Red Blind Films + Skin Tones + BW

[edo_t]

<p>Hi, I am new to film in general, literally have shot less than 10 rolls. <br>

I was wondering if red blind film would achieve dark, moody skin tones. I remember reading something about this a year or two ago, and i've been very curious to try it out for some fashion photography. If so, what are the options in terms of red blind films, or films that are substantially less sensitive to reds (B/W obviously).</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>There are some ortho films out there -- mostly slow-speed high-contrast copy films.<br>

Or try and find a Wratten 64 filter, it's mostly minus-red.<br>

Ortho film makes red lips very dark.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Don't use them on a female. They will never talk to you ever again. They are great for taking portraits of men but not boys.</p>

[edo_t]

<p>How slow would you you say slow is? I would personally like to get something in the 400 range, but it sounds like we are talking 100 speed?</p>

<p>Larry I'm looking forward to making my models mad at me! I would be shooting the film then scanning, then retouching, so I'm sure I can get by! </p>

<p>But, what are the film names and brands?</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>ISO 25 and 50 are the ones on the market at the moment. Rollei EFKE and ADOX make them. 35mm 120 and 4x5. Well Rollei does not make one but sells one someone makes.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Yeah, having a cyan filter will save you a bundle in film costs. It will also allow you to use faster film. You could even use a digital (in BW mode) to practice on.</p>

<p>It's kinda funny that all BW film starts off as ortho and they have to add sensitizers to make it pan, but charge you more "not to do that".</p>

[edo_t]

<p>efke ORT and ADOX ort? I may have made an error, this is Pierre Dal Corso's recent shots of Sheri Chiu, I was wondering if this type of film would in fact achieve these skin tones (NSFW by the way):</p>

<p>http://www.fashionising.com/pictures/s--Sheri-Chiu-by-Pierre-Dal-Corso-NSFW-8462-1.html</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Supply and demand. Diesel is cheaper to make than gasoline but we know that Gasoline is cheaper to buy. Well in the U.S. that is.</p>

[edo_t]

<p>Will a cyan filter have the effect I'm looking for? At the end of the day I'm trying to navigate away from digital, far far way, I've realize it is more valuable to shoot film for me, in many ways, one of the most important is how film treats tonality and the lack of black and white clipping (depending on the film)</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>How about examples?<br>

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>I was wondering if red blind film would achieve dark, moody skin tones.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It will show every skin defect, even those that aren't readily visible by eye. Every single pimple, bump, pore, and local shading difference gets enhanced. It's great for that weathered fisherman; not so good for a flattering portrait of your girl friend.</p>

<p> </p>

[edo_t]

<p>hm, Looking through it the skin tones are all pretty mid in terms of luminance right? Would I have to end up shooting through a filter and using orthochromatic film? Did you get to see my link monsieur Dressler?</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>I did now we must have posted pretty closely.</p>

[edo_t]

<p>Robert, that sounds delicious, haha. take a look at my link, I want to achieve those types of tones on skin, similar to Pierre Dal Corso's shoot with Sheri Chiu (again NSFW): http://www.fashionising.com/pictures/s--Sheri-Chiu-by-Pierre-Dal-Corso-NSFW-8462-1.html</p>

[Alan Marcus]

<p>As you know, films were and are made in various flavors. Non-color sensitized films are only sensitive to blue light. Thus objects that reflect blue light are recorded as various shades of gray in finished black & white prints. Objects that reflect zero blue light record as clear on black & white film and black on the black & white print. This is not as bad as it sounds because most objects reflect some blue light and thus record however the shade of gray realized might surprise you.</p>

<p> In the early days of the cinema, fortunes were made by makeup artist who were clever enough to use color makeup on the stars so they looked natural on the big screen. The best known are Westmores and Max Factor. They knew how to deal with the these early films.</p>

<p>Next came the Orthochromatic materials with sensitivity to blue and green followed by Panchromatic materials with sensitivity to blue, green and red.</p>

<p>Now making film is business that encompasses economy of scale. Simply put, it is costly to engineer and produce a film thus you must have sufficient sales to sustain it. The current reality is, we are well on the way to a total switch to digital thus the special purpose materials we could get a few years ago are infrequently available. Maybe never again.</p>

