Developing with Dogfish Heads SuperEIGHT beer

A few months ago, articles began to pop up with news of a beer that could be used to develop super 8 film. Recently my love for film has spread to the cinema world and I started to shoot super 8 (and 16mm), so this was great news! Developing super 8 at home sounds great! At the very least I could use it to test cameras before I use them on a proper project.

I finally got my hands on Dogfish Heads SuperEIGHT beer and wanted to share my results and recipe(s). There isn’t much information online at the time and only one video from kodak/dogfish head showing sample results.

IMG_20190428_151110.jpg

The instructions to make developer calls for;

  1. 17 fl oz of SuperEight beer
  2. 1/2 oz of Vitiman C
  3. 1 3/4 oz Baking Soda

Sounds simple enough, but after doing research on a similar developing technique using coffee instead of beer, I found that Baking Soda was not used in any recipes. Instead, Washing Soda, which has a similar chemical makeup and similar name, was used. I’m not a chemist but after researching further I chose to use Washing Soda in place of Baking Soda. Please do your own research but as you will see the Washing soda did produce usable images!!

So my recipe became;

  1. 17 fl oz of SuperEight beer
  2. 1/2 oz of Vitiman C (crystal/powder found at supermarkets, health food stores etc.)
  3. 1 3/4 oz Baking Soda 1 3/4 oz Washing Soda

Here’s where I had trouble. 17 fl oz of beer is roughly 1 1/2 cans. When you have that in a 2 gallon bucket(the example in Dogfish Heads instructions), it is not that much liquid. You could use a different bucket (which is what i did), but I wanted to try to stick to the instructions as closely as I could for this first roll. In a 2 gallon bucket the liquid is too shallow to completely submerge the film and will probably lead to improper development. What I recommend is using most of the second can of beer and adding a bit more Vitamin C and Washing Soda to compensate. Also, putting the liquid in a large beaker used for mixing chemicals. I used a 2.5 L beaker. I don’t recommend a smaller sized containers, when following the instructions the next step would be to go into a dark room and process the film in complete darkness. The larger container can help avoid spilling and splashing, which is great because Washing Soda is not something you want on your skin or in your eyes. I would also recommend gloves because you will be agitating the film by hand.

bucket

This is the bucket I intended to develop with but it was too shallow so i decided to transfer the finished chemistry to the beaker.

b

Into the darkroom. Per the instructions, I did not do a water wash, the film went straight into the developer. Using a kitchen timer I would know when my 15 minutes were up. I would definitely recommend some sort of time keeping device or someone to inform you that the developing is done. With gloves on, agitate for 15 minutes. I decided to forgo the stop bath and wash the film with water several times. Having several buckets in a tub with access to water makes this a much easier process in the dark. After the water wash I put the film in a bucket of fixer and half agitated half waited.

After that I washed the film and put it in permawash, followed by a final wash and some photoflow.

These are the results

 

At first I thought the film was overdeveloped, with it being very dense through out. Upon further inspection there were images! With super 8 being so small it was difficult to tell what was recorded. After scanning it becomes more clear. The film has an old look to it, the type of thing that might appear in the home videos of a character in a movie. Scratches and all the imperfections just cant be replicated digitally in my opinion so it’s a nice touch if that is what you’re looking for.

My developing method 

Using the same developer, I decided to try a different approach. I originally did half a roll in the Dogfish Head method intending to use the other half in a more conventional process. So, I put the remaining film in a tank and went through my normal process. Water wash followed by developer (at the same temperature about 74°F). Same 15 minute developing time followed by 2 water washes, fixer, water wash, permawash, final wash, photoflow.

During developing I decided to agitate 30 seconds throughout one minute. The original recipe calls for constant agitation so I thought half of that would be a good starting point. I also agitated a lot more vigorously than usually, making sure the emulation of the film never touched with another part of the film. This could lead to improper development and/or no image being developed in the parts that make contact.

The results are much more pleasing in my opinion, looking like more traditional negatives. A little less extreme, but still has an interesting look. For the full roll of film a 4x 35mm real/2x 120 tank might be better but you will need more chemistry. There aren’t many dedicated super 8 tanks available, it was never really a home dev type of film after all. The only ones I can find are Russian tanks, sold in Russia.

This method is much easier, in my opinion, because after loading the film in complete darkness the rest of the process can be done in the light. Anyone with home developing experience should feel comfortable using this method.

