Album cover
Album cover
Album cover
Emily Lee
Darkroom
Over this period of three weeks I intend to delve further into my theme of impossibility and explore the creation of double exposure images to amass a sense of confusion and disorientation. Having primarily used digital photography in the past, I plan to expand my grasp of photography and delve into film photography and make use of the darkroom to manually produce my double exposures rather than playing around with digital images to get what I wanted. I am therefore possibly more limited in what I can achieve, and this task will be a challenge for me, however I believe that this challenge will help me to gain a greater awareness of light, composition and camera settings as a result of the limitation of shot count forcing me to be more considerate with each image that I take. This care will be transferrable to my digital images, hopefully improving my overall skill.
Surrealism is categorised as a "profound disillusionment with and condemnation of the Western emphasis on logic and reason".
After the dada movement - in which the traditional constraints of 'art' were irreparably stretched by the likes of Marcel Duchamp and his 'ready-mades' - many dada practitioners moved on to form surrealism, incorporating a similar sense of disregard for rationalism. However this new movement differs from dada in the respect that it is an attempt to access the unconscious mind and explore into the dream world rather than a complete jumble of obscure intentions and nonsensical activities.
Blind double exposures
A blind double exposure is a term given to the creation of a multiple exposure image within the camera. As this is done without ever seeing the negatives, it is said to be 'blind'. The effect produced is the overlaying of two separate scenes onto a single piece of film, often to produce a surrealistic, or dreamlike effect. This can be achieved by taking your initial shot and holding down the rewind button when winding for the next shot so that the film doesn't advance in order to shoot onto the same piece of film. However if you wish to take a series of double exposures combining two very different aspects then you can shoot the entire roll of film and simply re-load it into the camera after winding it back onto the cassette.
In order for a double exposure of this fashion to work, all images taken on the same piece of film must be slightly underexposed. This is due to the fact that the shutter will be open to light on several occasions and hence the film will be exposed to a large amount of light. If all images are correctly exposed then the overall image will be greatly overexposed, thus stopping down for the individual shots will help to produce a good exposure for the overall image.
Film
'Untitled' by Scott Williams - n.d.
In this double exposure, Williams overlays a portrait with a natural scenic shot. Taken at sunset, the figure becomes backlit and therefore silhouetted against the glowing horizon. This silhouette is a dark mass in the centre of the frame, contrasting with the image of water layered over it in both its exposure and texture. The use of the backlighting causes the face of the model to fall into shadow, with almost the entirety of the head in darkness, thus losing details due to clipping. The overlay of the lighter image of waves reduces the gravity of the clipping, with its highlights rippling across the face of the model, adding texture to the image. Furthermore, the colours of the two shots produce a dream-like harmony, the subtle complementary blues and oranges helping to produce a soothing atmosphere.
Compositionally this image is sound, with the horizon resting approximately on the bottom third and the model sitting in the centre of the frame. Yet despite all of the calming features, the image has a very slight edge to it. Upon closer inspection, we come to realise that this edge is as a result of the model sitting not quite central in the frame, though not quite on a third line. Ever so slightly left of the centre, the model position does not quite conform to our compositional expectations of an image and
thus produces a minute sense of imbalance. This imbalance is furthered by the backlighting, creating a silhouette that obscures the face of the model, hence adding a sense of mystery. Therefore Williams has built an image of the dream-world, encompassing a number of emotions as a result of the double exposure combining a number of features. This draws a parallel to our overactive imagination within our dreams, leading to a rush of emotion unlike that which we feel in the real world.
For this shoot, I plan to begin experimenting into the overlay of images to produce a double exposure. I intend to combine a dreamlike landscape with a portrait image in order to infer a sense of serenity with the double exposure suggesting the model is dreaming of a beautiful, aesthetically pleasing landscape.
After taking my first set of images, I attempted to develop my film in order to produce my negatives for scanning and/or enlarging in the darkroom. However my attempt to develop my film sadly went awry and I produced an entirely blank roll of film. This was extraordinarily disappointing, and after much discussion, it has been concluded that the failure was as a result of the use of expired stop solution.
Second attempt
After my failure in the darkroom I re-attempted my shoot, returning to the woods to produce a second set of images. I had two different shots in mind for this set, my original idea of overlaying simply a tranquil scene with a close up image of a model, but also a more introspective shot with the model in both exposures. This shot aimed to combine the close up portrait of the model with a second image of the model further away with the intention that the entirety of the model would be seen through the head of the first shot as if they were imaging themselves walking through the woodland. I felt that this shot would be a better representation of the wanderings of the subconscious mind, supported by the atmosphere of confusion amassed by the ghostly effect produced by the double exposure.
