Lomo Color 100 and a Pentax 6x7

Last October, I spent a week in Arizona, staying in Tucson, and making day trips to explore other areas.  Bisbee, Arizona was on my bucket list, and I was not disappointed.  It's a mountain town, SE of Tucson, and while originally settled due to the mines nearby, it is now a resort town with lots of arts and local flavor.  I've posted a lot of shots from that trip on my Flickr site.  

One of the places that I also wanted to visit was the nearby "ghost" town of Lowell. All that really remains of Lowell is one street (Erie) that was part of the former business district.  When the open-pit Lavender Mine expanded in the 1950s, it ate up the residential areas, and as the homes were demolished, miners moved elsewhere, leaving the actual business district bereft of customers.  Local residents managed to turn Erie street into a sort of open air auto museum with storefronts and signage from the 1950s.  If you haven't visited Lowell, it's worth the short drive S from Bisbee.

I shot a lot of film that afternoon, and some of it was with my Pentax 6x7.  These images were shot on Lomocolor 100, and I'm pretty happy with the results.  After almost a year, I finally got around to editing the scans that I made on my Epson V700.  

If you like vintage autos that look their age, don't miss this spot.

A Developing Story

Film from the Arizona trip

Over the past few months, I have shot quite a bit of film.  Thirty-seven rolls on my October Arizona trip, and another 13 rolls during my November Ohio-Virginia trip.  That’s 50 rolls, and really raises my count for the year. Of course, the chickens come home to roost, which means that I have had to do a lot of film developing. The black and white film always gets done first - and while I tend to shoot a lot of different b&w films, there are some that I use more than others. Using only one b&w film does make the developing end simpler, but no, I am not that type. Therefore, the b&w developing takes longer since I have to work out the developer and time for each different emulsion.  The Massive Development Chart is what I use as a reference, as well as my developing notebook - which I’ve been keeping for almost 25 years. Lately, I have been using a lot of D-76, followed by Black White and Green, D-96, and HC110.  

On my recent trips I did shoot a lot of color film, even in medium format.  I used my Pentax 6x7 quite often during the Arizona trip, and I think the addition of a 3D printed right hand grip really makes the camera easier to hand hold.  I confess that I have not used the Pentax 6x7 very often over the past few years, and the Arizona trip was the most use it’s had in a long while. Most of the color shot on that trip was with my 35mm K-mount bodies, the Vivitar V3800 and the Pentax KX, and then the Pentax 17. As I was getting ready to leave for Ohio in mid-November,  I sent in the E-6 films to Dwayne’s Photo in Parsons, KS, and the 120 C-41 to Reformed Film Lab in Florida.  The developed film returned shortly after I got home from the November trip. 

I developed the 35mm color film at home using the FPP Color kit for ECN-2 and C-41 films.  I use a sous-vide in a 5 gallon tote to keep the chemistry at 42°C.  I have 7 Jobo tanks that take 2 rolls of 35mm, so what I do is this: 

Number each tank and record what rolls are in each. Work from Tank 1 -7, hanging the film to dry in the same order.  Since everything gets the same development, it doesn’t matter what rolls are together, except that I do keep ECN-2 films separate from C-41, since I don’t want remjet particles polluting the non-remjet in the same tank.

For a developing session like this, I mix a fresh batch of developer.  The kits are said to be able to develop up to 25 rolls, but after 18-20 rolls, I mix up a fresh batch. At $20 for a kit, it’s still a HUGE savings over sending the film out for development. 

