First roll Scala negs.

[Todd.Hanz]

Ater seeing some images posted by "Mike Richards" on Scala developed in Rodinal to produce a negative (instead of a positive slide) I decided I had to try some. there wasn't a whole lot on the web so I started with a basic "soup" recipe and times. The negatives are very sharp and tonality is great. I read that you should be able to get 8 stops max on this film, I'm not there yet. Scala is rated at EI 200, the box says you can pull this film -1 stop (EI 100) and push it +3 (EI 1600), I would opt for pulling it in mixed lighting as this is slide film and doesn't handle highlights well unless you expose for them. Here are a few samples: EI 200, "souped" in Rodinal 1:20 at 18c.

[Todd.Hanz]

another..........

[Todd.Hanz]

another.......

[Todd.Hanz]

Last one......guy taking a picture of his wife.

[Todd.Hanz]

This film isn't very forgiving of exposure goof's, I had several images where I exposed for the midtones and upon recomposing a little sky crept into the frame and blew it out like I've never seen! I like the rich, deep, blacks and shadow detail this film produces. Scala isn't cheap, everyone in town was out so I had to go to Houston Camera "Shysters",.....I mean Houston Camera Exchange where they got me for ten bucks a roll, I found some online for alot less so next time. I have some loaded in my M6 right now and will run it at EI 100 to see how well it works, keep you posted.

Todd

[thejazzguy]

these are great shots todd. i've never heard of scala being processed to negative before. the strength of these seems to me to be in the composition--so is the film/process worth the expense over, say fp4 /d-76? i don't know if you can answer that, i know you often use tri-x which would definitely produce different results.
c.

[Doug]

Really rich tones, very nice!

[rover]

Great shots, I love number three. Where is that?

I am not a technical guy, but I have liked the shots taken on Scala and processed normally. This film is on my shopping list when I run through the last of my "old" film.

[Todd.Hanz]

Rover, #3 and four are in Houston, TX. at a park that has this huge waterwall, like a water fall.

Jazzguy,
I don't know if the cost is worth it, I guess if you achieve the result you are seeking, within reason, it is.

Thanks guys,
Todd

[GeneW]

Interesting work, Todd. You've pulled some rich tonality from this combination.

I have a roll of Scala in the freezer and I'm tempted to give it the Rodinal treatment. Would you say it's best to expose for the highlights (a la slide film)?

Thanks for posting these!

Gene

[Todd.Hanz]

Gene,
It depends, for the images of the urns and pots, I looked for a midtone to meter off (patch of grass near the pots). I had a few that when I recomposed had some sky in them and the result was a blown out sky. I would expose for the highlights if there is mixed lighting, in this aspect it acts just like slide film.

Todd

[rover]

Wow, huge wall for sure.

Again, very nice shots.

[Mike Richards]

#1 has very nice shadow detail in the darker part of the urns. #3 is a just a great shot. Looking forward to your pull processed images. I haven't tried that yet, and have to get some more film before running another test roll.
I agree with your observation about the exposure and dynamic range. I made a test shot on my original roll that was deliberately designed to stress the range. I metered on the gray footpath. Here's the double peak histogram. I'll post the image in the next frame.

[Mike Richards]

Here's the image.

[digitalox]

Hi Todd,

Nice tonality there, I may have to try the scala.

I didn't realize you were in Houston too, until I saw the pic of the waterfall I knew exactly where you were. The old Houston Camera "Shysters" eh. The "Last Real Camera Store" of Houston, with the lamest commercials ever. Every time I see their commercials I laugh, they are so not geared towards experienced photogs. Have you tried Camera Co-Op on Sheperd@Richmond? They're not as big but they have a good selection and may be a little cheaper.

--
Scott

[Todd.Hanz]

Mike,
Exactly what I got, I hate to see that extra peak in the histogram, my peaks are closer so when I try and lift the midtones the highlights disapear complete.
Those shots above have more shadow detail on the neg/scan than they show here, the negative shows lots of detail, unfortunately I scan with a flatbed so some is lost.
I'd like to thank you for opening my eyes to this process, I can't wait to shoot/develop more.

Todd

[Todd.Hanz]

Scott,
Good to see some local representation :)
yeah I usually go to Camera Co-op first but they were out of Scala so I succumbed (is that a word) to our friends at the Camera Exchange. BTW, Camera Co-op is moving this month off Durham and I-10 in case you didn't know.

Todd

[SolaresLarrave]

Scala is my favorite B&W film... but I didn't know you could develop it and turn into negatives. There's always something new to learn...

