my original printed images. I'm not sure that I can correctly call them "vintage" images, although they were printed thirty to forty years ago... vintage in my book would be at least fifty years old. Although definitions differ according to the item, Vintage cars, for example, are classified as those constructed between 1905 and 1930 - anything earlier being classed as Veteran. Completing five races in my best Marathon running season at the age of 39 counted for little in overall results... one year later, at 40, I would have been a "Vet" and in line for category prizes rather than another piece of ephemera which stated I'd run so far and taken so long... but a high-speed car crash ended my running rhythm and I became another of the "also-rans." Speed influences photography too... all exposures are a combination of an amount of light passing through an aperture (in the lens) timed by a shutter speed (in the camera). Both aperture and shutter speed are usually variable, although the vast majority of popular cameras are point-and-shoot models where the two variables are linked to a pre-programmed exposure mode and are not user interchangeable. Camera manufacturers followed this path of not offering the camera user any choice because most people want perfect pictures... and the manufacturer's know best don't they? I'm not suggesting that companies such as Kodak and Fuji shot themselves in the foot - but perhaps they would have sold more film had they let photographers "waste" more film. I used to waste so much film in the early days of learning by my own mistakes (the best way) that I bought cheap "out-of-date" film in 100 ft rolls... and when I could find it, in 400 ft rolls... the latter being good for about 75 or 80 cassette loads. I didn't realise at the time but I was being sold Ilford Mk.V movie stock... the sprocket holes in the film's rebates were not rectangular, but barrel shaped... and processing times were not published either! However, at the price the film was almost free... and I was very free at using it. I probably exposed at least one roll during every journey to work on the local commuter train, month in month out and in all seasons... passengers gave up staring at my antics leaning out of the carriage's windows whilst wildly panning or jiggling the camera about on passing rows of houses, lines of trees, overhead electrification gantries, flocks of pigeons... anything that could possibly be printed in a different way to how it was actually seen was the subject of my attention through the camera's viewfinder. I can't tell you how much film was wasted... but when one photographs moving subjects from a moving poisition with a moving camera the chances of getting a good 'un are limited to say the least. The above image is one original I may throw away... at 20x16 inches it's too large to carry around on the road, and, the version seen above is better than the original. I remember planning and making it from two negatives taken on different days... the background silhouette of buildings were taken in Manchester's Piccadilly Gardens... the pigeons were flying around in Manchester's Albert Square a mile away. Both negatives were the best ones from a variety of shots made at different apertures and shutter speeds... the background image being a deliberate blur to streak the Lufthansa International Airways neon sign... brightly visible in the dusk. The pigeons were exposed at various shutter speeds to capture just the right amount of movement in their beating wings without destroying their distinctive outlines. The fun continued in the darkroom... combining the two most appropriate negatives was not easy... the frames could not be printed sandwiched together but rather as two separate exposures - the background as full frame, the flock of birds at a much greater enlargement from a smaller part of the negative. And here's the rub... the overlapping imagery looked interesting... and was good enough to help gain me a UK "Cameraman of The Year" and a Japanese photo award in the 1970s. But, the overlapping images never revealed any of the interesting grittiness so attractive in black-and-white... the graininess of the two negatives was effectively cancelled out by the overlapping double-exposure under the enlarger. However, in scanning the large original in two passes on my Canoscan 9900F and then having carefully blended the two, and retouched the join, I was able to add "25% film grain" in Photoshop CS and achieve digitally something I hadn't been able to do traditionally many times in the past thirty plus years in my darkrooms. With the new digital file now created I can print the image I pre-visualised all those years ago... definitely a plus point for digital... damn... just after I've enjoyed cranking one of my last precious rolls of the long discontinued AgfaPan APX 25 through the same Nikon F2 body I used all those years ago. The digital decision doesn't get any easier for me... 9:34:51 PM    comment []