<p>Filters to rescue: If you insist upon exposing film you and somewhat duplicate the effect by mounting an appropriate color filter. Now a filter generally passes its name i.e. a red filter passes red blocks cyan which is green and blue. A blue filter passes blue blocking yellow which I red + green. A green filter passes green and blocks magenta, which is red + blue. </p>

<p>To maybe replicate a blue only film you mount a strong blue filter like a Wratten # 47 or Wratten # 98.<br>

To replicate an orthochromatic film you mount a strong filter that stops red. That's a cyan filter like the Wratten 44.</p>

<p>These filters are labeled Wratten because Frederick Wratten (England 1840 - 1926) master filter maker compiled the recipes and made and sold them. The firm of Wratten and Wainwright was purchased by Kodak in 1912. Mr. Wratten's name is used to honor him. </p>

[edo_t]

<p>So what do you think Larry?</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>I would go with filters and selective development. lighting also plays in here as your lighting source will be drastically changed by the filters you use. If you were to use an ortho or pseudo-ortho and use tungsten lighting you have taken most of your light out right away.</p>

<p> Keep that in mind when exposing.</p>

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>I want to achieve those types of tones on skin, similar to Pierre Dal Corso's shoot with Sheri Chiu</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's easiest to experiment with this using a digital camera. Just look at the blue channel of whatever color image you record.</p>

<p>Remember that each photo site on the sensor is fronted by either a red, green, or blue filter. The photo site behind it is basically a bucket that can be filled by light from infrared to ultraviolet; it doesn't care what color light pours in. The sensor's sensitivity is fairly linear across the visible spectrum. This is not so much the case with film.</p>

<p>Now if you really want to be picky, the thing is to pick up an instrumentation/industrial monochrome camera. Outfits like <a href="http://www.edmundoptics.com/">Edmunds Optics</a> sell lots of filter types, with lots of options for spectral selectivity.</p>

<p>Barring the above, just shoot color film. Scan. Play with the channel mixer until satisifed.</p>

[rustys pics]

<p><em>"The sensor's sensitivity is fairly linear across the visible spectrum. This is not so much the case with film."</em><br /> I'm sorry but that is misinformation and biased toward digital. Digital sensors have a bias towards red, which is why nearly every digital camera sold in the past 8 years has a "Hot Mirror" filter to compensate for this extended red sensitivity. Lifepixel.com and others will remove this internal filter to essentially make your DSLR an infrared camera.<br /> I suggest you get ahold of some Ilford Orthochromatic film. Another cheaper option (If you have a sheet film camera or pinhole camera) is to use some B&W photo paper for film. It IS orthochromatic, which is why you can use it under a red safelight. It won't have the really dark skin tones of the link you provided, unless your model has darker skin. I'm assuming by her last name that "Chiu" is Asian? You'll have to try it with different people of different complexions. That can be a lot of fun too! Below is a shot I made with a 1933 Kodak Recomar with Ilford Gallery paper. ISO is about 3, so get out the tripod.</p><div></div>

[rustys pics]

<p>Here's a smaller version of the shot so it will display inline. 550 pixels is a stupidly small width limit....no wonder everyone is migrating to Flickr. </p><div></div>

[larrydressler]

<p>I need to dig out my books from the 40s as there is like 10 chapters in there just on this subject.</p>

[edo_t]

<p>WOW guys, I've learned so much today just from this post. Hope some luurkers out there got their fill too. Thank you so much for elaborating so much, it got me to think about film in a new way.<br>

I never thought about lighting temperature actually playing part of the madness in B+W. Phenomenally clever!!! </p>

<p>ISO 3, that's pretty awesome, how long was that exposure BTW? I'm thinking to paint my model accordingly now and then choose the appropriate filter hahaha~!</p>

<p> </p>

[James G. Dainis]

Note: The width/height limit for attachments to display is 700 pixels

[rustys pics]

<p>Actually the exposure at ISO 3 was not that long. Maybe 1/4 second? However I was using a 600 watt Arriflex tungsten light! Now remember that since it's photo paper,you'll get a negative image. You can scan it and reverse it which is what I did. Or just contact print it to another sheet of Photo paper to make a positive print. I've done it that way too. Just make sure to use Glossy surface Paper so it doesn't leave a texture on the image. You can use fiber or RC paper and just develop in trays. THis shoot was fun because I was able to rush back to the darkroom and see what I got right away! Who needs digital.....?<br>

I'll post another from that session. And I'll obey the size limit. Please post back here when you get some results.</p><div></div>