Pencil cup Pentax ME 50mm f/1.7 SMC Pentax-M Arista EDU 200 L110 Dilution E
My son Garrett made this when he was 4 or 5. It’s a pencil cup made out of a tin can with a piece of thick paper glued around it. He wrote his name on it and painted it. I love the way he shaped the g to start his name: a circle and a J-like curve, not connected. You can’t tell because this is a black-and-white photo, but he painted it in watercolors, peach and pink and green.
Garrett also made the fake flower, in the third grade. It’s a pen, actually; his class made them by the score and sold them to raise funds for something I can’t remember anymore.
I used to have a drawer full of keepsakes my kids made. I let a lot of them go a few years ago when I moved out of my last house. It was a little painful to see them go. It was very nice to get that drawer space back.
I will keep a few things, like this. They will stand in for everything else.
I’m not loving Arista EDU 200 in LegacyPro L110 developer, a Kodak HC-110 clone. This time, my fixer was starting to exhaust. It affected the whole roll to varying extents. But a handful of photos turned out all right enough, and I’m willing to make my claim based on them. Next time I use L110, I’m choosing a different film.
At least I had a good time with my Pentax ME and its 50mm f/1.7 SMC Pentax-M lens. Shooting the ME always brings me a little joy. Before the pandemic and the stay-at-home order, I’d been shooting my 35mm f/2.8 lens most of the time. I work in Downtown Indianapolis and that wider lens lets me get more in the frame without having to step into the busy street. But here in the vinyl village there’s plenty of room to roam. 50mm is perfect.
These are the best of the images from several lunchtime walks around my neighborhood. I just shot whatever. The shooting itself was therapeutic. I still have my vinyl-village project in mind, so whatever I shot I tried to grab lots of surrounding context.
Arista EDU 200 develops mighty fast in L110. Using Dilution B, 1:31, it develops in 3:30. My meager experience tells me that development times of under 5 minutes are not a great idea — there’s so little margin for timing error. Last time I worked around this by using Dilution E, 1:47. I didn’t love the results. This time I used Dilution H, 1:63. To get enough developer into the tank that it wouldn’t exhaust before developing finished, I had to use my 500ml tank rather than my 290ml tank.
The photo forums say that HC-110 (and I presume its clones) work well with Tri-X, HP5+, FP4+ — films with a traditional grain structure. Too bad I don’t have any of those films on hand. Arista EDU 200, which is Fomapan 200 in disguise, has more of a tabular grain structure I gather.
I’m realizing I’m still on my film-developing learning curve. I had only just started to get repeatable, decent results from Rodinal when I decided to plunge into L110. I’m so impulsive. I should have stuck with Rodinal until I mastered it.
My goal was to be able to develop a roll of Adox HR-50 I’m shooting. Rodinal is not recommended for that film; the Massive Dev Chart doesn’t even list this combo. After our discussion in the comments on my last L110 post, I ordered the Adox HR-DEV developer that is meant for HR-50 film. That ought to lead to the best possible results.
If you’re thinking, “What’s he bellyaching about? These are fine” — well, I don’t disagree with you. I’m not showing you the ones that didn’t work out at all, however.
I need to shoot up some film that’s expired but, since the garage fridge died, I can’t store cold anymore. I have a roll of original-emulsion Agfa APX100 left, and from what I hear that film was made for Rodinal. A reader sent me a roll of Arista Premium 100, which is said to be repackaged Kodak Plus-X. I’ve seen some samples of Plus-X in Rodinal in the forums and I love the look. I also have one last roll of Ferrania P30 Alpha to shoot. I tried that film in Rodinal before but the Rodinal was, surprisingly, exhausted. I’d like to give that film another go in fresh Rodinal.
I thought I’d use Rodinal for some time before trying other developers, but I’ve just tried an HC-110 clone, LegacyPro L110. It didn’t go as well as I hoped, but all was not lost.
I was looking for a developer to use with a roll of Adox HR-50 that the kind folks at Analogue Wonderland sent me to try. It’s a specialty film modified for use in regular photography. The roll is in my Olympus OM-1 now.