'Untitled' by Jessica Greaves - n.d.
Having used colour film for these images, I had to send them off to be developed as sadly I did not have the chemicals to develop colour negatives.
Upon receiving my images, I was happy to finally have captured some images, however the images themselves were unfortunately not all as pleasing as I had hoped. Of the 29 shots I took, perhaps 4 showed a significant double exposure - only 2 of which worked in the way I had hoped. The majority of my images were severely underexposed, quite the opposite effect to what I had been expecting. I had presumed that as the aperture was opening twice over the same piece of film that a 'good' exposure for both images would have entirely overexposed the shot. Therefore I decided to stop down on both images, underexposing both to prevent complete overexposure. However I seem to have overcompensated for this factor, resulting in the majority of my images becoming underexposed.
I believe that the time of day that the images were taken would also have significantly affected their exposure. Taking my photographs in the early evening on a rainy day towards winter time meant that the general ambience was unfortunately rather gloomy and hence this was reflected in the dark images. The setting also did not do any favours, with the dense foliage blocking most of the little light available, making the shots further underexposed. Hence it was imperative that I expose each of the two shots properly for this particular shoot.
I feel that these two images are the best of this shoot - showing an effective double exposure that fools the eye. The overlay of the close up portrait with the wider angle of the model walking through the frame creates a dream-like atmosphere, the positioning of the whole body shot within the bounds of the face giving the illusion of the visibility of the model's imagination. We therefore use this image as a gateway to delve into the unconscious mind of the model, exploring where her thoughts take her.
We are all able to relate to the idea of having a 'little voice' in our heads that we denote as our conscience, reading us our thoughts and urging us to do things. These images explore into this idea, giving body to this 'little voice' as a smaller version of ourselves within our minds. The smaller rendition of the model represents this miniature version of ourselves, confined within the boundaries of our minds, yet still free to roam and explore freely via the imagination.
Third attempt
After my prior attempt at this technique with the combination of natural landscapes with a portrait image, I decided to investigate overlaying other forms. I stuck with the portrait idea, but instead this time used a city scene as my second image, exchanging the tranquility for a more chaotic atmosphere. The use of a city scene also proposed a juxtaposition of form, with the natural curves of the model's face contrasting with the unyielding lines of the buildings.
As these images are much better exposed, the induction of a dream-like atmosphere flows far better, aided by the warm tones providing an almost soothing feel. Both aspects of the image can be seen far more clearly here and therefore the exploration into the subconscious is far more apparent. The juxtaposition of structure and form between the natural lines of the model's face and the straight edges of the buildings creates a striking composition, holding the viewer's attention to make them consider the content of the shot. The contrast seems so unnatural, yet at the same time so ordinary as we are so accustomed to seeing people amongst the rigid structures. It is the combination of both with lessened opacities to the extent that they show through each other that implies the dream-world: a state of imagination.
It is hence that I believe I have managed to produce an effective investigation into the dreamworld via the use of in-camera 'blind' double exposures.
My third attempt proved far more successful, with the majority of my shots featuring an intelligible double exposure. Again I sent these images off as they were shot in colour - but I did take a small number in black and white as well which I will develop myself - but this time they came back in much better shape. The vast majority of the images were correctly exposed due to my learnings from the last shoot: this time I exposed each of the images almost correctly to allow the full exposure to be completed upon the combination with the second shot.
Again I shot in the early evening (though this time due to a camera malfunction that caused me to have to re-shoot the entire series) and thus the ambience was less than I would have liked. However this shoot was in an urban environment with no overshadowing canopy which, combined with the addition of artificial lighting in shopfronts and on the street, led to an overall lighter atmosphere. The artificial lights also provided some nice bokeh in a few of the shots where the focus was pulled to the model, leaving the background to blur out as a result of my shallow depth of field.
Despite the brighter images, I feel that they are still slightly off. There is a large amount of grain evident in the images, which could be as a result of the combination of the film quality and the quality of the negative scanner not being as high as I would have liked. Nevertheless, this grain is not immensely damaging to the images and - I feel - in fact adds an almost nostalgic feel to the images as we associate grainy images with technology of the past and therefore the images appear older than they are. Consequently, the images become almost reminiscent, as if we are looking back on memories - another place that the subconscious mind may wonder to.
Box brownie
A blind double exposure can also be created via the use of a box brownie camera, capturing the scene directly onto the light sensitive paper rather than using the intermediary of negatives. Unfortunately this will produce a negative print, but this is easily resolved with the power of modern technology via the use of photoshop to invert the image.
