www.graemehird.com

Hi Andre,

Although it might look a bit strange, it is actually normal. It has happened as a consequence of the use of front rise. What you are seeing is the removal of perspective in one direction.

Cheers,

I asked the same question a couple of years ago:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003QiF

Don't let people put you off - make them yourself if that's what you want to do.

Cheers,

Leonard,

Whether or not you notice vertical convergence, it's there.

You'll find a similar discussion in the following link, with a couple of other solutions:

http://www.f32.net/discus/messages/7/7101.html?1093358721

Cheers,

"When the front and rear standards are parallel, perspective is rendered just as you see it ...."

I must respectfully disagree a little with Michael on this point: by keeping the standards parallel, the perspective will be removed and the scene will be geometrically correct, rather than being rendered "as you see it".

Verticals really do appear to converge from a person's point of view, but we often use the view camera's movements to counteract this perspective.

As someone else mentioned, a 210mm lens is not that wide, so you won't be getting that close that you'll need to worry about perspective control very much (assuming you want the whole tree in the frame). In any case, your assumption about tilting the rear standard is correct, but to maintain focus, you'll also need to tilt the front standard by a similar amount so that it too is (nearly) parallel to the tree. If you're too close, you might exceed the coverage of the lens. Good luck, and show us the pic when you're done!

Cheers,

If I may piggyback on this question:

How much are people paying in Oz for E6 processing? They slug me AUD$8 a 5x4 at Churchills.

Is anybody getting them considerably cheaper?

I assumed John was talking about colour labs, Bill. Not every LF photographer has a darkroom capable of processing colour films.

I do my own B&W, but trannies are another beast altogether with the equipment I have.

Cheers,

Graeme

I use Churchills in Perth on a regular basis for my trannies. They also do negs when I need them.

Others will chime in since there are quite a few still processing 5x4 film.

Cheers,

Graeme

Thanks Dave Rivera - these questions come up regularly and we always seem to go around in circles with the answer (literally, since the holder has no "right way up"). A picture is the definitely best way to answer it.

(Another example of the question is here: http://www.f32.net/discus/messages/93/1048.html?1076443686 )

Me too .... I had a hell of a time finding the place to put the batteries, and I still can't get the motor drive or the meter to work. :)

The company's manual only shows how to fold the camera because that's all the camera does. If you need to know how to make use of the camera's movements, read a good book or visit QTL's web site. That is where you'll find the info you need - such things are beyond the scope of a camera manual.

Cheers,

Is it Mark Gatehouse, Donal Taylor or D. Kevin Gibson asking the questions? He's at it here too:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/499146.html

Sounds like multiple personality disorder with a healthy dose of paranoid schizophrenia disorder thrown in for good measure.

(Or maybe I'm just jealous because the voices don't speak to me too ....)

Sekonic meters are calibrated on 12% grey rather than the 18% grey your camera is calibrated to. Search the archives and you might find a solution for this problem in there (ie how to recalibrate your meter). There might also be something on the Luminous Landscape web site. In the mean time, keep adjusting the film speed as you are if you're not happy with the exposures you're making without the adjustment.

Cheers,

Lakhinder,

In this context (ie the internet) it doesn't matter what format the image was captured with. What counts (as always) is the quality of the image as it is presented to us. Since all the images here are small digital files, they are what we should judge.

I believe the LF Photo of the Week you are referring to was probably my "Haunted Wood" image. If we were to lay out the print of that against some of the smaller digicam prints and judge them, things might change, but online, it doesn't matter. If we need to assess the way an image was formed to assess its value, it becomes an exercise in futility due to the infinite number of ways we can work an image.

Cheers,

Dave,

Nice shot - looks almost like a painting!

Hi Peter,

I'm a geologist and an LF photographer who has just returned from a 10 day trip to Ontario (both geological and photographic). I spent several days in Timmins and a day and a half in Algonquin Park.

"Must Sees" of geology: actually, there weren't any. The country north of North Bay has been recently scoured by glacial activity and the terrain is dominated by the products of that glaciation. The geomorphology is essentially glacial till remnants with lakes and small hills very common. Few large bedrock hills remain and there hasn't been enough time for the hills to begin crumbling and fracturing. Most of them are rounded and smooth where they are free of vegetation.