 

Final thoughts

This was a fun experience and I will experiment further but I do have to say Caffenol is a much cheaper alternative with more information and recipes available.

Super 8 is a very niche space within the already niche film community so I found it odd that they would market a beer for developing super 8. After all, it should work on other film stocks as well. The name comes from the “eight heroic ingredients” with super foods like quinoa and elderberry in the mix I can see where they came up with that naming convention. That being said, super 8 is a strange choice as far as film goes. With the only black and white film stock being tri-x reversal, you end up with a negative that cannot be projected. Most people, like me, do not have dedicated machines for digitizing super 8 at home. This is why I can only provide still images from my flat bed scanner (I will send them to be digitized as soon as possible) These choices are puzzling but after all I’m a film lover not a marketing expert. I still have a few cans so I will definitely experiment and report back on what other film stocks and recipes worked for me!

I do not recommend this for people who love beer and only have a slight interest in film. Following Dogfish Heads recipe might be a bit much for a layperson, having to make stop bath and fixer is a bit much for someone new to home developing. And anyone already developing at home has canisters and other equipment…

In the end, it is quite a lot of work, prep etc for someone who might do this just once. If you already have equipment, a darkroom, shoot super 8 and drink craft beer it’s definitely worth a shot. The beer itself is very refreshing, a nice drink for the summer. I’m not typically a fan of Gose style beers, or anything on the sour side, but SuperEight has a well balanced flavor of fruits, tart and a bit of salt that is unique and pleasant.

The developing ingredients are the same found in most Caffenol recipes so I do recommend trying both!

 

For more info on SuperEIGHT

https://www.dogfish.com/brewery/beer/supereight

Special Thanks to Union Beer Store for always being a good place to drink beer.

 

Please drink responsibly and responsibly dispense of photographic chemicals!

 

* Also developing with alcohol has been done before; http://www.caffenol.org/?s=wine but I could not find anything on developing with beer prior to Dogfish Heads SuperEight.

FUJI GF670w First Roll First Impressions 


I want to preface this first impressions by letting you know my writing is based on how I feel about this camera for street photography. Being a wide angle, fairly compact, medium format camera I think it would also make a great landscape or travel camera, but as of now those are not my focus.

6×6 medium format is probably my favorite format for taking pictures. I’ve used a rolleiflex 75mm 3.5 but found it difficult to get focus in a streetphotography situation. After the rolleiflex I tried a mamiya 6 with the 50mm lens with more pleasing results. There are only a few other cameras that can take 6×6 images and have wide angle lenses. SLR medium format cameras are out of the question for street and the other options just didn’t appeal to me. I even tried to make cameras out of mamiya press parts as well as graflex xl parts. These were ok, but not as functional as a camera that was mass produced. The GF670w wasn’t exactly massed produce, being difficult to find even used, but I think it fits the bill for what I’m looking for. My reasoning; the GF and voigtlander Bessa III line of cameras have the quietest shutters I have ever heard. When I first tested the 80mm variant I thought the camera had bad batteries and wasn’t working. At 500th of a second it is incredibly difficult to hear the shutter go off. This can feel strange at first, not knowing whether you got your shot or not. On the other hand, if I didn’t know the shutter went off, then people around me also wouldn’t know…

testttt016

Related to the shutter; at first I thought this camera was capable of double exposures. When no film is in the camera you can press the shutter a number of times without winding the film advance. Once you have film loaded, though, this is not an issue. The shutter can be pressed as if to take a double exposure but lo and behold no double exposure.

testttt015

Double exposure test. As you can see only one exposure. Photo credit Luis Mora.

The first roll here was shot in 6×7, mostly to have less pictures to take when testing. When I actually use the camera it will be in the 6×6 format, but having the option is nice. Note though, that you cannot change the format mid roll. That being said in 6×7 corner to corner looks sharp, so 6×6 should be even better.

testttt019

Photo credit Luis Mora

The camera is nicely weighted with extremly simple controls. I don’t like the two lugs for straps being on the same side.

Eye relief for the finder is fine. I dont find it difficult to see the meter information as long as i position your eye properly. I do not wear glasses but I don’t think it would be an issue  if you did. It can be a bit tricky to see the meter information. After using leicas for a long time I have learned to position my eye in a certain way, and that position isn’t the best for seeing the GF670ws meter information. Hopefully with a lot of use of this camera it won’t be as awkward to use.

