success w/double-exposures using Hasselblad?

[janet cull]

I intend to try (again!)double exposures using my Hasselblad 500cm. I

tried before but the parts that remained stationary (or should have)

didn't appear so on the film. My wobbly tripod was on grass, which

added to the instability. I have a new tripod coming any day, I will

move the mirror (not sure what that's really called - clicking that

little button up on the side) and use a cable release. With removing

the back to crank it, then replacing the back can I expect to

possibly nail the background parts of the image exactly for my double-

exposure. This is hard to put into words. I hope you understand my

question. If you have images you've done this with do you mind

sharing them?

 

My plan is to photograph a scene, then bring someone into it and

expose that frame again. I'm afraid that there will be a blur when I

photograph the same scene again. Can this work? Thanks.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Iused to do this semi regularly.

1.) Camera on solid tripod and use cable release.

 

2.) Use mirror lockup. be careful not to move camera

 

3.) shoot first image.

 

4.) darkside in. be careful not to move camera.

 

5.) remove back. be careful not to move camera.

 

6.) wind camera. be careful not to move camera.

 

7.) reattach back, be careful not to move camera.

 

8.) make second exposure.

 

9.) wind camera with back attached to do next frame.

 

A guy I assisted did double exposures so often with his Hasselblads that he had one

of his hasselblad backs modified by having the teeth on the wind gear filed away. The

film would be advanced to the next frame by hand winding the back. This modified

back was very clearly marked so we assistants would not mistake it for a regular A12

back.

[ulrik_neupert]

Unfortunately the position of the magazine is not exactly defined on a Hasselblad, there is some sideward play. Try it yourself, take your camera with the attached magazine and see yourself, how much play your setup has. So when you reattach the magazine after the first exposure there may be some offset.

 

Modifying an old 12 type magazine so that it does not transport the film when the camera is cocked is a good idea. Transport of the film would be done by turning the winding key of the magazine and controlling the transport to the next frame by peeping through the rear hole. At least this is cheaper than buying a 200-/2000-series Hasselblad where you can disengage the film transport by pushing the button in the centre of the winding crank during transport.

 

Tell us about your results, good luck !

 

Ulrik

[phil_hanson]

Ellis's technique works well - the only thing I'd add would be to make sure you use a cable

release. I have made many multi-exposures this way, over many years, and rarely have had

a problem.

[keith_laban]

<a href="http://www.keithlaban.co.uk">Keith Laban Photography</a><p>Janet, it really depends on what you are trying to do. The techniques described above work well if you want to produce a double exposure consisting of two different images. However problems arise when you want to for instance produce a double exposure comprising essentially the same image in both shots but with an element within the image either added or subtracted, which is I believe what you are trying to do. The trouble is there is always some play when attaching Hasselblad backs and it is just about impossible to re-attach the back in precisely the same position which results in the two images being out of register.

[russ_britt1]

I have heard of a modification with a switch on

the back to allow double exposures. I don`t know how this is done, or who can do it? You could also shoot two frames and sandwich them when printing.

[tarashnat]

Janet,

 

If you are trying to get a person to appear in multiple locations in a scene, you can try to

get the shot in low light conditions and use a flash to capture the subject, and expose the

scene with the shutter opened at the bulb setting. For an multiple exposure sequence of

the last lunar eclipse, I actually ended up getting an old bargin 2000FCW body so that I

could recock the body without removing the back. I ended up with 50 separate exposures

on that one frame of film. ( http://homepage.mac.com/tarashnat/astrophoto/images/MF

-00112-02.jpg [there are no spaces in the link]) I don't think I would have been able to

get this image with the 500C/M and removing the back for every exposure. I justified the

2000FCW purchase by wanting to have access to the 110mm f/2 F lens for some low-light

projects I had in mind.

 

The longer the lens, smaller camera motion will cause misregistration. As suggested, it

may be easier to register two separate frames on printing/after scanning than in the

camera. It is easier if the backgrounds are different, or if one source doesn't have a

background. This is how those huge moons appear in some compositions.

 

Taras

[janet cull]

Thank you, all. I'm adjusting my plan to rule out the lines I wanted in the image, but that needed to be stationary to appear the same in both exposures.