deanmeeks

<p>Nikon West Coast Service Center in Los Angeles just repaired an F100 for me, it took one week.<br> 6420 Wilshire Blvd #100 <br> Los Angeles, CA 90048<br> 1-800-645-6687<br> Marc</p>

<p>Photographer's Formulary TF-4 works. It's designed to remove the color cast to Tri-X and other films. Pre-soak five minutes at least, dump, and after development, a 2 minute wash, dump, then fix for 8-10 minutes. It'll be gone.</p>

<p>Having shot a wedding with both a D7000 and a D600 I can tell you both are a benefit, to me.<br> <br />Marc Meeks</p>

<p>I have 80mm, 65, 135, and 180. To me the 80mm covers the most applications more than than the others, however the 65 is a close second. I want the 105, my next purchase.</p>

<p>120 is a cinch. The only loading issues I've ever had have been with 35mm reels. For plastic reels be sure to pull the leader a good two or three inches down into the spool to make sure the film's slotted into the grooves properly.</p>

<p>Anne,<br> <br />I paid $150.00 for a new Epson V550 flatbed. I scan 35mm and 120 to TIFF files at either 3600 dpi or higher. With my Canon ProMarkII 9500 pigment-based printer ($100.00 used) I can get very nice prints on 11x14 Arista II Baryta paper from Freestyle Photo. I have wet prints and pigment based prints of the same image and there's no difference at this size or lower. I have images I scanned with the V550 that I had previously paid a top-end lab here in Los Angeles to scan at their medium size (12-18mb) and upon close inspection they are identical in quality. Certainly images scanned for the internet is a no-brainer. They're are people that will have you believe that only a drum scan can deliver a quality image - maybe for very large prints - but for most practical purposes and general printing sizes, this is not true. I've been in and out of the darkroom since 1976 and I know if something looks like crap or not. Hope this helps.</p>

<p>I have an Epson V550 and I can assure that there is pronounced difference in the look of a 6x6 neg scanned at any resolution compared with that of 35mm. The fundamental attributes of medium format are inherent the moment you snap the shutter. The neg is going to have massive resolution. I shoot 6x6 mostly as well as 135. I was hooked on 6x6 from the first BW negative I scanned. It made it hard to go back to 135. Processing black and white at home is easy. I routinely make inkjet prints with a Canon PIXMA Pro9500 printer using Arista Baryta 11x14 paper (from Freestyle) and prints look really good - even A3 sizes - and I come from a darkroom background since 1976. People knock flatbed scanners all day long but I don't think they're actually seeing prints made from flatbeds since hardly anybody prints anymore. The belief that you can only get a quality print from a drum scan or a wet print is rubbish. Have you asked your lab what their using? Some labs here in LA only drum scan, and some have "art scanners" which means flatbeds. The only inconsistent scanning results I ever found are with 35mm images; some film/developer combos are not good match ups for scanning, but they're usually good enough, and I've tried them all, I think.</p>

<p>The resolution of Agfa Rapid Copex 120 blew me away, astounding. I stand developed in Rodinal 1:100 for 1 hour. Next time I'll overexpose a half-stop. Freestyle Photo has plenty of Agfa Copex.</p>

<p>Heliopan is good enough for the biggest Hollywood motion picture productions using the most expensive lenses on earth -- they should be good enough for you too.</p>

<p>I developed (Xtol) my first roll of Kentmere 400 two weeks ago. Bright LA sun as well as interior Metro train shots. I found the images low in contrast which was nice because it made adjustments in Lightroom very easy. The shadows and highlights exhibited terrific range and made for very nice images. I'll buy more.</p>

<p>FE2.</p>

<p>That could've been a shadow falling at the base of the headstone. If you have software like Lightroom or PS I would pull the blacks all the way up to check for detail in that darkest areas of the image. If there is detail within that dark glob at the base of the headstone then it's probably a developing issue since all the surrounding shadow areas in this image also have a strong loss of detail. If there is no detail at all then it could be an emulsion defect straight from the box, which does happen, just unlikely.</p>

<p>Overexposing color print film by at least a full stop is the trend for a lot of wedding/portrait photographers these days, I do it to some degree depending on subject matter. There's no right or wrong, it just depends on the aesthetic you're after.</p>

<p>As a Motion Picture and TV scout for the last 10 years I've been detained by LAPD, County Sheriff's,<br />CHP, and ten thousand corporate security badges. I see 'em coming a mile away and just bite the bullet. After much long-winded questioning I'm always released, usually with the chime "who's in your movie? Any stars we know?" They don't want to do it, it's their job...most of 'em. Here in Los Angeles things are changing and this should hopefully lead to a national restriction among law enforcement about hassling photogs from executing their 1st Amendment right. See below...<br> <a href="/bboard/">http://petapixel.com/2015/03/07/la-to-pay-50k-to-detained-photographers-and-teach-deputies-that-photography-is-not-a-crime/</a></p>

<p>Mamiya C220/C330 system ($200-$300) with 80mm 2.8 blue dot. Add a few more bucks for other fine lenses within this line.</p>