Ortho film

I'm curious how many out there have recently shot with ortho film...what are

your favorite uses for ortho, things like that. Any recent shots you have taken

would be nice to look at as well.

I like to shoot a lot of ortho for sports, like skateboarding or footbag.

I personaly like it because of thehigh contrast and that doesn't sees redlight.

 

I shoot a lot of my agfaorth25 that is left in me freezer.

I also tried macoorth25 and am now testing the the adox/efke orth25 which to me is more like the agfa then the maco

 

 

I develope it with rodinal 25ml solution/225ml water continousagitation with a rotarymachine for 4min 20?C/68?F

I"ve shot a good bit with 120 size maco ORT25c. I like it for portraiture especially.

 

Here's a link to one such shot on my website:

 

http://www.mikesebastianphoto.com/photos/44562554-L-4.jpg

 

I like the swarthy 50's-matinee-idol look it gives to skin tones. I've not used it for much

else--at $10+ per roll it ain't cheap.

 

I process this film, like all my films, with Xtol or Mytol with very good results.

I was wondering if anyone is using a blue-green filter with a standard pan film to emulate Ortho film. I remember reading about this being done for instructional purposes in the 70s. I haven't done it but it seems that a fine grain film like T-max with the filters would result in a slower effective speed and a result like Ortho. Probably finer grain than some of these retro import films. I can't find the wratten filter number. A major advantage would be switching back and forth in a single roll of film.

I once shot a couple of rolls of the Maco Ort 25 in a Holga. It had an interesting look that I would like to try again. To be honest, a lot of that look was probably just high contrast. It was marginally fast enough for a Holga, and a few shots were underexposed. Seems like the film was very curly and hard to work with as well.

One of the main reasons I am going to mess with ortho is the cost. I just ordered a couple of boxes of 4x5 ortho for $3.99 each!

 

http://www.jandcphoto.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=311

 

As for the filter, if I remember right it is a Wratten 44. It will probably get similar results, though t-max has a higher red sensitivity so it might not work like some older pan films.

I just shot a roll of Efke 25 with a green filter. I will see the results tomorrow.

Hi, have you ever tried the "new" ROLLEI ORTHO 25?

michael

 

if the maco stuff is to expensive then try the ones from adox/efke they are much cheaper.

Normally JandC has the adox line but in this case I didn't find the 120size

In europe a 120 ortho from adox/efke costs 4$ so its more then the half of the maco stuff

 

maybe you can find it in the us or try to get it from JandC with a special order

I have been using 35mm Maco Ort 25c for portraits.It seems to work best with suntanned or darker skin.This goes darker on the print than with ordinary pan film.To get a good range of tones I have used a single strobe in a reflector to give a highlight.Slow film speed EI 12 means wide aperture and shallow depth of field and if in focus it looks like a larger format.

 

I was told the Adox Ortho comes from Fotokemika.I wonder if the Rollei Ortho is different from Maco Ort.

I'm not sure if there are any ortho emulsions left now. If not have Harrison & Harrison filter manufacturers make up a 50C filter for your camera. That will make your pan films ortho films and will cost you about 1 f stop in speed. There are real advantages to this since you can just use your favorite b/w pan films and filter with a slight esposure increase and do it all on the same roll of film.

 

Going back into my experience of 40 or more years, we liked ortho for male portraiture, some kinds of architectural or landscape photography, and it was great for female fashion/modeling if the woman had very good skin.

 

Lynn

I have a question for Lynn: if one uses a 50C filter (something I've not come across) can one simply process the pan film normally or are there any special techniques to achieve the "ortho" effect? I must admit that I'm quite attracted to trying this.

In my 1947 Naval Photography guide, Ortho film (Kodak made one at the time) was actually recommended for portraiture with male subjects because it enhanced masculine tendencies. I probably wouldn't use it for female subjects, as the guide recommended panchro for that. I think it'd make their makeup too light.

 

Regards,

 

~Karl Borowski

<blockquote><hr><i>

I have a question for Lynn: if one uses a 50C filter (something I've not come across) can one simply process the pan film normally or are there any special techniques to achieve the "ortho" effect? I must admit that I'm quite attracted to trying this.

</i><hr></blockquote>

 

Make sure you know what you want, and what you're getting.

<p>

More frequently than not, as of the past several years, when I hear people using the word "ortho", what they <i>really</I> mean is "lith" (as in "Kodalith Ortho").

<p>

"Lith film" is frequently (but not always!) "orthochromatic". (It's sometimes panchromatic.)

<p>

"Orthochromatic film" is <i>sometimes</I> (but <i>hardly</I> "always") "<i>lithographic</i>" film!

<p>

"Lith" ("lithographic") film is ultra-high-contrast film. By "high contrast" I mean "black and white" -- and by "black and white", I mean "black and white" <i>period</i>! Its standard application (in the pre-d_gital epoch) was line copy and halftone printing. When souped in what is colloquially termed "A and B developer" (i.e., a single-based (hydroquinone) developer, with a caustic (lye) accelerator), it would produce a very solid black, a completely clear white, and zero gray steps in between them.

<p>

One interesting artifact of the process is dot-growth, which allows its use for halftone applications. The <i>size</I> of the dots produced by a grayscale negative, exposed onto the lith film through a screened mask, is determined by the amount of light hitting the lith film. So, highlight areas (in the negative -- actually shadow areas in the subject) produce larger dots than shadow areas, and, when the plates are made, the larger dots pick up more ink, hence, darker "gray" print on the paper.