In looking over the lists of what I shot, here is the breakdown from the two trips:

Here’s the actual number of rolls:

1 Amber T800

2 Eastman 250D 

3 Fomapan 200

1 Fomapan 400

1 FPP Derevpan 100

1 FPP Retrochrome 400

1 FPP Svema FN64

1 FPP Xray

4 Fuji Acros 100

2 Fuji Color 200

1 Harman Phoenix 200 II

1 Ilfocolor 400

4 Kentmere 200

7 Kentmere 400

2 Kodacolor 100

1 Kodacolor 200

1 Kodak Color Plus 200

1 Kodak Ektar 100

3 Kodak Gold 200

1 Kodak Max 400

1 Kodak Tmax 100

2 Kodak Tmax 400

1 Kodak Tri-X

1 Lomo Color 100

1 Lomo Color 92

2 Lomochrome Purple

2 Lomochrome Turquoise

3 Rollei Retro 400S

The Lomochrome films were used in a Holga and my Rollei 35TE.  The Holga gave me some wonderfully wacky images, and the sharp lens on the Rollei definitely gave me some nice images, and with those color shifts from the Lomochrome - very surreal imagery.  Most of the 35mm films were shot in K-mount bodies - Vivitar V2000 for the b&w, and Vivitar V3800 and Pentax KX for color.  My Leica M2 shot a roll of b&w and two in color, my Pentax 17 1 b&w and 1 color, and my Pentax 6x7 for 120, with a few b&w rolls in my Lomo LCA 120, and of course, the Holga.

Now that I’m done scanning all of the negatives, the editing and deciding which ones are the “keepers” come next.  B&W definitely requires less editing. With color films, there’s typically a lot more that needs to be done until I have something that I am satisfied with.  Spotting, adjustments to the color and so on, takes more time. In the end, I’ll have several hundred images on film that I will have to evaluate.  Still, film gives me something that seems “organic” and despite the work that’s required, I enjoy the process.  I have plenty of digital images from those trips, too, and while they require much less work, I don’t have the same feeling about most of them.  There is something about seeing an image on a piece of thin acetate that has a tangible bit of reality about it.  

Here are a few examples from the film I shot.  I’ll go into more detail in the captions.

On the Lewis and Clark Trail in Missouri.  Vivitar V3800, Ilfocolor 400. Oct. 12.

Coolidge, KS. What appears to be an old bank building. Vivitar V2000, Kentmere 400

Offerle, KS.  10/13/25.  Vivitar V3800, Kodak Max 400

Grants, NM, Route 66. 10/15/25. Vivitar V3800, Fujicolor 200.

Just past the Arizona Welcome Center, I-40. Oct. 15.  V2000, Kentmere 400, red filter

The oft-photographed GANO abandoned grain elevator near Kinsley, KS. Oct. 13, Pentax 6x7, Kentmere 400

Saguaro National Park, 10/18/25. Holga, Lomochrome Purple

Pima Air and Space Museum, 10/18/25. FPP X-Ray film, V2000, 85b filter

Lowell ghost town, S of Bisbee, AZ.  Pentax KX, FPP Retrochrome 400. A perfect film for this vintage scene.  10/17/25.

Chiricahua National Monument, Rollei Retro 400S, V2000, red filter.  10/19/25.

Bisbee, AZ.  Lomochrome Turquoise, Rollei 35 TE.  10/17/25.

Pipe Organ formation, Chiricahua Nat. Mon., Lomo Color '92, Pentax 6x7. 10/19/25

Shell and Chevy. Lowell ghost town. Pentax KX, Kodak Gold 200

I still have a ton of editing to do on these hundreds of images, and I'll be sharing more on my Flickr pages (mfophotos).

Grants, NM, Route 66.  Pentax 17, Kentmere 200.

Widening My Horizon Part II

Using 35mm film in a Pentax 6x7

Back in mid-February, I wrote a post about some ways to get panoramic images with a 35mm film camera.  At the time, I had not yet shot anything with a panorama mask and 35mm adapter in my Pentax 6x7.  I ordered my panoramic 35mm adapter from Clever3dPrints on Etsy, and it arrived soon after. The adapters to fit a 35mm cassette into the 120 roll film spot work very well.  The panorama viewfinder mask fit over the ground glass, but I think it's a 1/2mm too thick, as the prism doesn't snug in tightly with it in place.  Second, the 35mm adaptor to go over the film gate doesn't really fit well, and wanted to rub against the shutter curtain so I decided not to use it, and expose the entire width of the film. 