In order to produce a double exposure in this manner, I will have to use a large amount of guesswork as to exposure times due to possible differences in light levels of different locations for my two images. I will have to underexpose both scenes in order to prevent the image becoming overexposed on the whole and therefore will have to approximate the point of half-exposure for each scenario.
'Untitled', anon - 2019
For my first attempt at this technique, I sat my model, face approximately level with the camera and took the image of her first, followed by the second exposure of the building. Using a room with multiple windows, letting in a substantial volume of natural light allowed me to use shorter shutter speeds for the images of the model, thus minimising the amount of motion blur visible in the image.
I positioned the model staring off roughly 45 degrees to the right, producing a slight side profile. The lack of eye contact from the model make the portrait appear more relaxed as a result of the absence of any direct address that may have added a sense of tension to the atmosphere. The serenity of the model stood as a nod toward the dream-world, with the mind subconsciously drifting through thoughts. The structure of the building served as the thought for the images - the strong lines also juxtaposing the soft curves of the model's form, adding to the sense of confusion produced by the image overlay as a whole.
For my very first attempt, I assessed the light level of the interior of the room and the levels outside to discern a possible starting shutter speed to work from. Using a number of books and magazines to raise the camera to around the eye level of the model, I opened the shutter for a count of 7 seconds, exposing the model first before moving outside to take the second exposure of the building where I used an exposure time of approximately 0.5 seconds.
These times were a good base to work from, having not been horrifically under or overexposed. Looking at the negative however, it was clear that the model was far more visible than the buildings that I attempted to expose over the top.
Taking into consideration the exposure times of the last shot, I decided this time to use a shutter speed of 4 seconds for the model and 2 seconds for the building outside.This allowed much more of the building to become visible through the model, however this lead to a loss of the model's form in the image as I had now done the reverse of my previous image: exposing the building to the extent that it overpowers the model in the image.
I also noticed that in both of my first two images, I had completely forsaken the background, leading to a chaotic mess that would make it almost impossible to make out the buildings over the top even if they had been correctly exposed.
In my third attempt, I altered my exposure to 5 seconds on the model and only 1 second on the building in the hope that this would be there middle ground between my previous two images, showing both subjects in the same image. These times appeared to have worked, however my positioning of the building in the second shot produced a diagonal line across the model's forehead, disrupting her form and making the image less aesthetically appealing overall.
The double exposure worked better on the whole though as I used a plain aground, eliminating the chaotic scene. Yet still the buildings were not as fully exposed as I would have liked, which I deemed down to the fact that I used a white backdrops which would have reflected light into the camera, thus exposing the paper in the area where the building would be most visible and consequently preventing the paper from capturing the structure.
For my next shoot, I intent to re-trial the use of a darker backdrop to investigate if my theory is correct and will therefore allow me to take a correctly exposed, double exposure image.
For my fourth and last shot in this attempt at double exposures I decided to see if I could avoid my previous problem of the diagonal line by changing the orientation to landscape. The room I was using was lit primarily by natural light through the window and therefore there are great fluctuations in the level of light within the room. Hence when I decided to add one extra second to my previous exposure of the model - in order to try and get more detail in the shadows - the image became slightly overexposed. I believe this was down to a little bit extra sunlight protruding through the clouds during the shot as the steep up in exposure was much greater than I had expected for a single extra second (I had kept the outside exposure exactly the same - 1 second).
I tried to use a darker background as well, in order to prevent exposure of the model's surroundings so that the building could more easily be seen. Theoretically this adaptation should have worked for the double exposure, however the background I had chosen was merely the side of a set of shelves of a dark green colour and hence was not entirely the most suitable background option. Not being wide enough, it allowed messy features to creep back into the image around the edges. Furthermore I had made a foolish mistake in the fact that I had changed the orientation of the shot of the model to landscape, but still took the image of the building in portrait, thus making the building even less clear within the image.
Second attempt
In my second shoot, I used the same room with large windows to let in vast amounts of natural light in order to lower the shutter speed as much as possible tin order to avoid motion blur. Additionally, learning from may last shoot I decided to use a large piece of black card to photograph the model against, producing a slightly more suitable backdrop.
I also decided to photograph the two subjects the opposite way around in this shoot, exposing the building first then the model over the top in order to see if this order was more effective.
