Gepe Medium Format slides - negative sliding within mount

[sanjay_chaudary]

<p>Hi, I got Gepe glassless slide mounts for both medium format and 35mm. It seems that a part of the image is cut off when using the slide mount - more so for the medium format ( 6x7 slides).<br>

1) is the image cut-off inevitable?<br>

I find it easier to reopen/close the 35mm slide mount than the 54x68 mount. Keeping the slide securely within the mount seems easier for the 35mm mount.<br>

2) The slide looks more prone to shifting around within the 54x68 glassless mount . I see two slits on top and two on bottom within slide mount . <br>

Are these meant to secure the negative frame?I have some of my slides shifting within the mount and I can see gaps.<br>

It seems more difficult to use than the fix points on the 35mm slide.<br>

3) If I position the negative frame within the slits, I am ending up with fingerprints on the slide and the slide is getting slightly curved.<br>

thanks</p>

[henryp]

<p>Once upon a time most slr viewfinders showed 92% of the image precisely because most people shot slides and the finder image was designed to be the same as a mounted slide. I don't recall when camera manufacturers first started bragging about 100% viewfinders but for those of us who remember slides and shot them regularly your experience is nothing new.</p>

<p>Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

[david_henderson]

<p>For more than ten years I shot medium format slides and the best say 20% were projected, so about 1000 pa to be mounted . In that time I never did resolve the best way to mount them.</p>

<ul>

<li>The Gepe 6x6 and 6x7 glassless were about affordable but as you're finding they tended to slip about inside the mounts and it was at best time consuming and sometimes impossible to control the view of your original and flatness control was an issue too. So for lots of reasons you often didn't get the best view of your slide when projected and it was very difficult to mark locations etc. People with 635 and 35mm cameras had it easier all round.</li>

<li>The Gepe glass mounts kept the film flatter and held it more firmly for projection but at a huge cost in terms of money, space ( you could get far fewer sheets in an album/file) and also of weight. It still didn't resolve the titling problem. You have to de-mount them before posting them to a lab or wherever. </li>

<li>Adhesive card mounts were cheaper, generally made badly so the adhesive dried out sometimes before you used the mount but if not pretty much always afterwards. Performance in a projector was variable and so not 100% reliable as they were thinner than the plastic mounts. They certainly had a tendency to mangle in a Hasselblad projector and if so there was a chance you'd damage a slide. But you could title /number the mounts easily enough, and you could control the view of your slide that the world got, albeit that it was never 100% of the image area. . There was always a concern that the adhesive would damage the slide though that wasn't my experience, though you did sometimes need to clean dried adhesive off the surface of the slide with Pec 12. Then they stopped making the version with adhesive already applied, and sold you a little machine to roll on strips of adhesive. Total junk.</li>

</ul>

<p>So there you are about 20 years after I shot my first 8x8/67 slides and still don't know what's best. There are also dynamic solutions, like keeping cut frames of selects in sleeves and mounting them an class when you know you want to project. <br>

Best of luck</p>

 

[sanjay_chaudary]

<p>thanks for all the responses. It answers some of my questions. I avoided the glass version for the cost and also to avoid fungus ( I live in a place with very high humidity).<br>

My question about the medium format slide mount with metal mask is whether the two slots above the slide and below the slide in each half of slide mount is meant for securing the slide. Does one insert the slide into the slot?<br>

<br />thanks</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>Yes. It works to some extent, though imperfectly. I found it best to lift up the flaps of metal a little with a fingernail to make sure the slide could slip into the slot and then when fully positioned press down on the metal to hold the piece of film more strongly. As I say, better but not perfect.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p>As David said, the slots are for locating the film - I use a pair of tweezers to lift them slightly, but the film still has a tendancy to move. I fix the film in place using a small sliver of self adhesive tape on the very edge of the film - a method I've used for years and found very effective.<br>

As you've pointed out, there is a small degree of image loss (about 1.5mm if my memory serves me correctly) - not necessarily a bad thing as it allows for a small amount of image adjustment within the slide frame and allows you to correct a slightly sloping horizon!</p>

[sanjay_chaudary]

<p>thanks. It's just one or two slides moving inside the frame in a batch of 14 mounted slides. I am wondering if the metal mask is really needed? <br>

It looks to me like the 35mm slide mount design is better.</p>

[david_smith35]

<p>Sanjay, if you are using the glass mounts the metal mask holds the glass in the mount. Strictly speaking, the mask is unecessary but the design of the mount makes them a necessary evil.</p>

[sanjay_chaudary]

<p>David, I was speaking of the glassless mount for 6x7</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>"I don't recall when camera manufacturers first started bragging about 100% viewfinders"<br /><br />Nikon was making a big deal about 100 percent accurate viewfinders when I bought my first F2 in 1976. Seemed important at the time but Henry is right -- slide mounts cuts off a hair all the way around, as did negative carriers. And then another little bit got lost from the easel blades that held down the paper to make a print. And that's to say nothing of the fact that ost people cropped what would have been an 8x12 image to 8x10. And newspapers or magazines cropped any which way they liked.<br /><br />There were "artistes" who filed out their negative holders to show the edge of the frame and made prints that showed the sprocket holes but do me that was pointless.</p>

[sanjay_chaudary]

<p>Thanks for the replies. I am more concerned about the negative in the slide moving around in the mount for the 6x7 , than the cropping.</p>