View allAll Photos Tagged dr5
Nine Inch Nails at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Provia 400X developed by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Shooting film of all the people shooting digital.
Nine Inch Nails at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Provia 400X developed by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Fresh snow covered detail of the Clark Memorial Fountain at the University of Notre Dame. This "War Memorial", in actuallity a Peace Memorial, is also known as "Stonehenge, and was designed by John Burgee and Philip Johnson.
The photograph was looking south using a Nikon F4 and Efke 25 B&W film. A nikkor 50mm f/1.4 lens was set at f/2.8 for this shot. The film was exposed at ISO 25 and was DR5 Reversal Processed. The slide was scanned using Vuescan on a Nikon Coolscan 5000ED.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Canon 1vHS with 70-200mm II at f11 on fp4 processed in dr5
I cannot see where this is against the rules of 100 strangers, and Miyuki was a stranger to me before this shoot, but let me know.
This is #4 in my 100 strangers project. You can learn more about the project, see other photos and photos by other photographers at: www.flickr.com/groups/100strangers/
I sometimes shoot with Tim Porters group in Tokyo, and this was my first time to meet and shoot Miyuki. Miyuki is a model in Tokyo. I am not the worlds greatest in posing models, but Miyuki was a true pro and wonderful to shoot.
Wedding photo using Kodak IR film (HIE) and dr5 processing. Nikon FM2n with Nikkor 28mm F2.0 lens and R25 filter. Sepia toned.
Nikon f3
nikkor 50 mm 1.4
expired 2002 agfa scala
pushed to 1600
developed at Agenzia Luce, Trieste.
epson v500
scanning this film is a real pain in the a**. the blacks are so black and dark that my epson v500 can't read well the negative.
i invite you to try this film once. the results viewed live are incredible.
Nine Inch Nails at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Provia 400X developed by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
this may be a case of me trying to do too much all at once. i wanted to use a film positive from my dr5 film processing test as a mask in front of my film, shot thru my holga. here, you can see the black vertical stripe of the edge of my dr5 HP5 film frame.
basically, i wanted a partly inverted image overlay on my tri-X 320 film negative. but, this ended up just being a mess. oh well...
oh yeah, like that isn't enough, i developed this roll in a new barkenol formula. lol. i don't think the barkenol was the problem, exposure is actually pretty decent, it's the dr5 neg that is the prollem. interesting that there is a kind of 'halo-ing' effect between the positive and negative images in this overlay.
but don't even get me started... i just developed my fuji acros 100 roll i got back from dr5 labs (unprocessed by them). and got my first roll of absolutely BLANK film in over a year. makes me wonder if they screwed with my film or sent me a different roll back... since i clearly pi$$ed them off somehow.
read my dr5 film processing review on my blog. judge for yourself. i'll likely post more about dr5. as far as i'm concerned... they blow... like a silk handkerchief off a steep cliff.
cheers.
if you have any interest in this lab and dr5 process at all,
i URGE you to please read my full review on my blog.
I absolutely will never use them again. read my review and experiences... then judge for yourself.
--------------------
My new photography blog has yummy ice cream you can download! And fuel additives you can add to your car to triple your mileage!
---------------------
If you’d like to view my images larger… While I only allow my contacts to view my larger images (I generally upload at least 800px images on the long axis)…
a quick workaround I might suggest is to view my photostream as a slideshow. Works well for me. This is frequently how I view others’ ‘streams, and it will put a large image on black. just click the projector screen icon next to the stream or set. : )
---------------------------
on 01 jan 2010, I began a new journey w/ a flickr 365 group that i formed. The idea is that I strive to push myself daily; by exploring techniques, ideas, and experiments.
-----------------------------
Jane's Addiction at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
I had always been curious what B&W Slide Film would look like. And while you can get Scala again, there's a lab that can turn almost any B&W Negative film into a B&W Slide. So a group of us decided to give it a go. Now one of my least favourite films in 35mm is Ilford HP5+ so it was the one I decided to go with. And you know, using the Dr5 process it actually looks awesome. Rich, contrastry, and excellent grain.
Nikon F5 - AF Nikkor 35mm 1:2D - Ilford HP5+ @ ASA-400
Processing By: Dr5
Scanner: Epson V700
Editor: Adobe Photoshop CC (2017)