Return to North Leverton Windmill

As I wrote about yesterday, I visited North Leverton Windmill back at the start of the month. I shot five frames in total at the location, three of which are posted here today. The other two were both out of focus to some extent, which I put down to a combination of being in a meadow with slightly springy ground, and also because I was using a 90mm lens that I’ve got on loan at present. It’s a nice lens, but it’s huge compared to my 135mm, and the aperture locking switch is a little stiffer than my Fujinon, meaning there’s a risk of me moving the camera when operating it. I’m not sure if that was the cause here, but it’s something I need to take care with.

It was a hot day and there were few clouds in the sky most of the time I was at the site, although a few blobs of fluffy cumulus had started to appear when I took the two pictures of the windmill.

The people who look after the windmill were curious about my old-fashioned looking camera and asked lots of questions. The mill still produces flour, and is apparently the oldest windmill in the country to have seen continuous operation (it was built in 1813). They were even kind enough to set the sails in motion (even though that kinda made it more difficult to get pictures, it was great to see), and also to move the cars from the front of the mill (which you can see in the first shot), which was very nice of them.

Chamonix 045N-1. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 (second shot: Linhof Super Angulon 5.6/90 on Fomapan 100) & Ilford HP5+. Ilfotec DD-X 1+4 9mins @ 20°

Taken 2 September 2023.

Dead tree and pylons

Another large format shot. And another with faults, this time some out of focus elements in the middle right of the frame. I’m not sure whether this might not just be a gust of wind blowing the power lines and trees about though. I’ve had similar issues with other shots however, including some I’ve just developed, so it could well be something else causing it. More (time consuming and tedious) trial and error work will no doubt be required. So far I have to say that it’s the promise of large format that is keeping me going rather than the actual process – 35mm and medium format are sooo much less faff!

Still, the problem in this picture is barely noticeable unless you start pixel peeping, and otherwise I like the picture. Maybe I should give myself a break. I used a yellow filter here which has really given the skies some nice contrast.

Chamonix 045N-1. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+4 8mins @ 20°

Taken 1 August 2023.

Mother Cap

As promised yesterday, here are the two large format photographs of Mother Cap, a gristone outcrop on the moorland above Hathersage. Looking at them closely, both have focusing issues, and I’ll leave the yellow filter off the lens until after the shot is composed and focused in future as it did make it more difficult to view the scene, but they both look fine if you don’t investigate them too closely.

Chamonix 045N-1. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12mins @ 20°

Taken 19 June 2023.

Large format difficulties

I had a day off work yesterday and decided that I would take my Chamonix 045N-1 for a second outing. After my initial test a couple of weeks or so back, I felt confident enough to take a slightly longer trip out into the Peak District. By some miracle, the weather was actually good too – warm, with plenty of sunshine and cloud. There was a risk of rain predicted but not until later in the day.

My initial plan had been to visit a few locations but, in the end, I only went to a single spot as I soon discovered that, despite everything else, there was still sand in the gears (not literally!).

I drove out to Surprise View car park in order to photograph Mother Cap, a large gritstone outcrop, and then to photograph the birch woodland in the same area. Although Mother Cap isnt too far from the car park, it is quite a bit higher and the footpath requires some scrambling over rocks – nothing too challenging, but still enough to work up a sweat when you’re carrying a big tripod and a heavy backpack.

The first two shots went well, I thought, although I found focusing a little difficult because I had fitted a yellow filter to the lens (note to self, focus before fitting the filter enxt time). As it turned out, I managed to get some camera shake on the first shot, probably because the tripod was stood on springy heather covered ground and wasn’t stable enough.

The next shot was taken on firmer ground but the issues with the filter meant that there are a few minor focusing problems where I hadn’t set the camera movements as well as I might. It was at this point that my cable release also broke, the threading on the end somehow coming undone slightly, so the next shot had to be taken using the shutter release on the lens without the benefit of the cable. It was at 1/60sec though, so it came out ok. I’ll post these two pictures tomorrow.

The final shot I took was of the birch woodland. This time the camera was placed in a stable spot, and I managed to finagle the cable release enough that it functioned properly again (although I’ll be using a different one in future AND taking a spare). Despite this, a new problem came to bear…

Because it was a warm day with hot sunshine, and because I was quite hot from hiking around with my gear, I now found that beiing under the darkcloth for more than about ten seconds resulted in my spectacles completely steaming up, rendering any attempt to focus of check the scene nigh on impossible (and made even more difficult by the yellow filter).

I did my best with it, but it wasn’t good enough, and the resultant image has a number of problems with soft focus in various parts of te scene. Thankfully it’s not terrible, but it’s not what I wanted. I do like the resulting picture though and it might be worth another visit to try and get a technically better result.

Here it is. It probably looks fine on a small screen, but it loses a lot of sharpness when viewed large.

Chamonix 045N-1. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12mins @ 20°

Taken 19 June 2023.

Westland Wessex

Another of my rescued 4×5 sheets. Of the eight I shot I’ve managed to recover four to an extent that I’m happy with, or at least happy enought to publish. I only managed to fix one of the HP5+ sheets – the others being beyond the limits of my Photoshop skills or, perhaps more likely, my patience.