The back of the Pentax 67 opened up, showing the supply
and take-up cassettes, and the taped-on leader.

You need to set the film to 220 on the Pentax 6x7 pressure plate as well as the 120/220 selector button on the right side of the body.  To make sure that I got as much out of the 36 exposure roll, I taped a length of exposed 35mm film to the end of the fresh roll that was connected to the take-up cassette.  The take-up spool is an empty cassette (obviously oriented upside down. As it turns out, I need to make the leader a bit longer, as there was a length of unexposed film at the beginning of my roll.  The 220 setting is necessary if you are using a 36 exposure roll, and you should get close to 19 shots, unless you respool your own film and make it a 40-exposure roll.  

The beauty of using this without the panoramic mask in the film gate is that I get 24x70mm negatives, excluding the sprockets.  If you are sprocket freak, then you'll appreciate the exposed sprocket area. Compared with my Horizon 202 (more about that in another post), it's a bit wider - 12mm. I used the Pentax 55mm lens on the 6x7, which is about equal to 28mm in 35mm. The Horizon 202's lens is also 28mm, but the crop with 6x7 55mm lens  results in an image without any distortion that one sees with the Horizon camera.  

The obvious drawback with this setup is that the film still has some exposed frames that will be ruined if you open the back in daylight, unless you forgo shooting to the end of the roll.  I brought my camera back home and opened it up in my bathroom/darkroom and rewound the film into the original cassette.  I shot a roll of Ultrafine Extreme 100 and developed in D-96.  To say that I was happy with the images is an understatement.  All of my shots were handheld. The D-96 came from the FPP store.  All of my frames were scanned on my Epson V700 scanner.

Some results.

Dillsboro, NC

Dillsboro, NC

Rt. 197 up Ivy Knob to Cockscomb Mtn.

The French Broad River at Ledges Whitewater Park

After I scanned in the negatives, I was pleased at how big those images could be viewed. Zooming in revealed a lot of detail, and a print from them would be quite striking.  You may ask why not just crop any 6x7 negative post scan to be a 24x70mm negative, and my answer is:

• You can no longer buy 220 film that is fresh
• There are so many more emulsions in 35mm
• The viewfinder mask defines your image area
• It's part of the process

In part III of this series, I will discuss my experiences with my Horizon cameras.   

  

Falling Back Into Love With 6x7

A t-shirt that I have had for several years.

Almost 20 years ago, my mentor, Bill Brudon, gave me his Pentax 6x7 kit. He said it was too heavy for him to use at his age (80-ish), and as I was in my 40s, I thought the camera was just fine. At the time I was all over the place with my photography, trying to figure out what I really liked, and working through all those wonderful cameras that came my way. The 6x7 was large and heavy, and I lugged that camera around in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, thinking that I had the perfect camera for landscape photography.  I took it on a trip to New Mexico in 2003,  and took a few good photographs with it.

After a decade,  I hadn't used it as much as I thought I would, and lured over by the much lighter Rolleiflex and Hasselblad to a 6x6 format, the old 67 didn't see much use. At some point, and I don't remember when, the 6x7 had a mechanical problem, so I ended up selling all the 6x7 stuff I had. In 2014, I was selling the photographic gear of a deceased photographer, and ended up buying a Pentax 6x7 that lacked the battery cover (easily remedied with tape and cardstock).  The 90mm normal lens was all I had for some time, then I bought the 135mm macro lens for a lot less than I would have paid a decade earlier.  Over a year ago, I picked up a box of Pentax 6x7 accessories at a thrift shop for $10. Among the items were two Pentax close-up diopters for the 6x7, which obviously sell for a lot more.  This spring, I purchased the 55mm SMC Takumar lens - which is just what I needed to do landscape photography.  Now that I'm in the Appalachians, I know that the 55mm lens and the 90mm will be used quite a lot.  With the 10 negatives/roll of 120, I'll be more selective in my shots compared to using 35mm.  Yes, using a camera like the 6x7 does slow down my photography, and that's probably a good thing.

