Nov. 21, 7 More Boring Shots From the Archives;

These were shot on T-max 400 on Dec. 17 of last year and developed in Caffenol. There is nothing really special about these shots other than that most of them depict construction in front of the VA that is now completed, so as with any photograph really, they’re a relic of a slice in time that no longer exists. For whatever that’s worth?

I’m sure these were shot with my Canon IVSb2 Barnack style rangefinder as I’m pretty sure that was the only 35mm camera I had at the time, not that I have billions now (three I think), but I’m not sure which lens. I’m guessing the Canon 28mm f/2.8 screw mount?

I’ve read that Caffenol is not a good developer for T-max 400, but I’m not really sure why? I don’t think I see anything particularly egregious about these photos. But maybe I’m missing something? What do you think?

Big Green Pipe
Temporary Wall of Steel
Arc de Triomphe
Little Free Library

7 responses to “Nov. 21, 7 More Boring Shots From the Archives;”

  1. These all have a really interesting stipple effect. Is that the film, the developing solution, the lens? Whatever it is, it’s got a depth to it that other modern photos don’t. For me, it makes the images jump off the page.


    1. Thank you siunkelan! I think that’s the grain of the film that, in this case, is enhanced by development in Caffenol. I think that’s why some people advise against developing T-max 400 in Caffenol, because it results in a more prominent grain structure than that of other developers. I’m glad you like it!

      Liked by 1 person

    2. I agree, I am digging the grain!!!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Oh cool! Thanks brineb58!


  2. I’ve developed T-MAX 400 in Caffenol before, specifically Caffenol-CL. It certainly results in chunkier grain, but I think your images here exhibit quite a bit chunkier grain than my own results. Your images almost look like TMZ (P3200) rather than TMY. And please don’t take that the wrong way as it’s not a negative; I love P3200’s grain structure and its salt and pepper appearance. All this makes me curious, though. What Caffenol recipe did you use?


    1. Hi P, No worries and thanks for the comment! I’m not very easily put off.
      To be honest, I’m not sure what Caffenol recipe I was using back then. The recipe that I’ve used the most consistently is C-H, but I’ve used Delta, C-L and probably some others that I can’t recall.
      Going back through my very crude records, I notice several checks next to T-Max 400 under the C-H heading, so I’m guessing it’s that. I do recall that early on I overdeveloped several rolls of film while trying to work out development times, the listed times turned out to be way too long, but I’m also not 100% confident that I was mixing the caffenol correctly.

      My results with TMZ have been extremely grainy, but I’m not complaining!


      1. Thanks for the reply. Caffenol-CH definitely results in the chunkiest grain of the recipes I’ve tried, so I bet you’re right about that being what you used. Over-development will also result in such, obviously. But it’s an interesting look you managed with TMY. That’s why I was curious how you achieved it. Caffenol-CL is my preferred Caffenol recipe, by the way. I’ve gotten away from Caffenol, though. I still like it. It’s just too time consuming to mix up.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: