by J. Rae Chip

Six months ago I shot with model Kaitlyn Roberts in the Linda Vista Hospital in East LA as part of a Google+ Photowalk. I shot a roll of color film with my Canon AE-1 after I shot off the last two frames of black and white that were in there. My AE-1 has never been stellar with color film, but I figured I might as well play with it alongside my digital cameras.

I expected the roll of color to be no good after the shots were taken. The shutter kept sticking, so I expected all of them to be over exposed. Then I had problems rewinding them back into the casing. 

Because of that factor, I decided to take the negatives to the darkroom at the university and play around with them with some other film enthusiasts.

When I was developing the negatives, it quickly became evident that something was weird about them. Almost everything came out cloudy even though all the chemicals were as they were supposed to be for the film I was using. According to the dates on the film, it wasn't yet expired.

My first instinct was that the fix was incorrectly mixed, but upon looking at it separately, it was mixed correctly. I started seeing the white cloudiness showing streaks across the film, and it looked like some of them had been accidental double-exposures. So I determined that the film was not winding correctly in the camera, hence why I had trouble getting it to rewind back into the canister. So there were some kinks, and there were some times when the film just didn't rewind correctly.

I finally got the images to be workable to the point where I'm willing to share them publicly.

The images are of artistic nude content matter and may be considered not safe for work or viewing by children. Please view the images at your own risk.
Picture
This image has a weird magenta-green shift.

The magenta-green shift is something I'm familiar with when working with digital cameras in fluorescent light, but this still alludes me as to how it came to be this way. The shot was lit with a tungsten continuous light, and the walls were a yellow hue.

It was one of the cloudy images, and after a few fixes it still looks a tad cloudy. I didn't think that would affect the color of the shot though, and considering the shots before and after it (which were garbage), I don't think it's a weird double exposure accident.


Picture
This image is more symbolic of how the scene actually looked - the wall and the lighting are more appropriate in this scene. However, there is still a magenta hue on Kaitlyn, and I have no idea where that came from.


Picture
This shot of Kaitlyn Roberts was the next frame, but able to be resurrected by re-fixing the film twice. It came out a bit over-exposed, but an adjustment to developer time from the negative to the paper was able to produce this product.


Picture
This was the next (two) shots on the roll. It was intended to be the same shot as the above, but with a red light landing on Kaitlyn's body where the shadows were in the previous shot. Then we walked upstairs to the blood room where the movie SAW had been filmed just days before. I think the roll got kinked, leading to the odd pulling formation in the second exposure.

After fixing the shot twice and taking the exposure time down significantly with developer time, I noticed it was a double exposure and that it appeared the film had not been winding (or rewinding) correctly in the camera.


Picture
This shot of Kaitlyn in the blood room where SAW was filmed just days earlier turned out =) 

It was a bit over-exposed because of the time when my shutter was being sticky, but by playing with developer times, I was able to produce this image.

 


Comments

Marc Briggs
04/03/2013 11:12pm

Wow, great series!

Reply
J. Rae (Author)
05/28/2013 2:19am

Heh. Thanks Marc.

Reply
Jeremy Zano
04/04/2013 4:27pm

Well done, J. Rae! The mixed colors, inadvertently, it gave new directions to your foreground, and the prospect became something new. Congratulations!

Reply
J. Rae (Author)
05/28/2013 2:20am

Thanks homie.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply