The bridges over Fish Creek

A few things came together for this. Some of my very first photos were of the bridges in Fish Creek. For a while I was musing about a photo project of getting nice photos of each of the bridges in each of the seasons, preferably within the same calendar year. I might still do it.

But last week I was in the mood for a bike ride in Fish Creek, and in the mood to capture all the bridges the same day, in the same light, on 35mm Delta 100. I'm not sure if the bike ride was an excuse to use the camera, or the planned subjects were an excuse for a bike ride.

As I was getting ready, I was thinking given the time of day and the particular lens, my desired vantage point would be from the south side looking north to avoid lens flare. This isn't my typical vantage point. It would mean a fairly long ride, given the park is about 20 K from end to end, and I figured I might be on the bike for 50 K to get all the bridges in one trip.

However, I hadn't figured on it being so hot! I got to bridge 10, just west of Bow Valley Ranch, and turned back. Even so, I was flirting with heat stroke on the hill out of the park. I stopped at our community centre to say hi to one of our employees and sit in the air conditioning for a little while. 

The next day I drove over to the east part of the park to get photos of the remaining bridges. They're in a group not far from Bow Valley Ranch. I had a breakfast date with a buddy so I couldn't dilly dally. There are 3 more pedestrian bridges in Fish Creek, but they span the Bow River and are difficult photographically. I decided to limit my scope to just the ones over Fish Creek itself. I'm ignoring what I think is an unofficial bridge over a dry gulch.  

Starting from west to east, the bridges are numbered from 1 to 15 currently, and I'm guessing the new one just south of 22X will be 16. One of 12 or 13 is a vehicle bridge, but I'm not sure which is which. I didn't do them in that exact order, but for simplicity I'll present the photos in the order I took them, plus some of the nearby scenery that caught my eye.

1. B1. Not a particularly attractive bridge. It's just east of where Stony Trail crosses over Fish Creek using two huge highway bridges, and the traffic noise is usually intrusive. It's a good place to catch your breath and gird your loins for the nearby hill of death. Also nearby is a huge burl in a tree that I like to try to photograph. That might be a blog idea, find all the photos and post them together for comparison purposes.

2. B2 is by far the most photogenic bridge. There are several nice angles to capture the great setting. A photographer can choose a wintery evergreen background, or fall colours.

3. Looking upstream from B2. This is often a good spot for watching dragonflies. The only problem is that it's really close to the Shannon Terrace parking lot, and there can be lots of people around. I once abruptly turned to follow a dragonfly and nearly hit someone with my 70-200 lens. I hadn't known they were there.

4. B3 is also fairly attractive, but it's harder to work with. There are fewer vantage points and the setting isn't quite as nice. I was photo bombed on this one, and hadn't realized it till I developed the film. This bridge is also pretty popular since it's near Bebo Grove parking. Lots of people like to bring their dogs to splash in the nearby shallow areas. The stream bed is a nice gravel.

5. B4. This style of bridge was used to replace the bridges damaged or destroyed during the floods. I think they're ugly, but some of the settings are nice. This exact spot is a great place to hang out and wait for dragonflies. As I was working the scene, a buddy stopped his bike to say hello for a quick chat.

6. B5.

7. B6

8. I saw the log while trying to find a nice angle for the bridge.

9. B7.

10. B8. This is an ugly bridge and very difficult to get a nice photo of. I'm actually standing almost underneath the LRT and railroad tracks. Unless you're into industrial stuff, the railroad trestle bridge is not the least bit attractive. A little further behind me is McLeod Trail, the other major north south artery crossing Fish Creek. Depending on the time of year and water flows, there are sometimes some nice photos of the water under the highway.

All of these so far are in what I think of as west Fish Creek, an easy bike ride, a nice run (not that I'm running any more), or longish walk from my place. During my triathlon days I often ran through this part of the park, and know it quite well. It's one of the most beautiful places in Calgary.

11. B10, not far from Bow Valley Ranch. I have tough memories of this bridge, as it was the turnaround point for my first half Ironman. I was suffering on the first loop, and even more on the second. It's on the main part of the path so there's lots of people around. I had to wait a few minutes to get an empty bridge. There is a lot of fencing around it just now, so I wasn't able to get the vantage point I wanted. I'm a bit bummed that I chopped off a bit of the tree.

12. B9, taken on a big detour on the way back. It's off the direct east west pathway. A boy was fishing, and I had to wait a bit so he wasn't actually in the photo. He said he was going to be there till he caught a fish, and I wasn't going to wait that long. I wonder if he made it back home before dinner time. Maybe he was told to bring fish home for dinner.