<p>

The science that explains the relationship between the development byproducts and the hydroquinone is readily available to anyone who is interested (any web search engine will suffice), and, irrelevant to the topic at hand.

<p>

The main thing is that <i>until</I> the past few years (and I attribute it to nomenclature-careless "photography instructors", as well as the general loss of pictorial othographic films from the marketplace), when one used the term "ortho film", it was understood that one was speaking of a continuous tone film with orthographic spectral sensitivity.

<p>

Unfortunately, due to the widespread contemporary misapplication of the term, "ortho film" is meaningless unless one clarifies that he is speaking of either lith film <i>or</I> continuous-tone film.

<p>

That said, spectral sensitivity issues aside, there is a black art (pun definitely intended) in using actual lith film <I>as</I> a continuous-tone pictorial film, using soft/compensating developers to allow it to produce an actual grayscale.

<p>

These films (Kodalith and its ilk) have <i>extremely</I> fine grain and high resolution, rivalling if not surpassing microfilms such as Tech Pan.

<p>

For a while, Kodak sold cassette-spoolings of Kodalith, under a completely different name (I think they called it "Ektagraphic Slide Film" or something like that), to be used for creating title slides for slideshows. The absolute black/white rendition was useful for that application -- but, if you can find any (and as with most ultra-slow emulsions, the keeping qualities should be excellent), you might want to experiment with it as a pictorial film. (They also sold Kodalith Ortho in bulk rolls.)

<p>

I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that regardless of any filtration used with panchromatic film to produce orthochromatic rendition, you will NOT be able to develop under safelight! So, if that was the goal (for using pan-as-ortho film), it's a non-starter.

Hello Claudio Farkasch,

the rest of the MACO 25C are sold out to extremly low prices in Europe. There will NOT be a NEW PRODUCTION in Croatia under the name MACO ORTHO 25C. That what is offered now in rests, comes from the old croation production plant. The new ROLLEI ORTHO 25, qualitatively deals NOTHING with the old MACO ORTHO 25C! It concerns a NEW film which is produced in Germany. Poured on P.E.T., with a technically considerably more demanding emulsion technology than the old one, since 1998 produced MACO ORTHO 25C film. The ROLLEI film is in short, excellent, has more tonality, and is not comparable. How one knows, since decades, the raw materials are for high-quality ortho emulsions considerably more expensive than for panchromatic emulsions. Also the ILFORD sheet film, is more expensive with ORTHO, than comparable Pan sheet films. In addition, it concerns a technology which becomes more than 90% used in the scientific areas, hence, these products comparable are considerably defeated by more strict selection procedures in comparison to cheaper mass films. Who is able to produce a realtively cheap ortho film, hence, can be enough for no scientific claims, but delivers a quality which cannot be comparable from the ROLLEI ORTHO 25. Once as background information about the price level of ortho films.

 

Regards

thanks wolf for the input.

 

I did know that allready but the cheaper ones serve most of the needs when people ask for an ortho film.

 

true the scientific stuff is much better. this si why I use still the agfaortho

 

maybe I should give the new rollei a try and test it but stiil it is very expensive to play around with.

 

and for lith style I still got a roll of old kodalith - hard to get.

does anybody know where to get some more or a replacement?

 

but maybe the new rollei Slide direct could give a lith look with special development - I will definetly do some test

Hi Claudio,

 

the new ROLLEI slide direct, should be exposed only within ISO 10 to ISO 25, and developed with a double developing time as normal! Good luck.

 

Regards

I know the slow stuff

 

in the beginning evrything was at 400iso and now I'm down to 25-100iso or even less plus some f1,4 or f2 lenses makes a good combination

 

slow means no grain and thats good for my purpose

 

still a lith film would be best I don't think ther's anything like it

 

true blacks and whites

For Jeffery,

 

The answer is yes. Nobody make this filter as a routine product because only I talk about it. Contact this company, Harrison and Harrison of Porterville, CA makers of make many different kinds of filters, they have been awarded several technical Oscars for their work in film making. They make the world's best diffusion, soft focus, and fog filters. Their camera filters are made of optical quality acrylic plastic (as are Dr. Bob Singh's, Singh Ray filters and other fine filter makers). Arylics can be made perfectly, unlike all glass and glass sandwich filters.

 

Lynn

Lynn, thank you very much indeed for the information. It sounds like to 50C is exactly what I'm looking for. Interestingly, Anchell and Troop suggest trying an 80A and as it happens, I have one of those. I just shot some pictures on HP5+ using the 80A filter to see what the effect is, but the 50C would no doubt work better. Thanks as well to Reuben, your points are very well taken.

Thanks!

<p>

Unfortunately I see that my own nomenclature is fouled up. When I spoke of "orthographic spectral sensitivity" I obviousely meant "ortho<i>chromatic</I>" response.

<p>

I plead fatigue, and "seniority" :)

Regarding filers, you might want to consider using gelatine "color correcting" filters (probably most frequently used for color printing with older enlargers that lack a filter drawer). You definitely want to avoid "CP" (Color Printing) filters, which are intended for use "in the drawer" (above the negative, rather than under the lens). The gelatine filters will not degrade the image the way like the acetate "CP" filters. If you can't find a CC50, you could probably be OK by stacking a CC20 and a CC30, or two CC20s and a CC10, etc.

 

(In prior years, "quality" camera filters ("glass") consisted of two very thin sheets of glass, with a gelatine filter cemented in the middle of the sandwich, and it was not uncommon for studio photographers (back in the halcyon days of Kodachrome) to work up a gelatine filter pack for each batch of film, to tweak it to perfection.)