In my first shot, I continued with the landscape format for the exposure of the model, but unfortunately my framing was slightly off and I accidentally included an interior ceiling light in the top right corner. Due to the slightly dimmed natural lighting (as a result of moving further away from the windows to be able to prop my black card background against a wall) I decided to increase my exposure time to 8 seconds for the model, but dropped it to 0.5 seconds for the buildings to prevent the image from becoming entirely overexposed.
There are a few lines of the building present in the image, the most obvious being through the face where the image of the model was the most transparent.
In response to my first shot, I decided to try and include less of the model by reducing her exposure time from 8 to 6 seconds, however as I left the exposure time of the buildings at approximately 0.5 seconds, the image came out underexposed overall, with a large amount of clipping in the shadows. Thus the building was still not more visible through the model.
Despite the underexposure, my framing was much better, with the model sat, more central in the crop, giving her a sense of authority. Additionally, the adjustment of the card background eliminated the distracting interior light.
Unfortunately, something I have noticed throughout all of my images is that despite the varying exposures, my model is out of focus. This is due to my intention to have the model's face rather large in the frame and therefore I moved the camera close the subject. However I did not consider the minimum focal distance of the camera and consequently all of my images of the model were taken from a position closer to the subject than the minimum focal distance in order to satisfy my composition.
For my third image therefore I adjusted the exposure times to ensure that the building would be visible in the image. Exposing the building first for around 4 seconds, followed by the model for 5 seconds produced a better exposed image overall, with far more detail in the shadows. Unfortunately though my exposures were still not balanced as I had now used too long a shutter speed for the building and the model became nothing more than a faint cloudy patch over the centre of the image.
This time however I had realised why the buildings were previously not as prominent as I would have liked: I had been again using portrait for the buildings and landscape for the model, resulting in the lines of the building being almost indiscernible. I only realised this, though, after I had taken the initial shot of the building and therefore I was forced to use a portrait orientation for the model also. Had my exposures been more balanced, I believe that this alteration would have produced an effective double exposure.
Lastly, I returned to my landscape format as I feel that this better portrays the idea of the dream-world due to the wider edges of the image showing a broader range of surroundings, making it more similar to the human vision than a portrait orientation. I this time used an exposure of 2 seconds for the buildings then 6 seconds on the model which produced possibly the best balanced image. Though the buildings are darker than I would have hoped, both them and the model are properly visible within the image, thus demonstrating a double exposure.
I feel that perhaps I should have exposed the model for slightly longer to give her more presence in the frame, however I quite like her ghostly appearance, giving the image a more ethereal atmosphere on the whole and thus more strongly linking it to the surreal and the 'dream-world'.
Sandwich technique
The sandwich technique - unlike taking blind double exposures - takes place in the darkroom. After having taken and developed your negatives, take the two (or more) images that you wish to overlay and place them in the same negatives holder, 'sandwiching' them together. Shining a light through both together will create an amalgamation of both compositions positive print - similar to the effect of the blind double exposures.
Edward Steichen
Here, Steichen has 'sandwiched' two negatives together when enlarging in order to represent two alternate angles within one print. This produces a final print filled with abstract forms produced by the urban scene. The overlapping geometry of the buildings provide highly contrasting areas of harsh shadow and brightness highlight, thus producing an atmosphere of confusion. This confusion translates the hectic ambience of the city, capturing its chaos into a single print.
There is also a further juxtaposition evident here between the curved lines of the figures at the bottom of the image and the immalleable lines of the buildings above. Down the left hand side of the image a series of highlighted sections cut through the shadows, and within the bottom most section exists a figure. The illumination of this character thus accentuates the juxtaposition of form within the image.
I plan to 'sandwich' my negatives together similarly to Steichen to produce an atmosphere of confusion via the amalgamation of structures to create abstract contrasting lines. Hence I will create a surrealistic scene, venturing into a dreamlike perspective.
'Rockefeller Center, New York' by Edward Steichen - 1932
Response
For my first image, I decided to sandwich together a negative of a person walking along a mountainous ridge line with a landscape of a lake. It is possible to vaguely discern a figure through the assortment of rocks in the lake, however I feel that the two images were too similar to produce a proper double exposure largely due to the fact that the horizon lines of both photos sat in roughly the same spot and the lake image overpowered the mountain image. Thus only a small portion of the mountain scene is visible in the bottom right of the print.
For this image I decided to combine an image of several pine trees with another shot of the lake. I hoped that these two images would be more distant and thus produce more of a visible double exposure.
Despite being more contrasting, the double exposure was still not as effective as I would have liked as the natural forms produced a harmony that made the scene appear realistic. Even though the rocks showed through the tree trunks, the image appears to just be of a grove at the water's edge.
