Tag Archives: found

Phound Photos Volume 17

This film was in the Chinon SLR I reviewed. It’s Kodak Max 400 I think, I can’t find my notes and the film is so dark I can’t read frame numbers or edge markings.

There was a lot of overlap, sometimes triple exposure, so the parts of the film that have images are kind of a jumble. Except for a couple (see below), it wasn’t worth extracting individual frames so I scanned strips – 5K-ish wide by 700-ish tall. WordPress image upload barfed on trying to do post-processing on the wide images so I’m putting links to unprocessed files. Click the link and your browser will open the JPEG in a new tab or window. In Firefox or Safari, click it and it will zoom to 100%. Then you can horizontal scroll.

1st image (~1.4MB)– The exterior shots look like the landscape around Los Alamos.
2nd image (~2MB)– This half is in better shape (multiple exposures aside). I think it may have been earlier on the roll so better protected when curious folks opened the camera back.

This is probably the best image I could salvage.

This is probably the best image I could salvage.


Old image or just old school. Dad may be military.

Old image or just old school. Dad may be military.


After WordPress couldn’t process, I punted and put the files on Google Photos. [time goes by…] After wasting an hour or so of my life, I found that Google Photos, like many things Google does, is a useless waste of time. They want complete control of how and with whom you share your own photos. I can share an album or a photo that’s not in an album but it either is controlled within Google’s viewer, which blows, or it can be downloaded. As a download transfer station to get images to friends, it does work, so it does have very limited utility. There are a couple of convoluted hacks to get links directly to files but none of them worked for me. I should have expected as much. After giving up on Google, I looked at the media library in WordPress and the original files had uploaded, it just couldn’t process thumbnails and other intermediate sizes.

Google – Don’t be evil. Hahahaha! Sucker! Getting you to think we weren’t going to be evil was the most evil part.

Phound Photos Volume 15

This roll of Kodak MAX 400 (C-41 color print film, not T-MAX) has been sitting in the refrigerator for a while. It was in the Canon AL-1 when I bought it in late December 2019. I’m trying to work my way through more found film before the chemicals go bad. I’m using the Cinestill “Color Simplified” 2-bath kit. It’s the 1st batch I’ve used so I have no idea of its staying power vs the Unicolor kit I usually use.

On to the images.

Gorgeous dog. Want to steal.

Gorgeous dog. Want to steal.


Wind chime.

Wind chime.


Frozen bird feeder.

Frozen bird feeder.


Frozen bird feeder detail. Even the perch has ice.

Frozen bird feeder detail. Even the perch has ice.


Icicles.

Icicles.


Some color correction. The film survived its journey through a thrift store to me in pretty good shape.

52 Cameras: Nikon Coolpix L310


Nikon still has the manual here.



A photo that was on the SD card when I got the camera.
 The previous owner had a lot of bird images.

The previous owner had a lot of bird images.


I’ll do a separate “Phound Photos” post. The card had images from 14 Dec 2012 to 11 Jul 2013.

McPigeons in Bernalillo, NM.

McPigeons in Bernalillo, NM.


Goober.

Goober.


Storm over the Jemez Mountains.

Storm over the Jemez Mountains.


Not a scene mode but it has settings for B&W, sepia, cyanotype, & vivid.

Not a scene mode but it has settings for B&W, sepia, cyanotype, & vivid.


Doorbell & shadow.

Doorbell & shadow.

Phound Photos Volume 14

I had several cameras with found film in them. As usual, most had nothing but a couple had something. I had gotten this roll processed at The Camera Shop of Santa Fe and it wasn’t scannable. I set it aside and came back across it while cleaning the office/workshop. Before chucking it, I held it up to the light and could barely make out some images. I scanned and did some heavy correction. The trouble is, it sat around so long I don’t remember what camera it’s from. The film is so dark I can’t make out any edge markings or frame numbers either. After I scan some other found film I may be able to do a “Cat In The Hat” and figure out which film it’s not and hopefully narrow it down.

