Kentmere Pan 400 at Palmer Square

Last month, I grabbed my Minolta XD-11 and Minolta MD Rokkor-X 45mm f/2 lens and drove to Palmer Square in downtown Princeton. Palmer Square is a public square and planned development across from Nassau Street and Princeton University that forms a collection of shops, restaurants, offices and (expensive) residential spaces. It's a mall.

Palmer Square is named for the original builder, Edgar Palmer, heir to the New Jersey Zinc fortune. Constructed between 1936 to 1939, the Square was created by architect Thomas Stapleton in the Colonial Revival style as the town's complement to Princeton University, which sits directly across Nassau Street from the Square. The construction of the mall was not without controversy. In 1929, the houses on Baker Street, which was the centre of the original African-American neighbourhood of Princeton, were moved to Birch Avenue; however, the financial challenges of the depression delayed construction of the Square until 1936. Plans to extend the Square past Hullfish Street were put on hold after the initial construction phase was completed and were not realised until the 1980s.

Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2

The original architect, Thomas Stapleton, used a variety of architectural styles borrowed from old Newport, Philadelphia, Annapolis and Williamstown. However, the plan of the Square is a mini-version of Rockefeller Center in New York City.

Nassau Street, the main road through the middle of Princeton, borders the southern part of Palmer Square. Hullfish Street connects the northern part of Palmer Square. Palmer Square East and Palmer Square West are the streets around and through the middle of the mall. There was a lot of construction on Palmer Square East, so I exposed a few frames on Palmer Square West.

Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2

Palmer Square has become the primary dining and shopping destination in downtown Princeton. One of my favourite coffee shops is Rojo's Roastery on Palmer Square West. Before the pandemic, the Winberie's Bar on Palmer Square Est was a favourite after meeting hangout for the Princeton Tech Meetup. Palmer Square has been one of my frequent subjects for photography throughout the 21 years I have lived in the area. When all the shops were closed during the global pandemic, it was effortless to photograph the shops and streets in and around Palmer Square. This has become challenging again as activities on the Square have returned to their pre-pandemic hustle and bustle.

Palmer Square (and surrounding streets) is host to many popular local events such as Jazz Feast and Communiversity.


This set of images is from a roll I exposed last month. The sky was overcast, but it was a bright morning. I wanted to finish the 36-exposure roll of Kentmere Pan 400 black and white 35mm film. This was my first time using this film stock. Each frame was exposed at box speed using my Minolta XD-11, set in aperture priority mode. After the negatives were returned from The Boutique Film lab, I scanned them using my Epson Perfection V600. I would typically have used VueScan, but there is some incompatibility between the VueScan software and the macOS Monterrey version of the scanner driver. The negatives were scanned using SilverFast SE Plus and the scanning workflow I learned from Matt Wright. I don't know the film resolution specifications for Kentmere Pan 400, but based on my study of other ISO 400 black and white 35mm film and what I learned from a blog post by [Jim Grey], I assumed it was around 60 lines/mm. I set my scanner to scan at 1600 pixels per inch resulting in 20MB files.

The scans have more grain than I expected from this 35mm film stock. Some photographers would be ok with this level of grain, but I'm not too fond of grain. I have become spoiled by how clean a high ISO image looks from a modern digital camera sensor. I think part of my disappointment is due to operator error. I am still struggling with properly exposing 35mm film. Some of the frames are overexposed in the highlights, and the shadows that attracted me are barely noticeable. I want to change my technique.

What technique do you use for exposing high ISO 35mm film?

Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
23 March, 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
Saturday 26 March 2022 • Minolta XD-11 • MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2

Film aesthetics without content

I grew up in the 1970s and learned the craft of photography in the late 1980s with an inexpensive Pentax 35mm analogue SLR camera in hand, spending countless hours in the darkroom. Stacks of 35mm film negatives and colour transparencies still bear witness to my creativity. Back in 1999, I was quick to jump onto the digital wagon, buying an expensive (for the time) Sony point-n-shoot camera. By 2006, I began using DSLRs and Adobe Lightroom as my digital darkroom. I returned to 35mm film photography a few years ago. While relearning 35mm film photography, I have abused quite a bit of 35mm film, trying to accomplish with my Minolta XD-11 camera what I could more easily produce with my Fuji X-T3 digital mirror-less camera. I even tried using film simulation recipes to duplicate the looks of popular 35mm films such as Portra, Kodachrome, and Ilford HP5.

I looked around the web for inspiration and followed some popular film photographers. But I started to feel like the more I looked at the work of present data famous film photographers, the more disillusioned I felt. Many present-day photographers take too many photographs without content; they fetishise the film aesthetics (grain, tonality, etc.) without considering the subject matter.

We can speculate as much as we want about the reasons why the photographic film is coming back. I personally think that it’s one part nostalgia and one part a desire for a more challenging and hands-on medium.

Take the popular Instagram channel, burbsonfilm. I started following this channel because I thought the subject matter would be more approachable since I live in the suburbs. I also hope to learn what film stock might work best for this subject matter. But after some time, I started to see a pattern. Almost all images are captured via some 1970s or 1980s time machine camera. Nearly every scene has a 1970s era car parked in a driveway or street corner, and run-down gas stations, records stores, and vintage diners are common. I have photographed the Princeton, Montgomery, Hopewell and Lamberville suburbs. Few of my 35mm film or digital photographs of these areas look like anything on the burbsonfilm channel.

