It's art, Jim, but not as we know it...

[Scuba Jim]

I saw that too - do you mean the semi-circular thingy wotsit on the side of the sub? I need to look at the negative but I think it might be some whip coral or something. If not then I am sure I can remove it somehow.... There are some faint splodges to the left of the conning tower that are where the chemicals have not been cleaned porperly. I need to look into getting that removed also. I hope Filmclean will do that, but will have to ask someone before I try it!

Ed - by that I assume you mean some kind of watermark? If that is the case, then the answer is no. But on my web site it says (or should do!) that all images are copyrighted. As for Sepia, no I have not tried yet - I'll give it a bash and send the results!

This is the first time I have ever used b&w film underwater, and I am pretty chuffed with the results. But I think next time I will perhaps try a slightly slower film and see if I can get more detail. I can always alter the image after that. (or just take the picture out of focus!

Anyway, glad you like them....

 

[blacknet]

hello,

If I may. Just a slight touch of sepia.

Ed

 

[Scuba Jim]

Whatcher done with me scratch?!!!!

 

[Dee]

Jim...yeah that was it.

Ed...nice fix!

 

[Scuba Jim]

through all the negatives looking for some others to scan.

It seems that with this film you have to be some distance from your subject as it blackens out all the detail.

Here are a couple more than I have added a touch of colour to. Unfortunately someone moved the submarine as I was taking the portrait shot and so the end of the barrel on the 5-inch gun is missing. Darn & blast.

You defintely do not want a diver with a bright torch stuck in your camera, as the last picture will testify! The film's too sensitive for that!

Anyway, hope you enjoy these!

 

[Scuba Princess]

I absolutely love b/w photography! With all the technology we have these days, I still believe in b/w!!! Thank you for sharing!! That made my day!

 

[blacknet]

Scuba Jim once bubbled...
through all the negatives looking for some others to scan.

It seems that with this film you have to be some distance from your subject as it blackens out all the detail.

Here are a couple more than I have added a touch of colour to. Unfortunately someone moved the submarine as I was taking the portrait shot and so the end of the barrel on the 5-inch gun is missing. Darn & blast.

You defintely do not want a diver with a bright torch stuck in your camera, as the last picture will testify! The film's too sensitive for that!

Hello,

Not entirely true! It's all a function of exposure (see my upcomming article in tips/techniques on exposure) The distance is a factor of the lens and the blackness is an exposure factor. Definately don't want to use strobes with a high speed film like this. Like I always say embrase the ambient!

You said this is ilford 3200? I would recomend you get some rolls of tmax 3200 and try that, think you'll find tmz is less grainy.

I'll make another post on some sample corrections with your 3 new images if you'd like.

Ed

 

[Scuba Jim]

I realise that it is to do with exposure.

having not used this kind of film before I did not want to do too many weird and wonderful things, as I would more thaan liley forget what I did and how.

All I know is that the closer to the subject the less contrast there seems to be, regardless of what exposure you use.

That is why the wide angle shot of the stren and the shark have worked better than some of the others...

I think next time I will actually use a slightly slower film - around the 800-1600 range, me thinks. That would be more than sufficient for this place, where if the sun is out and the viz is good, there is lots of ambient light.

Feel free to tweak the pictures, Ed!

 

[blacknet]

Hello,

Not sure if I mentioned it here or elsewhere but the 3200 speed film is really rated at 800.

Also could you tell us your bottom mix and what tables/computer was you using? What did you use to scan these images with? I'm seeing red in the images and I should not be seeing that with b/w film!

This one I had some trouble with. I thing that it's possible with the scanner or when it was resized. I tried to compensate for the top area.

Again compensated for the top.

This one is interesting. I did some color compressing and it turned out very interesting.

This is perhaps my favorite of all.

I think I could get some really interesting results with larger resolution scans or the original negatives.

I am in the process of making long term plans to get more training and to purchase a rebreather so I can dive saratoga. Don't have any dates set as of yet.

Ed

 

[Scuba Jim]

firstly, on the mix/tables front.

You use air at Bikini, no mixes for the dives. They are too deep for Nitrox. You decompress on a Nitrox mix ranging from 74-78% depending on the mix they make. See my trip report in the Oz & Pacific Section....

Also, regarding your thoughts on a rebreather. Sure, they are great to eb able to use at a place like Bikini BUT planning to take one with you i froght with problems. The little plane simply cannot take that sort of stuff if everyone takes it with them, and you would have ti ship your sofnalime out well in advance. IF the big plane is functioning not a problem, but when I was there 4 weeks ago the big planbe was bust for the outward leg. If you had the same scenario then you would be focred to leave your rebrather in Majuro. Also, there is no need for a rebrather there in that you can do all the dives on air without a problem. Just because you had a rebreather would not mean that you could stay in longert than everyone else.

My advice is by all means learn to dive with a rebreather and even buy one if you want, but don't bother with it at Bikini. too many problems....

On the image front I scanned them with a Nikon coolscan III....

If there is red in them it is because I did colourise them a TINY WEENY bit so I could do some thingies with Photo Enhancer that you can't do with b&w pictures....

When you say larger resolution scans I preusme me mean higher resolution not larger images?

I could PM you a high res scan if you want....

Regards
Jim