Update 25 September 2019: I take snapshots with my phone when I find film and I think this is from a Canon Z115. I still don’t remember when or where I acquired it but it’s a start.

I usually don’t post all of the found images from a roll but these tell a cool story.

Building a log house

Building a log house


Hard work

Hard work


And long days

And long days


A lot of progress

A lot of progress


Coming along nicely

Coming along nicely


Every project's nightmare - snow before it's weather tight

Every project’s nightmare – snow before it’s weather tight


Vintage VW and solar panels

Vintage VW and solar panels


Another building.  Workshop?  Studio?

Another building. Workshop? Studio?


Nice views

Nice views


I thought the camper lid was up but it's the building behind it

I thought the camper lid was up but it’s the building behind it


Sunny so maybe work can resume soon

Sunny so maybe work can resume soon


Detail of the side door

Detail of the side door


Detail of the front door - beautiful cedar

Detail of the front door – beautiful cedar


Shadows from the west - solar panel facing south

Shadows from the west – solar panel facing south


After the snow - getting a proper roof

After the snow – getting a proper roof


This is going to be a gorgeous house

This is going to be a gorgeous house


Not sure if these are from before or after the snow

Not sure if these are from before or after the snow


Giddy or exhausted - maybe after

Giddy or exhausted – maybe after


Clowning for the camera

Clowning for the camera


OK, do a serious one

OK, do a serious one


Camera shy

Camera shy


Chillin' on the porch

Chillin’ on the porch


I guessed the order based on progress I could see. Some are probably off but close enough.

Phound Photos Volume 13

Kodak Max 400 found in a Canon Sure Shot Ace. The film canister doesn’t give any clues about the date. The camera is from 1988.

Some young ladies having fun trying on prom(?) dresses.

Weird to think they're probably in their 40s now.

Weird to think they’re probably in their 40s now.


The film was horrendously jammed. With a good battery, the film wouldn’t rewind and it was at the end of the roll so it couldn’t wind either.
Double exposure

Double exposure


The extra exposure from the back being opened created what looks like the Sabattier effect.

The extra exposure from the back being opened created what looks like the Sabattier effect.


An even more extreme example of the effect.

An even more extreme example of the effect.


Cropping out the overexposure and a little tweaking of levels and this could be a nice image.

Cropping out the overexposure and a little tweaking of levels and this could be a nice image.


There are twelve frames with something. A few of those are salvageable as “normal” images. To get the film out, I had to work in the dark bag and cut it loose from the canister. Then I was able to feed it around the take-up spool in the wind direction until it separated from the spool.

    Some notes & random thoughts

  • The film has a really pronounced curl along its length so it was difficult to get it into the scanner. While researching how to get rid of the curl, I came across a suggestion to iron it. I used a black portion of the film to try it. I did about five seconds and the film picked up the texture of the cotton cloth (old summer-weight PJs, not textured) and the table beneath it. I do not recommend ironing curly film. By inserting the film emulsion down, apex of curl up (opposite Canon’s directions), I was able to get the film holder to make it flat enough to scan. It’s easy to flip the images in post. The scans are OK but the film is in a sleeve inside a large hardcover book. I’m curious how long it will take to flatten. I found some wrinkly manuals I’d put in there maybe a year ago (and forgotten) and they look great.
  • I really want to experiment and figure out how the pseudo-solarization came about and repeat it on purpose. On the first yellow image above, I think the left part was on the spool towards the back of the camera and the image was increasingly shielded by the take up spool as you move right. The same for the rotated portrait format image. I’m guessing the landscape one was a lower frame number so it was more shielded. I’ll have to check the numbers. That the effect is yellow is a good starting point for reproducing the effect. Exposed through orange tinted backing, yellow’s RGB complement… I have a lot of research to do.
  • The camera is a little weird and kind of cool for an f/3.5 wide angle P&S from the 1980s. It has an “Easy Viewer”, a low-angle viewfinder like the Photura, and the left side slides off to become an infrared remote. I have a battery and some dead film for transport testing. If it works, I’ll shoot with it and feature it soon.