One thing bothers me about Scala. When those great, dense blacks are scanned or observed closely, they show a particular kind of banding that wrecks their use as prints. I have a shot of an artisan in Barcelona that I have scanned lots of times, and when I edit it I'm always checking the histogram to bring out the midtones and, no matter what I do, I get the banding. Maybe you can see it here...

[SolaresLarrave]

Not only the banding, but a weird internal reflection from the lens... or maybe the reflection of the lonely light bulb on the backs of the chairs. I like this shot, but the banding is lethal. It's probably something you won't deal with if you develop it into negatives.

Have fun! I got a new camera today, so it's playtime!! :)

[Todd.Hanz]

That looks like a processing problem, like the film ran through something with rollers.

Todd

[back alley]

ok, i have to ask, what exactly is a histogram?

joe

[Todd.Hanz]

A histogram is that graph looking thingy Mike posted above his picture (above), most higher end digital cameras and imaging software, Photoshop, have them. It allows you to see where the shadows and highlights fall within an image. Ideally you would want all that "black mountain" looking area to be in the center between the left and right, not touching the edges. The left side of the histogram is the shadow area of your image, if the black goes all the way past the edge you have lost or blocked up shadow detail, if it goes beyond the right side you have blown highlights. All of this is also subjective to your particular image.

BTW, "black mountain area" is not the technical term, its just easier to explain that way, I didn't want to go techy on you.

Todd

[back alley]

thanks todd!
for the record i kinda thought the 'graph looking thingy' was a histogram but i had no idea what it was or how to interpret.

i gotta take a class in photoshop. i have ps 7 and never use it cause it looks like waay to much for me.

joe

[taffer]

Joe I got a good PS book years ago and made a world of difference. I think I've probably used 5-10% of what it's written there, so go figure.

There are specific PS books for photography digital treatment, they may be worth a look.

Scala processing is simply too expensive here (around $15) so that sounds interesting, however, has Scala some speficic advantadge when used as B&W negative ?

[back alley]

oscar, i've seen what look like good books on ps but i am more a hands on kinda guy at first and then it helps to have a book to reference certain things.

joe

[Todd.Hanz]

Joe,
open an image in photoshop, go to "image", click, go to "adjustments", click, go to "levels", click. There is your histogram of that image, if you'll look under it there are 3 sliders, black, grey, and white. Click and hold on one to slide it left and right, watch your image as you do it. Once you get it where you want, get out of there quick. Here are some links that may help:

http://nebulus.org/index.html?pg=tutorial_ps.asp

about the histogram http://www.nebulus.org/tutorials/2d/photoshop/ps6/

http://www.thinck.com/photoshoptut-2.html

most of everything you'll need is on the web so it's free!!!!, just don't blame me for keeping you up late at night :)

Todd

[Mike Richards]

Francisco,
If the banding is not on the transparency, did you try to scan it as a negative and then invert in PS? Just a thought. It amounts to a double inversion, but might work. I'm still waiting for my first lab developed positives, so it's hard for me to judge the banding problem.
BTW, I sent the first two rolls of film to the lab in Miami that sells mailers for about $7 on B&H. The Rodinal processing at home was my 3rd roll. Processing by mail here in Germany using a lab in Munich totals up to about 14 Euro per roll. Don't like to get ripped off, which is why I tried the Miami lab. I don't intend to use commercial positive processing again unless the result is clearly better than home negative processing.

[Todd.Hanz]

Francisco,
It could also be a banding problem with your scanner, try and turn the slide horizontal and scan again to see if band appear vertically.

Todd

[SolaresLarrave]

Thanks for the comments! It turns out that I once had a chance to analize the slide on a lightbox... and yes, the big rollers were present, and that's probably where the banding comes from.

Mike, I'll scan the image again as a negative (and invert it later in PS, right?) and I'll let you know. Needless to say, Todd, I'll try placing it in the scanner again, horizontally this time, although I'm afraid the bands are on the film itself but it's worth trying. I really like that image and it's sad to me not to be able to use it.

Joe, you have PS7? There's a very hands-on book titled Classroom in a book. I got it off eBay for $25 and it comes with a CD. You do the stuff in the CD following the directions in the book. I've learned a number of things doing it that way!

[Doug]

I agree with Todd that it's probably a scanner artifact, especially since the banding is centered around those three bright lights in the image. Good idea to turn the neg and rescan to see if the banding orientation follows the scanner orientation or the film's.