To be honest, the Pentax 6x7 is a beast.  It's a bit ungainly, but not as much as a Mamiya RB67.  It's weighty (5 lb 6 oz), and at 63, I know that it's not the camera that I'll take on a hike in the woods.  However, the negative size is perfect, and I am finding so many interesting things to shoot here in NC.  It's all about the negative, though, and the 6x7cm negative has a lot to offer. I'll never be a large format shooter - it's just not my thing.  A Fuji 6x9 "Texas Leica" has some appeal to me, but the Pentax 6x7 has great lenses from wide to telephoto, and the SLR has many advantages over a 6x9 rangefinder camera. Not that I don't love the 6x9 format - I do, but 6x7 is really nice, too. For close-ups and macro work, the 6x7 excels, and somewhere in my files I have transparencies of that early work that I did.  I just did a bit of a look through my negatives from 2003, and here's one from the Guadeloupe Mountains near Carlsbad, NM.

Nothing spectacular, but proof I was there, I guess.

At this point, I'll be selling some items to acquire some Pentax 6x7 accessories -- a waist-level viewfinder, for one. Low-angle shots really require one.  I used to have the 200mm lens, which is great for portraits, so I just purchased one on eBay. I already have a lot of 35mm Nikon gear, so all of my Minolta SLR gear will be on the auction block soon.

From 2002, UM Peony Garden, Fuji Superia

The Pentax 6x7 is definitely a camera that is well-suited for use with a tripod.  It makes it much easier to compose, and then use the mirror-lockup to not have to worry about mirror-slap vibration affecting the sharpness of the image.  I used to have that wood-handled grip, too, but I don't think I'll bother with finding one.   I look forward to spending more time with my Pentax 6x7 and getting back into the groove of using it regularly.

Recent 6x7 work:

Fomapan 100

Fomapan 100

Fuji Acros 100

Fuji Acros 100

Panatomic-X

Projects can keep you fresh.

Day 8 of "Solstice to Solstice"

It's just about the end of the year, and while 2016 has seen its share of bizarre events, disasters, celebrity deaths, and potential end of life as we know it-- on a personal note, I can't complain.  The bigger picture is beyond my sphere of influence, and rather than let fear and/or anger lead my way, I have to do what I know best, and that's to do photography.  I'm not an "event photographer" nor am I an "adventure photographer."  My work is more often introspective, about nature, slivers of life and places, and of course, a lot of it is on film.  If you look through my images on Flickr, where I have been since 2004, you'll have a pretty good idea of what I photograph.  Probably over a  third of the images there are on film.   I continue to shoot it a lot -- in fact, I think 2016 might just be the year that I have shot well over 100 rolls - close to 130.   Developing my own C-41, E-6, as well as B&W has saved me a lot of money -- which of course, can be used to buy more film!

So, with all the film have I shot, what have I done with it?  I have long-term projects that accrue by the fact that the subjects are easily grouped -- Michigan post offices would be one such project. Recurring images of water in various states would be another, and while I had an exhibit in 2102 of winter water images, there are always more.  Sometimes, a single roll can be a small project, and that is always a fun challenge.  I feel that it's good to have some goals and  projects to keep one engaged, no matter what your endeavor. I rarely announce a photography goal, but this year, I am doing a "Solstice to Solstice" project, where I upload one image taken that day, from the Winter to the Summer Solstice -- basically, 6 months. That's not really a project I can do on film, and I decided to use just one camera for that, a Nikon D3200.  It's lightweight, takes different lenses, and while lacking features of my workhorse (and some may say outdated) D200, it allows me plenty of creativity.  So, on December 21, I shot and uploaded Day 1.  I hope to finish with consecutive images on Wed., June 21, 2017.  The idea that I have to produce an image for each day is challenging, and it has to be a worthwhile image.  Half a year's worth.  I think it'll be fun, sometimes frustrating, but I want it to be worth the effort.  I'll know in June.

