Another cross-processed and rescued Velvia image . . . absolutely hideous in CP and barely salvageable in b&w! What’s a girl to do? The camera, though, does a fine job when the user doesn’t mess up. The lens is a Xenar, uncoated, which gives it a particularly vintage quality that modern digital do not have.
This picture was an accident. The Welta Weltur has no double-exposure prevention mechanism. Potential mistakes to potential artwork! This made me think of the point between the wave and the tideline, where movement increases and decreases imperceptibly to its own rhythms.
This is a test film of flowers on my patio – Ektar 100, Welta Weltur, Epson V600. This was taken to test the sharpness of the lens – and to just use the camera!
Out of the roll of Kodak Ektar 100 I used in the Welta Weltur, this one is my favorite. It has an old-fashioned look to it, which may be due to the fact it is is 1930s lens which is uncoated. I pushed the colors a bit to get the result I liked best. I scanned this with the Epson V600.
An Alice in Wonderland themed cafe in town. Sadly, it closed last week.
Welta Weltur, 6×4.5, Kodak Ektar 100, Epson V600.
In the past couple of months, I’ve moved from digital to film, which is much slower. It’s a totally different mindset for me. I hated film years ago because I couldn’t take a picture worth paying for. Now, after doing digital, I more comfortable and confident, and most importantly, knowledgeable. I continue to use digital, but sort of have a “year long project” to master film photography, from taking to developing both b&w and color.
The medium format film craze for moi started with the Holga 120 GCFN I got for a present. As a camera, the Holga leaves a lot to be desired, like control. Since then, I’ve gathered into my camera herd an Agfa Isolette iii (6×6), and with this image, a Welta Weltur ca. 1938, that produces both 6×6 and 6×4.5 with an insert. The interesting differences between the two cameras is that the lens on the Agfa is from the 50s, therefore coated, and the one on the Welta is uncoated. The visual differences are there, as well as how each handles flare and other things.
Shot on Kodak Ektar 100 with the Welta Weltur, scanned using the Epson v600. Post in LR and On1 software. Developed at a local lab for $5.00.
I am not sure if the lab is to blame or the camera, but this image was filthy when I got the scans back from the lab. Either way, for what I am doing, it is unimportant. I am just playing. At some point, I will check to see if the debris is stuck in the film. I cleaned up the worse of it in post, and then did some color correction.
This is an interesting process, looking at the images out of the Lomo LC-A. To my eye, it says poor equipment and bad images. On the other hand, I can see why it could be just fun. My persnickety side is at war with my “let’s do it and see what happens” side.
Aesthetically, I do not think grungy, dirty pictures (with debris all over them) are interesting if it was not done intentionally.
To counter the Lomo, I have a 6×6 Isoletta III rangefinder due to arrive today. Let’s see what that produces.