Pool Lessons

[Tuna]

Leica MP, Voigtlander 75/2.5 Color-Heliar, XP-2

[schrackman]

At first I didn't quite get this photo subject-wise but then I noticed the two little hands grasping for the side of the pool and and the woman looking down and then it hit me. That's when I chuckled, lol. Good shot, Tuna.

[Coastal Flyer]

Precisely why we keep a camera handy at all time. Nice shot.

CF

[Tuna]

Ray, Coastal - thank you for your comments.

Ray, I wondered if the hands were prominent enough to be noticed or if the moment was lost...

Tuna

[schrackman]

I have to admit, I almost missed the hands. That's why I didn't get it at first. But I came back to it because I wanted to know why the heck you posted this with that title. There just wasn't much going on in the photo other than a kid and adult sitting stationary in a pool. That's when I noticed the hands, and then it hit me. It's one of those "if you don't look close enough" kind of photos you'll miss the whole point.

Ray, Coastal - thank you for your comments.

Ray, I wondered if the hands were prominent enough to be noticed or if the moment was lost...

Tuna

[schrackman]

By the way, that Leica is supposed to be like the rolls royce of film cameras, ain't it? I bet you paid a pretty penny for it too.

I just bought my first rangefinder myself, but I opted for the more economical, classic Canonet GIII QL. This is a first attempt for me at film photography (excepting, of course, the days where I used to have a Kodak 110–but who didn't have one?). I've shot my first test roll of color film and now I am on my first b/w test roll which I should have developed this week. I opted for the only b/w film the store had...Kokak 400. Would like your suggestions for a great b/w film that will give me that "classic" look of the 50s to early 70s.

[yogestee]

Hi schrackman,,,Kodak Tri-X 400 if you can still get it..

Jurgen
Australia

[zrfraser]

Yeah Tri-X will definitly give you that look of a gy gone era, and you can still find it around my parts. There is a drugstore that carries Tri-x and they generally save some for me because no one ever really buys any. Also, try Fuji's Neopan 400 its a little smoother than Tri-x but you can still get that contrasty look of it. Also, try hand developing your film that helps. Sorry to hijack the thread...Great shot as always tuna, if you ever show your things in a gallery I want to be there.

Z

[schrackman]

I will check out both of those recommendations. Thanks!

[schrackman]

Here's another question for you film buffs...what process do you use to have your b/w prints developed and on what paper do you have your pictures printed? I've seem some photos on the web that used the PMK Pyro process (on the Fuji Neopan 400 film) and printed on Arga paper and the results are very nice. Kinda close to what I want.

[Tuna]

Yes, Tri-X is nice but so are the Kodak TMax 100 and 400 films, as well as the C-41 process B&W films (Kodak CN400 and XP-5). I've also had good luck with Ilfords regular B&W films. To achieve the "classic", timeless look you are referring to, I would say that the film type has little to do with it. I would suggest choosing an image that has a "classic", timeless quality to subject matter and to keep your post-processing (in computer...?) simple.

Enjoy your Canonet - my first rangefinder was a Leica IIIc and I still enjoy shooting with it and am still inspired with it in my hands.

Tuna

[zrfraser]

for my b/w photos I hand develop and hand print so I can only speak from that experience. I use d-76 for developing, and dektol for printing. I use tmax as well, but I find it harder to get the contrast I like.