B9 and 10 are out on the the bald prairie portion of Fish Creek east of MacLeod Trail. They are a long way from car parking, so are tougher to visit on foot. There's very little shade nearby and no particular reason to hang around.

13. Looking downstream from B9.

14. B11, south of Bow Valley Ranch, in difficult light. I couldn't get at my desired vantage point. Lots of places in the park are fenced off to allow vegetation to regrow.

15. I found this big log just off the path near B11, and really liked the light on the weathered wood. 

16. B12 and 13. It gets complicated here. There's a pedestrian bridge and vehicle bridge right beside each other, and both are ugly. But the reflections in the water were lovely!

17.

18.

19.

20.

21. A sign with a map of Fish Creek. Several times I've stopped to help people figure out where they are. It is quite easy to get turned around and lose track of where you are, or how to get back to where you parked your car. It's not difficult to be out for a walk, thinking you'll be able to finish a loop, only to find the river, or a hill much steeper than you want to scramble down.

22. Bow Valley Ranche. (Yes, with an 'e'.) There's a nice restaurant in there. We ate there once a long time ago, but haven't been back. I just took a look at the menu. Eek! Won't be back any time soon. It's hard to shell out that kind of money for food we can make at home.

23. Walking along the west bank of the Bow River north of B14, heading for Bankside. I was originally going to park there, but the City has a non-potable water pumping station set up there. The parking lot was full of trucks waiting to load up. If you look carefully at this tree you'll see a big bird. I think it's a heron.

There are any number of times I've thought the silhouette of trees against the sky would make a nice photo, and I'm often disappointed. Something to work on. An orange filter might have brought more contrast to the sky.

24. A lovely reflecting pond near B14.

25. I really liked this stump, but the photo disappoints me. My eyes saw something quite different, with the wood being much more silvery.

26. Another of B12, mainly because of the reflections. 

The rest of the bridges, FYI. Bridge 14 is just south of the Ivor Strong bridge (currently under construction) where Deerfoot trail crosses the Bow River. Bridge 15 is kind of in the middle of nowhere, about halfway between bridge 14 and where 22X crosses the Bow River. What I think will be called bridge 16 is new, just south of 22X crossing the Bow River.

Much of the rest will only be of interest to other film photographers, but scroll for 3 more photos.

I'd started the roll before my first darkroom class. I hadn't realized we would be asked to expose a specific film for the second class, so I needed to finish off the Delta 100 so I could put in the FP5 400 for the class. I've got an idea about exposing that roll. As it turns out, that photo session had to be delayed, so I need to come up with a new idea between now and Thursday. If you've missed it, I'm using a Canon EOS 3 with a 50mm f1.8 lens.

If you've been following along you know I've developed several rolls of Delta 100 in medium format. You can see the results of the first try here. It's exactly the same process to develop 35mm as medium format. 

Getting the film out of the canister and onto the reel is much easier for 35mm. Why? Because when the camera rewinds the film, I have it set to leave the leader poking out. It's easy to trim off that leader, pull out just enough film to slide into the reel and engage the little ball bearings. Then turn the lights out, gently tug the canister away from the reel to expose the film, and ratchet it onto the reel. Easy peasy, no muss, no fuss. When it stops, cut the end right at the canister and finish putting it onto the reel.  

If the film leader gets rewound right back into the canister things are a bit trickier. All this takes place in complete darkness. There's a tool to rip the top of the canister off. Then pull out the film and spindle, hopefully not letting it go sproing to collect dust from whatever is nearby. Cut the leader off, and feed the film into the reel. As near as I can tell, you need three hands. One to hold the tank reel and keep the little tabs aligned, one to feed the film into the reel, and one to hold the film and spindle. Then again, the same trick that works for medium format will work for this. (You can see a photo and description in the link above.) Then again, again, there's a style of reel where the film gets hooked into the centre of the reel and wrapped around from the inside out. 

From there the reel goes into the Patterson tank, and development is as normal. I was thinking I maybe should have put an empty reel in the tank as well to keep the loaded one submerged, but it wasn't a problem. This time I didn't warm up the water at all. The basement is almost exactly 18 C, so I compensated by adding a bit of development time.

It turns out that the 35mm version of the film has a slight curl when dried, but it's not a problem. I cut the film into 7 strips of 5, plus the bonus photo. If I should want to print a contact sheet, I'd cut out the one photo that is out of focus, and slide the last photo into that sleeve. I found the hardest part to be cutting the film. There isn't much space between the photos. There's probably better ways of doing this.

I actually ended up editing 29 of the 36 photos, which I think is pretty good. The ones I didn't edit were experimental photos, so I'm not crying about them not working out.