The picture today, of a Westland Wessex helicopter is one of the least affected images, but not perfect. This one was affected by the loose tripod as much as by the light-leak. The original image on the ground glass included all of the tarpaulin-covered object that is now partly cut off at the bottom left side of the frame whereas the negative included a lot of additional scenery on the right side which I’ve cropped out. It still works as a picture though.

This version of the Wessex is the HC2 which was designed as a troop transport, able to carry 16 troops.

The Avro Ashton fuselage featured in yesterday’s post can be seen in the background.

Chroma 4×5. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12 mins @ 20°

Taken 7 April 2023.

Fuselage

Another rescued large format photo. A number of the images were less badly affected by the light leaks than others, this one included, and it’s difficult to see it at all now (although, again, there has been some cropping involved).

The aircraft in the picture is an Avro Ashton Mk 2 jet airliner (or the fuselage of one, at least). The Ashton was developed in the 1950s as an experimental aircraft using the airframes from Avro 689 Tudor II piston-driven airliners and was never intended to go into commercial service. Only six were built. The fuselage here is from the second of the six aircraft.

Chroma 4×5. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12 mins @ 20°

Taken 7 April 2023.

DeHaviland Dove

The photograph presented here today, of a post-war DeHaviland Dove passenger aircraft, is one of the 4×5 frames I shot at Newark Air Museum last Friday.

The eagle-eyed amongst you might have noted that this is not a 4×5 aspect ratio picture. This is because it was affected by the light-leak and the loose tripod column I moaned about the other day. The light leak has been largely recovered using graduated masks in Lightroom. It’s still there, but you’ll prbably only spot it if you look very closely (or know where it is). The composition has been, well, not rcovered, so much as salvaged by way of a significant crop. The full frame has the aircraft nose off-centre by a significant margin and one of the propellers fully in-shot. In the end I decided that this panoramic format was the best option.

It isn’t the picture I envisioned, but it’s better than no picture at all.

Chroma 4×5. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12 mins @ 20°

Taken 7 April 2023.

St. Peter’s Church, Thorpe Salvin (including an exciting hidden pigeon challenge!)

Another church, and another named after St. Peter just a couple of days after I posted a photo of its namesake at Elmton.

Quite a difference in architecture between the two buildings though.

When dust-spotting the scan I spotted a lone pigeon hiding in the scene. Can you spot it? You’ll probably need to click through to Flickr to see the full resolution version in order to find it though.

I’m now very much looking forward to the four days off work that the extended Easter weekend will bring. I’m hoping to do some more photography if the weather remains decent.

Chroma 4×5. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12 mins @ 20°

Taken 2 April 2023.

The School Room at Elmton

I can’t say that I know very much about this building beyond that it was renovated in recent years for community use and that, in the past, it was almost certainly and actual school building.

It’s an attractive structure though.

Although this picture below was shot on 4×5 sheet film, I have a very similar picture that I shot on a Ricoh GR III back in the summer of 2021. While the large format film photo is sharper and has more detail, there’s not a lot in it considering the GR III is an APS-C crop-sensor camera. This should all be balanced out by the fact that my large format negatives are scanned at home using an Epson V700 flatbed scanner at 2400dpi. It produces scans that meet my needs admirably, but I doubt it really compares to something like a Nikon Coolscan or, at the top end of the scale something like a Flextight or a proper wet-mounted drum scan.

I don’t shoot film for it’s sharpness though. I like nice sharp images, and 4×5 certainly provides that over and above medium format, and certainly 135 format, but it’s really about the experience, how I feel when using and shooting film, and the pleasure I get when I see the results. So, while I like the pictures my GR III makes, and it’s a very convenient camera to carry, it’s not usually the one I reach for when I want to go and make photos.

Chroma 4×5. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12 mins @ 20°

Taken 2 April 2023.

And here’s the digital picture:

Ricoh GR III. August 2021.

Working with the limitations of a prime lens

The picture today is of St. Peter’s church at Elmton. The church (including a similar photo on 35mm film) has featured on the blog before (here, here, here, and here).

On this occasion I had my 4×5 large format camera with me. I only have one lens for this camera at present – a Fujinon 135mm f/5.6. The lens is roughly equivalent to a 40mm focal length on a 35mm or full-frame digital camera. It’s a nice focal length and one I use a lot – many of my compact cameras have focal ranges that are similar, so the field of view it affords is one that I am used to, and I’m a regular proponent of the “zoom with your feet” school of thought.

Sometimes though, a fixed prime lens has it’s downsides – noteably when the ol’ zooming with your feet option doesn’t work. I’ve yet to find a way of zooming backwards through walls, or floating up and over unavoidable obstacles obstructing my field of view. I’d an idea of getting a picture of the church incorporating the low tower, either side on, or from the fron of the building but, alas, the 135mm wasn’t wide enough for this and the church is a little awkwardly positioned in terms of available longer vantagepoints.

And so the composition you see below was the best I could get on the day. I might have gotten something different from the other side of the church, but that would have meant most of the visible part of the building would have been in shadow. I think this composition still works though. You can just see the tower peeping up at the left of the structure, and the rear of the church has plenty of interest, including the weathered gravestones. The angle also means I got some nice contrast and relief shadows that I wouldn’t have had from a side-on view of the church.

Chroma 4×5. Fujinon NW 135mm f/5.6 & Fomapan 100. Ilfotec DD-X 1+9 12 mins @ 20°

Taken 2 April 2023.