In my third attempt, I reverted back to the use of a figure with a natural scene. In order to better show the image beneath, this time I decided to use an image of trees bordering the edge of the photograph to allow the figure to show through in the negative space. This double exposure was more effective than my previous two as the rock the character was standing on was visible in the negative space and appeared to be floating above the lake, thus making it surrealistic.
The perspective also allowed for a more effective double exposure as the size of the figure is disproportionate in comparison to the size of the trees, though not quite enough to stand out in the image.
My final attempt used the same idea of figures overlayed with a natural scene. I used the same image of the framing trees to allow the other image top show through again, but this time used a tighter cropped image of a figure. This produced a bigger contrast between the perspectives, creating a more disproportionate composition that consequently appeared more surreal.
Unfortunately, all of my images turned out in varying shades of grey rather than the crystal clear range from black to white that they should have showed. I believe that this could have been as a result of the print developer as the negatives I used were pin sharp and high contrast.
4" exposure
2" exposure
1" exposure
Re-attempting this process, I used a more freshly poured dilution of the print developer which resulted in the production of a more highly contrasted image rather than my previous shades of grey. In these attempts the blacks and whites were much more pronounced, leaving it down to my exposure time to produce a clear print where previously the length of the exposure had made no real impact on the subsequent print as a result of the old developer.
Dodging and burning technique
This technique is unlike the other two, creating more of a seamless composite image as a result. Where the other two techniques produced a final image consisting merely of two images layered atop one another, this technique uses more hands-on work to expose some areas to (burn) and guard others from (dodge) the light source to add only specific parts of the images to the final print.
Jerry Uelsmann
In his work, Jerry Uelsmann is a master physical doing and burning in the darkroom, producing a seamless composite of two or more images to create a surrealistic final image. Uelsmann seems to take a particular interest in the juxtaposition of man-made and natural forms - an intention which is clear in this image particularly.
Here the viewer is drawn into the image by the leading lines of the roots of the tree, the natural curves sweeping across to create a calming atmosphere. The viewer's eyes are thus drawn up the trunk towards a point of disruption: the trunk begins to change into a man-made structure. The placement of the distortion in the centre of the image draws the attention to this point, thus emphasising the alteration. The trunk becomes cracked and faded as it morphs into a house rather than extending up to the sky as it should, thus Uelsmann prompts the idea that natural growth is stunted by human existence. Additionally, using the bottom half as the tree and the top half as the house implies a more twisted theme: murder. The head of the tree is cut off, killing it, as an anthropogenic structure is born out of it. Only at the death of the organic can there be human progression, this image seems to say.
I hope to use dodging and burning as effectively as Uelsmann in order to produce a warped version of reality with a powerful juxtaposition.
Untitled by Jerry Ueslmann - 1982
Practice
Before committing to a larger print, I decided to conduct a series of smaller experiments to explore into the technique of dodging and burning in order to produce a composite image.
Using some prior images, I tried to make use of a landscape scene in combination with an image of a figure. The landscape involved a woodland on the left hand side, with a footpath snaking down the right. I planned to dodge the majority of the tree section in order to burn in the image of the girl to form a surrealistic composition- dream-like in the way she would appear to be looking over the landscape before her.
In my first attempt I used only my hands to cover and expose parts of my negatives, thus resulting in a stark cut between the two images resulting from my hand being entirely opaque.
Consequently in my second attempt I decided to use a piece of tissue paper, waved back and forth over the sections I was working on in order to make a more feathered cut. I also chose to use a slightly larger piece of paper in order to both reduce the light intensity to give myself more time to work (a larger piece of paper involves the moving of the enlarger further away, thus allowing more space for the light intensity to dissipate) and allow myself more space to work and therefore be able to make smaller adjustments. This image still did not turn out quite how I'd intended though, having not had enough time to isolate the intricacies of each section.
I felt that the combination of the two images was not effective as they shared too common a theme and consequently I decided to use a different image of the girl to combine with the scene.
Response
For my response I intended to swap the face of a cow with the face of a man. Unfortunately, I mistakenly forgot to cover the outer section of the transposed image of the face and consequently the full crop ratio featured in the image.
I also noticed that the face was much darker than that of the cow due to the greater light intensity produced by the enlarger being closer to the paper.
In my second attempt I did not expose the face for as long in order to avoid making it too dark in comparison to the rest of the image. Sadly I had not quite aligned the images correctly and I had also this time not exposed the face for long enough.
The image has large black streaks across the edge and has a slight blur effect due to an unexpected flash of light emanating from a door into the darkroom.