It's not a bad thing to set some goals, and I think it helps one grow as a photographer.  Maybe you would like to be better at doing portraits.  Learn about lighting, and experiment. Enlist friends or family to pose for you -- find out what your "style" is.  Maybe you'll find that b&w works better for you than color.  Or not.  You'll never know if you don't try.

AuTrain Bay, Pentax 6x7, August 2016

Take a single camera and lens combo and use it a lot.  We all get that "gear-acquisition syndrome" or GAS.  I'll be the first to admit it.  But what if you found that just using a 50mm lens or a 28mm lens for a lot of photography made you a better photographer?  Give it a try.  There are many "projects" one can do in 6 months.

To go to the other extreme, shoot one Polaroid a day.  It's been done by many, but what about you? What story do you have to tell?  Six months of Impossible Project film might be pretty expensive though. Hell, one month of IP film would be expensive, so 6 months would be about $750.  Make those shots count!

Since I have been on winter break (one of the perks of working at a university), I have had time to do some darkroom cleanup, mix up more C-41, and process a lot of color film.  Some of it dates back to June!   Scanning is going fine, and yes, while it takes time, I enjoy the results.

Kalamazoo, MI, July, 2016. Canon EOS 2000.

FPP recording  session, my house, Feb., 2016. Minolta XG-M.

Princess Phones, Kiwanis, December 2016, Minolta X-700

UM Art Museum windows, Dec. 2016, Minolta X-700

Berkeley, CA. Nikon FG, April 2016

Hocking Hills, OH. Nikon F3HP, May, 2016

Matthaei Botanical Gardens, Nikon FE, Feb., 2016

Film shots from the straits of Mackinac

A few weeks ago, my buddy Marc Akemann and I were on a road trip to Photostock and then to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.  I have already posted a few digital shots on the previous post, but I haven't said much about shooting the film cameras.  We had some great fog conditions for photographing the Mackinac Bridge, which is itself a marvel.  It's 5 miles long, and the main towers are 552 feet above the water.  Prior to its opening in 1957, one had to take a car ferry across the straits, and the Upper and Lower peninsulas were certainly separated economically and culturally as well as physically.  The Mighty Mac changed all that, as the UP became more of a tourist destination, and not just a place for hunters and fishermen to visit. You can see many of the old places along US-2 that have survived from the late 1950s-early 60s.  That is another project someday-- before its too late-- to document the tourist-oriented business along US-2 between St. Ignace and Manistique.

Marc and I had the opportunity to photograph the Mackinac Bridge from several vantage points NW and SW of the bridge, and I have already photographed it numerous times from the NE and SE side.  This time though, we had the added attraction of some foggy weather over the straits, and it resulted in some different shots for me.


It seems that cellphones have replaced point and shoots for most people.  Nikon N2000 with 35mm f/2 lens. That 35 has become my carry-around lens now.

I haven't been using my Pentax 6x7 as much as I should be, but when I do, I am almost always pleased with my results.  This was taken with Ilford XP-2 film. I probably had at least one filter on the lens -- a red filter.

Taken with my Nikon FM2N, 50mm 1.4 lens, on Arista 100 film.  Funny thing is that I brought the FM2N as a backup to my N2000 and N90s.  I finished up the roll that was on it, which turned out to be the trip from December 31 that Marc and I took along the Raisin River!  Maybe I have too many cameras...

Taken from the NW side of the bridge which gives a pretty good viewpoint. A tern was hunting in front of me and kept diving into the lake to catch fish. You can see it on the left side of the photo.  This was Fuji 400 ISO color film, arguably not the best choice for this subject.  A finer-grained film such as Kodak Ektar would be a better choice.

Film drying.  I shot quite a bit of Polypan-F on the trip, and am really pleased with the negatives I got from it.  I'll have another entry about shooting at Fayette State Park, which I highly recommend as a photo destination!