Maybe the big question you have is, will any of these make it into the darkroom to be printed? Probably not. I've got lots of photos I'd print before any of these. I just hope exposing the roll of HP5 that I get some nice photos I'm not ashamed to show other photographers. 

The first two remaining photos are from a walk in North Glenmore park. There is a lot more water there now compared to a walk earlier in July. Most of where you see water here was bone dry. Scroll past the language rant to get to those photos.

27. Part of the view from the bridge in photo 28. 

28. The bridge over the Elbow River, right where it turns into the Glenmore Reservoir. If it has a bridge number I don't know what it is. During the walk earlier, the river here was so small someone could jump over it.

29. Linda in our back garden, to finish the roll in style.

My books

 If you've been following along with my other blog you know the book I was expecting on Friday, that I had been told would arrive Friday, spent the weekend in UPS limbo. Somewhere. Unopened. Unloved. Unappreciated. 

On the way into a dental appointment this morning I got notified it was available for pickup just down the street. Yay!

As an aside, my dentist and hygienist think my teeth are just fine. Which they are regularly pleased by, given the events of 16 years ago, almost to the day. (Susi, DO NOT click this link, and the rest of you be warned, the post title is "More ow!!! Graphic followup..." and for darned good reason.) 

And 16 years, how time flies.

Anyway, here is the book! 62 pages, 89 images in a big lay flat book printed by Blurb. My 10th book.

I am really pleased how the photos turned out! I'm still figuring out the screen to page translation. There's one photo that I did not do the image enhance thing to, and it looks perfect on the page. There's been a few others in the other books where I went back and forth and wished I could do half of the effect, but I'm still generally pleased. The red of the cover title looked good on screen, but comes off as a bit too vibrant in print. I need to do more work on colour theory. Everything else came out really well.

Up till now, my books lived on a shelf above the photo editing computer. They and a few other books have outgrown the space, so I need to think about that. One possibility it to shelve them without the nice white box they come in. They would take up a lot less space, and I'd be able to see the titles, which is good. But the box is really nice, and it's part of the experience to take the book out of the box. I think they took a page out of Apples book when it comes to packaging their products.

There seems to be some subtle changes to the production process. Even though I used the same layouts, the photos and text seem closer to the page edge. I'm not an expert by any means, but I'm glad it's no closer, and might be considered a hair too close for good balance or layout. That's on me, I guess.

Of course I took far more photos than ended up in the book. There's a few that I winced about leaving out of the book. But when they don't go with other photos, it's hard to include them. I try to have all the photos on a set of facing pages go together somehow.

There's some film photos in the book, and they look great! Other than mentioning the film stock, I don't go into much detail about them. Some photo books have all the settings info, and commentary about why, and all it shows is the photographer spent time in their notebook when they could have been looking for the next photo. My thinking is that for most scenes, the actual settings are the least important part of the whole deal. Usually there's several combinations of settings that could produce the photo.

For the pedants out there, I do keep basic notes about the medium format photos, especially the long exposure ones. This is part of the process of looking at an end result, and at least trying to understand how I got there, in case I want to do it again, or more likely, not do it again. But generally nobody else cares.

No matter how carefully one reviews the book, mistakes creep in. One photo I thought I had gone back to re-crop ever so slightly to remove a hint of the black margin of the photo, actually didn't happen. I haven't seen a spelling mistake yet, but I'd be kind of astonished if there isn't one. The spellchecker isn't the best in the world.

Just to blow my own horn, mainly because if I don't, who else will. Which actually isn't true, there are several people who have sung my praises as a photographer, and all thanks go out to them. Here's the other books I've done, big lay flat hard covers first, then soft covers. When I say big, the hard covers are about 12.5 x 11 inches.

Overall I'm really pleased by the books. It's been fun to produce them, and the experience has changed my photography. When I'm out on a photo ramble I'm now thinking about what images might go in a book, along with text and other images, and why. I'm trying to think if there's a story beyond 'there I was and this is what I saw.'

As a technical note, I'm using Blurb's Bookwright software. It's a free download, is reasonably easy to learn to use, and gives lots of choices about fonts, layout, and control over the various elements. Certainly if you've never done a book before, this is a great place to start, unless you're already famous and expect to sell a million copies, in which case you've already got an editor and publisher drooling at your feet to take care of the details.

As another digression, there's a joke about this. When asked how to become a famous photographer, the response was to become famous for something else, like being an actor, or singer, or sports star, and then learn photography.

