The Dirk Braeckman look?

[patrick_mason3]

<p>Hi guys,</p>

<p>I have recently come across the work of Belgian photographer Dirk Braeckman (<a href="http://www.dirkbraeckman.be/works">http://www.dirkbraeckman.be/works</a>) and I love the tonal quality of his photographs. They are low key, low contrast, rarely have white white highlights and shadows that while deep still seem to retain detail. I have read them described as grey scale photos rather than b/w photos. I was wondering how to best go about getting a similar look? I can tell he uses flash in the majority of his interiors and I think he uses a variety of cameras including a contax t2. Do you think he exposes normally and then just slightly underdevlops, to avoid blown highlights and high contrast? Any ideas on how this look is acheived would be much appreciated.</p>

<p>Cheers,<br>

Patrick</p>

[andrew_becker1]

<p>It sort of looks like he underexposed it (around 1 stop) , then developed it normally, and compensated in the darkroom to get that sort of shade. Also, some contrast filters might be able to help you out, but not to the degree that he has it goin' on there.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Easy use larger format and then just develop it with any film and developer ..... Just do it like him... :-) Did you write him? I have found that that works...</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>He seems to choose the direct flash look normally associated with unsophisticated snapshots, while using exposure and processing techniques to keep contrast low and avoid blown highlights. There are various ways to achieve a similar look.</p>

<p>It's difficult to tell much from online JPEGs. Some of his flash photos resemble results I've had with 120 Agfa APX 400 rated at 800 in Diafine, using the film in an Agfa Isolette folder with direct flash in dark rooms or outdoors at night. That's a significant underexposure since APX 400 was probably no more than a true 200 speed film. Despite the high contrast scenario, the overall tone was very flat.</p>

<p>Diafine will produce similarly flat contrast and odd tones with Tri-X at EI 200-400, T-Max 400 at almost any speed, and FP4+ at or near the box speed. But it takes some experimenting to get a feel for any combination of film, exposure index, lighting and developer.</p>

<p>Other films in a two-bath developer or other low contrast developer might offer a similar look. So would Delta 3200 at EI 800-1600 in many developers, although with much more prominent grain.</p>

<p>If I'd seen only one or two examples I'd wonder about the experience of the photographer. Seeing an entire portfolio with the same overall look reveals a deliberate choice. It won't appeal to everyone. That's always the risk in choosing to explore the aesthetics of "snapshot" photography, the banal or mundane.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>;-)</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>I would imagine he under-develops quite considerably. I have achieved results like this by accident when I over-diluted Rodinal to 1/150 and got very strongly compensating development (i.e. the highlights didn't develop up to normal density).</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Personally, my take is much simpler. It looks like good prints scanned badly on a cheap scanner.</p>

[pc_b]

<p>Exposure and development as pull (+1) for 400ASA films, pull+2 for 100 and slower.<br>

Then printing the negs in the 0-1.5 grade range. Plus rather longish exposures to get all whites 'down' without much solid black areas (if any), soft paper developer, too. Very simple 'technique'.<br>

I actually believe I could get that look out of any correctly exposed and nominally developed 400ASA neg - given such flash use and approriate subjects. And given some truly soft-grade-capable paper.</p>

<p> </p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>I once had some stale paper that gave me results similar to that. Can't say I really liked it that much.</p>

[boxcustom]

<p>expired film by 15 years or so.</p><div></div>