The content on the boxspeed Instagram channel is more varied, but much of it is still trying to evoke scenes from the 1970s and 1980s. It seems to me that many current film photographers are trying to recreate the look and feel but also the time and place of old photographs from the 1970s and 1980s. Many of these photographers are trying hard to show that they shoot 35mm film by using film stock with excessive grain, exposing expired 35mm film, or using a camera with mechanical defects (e.g. light leaks). Perhaps to them, all of this is new.

Pier 11, Wall Street, Manhattan | 26 February, 2020 | Asahi Pentax Spotmatic II | SMC Takumar 55mm f/2 | Ilford HP5+

In the late 90s and early 2000s, 35mm film cameras and printing became very advanced and technical image quality improved considerably and moved away from the limitations of the 1970s and 1980s. 35mm film stocks didn't change much, but the cameras became more capable. Ironically the number of people shooting film declined as more people were switching (briefly) to digital point-n-shoot cameras and then ultimately to smartphones. Now here we are in the 2020s, and suddenly this 35mm film photography is cool again because many of the people shooting it are experiencing it for the first time in their lives. This is a recycled old hat for anyone who started with 35mm film photography in the 1970s, 1980s or 1990s.

Hipstamatic was one of the first popular smartphone apps that tried to emulate actual film flaws like exaggerated grain, underexposure, light leaks, and faded colour prints. Hipstamatic was an attempt to lend authenticity to digital images. Somehow, evoking the memories of faded snapshots made the digital image feel more "real" (I'm rolling my eyes right now). I think this feeling has led some people to intentionally create poor 35mm pictures (exaggerated grain, underexposure, light leaks, etc.) to hammer home that the image was taken with film.

Of course, the film negative must be digitally scanned and uploaded and shared for viewing on smartphone size screens. So what we are seeing are digital impressions of analogue media. I believe that well-made images made with quality film stock (anything that is not homography) are indistinguishable from digital camera creations once you shrink the photos down to fit on a smartphone. The flaws are the only reason to shoot with 35mm film for many people.

Avalon Beach | Wednesday, 26 August, 2020 | Minolta X-700 | MD Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.7 | Ektachrome E100

While I have not intentionally attempted to photograph scenes that would be commonplace in the 1970s or 1980s, nor intentionally underexposure my film, I must admit I'm guilty as anyone for posting scans of my failed 35mm film adventures but additionally that the subject of many of my 35mm film photographs are “underwhelming”. I want to step up my 35mm film photography game. I want to make pictures worthy of sharing. In my search for inspiration, I discovered a new e-zine called Grain, dedicated to film photographers. It’s a project by the publishers of the Fuji X Passion e-zine. Lifetime membership is US$35. I mostly make photographs with my Fuji X-T3, but I subscribed anyway.

If my rant conveys a bitter narrative, I apologise. Ultimately photography is about using a visual medium to tell "the story” and not about the process that captured it. A good photo is a good photo. How it was made need not be explained to the viewer. Yes, I am a bit of a hypocrite here. The captions in my posted images all contain the type of equipment used, and if it’s a scan of a 35mm film photograph, I include the film stock. Why?

I think it’s a sort of signal, indicating to members of the Fuji X and 35mm film community that may happen upon my website that “I am here. I am one of you”.

Garfield Way

One of my roles in my current journey with 35mm film is that of "film detective". A few weeks or months can elapse between the time I put a roll of 35mm film into my Minolta and when the film roll is developed and returned from the lab. In that time, I may easily forget the “when" and the “how” I exposed each film frame. The where is usually apparent from the film frame itself, but the dates, times, and camera settings are forgotten.

13 February, 2022 | Minolta XD-11 | MD ROKKOR-X 50mm F1.7

With digital photography, the when, how and where are automatically recorded into the EXIF metadata of the digital image file. But with 35mm film, except for the information about the film stock, I have no recorded information about aperture, shutter speed or exposure compensation. A few years ago, I tried a few apps to record each frame's aperture or shutter speed, but I quickly grew tired of doing it. Most of the time, I forgot to record the settings.

13 February, 2022 | Minolta XD-11 | MD ROKKOR-X 50mm F1.7

To compensate, I go on a digital adventure, scrolling through my Adobe Lightroom Catalogue, searching for photographs that I might have made around the same time using my Fuji X-T3 or iPhone 11 Pro.

I’m not sure when these four New Classic EZ 400 film frames were exposed. I think I put the roll of 35mm film into the camera sometime around the beginning of January. I searched Google for a list of snow dates in 2022 and found references to 1 January, 2 January, 3 January, 6 January, 7 January, 16 January, 17 January, 28 January, and 29 January. In the photographs, the roads and sidewalk are ploughed, so these film frames were probably exposed a day or two after one or more of those dates.

13 February, 2022 | Minolta XD-11 | MD ROKKOR-X 50mm F1.7
13 February, 2022 | Minolta XD-11 | MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
13 February, 2022 | Minolta XD-11 | MD ROKKOR-X 45mm F2
13 February, 2022 | Minolta XD-11 | MD ROKKOR-X 50mm F1.7