One of the rules to remember when doing a book is that the perfect is the enemy of the good. None of my books are perfect. Not even close. For all I know the Blurb staff are closing their eyes as they work on it, or they show each other a proof page as a 'can you believe it' sort of thing. 

Yours won't be perfect either. Nobody's book is perfect, no matter how much effort goes into it. So what? Start by producing a test book. You can see mine, with a photo of me holding the wine glass. Start. Pick a reasonable size and standard paper. Put in some photos that you think you might use in a story. High and low key. Portraits. Landscapes. Street. Your cousin's wedding. Whatever. Try different fonts and text sizes. Try different layouts. Play. Experiment. Have fun. If it isn't fun you're in the wrong hobby. 

If you must, your mantra will be "nobody else will ever see this". And then push the publish button. That is the most important step. Push that button. Until you do, you have nothing. Print your photos, and a book is a great way to start. Unless you get really carried away, you'll probably spend about $20 or $30, but could be less if you get a sale. When you get your book, (it typically takes less than 2 weeks) go through and write in it, what you like, what you don't, what you'd do differently. Then start the next book. Finish it. Hit the publish button.

A word about money, but first a digression about money. One of the things that really annoys me is people complaining about how much things cost. That all singing, dancing, app that will make your life better costs less than a cup of Starbuck's crappy coffee imitations, and the reviewer complains it's too expensive. People are always looking for the cheapest, and then they complain it won't do what they want, doesn't last, and they still go out and do it again. I laugh at them. 

There are other considerations in life beyond getting the thing at the cheapest price. I prefer to spend a bit more money and get a better thing more suited to my needs. Don't get me started about camera pricing. These amazing modern cameras, and people complain they're too expensive. Or film, people look for cheap film, then wonder why the results look terrible. Ante up people and quit your bitching. You don't get into a hobby like photography, or golf, or anything really, to save money.

My books are expensive, true, but I'm not trying to sell them. I mean, you could buy some of them if you really wanted, but you'd have to really want to. Even by expensive coffee table book standards, these are expensive. I don't care. I'm doing them for me. I am coming to like seeing my photos in print, and a book, even in expensive Blurb books, is cheaper than getting that number of photos printed. Much, much cheaper. I could get them printed in a smaller book, one that does not lay flat, but then the panorama images wouldn't be the same. That panorama photo of Tombstone takes me back there. Every time I look at it. My thinking is go big or go home.

This link should lead to a preview of the books for sale.

And for people who live in town, all they need to do is buy me lunch, and ask me to bring along the book they want to see. 

Another consideration, I'm getting to be an age where I'm thinking about what happens to my stuff when I die. It's sad to know that the hard drive that currently contains the data for about a quarter million photos and the computer driving it all, will be thrown into an e-recycling bin without a second thought. I would like to believe that someone seeing an expensive looking photo book will at least take it down and leaf through it. With any luck at all they'll think, 'hey, these are great', and take the book(s) home for a closer look. Anybody can look at a photo in a book or framed on the wall and like it or not. It takes the right hardware and software to 'see' a photo on a hard drive. 

And even if someone were to know the password to get into the computer, and could get Lightroom fired up, and figure out how I've got things stored, where would they start? And why would they? (Unless of course, I become famous, somehow.)

So if you're a photographer, and haven't seen your work in print, do it. Print a book. Do a calendar. As a gift to yourself take your best photo and go to a bespoke printer like Resolve or Royce Howland. You will be stunned and astonished at the results. It's almost certain the framing will be more expensive than the print. Indulge yourself.

My next book?  I'm still working on one for a private client, and we need to get together and figure out next steps. The untitled film project book is going to be hibernating till I've worked through at least part of the darkroom printing course I'm starting later this week.

There's two blogs. The other one is somewhat irregular (a hair under 4000 posts over 6190 days, or a post every day and a half or so), and could be on any topic under the sun. This blog is much more irregular, and is mainly of interest to photographers. If you'd like to be notified when I post for either blog, send an email to keith at nucleus dot com, or comment on the blog and ask to be added to the notification list. These people sometimes get a little something extra. Oh, and for current subscribers, thank you!

First own development!

When I started using a film camera, I wasn't sure how into it I'd get. There were vague thoughts of doing my own developing, and then finding a darkroom for prints, but I think it's smart to walk before running. So here's one at my walk stage from last week, developed by the lab.

Those that have been following along know I now use two film cameras. The 35mm is a Canon EOS 3, one of the last film cameras before digital came along. The medium format is a Fujica GW690. I started by having a local guy develop the film and I've been really pleased with how that worked out. Alas, he has sold his home and is moving to Nova Scotia. 

