m.c.fitz

<p>There's something I don't underestand about the streaks in the photo and in the negatives - the image of your wife is not affected by them, as they do not come down over her head or face. Yet the streaks extend below her, on either side of her face. What was the background she was photographed against? Yes, I do realise that there seems to be a problem at the edges of the negatives, and I can't explain that, either, but if the problem were caused by agitation during development, then wouldn't the streaks have been apparent on the subject's head and face as well?<br> <br />Sometimes the mysteries in photography and life just keep on, well, dare I say it, developping?</p>

<p>Steve, thanks, I quite like the last photo as well, and when I can get back into the darkroom, will print it up. I'd be interested to hear how your Rokkor enlarger lens is, once you get a chance to print with it.</p> <p>Thanks Rick, I agree, the results were quite satisfactory, considering the limitations I was dealing with. I actually enjoyed the limitations, and not having complete control over the material.</p> <p>Mike, the fish-eye effect is interesting, and worth trying out. I don't use that lens often, but it can be fun to use.</p>

<p>Tony, yes, the lens was wide open with all the images. I agree, the Rokkor lenses are always a treat, and it's great to be using them again.</p> <p>Thank you, I really like the last photo as well, and right now, I wish I was back there!</p>

<p>One of the reasons I decided to try the wide angle on the HiMatic is because the lens has some vignetting in the corners when wide open, which to me is part of the charm of this lens. I was curious what the results would be with a wide angle, and I'm quite pleased with what it gives, especially in the landscapes. Those big skies and wide horizons really took to it, I think.</p> <p>I had forgotten how much I like this camera, and using it again is like getting together with an old friend. The view finder isn't very clear, but it never was. The lens is clean, no haze or fungus, and it really is a very sweet lens. Maybe it's because I used it for so long, and started learning about photography with it, but I really like the 45mm focal length.</p> <p>Here's one last one, and thank you for reading and looking at what I've posted.</p><div></div>

<p>This next is taken from the same position as the above:</p><div></div>

<p>Another one:</p><div></div>

<p>This next was taken from the same position as the previous one, with the wide angle lens attached:</p> <div></div>

<p>The Minolta HiMatic 11 was my first camera, purchased from one of my sisters in 1978. It's a range finder with a fixed Rokkor - PF 1:1.7 45mm lens. It has speed priority, and does really nicely in low light. I passed it along to another of my sisters when I bought an M6 in 2000.</p> <p>During a recent visit to that sister, in Italy, she gave the HiMatic back to me, because - no surprise - she wasn't using it at all. I was happy to get it back, especially because the on/off switch on a Minolta XE-5 I had with me crapped out, rendering that one useless.</p> <p>The battery in the HiMatic was dead, but the shutter release works without it. It means, however, that the lens remains wide open and there is no metering. I decided that wasn't a problem, but a challenge. Then I decided to up the ante, and fixed an ultra wide lens to the front of the Rokkor. That meant framing and composing were calculated guess work. I loaded a Delta 100 into the camera, and decided to meter it at 100, since I also used a red filter.<br> <br />So, metering at 100 with a hand held meter, a red filter, a wide angle lens I can't see through, F 1.7, top shutter speed 500th of a second, and very bright lighting conditions - not a total loss of control, but apart from the loss of one roll of film if it was a total disaster, what did I have to lose ? Nothing at all.</p> <p>Here are some of the results:</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<p>Through a shop window</p> <div></div>

<p>Mike, that photo really brings back memories for me. My father worked for Texaco for pretty much his entire working career, and that Texaco logo was on so much stuff in our house. I haven't seen it in a very long time. Thanks.<br> I'll take the 28th. </p><div></div>

<p>Last one, same roll of film. This lens is so wonderful, and slowly but surely, I think I am getting a feel for it.</p><div></div>

<p>Same camera, same lens. Film is HP5, developed in HC110 dilution E.</p><div></div>

<p>Wonderful selection of images. Here are my choices, and I hope I have the scaling for them correct, so they will post.</p> <div></div>

<p>Hello everyone, this is from the Fine Arts Museum in Lyon, France. A painting depicting the interior of a photographer's studio in the 19th century, with a young couple ready to have their wedding portrait taken. In front is a lady preparing to take a photo of the painting with her cell phone. I like the layers of reference in this one - a photo of a painting depicting a photo about to be taken, with a photo being taken of the painting. The image is a bit blurry, camera shake, I'm afraid.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you all for your replies, suggestions and links to other threads and information. All of it has given me plenty to read and take into consideration.<br> I had pretty much come to the same conclusion as Dave S suggested, I'm going to have to do some testing.<br> Thanks again, if I get any satisfactory results, I'll share them here.</p> <p> </p>