Sometimes there are so many errors in an image that quality comes round again to being, dare I say, good? Example in case above. I had expired SPUR DSX ultra-high resolution film in my F6 and the new 105 DC lens on it when I chanced on an eerie scene while on a walk through the forest. Someone had tied a smurf balloon to a utility pole at a crossroads. It had lost some of it’s helium and was barely floating to and fro in the balmy spring air, turning this way and that, showing his spooky face or the shriveled body. I took quite a few shots and went my way, shaking my head. What would be the impression if someone encountered the smurf at night?
When I developed the roll, the SPUR Modular UR developer components I had left didn’t look too good, one of the fluids had turned medium brown from oxidation. And they weren’t that good, the film came out severely underdeveloped, the strip showing only faint image traces. Resignedly, I still pushed it into the scanner. Though the histogram occupied only three instead of the usual 9+ stops of density range, the scanner did what he could with the data available and I got images that were grainy but sharp, not much of a gray scale and they showed a lot of dust. Regardless, I pushed them on into Aperture and tried out some Nik Silver Efex Filters on them. One I almost never use, called Pinhole Camera (a heavy vignette, steep gradation and still more grain), gave me the impression I had visualized out there in the forest with the tied-up smurf. After two technical errors and a cheesy choice of software filter.
So, don’t throw your errors away! Work with them!