52 Cameras: # 170 — Sony DSC-H7


I glossed over a lot of the features, face detect, in-camera effects like sepia and saturation, exposure compensation besides bracketing, etc. Even Sony divided the information into a setup guide, instruction manual, and handbook — probably 250 pages worth.



Phound Photos Volume 9 has some of the found images from the memory stick.


18 Jan 2019 - I used GIMP to fix the perspective & adjusted the levels.  The deep shadows fooled the meter.

18 Jan 2019 – I used GIMP to fix the perspective & adjusted the levels. The deep shadows fooled the meter.


21 Jan 2019 - Waiting for moonrise.  The camera biffed the white balance (WB) but GIMP fixed it up.

21 Jan 2019 – Waiting for moonrise. The camera biffed the white balance (WB) but GIMP fixed it up.


28 Jan 2019 - M at Plaza Cafe.

28 Jan 2019 – M at Plaza Cafe.


10 Apr 2019 - Macro is hard in high wind.  The camera did a great job during a rare lull.

10 Apr 2019 – Macro is hard in high wind. The camera did a great job during a rare lull.


10 Apr 2019 - Lupines (I think) in the yard.  Bokeh's not great but not bad.

10 Apr 2019 – Lupines (I think) in the yard. Bokeh’s not great but not bad.


10 Apr 2019 -  Shot through a filthy window at max zoom (78/465mm equiv). I tweaked WB & shadows.

10 Apr 2019 – Shot through a filthy window at max zoom (78/465mm equiv). I tweaked WB & shadows.

Phound Photos Volume 12

I was so stoked when I saw the old 3000 speed film inside the Polaroid 100 with the Zeiss viewfinder, I didn’t thoroughly go through the kit. Inside the cold clip was this old sepia Polaroid print.

Looks like an airport terminal.

Looks like an airport terminal.

On the back is what looks like the letter ‘H’ and the number 815341. It seems to be part of the print and not a catalog number or something added later.

I started looking up what the codes mean. What I found referenced other information on the back of the print. I hadn’t seen anything but shining a flashlight on it, I could see more information. I mangled the scan to get enough contrast but here it is.

Hidden (as in faded to near invisibility) information.

Hidden (as in faded to near invisibility) information.


Upper left, lying on its back is a ‘5’. This was the fifth print in the pack.

“POLACOLOR ® 75 SPEED TYPE 108”. Interesting. This isn’t sepia, it’s color, just really faded.

The blob at the far right goes with the manufacturing code — it should end with a letter. I didn’t chop off the scan, the letter is just badly placed and only half on the print.

According to this document (820K PDF), ‘H’ is the month of manufacture, so, August. The first digit is the year of manufacture, so ‘8’, but 19_what_8? It would seem to be 1968 since the same document says “renamed Type 108 Polacolor 2, 1975”.

Screen grab from the document.  I'm confused

Screen grab from the document. I’m confused

The example shown in the document for Polaroid Land Pack Film is confusing. The example serial number is “H612591 P” and they give August, 1976. It seems that the example should say “Polacolor 2” since it’s after 1975. Unless they mean it was renamed to “Type 108 Polacolor” in 2, 1975 (as in February, 1975)? Or maybe the film name change doesn’t correspond to what’s printed on the back of the print?

OK, I will have to dig more for what decade. This other document (155K PDF) from 1998, shows better what the other numbers mean.

The next 2 digits in H 815341, the “15”, are numbers showing what machine made the film pack. The next 2 digits, “34” are more useful. Using the lookup table on page 7 of the 2nd document, “34” means the ‘A’ shift on the 12th of the month.

So, this print was made on machine 15, during ‘A’ shift, on 12 August, in either 1968 or 1978.