Thus the time has come to try developing film myself. I was a bit nervous about the whole thing, in spite of watching several videos about the process. I picked up everything I needed to develop B&W film from The Camera Store. Chris was very helpful and reassuring.

There were already several photos in the camera and I finished off the roll with a visit to a spot I've wanted to pose a model on for years. Alas with the rain the water was much deeper than our rubber boots, so we moved along and found a similar tree trunk on dry land.

I'll show you the pairs of photos, negative, then edited, with some comments, then get into development details below the photos.

1A.

1B. This was taken several days before Michelle and I visited on Sunday, and the water had risen so that most of the trunk was submerged. To get the photo I want, I need to be in the water. Right now it looks pretty muddy and gross.

2A.

2B. A river running down the hill into Fish Creek.

3A.

3B. The Bow River near the bird sanctuary.

4A.

4B. The Bow River near Mallard Point.

5A.

5B. Same as 4.

6A.

6B. Michelle posing on the other tree trunk we found. This is a tough exposure with overcast clouds, trying to balance her white dress with the dark jacket and the roots. 

7A.

7B. She got rid of the jacket, which makes the exposure easier, though in an ideal world an assistant would have reflected some light onto her face.

8A.

8B. The light was a bit better for this photo, although I think my eyes are playing tricks on me. I keep thinking there's an ever so slight green cast to this image.

Photos 1 to 5 are all long exposures, using a 10 stop ND filter with an exposure factor of 1.3.  The actual shutter time varies depending on the amount of light and what the wind is doing on the water. I generally aim to err towards more time with the shutter open, if the light is variable with changing cloud cover.

I'm not entirely sure if the photos were slightly under exposed in camera, or perhaps slightly over developed. My inversions were maybe a bit too fast, and did a few more than the recommended number. Not sure how much that matters. (If you know, feel free to comment or email!)

Develop process.

The trickiest part of the whole process seemed to be getting the film off the camera spool and onto the reel that goes in the development tank. I practiced a bunch of times with a blank roll. It's easy when you can see what you're doing, but as you all know this has to happen in total darkness. 

You need to slide the film into the end of the spiral track, just under the little tab. 120 film has a tight curl from being wound on the spool and it wants to stay curled. Plus the two sides rotate with respect to each other to load it on, but the tabs have to be square to each other to start, and stay that way till you're ready to ratchet the reel to load the film. They don't want to stay that way, and it seemed to me that three hands were needed. 

Then I figured out a trick. I cut a piece of exposed film into a slight wedge shape, and slide it into the reel just below where it needs to be loaded. This keeps the two sides aligned during the initial feed, and supports the film. Once the film is fed about a quarter way onto the reel, I took out the exposed film so I could ratchet the two sides. Ta da! First try in a dark room. 

I had assumed it would take a while. Then I had to wait while the water and chemical mix warmed up.

To go with the Ilford Delta 100 film, I used all Ilford development chemicals. Ilfosol 3, Ilfostop, and Rapid Fixer, with everything pretty close to 20 C. I followed the instructions quite closely using these mixtures and the same bottled water I use for making wine.

Dev 1+9 = 50ml + 450 water, for 5 minutes, with inversions per Ilford, though I did an extra one.

Stop 1+19 = 25ml + 475 ml, for about 20 seconds.

Fix 1+4 = 100 ml + 400 ml, for 3 minutes with inversions.

Then rinse with lots of inversion. The last rinse had a wetting agent added. Squeegeed with my fingers and dried. Digitized per my usual procedure, which I've talked about in earlier blogs. 

Am I thrilled? YES! I like how they came out, and with no more dust or water spots than I've seen on other rolls. They might be a bit dark in the shadows, but they were all done under overcast skies. I think it would look odd to see a brightly lit subject under gloomy skies.

Learnings? I was pretty close on times, though I got a bit flustered when the Devit timer on my phone kept going between pours and additions of the next chemical. That was between the Dev and Stop chemicals so I don't think it really matters. I think I'll turn off the auto feature for that, and do the pour and press the button thing. It took a little longer than expected for the chemicals to go from 18C to 20 C like I wanted, so next time I'll use a warmer water bath. Yes, I know I can let the development run a little longer for a cooler temperature.

Overall, as promised, it really wasn't difficult. I'll be doing this again.

It was suggested that I photo the procedure, but I was focussed on the procedure, not documenting it. I'll want to do it a few times before trying to take photos during the process. Plus if I'm the one doing it, it's pretty hard to be taking the photos.

As a bonus, here's what Michelle looks like in colour.

If you're new to the blog and don't want to miss the next one, just leave a comment asking to be added to the blog notification list. Or email me at keith at nucleus.com.