Algonquin park has some great lake scenery that's easily accessable from the car. If you're patient or quick, you can get LF wildlife shots from the the side of the road - the moose were very plentiful last week.

Watch out for the mosquitoes - they are also very plentiful .....

Cheers, Graeme

Len,

You'll find a few of my LF shots here on PN under my single photos, many more on the www.f32.net site and even more on my own web site, www.scenebyhird.com - have fun.

Cheers,

Graeme

I also have the Starlight. The lack of viewfinder display is of no consequence during actual use. Meter off the two extreme parts of the scene you want to record while using the "average" function and you will see the SBR of the scene at a glance. You then choose the exposure settings you want from the analog scale at the bottom of the screen.

If you can't see which part of the scene is the darkest that you would like to record, you need more than a spot meter.

The Starlight is a very capable meter and I'm happy I bought one.

Graeme

Melvin,

The scene in Perth is also quite poor. Places to try are Camera Electronics (they've got the best range of stuff) and Perth Pro Sales (I haven't been there for some time, but they don't have much).

As far as places to photograph, I can't recommend many places in the Perth area, but if you are heading out to Kalgoorlie, give me a call and I'll take you out to some of my favourite haunts.

Cheers,

Graeme

Kevin,

Even the f32.net forum gets more traffic than photo.net's LF forum these days. I guess photo.net are no longer listening to their customer's needs. It's a bit sad really ....

Graeme

Hi Frank,

Ya got me there .... I didn't realise the orientation of the flare was in that direction.

Given that info, it looks like internal reflection between two parallel mirrors. I'm sure you've seen the effect when you enter a room with mirrors on opposing walls. Reflections seem to step off into the distance, each slightly offset from the previous image. The scans shown above have that look about them.

How to deal with it? Is there a text shortcut for a shrug of the shoulders? Again, I think the best solution is to turn the light down a little, since the scanner is boosting the level to attempt to see through the dark areas of the film. That's not a real solution though - there will still be some reflection occurring.

Cheers,

Graeme

Hi Frank,

That's definitely wrong. The step-wise nature of the flare suggests to me the sensor is experiencing flare, in that it is "remembering" the highlight after the sensor has moved to the next step in its scan. The memory fades over time as the sensor moves along its path. It shouldn't show that effect, but it indicates the level of the light source is too bright. If you can find a way to turn it down and do multiple passes to get your exposure correct, you might be able to work around it.

Let's hope PD comes to the party with the replacement scanner.

Cheers,

Graeme

Hi Happy,

1) I bought mine new in 1998. No manual came with it.

2) The wood on mine is varnished - the raw wood should be protected by that. If your nose is against the glass, you're too close. Clean it with glass cleaner - and the glass when you've finished your nose :)

3) Don't bang the camera while you take a picture, and stop worrying about it. It'll be sharp.

4) The serial number is on the underside of the camera when it is open. It is written in pen. Mine is 97-25, indicating it was made in 1997.

5) Mine does not have anything written on the screen.

Stop worrying about your new acquisition and make images with it. It will last you many years.

Cheers,

Graeme

Hi Butch,

I'm not going to critique your work from a 3 month period 5 years ago: you've moved on from those days and won't be recreating the same images.

Your question indicates a desire to grow because you are no longer challenged by your work. You've demonstrated a technical proficiency with your current materials which few can match, and yet now feel there must be more to life than creating the same images. Fine - nothing wrong with those feelings whatsoever. It seems to me that what you are really asking for is a challenge, so step outside your comfort zone. Stop doing what you now do: shoot colour, use a digital camera handheld, pick a subject and make 12 good photos of it over a month, shoot with only one lens for a month, try portraits, take only one sheet of film with you on an outing, shoot high-key subjects only, shoot only at night, etc, etc ..... It does not matter what you do, just do something different and master it. The exercise should foster different methods of thought and help break your creative block. Then you can go back to your normal methods if you desire.

Above all else, have fun!

Cheers,

Graeme