Metering looks good, most exposures were on auto shutter and retained shadow/highlight details nicely.

testttt023

Automatic exposure. I think the GF670w has a good metering system. The GTR in the picture was black with a sunny backlight sky. There are details in the shadows and hightlights.

The only thing that was a bit annoying was the focus tab on the lens. Unlike leica lenses the ring rotates clockwise from infinity to 0.7m. at Infiniti the tabs are horizontal and at 0.7m the tabs are vertical. In practice it is easy for me to focus from 0.7 to infinity but focusing from infinity to 0.7m feels awkward. In the end though this might not be an issue for me. For street the camera will probably be set to 3 meters and it will be fine.

Skip to the end:

-ALMOST silent shutter on both the GF670 and 670w

-Beautiful modern Fuji optics.

-Great first impressions, it makes me want to ditch the mamiya 6.

-I prefer this design. No bellows means less fiddling to start shooting.

Luis Mora @35mmmora on instagram. http://www.35mmmora.com

Rule of thirds

I was sitting in on an introductory photography class the other day when the professor brought up the rule of thirds. They didn’t necessarily agree with the rule of thirds but I know many people that swear by it.

It got me thinking about framing and what people look at in photographs. When a someone first sees a photograph they will usually focus on the subjects eyes(if there is a person/animal), the lightest part of the photograph, or the middle. So it would seam like a good thing to put your subjects well illuminated eyes in the center of the frame right?  It’s such a natural place to put your subject with the focus points on digital cameras or rangefinder patches being in the center of the frame so that’s logically be the best place to put a subject right?

Maybe… But I prefer to use the rule of thirds, or rather not place my subject in the middle. By shifting your frame left, right,up or down you can get more information in a picture. Or get unwanted subjects out of a picture. When I see pictures framed with subjects in the middle I tend to want to know what’s going on just off frame. For example in a photosomeone was sitting at a dining table and you get a glimps of a kitchen to the left and to the right a wall. You want to know what’s going on in the kitchen and the wall is just blank space that doesn’t tell you anything. If you shift the frame over to show more of the kitchen and have the subject allined with the rule of thirds it could look authentically pleasing.

It is somewhat easy with rangefinders because the frame lines can show you something similar to rule of thirds(35/90 frame lines for example or the 90mm frame lines when using a 50mm on an m3). When shooting during the day you can stop down and pre focus so it becomes very easy to concentrate on framing. I think it’s a great approach for shooting street photography. 
 by not framing in the middle you get more information (train tracks ,grass etc giving you a sense of where the photo was taken) where as to the left was a fence which wouldn’t have added to the photo.

But then again on medium format 6×6 (or Instagram photos I suppose?) Having the subject in the center can be quite pleasing. 
Trying to frame so the subject isn’t in the center can cause you to lose a shot, but can make the difference between an ok photo and a great one. If you always shoot with the subject in the middle try the rule of thirds! And if you use the rule of thirds a lot try framing things in the middle for a change. 

leica m3 with 90 apo asph

When i bought my m3 this year i decided i should round out my camera bag with a 90mm lens. The thing about 90mm leica lenses is they feel more oriented for portraits than street photography, being heavy with long focus throws etc. That being said i had a chance to get the very special 90mm apo asph and went for it!
I went and took some pictures with it just yesterday. It feels very different from my usual 35mm setup. At first it felt like a cropped 50mm but as i got used to it i could see where it would be useful on the streets as well. Pared with the m3 you have a very stealthy setup. F/2 is also really nice and can be shot all day and night!
I probably wouldn’t have this as the only lens in my bag but pair it with a 35mm or 28mm and you have a great kit for whatever you want to shoot.
I won’t be able to scan my photos for a while but when I do I’ll post them!

costs associated with photography

In preparation for a trip i have been buying/preping a lot of gear. This has made me think about the costs associated with taking pictures. Sure you could go out with just a one camera one lens set up and there aren’t too many extra things to invest in. That doesn’t always work though, especially when you are traveling. For a trip I want to take a tripod, extra lenses, film (or SD cards), batteries if necessary, cable release, etc etc. I might have all those things already, but when you invest in a new system or for someone just starting the price of the camera is just the begining.
Whether its film, digital or video there are so many more costs associated with taking pictures and video. Not to mention post processing and those costs.
It makes me miss the times when I would just go out with a one camera and standard lens setup.
I think I will elaborate on thus topic later when I have more time to think and write about it.