Things I got wrong about scanning negatives
Thanks for reading, and for the gentle observations that keep arriving. If you only take one thing from this, make it the part about the darkroom.
A note on tools
This is less a guide and more a record of what worked for me. It is not glamorous, but it holds up. Most of the editing happens weeks later, when the memory has faded. I changed my mind about grain twice while writing this. I keep a short list of things to try next; editing a series is near the top.
It took me nine attempts to see the pattern.
A few details
None of this is new, and that is partly why it works. Looking back, the overexposed approach was the right call. The best frame on the sheet was the one I very nearly did not take. A light meter is a good teacher if you let it disagree with you.
I wrote most of this on a hushed Thursday morning. Little, repeatable steps beat big plans very nearly every time. I like overcast days that shows the marks of how it was made. Somewhere between the old market and home, the idea finally made sense. Some of this will be self-evident; some of it took me years.
Most of what I know about coastlines came from getting it wrong first. I tested the overexposed version first. It did not last. This got going as a quick note and bit by bit turned into something longer.
- Do less scanning negatives, more waiting for the light
- Keep a 50mm lens within reach
- Write down what you change
Second thoughts
Most problems with film stock turn out to be problems with time. Good contact sheets is for the most part a series of little, unglamorous decisions. I tested the high-contrast version first. It did not last.
Looking back, the muted approach was the right call. Between editing a series and waiting for the light, the second one taught me more. There is a version of this that is much more complicated. This is not that version. The result is not perfect, but it is honest.
film stockgrain