The Massive Dev Chart has timings for HR-50 with only a few developers, and my go-to, Rodinal, isn’t one of them. Adox mades a developer especially for this film, HR-DEV, and it’s allegedly great for all black-and-white films. I probably should have just bought it. I might yet.
But my first thought was to use HC-110. The Massive Dev Chart has timings for HR-50 in Ilfotec HC, which is said to be an HC-110 clone. HC-110 is less expensive than Ilfotec HC. But L110 is less expensive still than HC-110, and I could get it in a smaller quantity than HC-110. So that’s what I bought.
I put a roll of Arista EDU 200 into my Pentax ME with the 50mm f/1.7 SMC Pentax-M lens attached. I shot the roll over a couple days around the house and neighborhood and then developed it in L110 Dilution E, which is 1:47.
The popular dilutions appear to be B at 1:31 and H at 1:63. But Dilution B gives a development time of just 3:30 at 20° C, which gives no margin for timing error. Dilution H gives some margin at 7 minutes of development time at 20°. But you need at least 6 ml of L110 or the developer will exhaust before the film is developed. At Dilution H, that would mean a far greater volume of diluted developer than would fit into my 290 ml tank. I didn’t want to use my 500 ml tank, so I compromised on Dilution E. I always round up to 300 ml in my 290 ml tank, which led to 6.2 ml L110 and 293.8 ml water. HC-110/L110 development times scale linearly with dilution, so I calculated 5:15 at 20°. The diluted developer was 21.2° thanks to room temperature, which would have reduced development time to less than 5 minutes. So I chilled it in tap water until it reached 20° and plunged in.
I gave all that detail to show how careful I was. Yet I got thinnish, slightly underdeveloped negatives. When I scanned them on my CanoScan 9000F Mark II using the bundled ScanGear software, only a few images looked truly good. Most needed heavy rescuing in Photoshop and even then many of those turned out marginal. A few images could not be salvaged.
I’ve had growing thoughts for a while now that ScanGear isn’t giving me the best from my negatives. So I bought VueScan (thanks to your Buy Me a Coffee donations!) and rescanned the whole roll. VueScan gave me far better scans from these negatives, though it did take far longer to scan the roll than with ScanGear. Quality takes time. Still, VueScan couldn’t overcome all of the underdevelopment. Shadows are blocked up in several shots.
I think next time I’ll just use Dilution H and my larger tank, to give myself more development time and therefore more margin for error.
I shot a series of things on my coffee table with the camera on a tripod, and many of those turned out well.
Most of my outdoors photos turned out well.
These two photos led me to try VueScan. Using ScanGear, the first was muddy and dark beyond saving, and the second had blocked-up shadows everywhere. VueScan let me make them usable.
One last photo from the roll. I shot this one at noon, sunlight streaming in through a nearby window. It looks like I shot it at night.
I’ve popped another roll of Arista EDU 200 into the Pentax ME. I love using that camera anyway, and I want to have another go with L110. This time I’ll just use Dilution H in my larger tank.
Cormorant hood ornament Pentax ME, 50mm f/1.4 SMC Pentax-M Kodak Tri-X 400 (at EI 200 by mistake) 2016
Early Packard automobiles had an array of stunning hood ornaments. You might think this bird is a swan, but you’d be wrong; it’s a cormorant. You’d find cormorant hood ornaments on the finest Packards.
If I had not shot this at EI 200 by mistake, I might not have gotten just this perfect look.
As I made digital photos of the cars at the Mecum auction each year, I always photographed the card in the windshield that told the car’s make, model, and year. But I did it with my digital cameras, not my film cameras — why waste the film on those cards? But then when the negatives and scans came back from the processor, I sometimes couldn’t match the photo to the car it came from.
This is one of those times. Clearly, this is from a Plymouth, and it had a V-8 engine. That’s all I know. If you know more, do tell in the comments.
Fortunately, my Pentax Spotmatic F is still going stong. So I used that. I also got out my Nikon N90s and, just today, my Nikon N2000 for some work. I really like all of those cameras. The N2000 continues to surprise me by how pleasant it is.
Still, it feels very weird not to have a functioning K-mount body. Both my ME and KM need to go to Eric Hendrickson stat.