I’ll try dating the 3000 film that was in the camera. Of course, like Midge, the print may have nothing to do with the camera.

Update (still 1 March 2019): The 3000 film wasn’t as old as I thought. It was made 10 May 2001 so it’s no help trying to date the photo. At least I know for later films, the date codes work.

2nd update (still 1 March 2019):
Heritage Auctions had Andy Warhol Polaroids on Polacolor 2 and it does say it.

Polacolor 2 does say "Polacolor 2". H107621

Polacolor 2 does say “Polacolor 2”. H107621


They say “circa 1970s” for the photo but the film Warhol used was made in August of 1981. It can’t be 1971 because the film wasn’t labeled “Polacolor 2” until after 1975.

Finally, I’m happy enough with the evidence to say my print’s film was made 12 August 1968.

Phound Photos Volume 11

I recently acquired an old Canon Digital Rebel. I don’t have a charger yet so I haven’t used it but it has a CompactFlash card in it with images from July 2013 to August 2015.

Whoever the photographer is, I hope she sticks with it.

Probably San Diego based on a ship in another image.

Probably San Diego based on a ship in another image.


Nice macro.

Nice macro.


A person of discerning taste I see.

A person of discerning taste I see.

Christmas ornament selfie with festive nails.

Christmas ornament selfie with festive nails.


Out of focus but this is a cool shot.

Out of focus but this is a cool shot.

Phound Photos Volume 10

Found photos sort of. I didn’t actually get any images that I can be sure of (stare at them for a while and you start to “see” things) but the scans are kind of cool.

I got a box camera recently and it had three film holders in it — 4X5 inch glass plate holders with dark slides to be more precise. One of the holders had plates in it.

There isn’t much info out there about processing old glass plates. Tons about scanning or making prints or preserving glass negatives that have already been processed but not developing old negatives. I processed them with Arista B&W paper developer from Freestyle, Kodak stop, and Ilford Rapid Fixer. The developer did the job — the exposed silver in the emulsion converted to metallic (black) silver. The trouble is, it was all exposed. Somewhere along the line, the dark slides had been removed.

This is a positive from the scanned negative.

This is a B&W positive from the first scanned negative.

I had to scan in two passes since the light source on the CanoScan 9000f isn’t wide enough. The exposure wasn’t quite the same but I was able to play with the levels and get it pretty close. I glued the half-images together in Photoshop Elements 15. Version 15 is kind of a POS (not point-of-sale if you know what I mean). It only has panorama stitch in “guided” mode and it doesn’t guess very well. It lined the images up OK but I could not get the exposure of the layers right. I ended up doing it manually with a huge blank canvas and two layers. I made one layer semi-transparent and picked a dot as my alignment point. Nudge, nudge, too far, back, SWEET! It’s not perfect but pretty close for moving the plate on the scanner manually without a straight edge. Once the layers were aligned, I set the transparency back to opaque, picked one layer and tweaked the mid-tone level .01 at a time until I couldn’t see the seam. Since it’s a gray scale scan, .01 would be one hundredth of 255 (0=black and 255=white).

I got a wild hare (hair?) and did the second image in color. I had to scan one half twice to get the exposure close. The Canon software “snaps” to an exposure level depending on how much light or dark is in the selected scan area — move the selection area in or out and the exposure varies in a huge jump. With the color information, more overlap, and using a straight edge this time (an SX-70 print), Photoshop did a much better job stitching the halves together and I didn’t have to do it manually.

This is a color positive from the second scanned negative.

This is a color positive from the second scanned negative.

Images of the camera and slide holders will have to wait until I feature the camera on 52 Cameras. I have some big film (not 4×5″ big, but big), print paper like I used for the cardboard box pinhole camera, and some Instax wide so it’ll be a fun project.

Note: Not my fingerprints — I used gloves. I’ve read enough to know gelatin emulsion on glass is really fragile and LOVES fingerprints.