It’s Lonely Out Here

It's Lonely Out Here

Brian Auer | 06/29/2008 | Huntington Beach, CA | 135mm * f/2.8 * 1/?s * ISO50
[Purchase Prints] [See it at Flickr]

This photo is quickly becoming one of my personal favorites — but we have yet to see if it stands the test of time. It was shot recently at Huntington Beach around the same time and location that my “Darkness Creeps In” photo was taken. Like that photo, this one was also taken on film — Ilford PanF Plus, which is rated at ISO 50. This was the first roll of PanF I’ve used, but the results remind me of the Ilford HP5. Nice smooth tones and gradients, and lower contrast than films like the Delta, XP2, or Neopan. I think it goes well with an old camera and glass, giving the photo more of an “old school” look and feel.


Shoot, develop, scan, upload. That’s one of the things I like about film — you can often get great looking and interesting results without post processing. It’s actually a relief sometimes when you don’t feel obligated to process a set of photos.

8 thoughts on “It’s Lonely Out Here

  1. Derek

    I did search your site and I couldn’t find mention of it. What are you using to scan your film? Investment in a scanner seems like another expense for me if I get more serious about film.

  2. Brian Auer Post author

    I’m currently using a Canoscan 8400F, but I’m looking to get the latest 8800F. Mine scans up to 3200 dpi which churns out ~14MP from a 35mm and ~50MP from a 120 frame. I want to say that the 8800F is capable of at least 4000dpi, but I haven’t looked into it yet. The 8800F retails for $200, but you can find them for ~$150.

    These scanners last quite a while, so it’s a good investment. I bought mine over 5 years ago so I could scan my wedding film (120 format) and it still works just fine.

  3. Brian Auer Post author

    Thanks man — I really do need to have it printed. 800 pixels on the screen does it no justice. Now I just need to figure out how to print from that film stuff.

  4. the_wolf_brigade

    You just hit the nail on the head :)

    Can a scanned negative provide an adequate print from the digital file, or would a traditional print bring out more detail?

    One reason I want to move into 4×5 (apart from perspective control) is that contact prints will be a decent size to appreciate the shot.

  5. Derek

    @the_wolf_brigade – I was planning on shooting both, but got my first two rolls of 120 back from the lab last night and realized the focusing on my 6×9 camera is shot (Mayima Press rangefinder). Every shot is out of focus. I won’t be shooting 35mm for a while either as the shutter curtain froze open that camera too. Needless to say, I’m now in the market for a new camera and not a scanner. :(

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>