cony_dowen

Scott, I gave it another a minute ago by scanning at 1200 dpi (the native resolution of the Epson 1240) instead of 300 and by choosing 'color neg' instead of 'b&w neg' as the source. Then in PS Elements2 I discarded the color information (grayscale) and I also sharpened a bit and chose 'auto contrast'. The result is way better now but the sky is still somewhat muddy. IMO the picture is not worth wasting a sheet of printer paper on it. The real good test wold be to dust off the Durst again and print the image for a comparison... I still can't believe that the negative is so horrible. But then I don't have any Rodinal nor Delta 400 experience at all and you are probably right that this combination is to be avoided (I am used to Microphen). I guess they don't call Rodinal 'pea soup' for nothing. I will dig up a better negative with known paper result and scan that as a test.

Thanks for all the help so far.

Thank you for all your very helpful answers. The recommended sites also look very interesting and I will have some reading to do there.

Jordan, I already scanned colour negatives and transparencies on the Epson and was not unsatisfied, but B&W is so much harder and unexpectedly disappointing.

Edward, thanks for the tips. Yes, 14 bits is possible with the 1240U, and I tried to work that way (read a tip about it in a magazine) but then I got a pop-up warning about the resulting file possibly not being usable by certain programs (or something like that). What are the right steps and how and when to convert please?

Scott, I got the Delta 400 roll for free, I usually choose HP5+ or Tri-X when I need ISO400. I recently switched to Rodinal because of economy (it's cheap) and ease of use (liquid). I don't mind grain and the negatives of the Delta 400 looked normal to the naked eye. I would have to enlarge a negative or two in order to appreciate the real contents of the neg. On the scanner the pictures look like the negative has been dragged through mud!

I want to digitalize my output stage but so far scanning B&W negatives is obviously not so straightforward and is taking more time than setting up my wet darkroom and printing a contact sheet and some test prints. I will only upgrade to a film scanner if it works well with B&W too...

Beau and Erik, very nice site-tips, thanks.

Thank you all for the great info.

Dear All,

For the first time I am trying to leave out the enlarger and

chemistry out of the workflow. I developed my Delta 400 in Rodinal

and tried to scan the negatives with the TPU of my Epson Perfection

Photo 1240U flatbed scanner. I am new to scanning and for the time

being I will try my hand on this with the scanner I have now (as a

test) and upgrade later, if I like the process and the results.

So I launched Twain 5, scanned at 300dpi and opened the image in PS

Elements 2... what a crappy result. I obtained a grayish, flat and

muddy picture that doesn't look at all like what the negative

promised (which looks absolutely normal BTW). The prescan in Twain

already suggested a 'dirty' result and no PS treatment seamed to

help. What am I doing wrong? What is the right way to obtain more or

less respectable prints please? What do I need to do to obtain at

least a usable contact sheet? Thank you so much in advance.

-An absolute scanner-rookie-

Timothy, making more dynamic panos is indeed the second reason I want to get away from stitching. I agree a better stitching software would be great for static landscape and cityscape panoramas like I have been doing until now, and I know there is better software out there which is not very expensive either. Wide close-ups, people and city action shots is what attracts me now, in addition to the landscapes. That calls for direct in-camera panos. But if I can do them with my existing equipment (as described in the title of my question) then I can save the money for the XPan, but perhaps the 'feeling' is not the same and maybe the images won't reveal themselves to me through the masked finder of a 35mm SLR the same way as they would through the VF of an XPan? I could start with scanning the XPan negs/slides on my Epson 1240Photo flatbed scanner (for the time being) and move up to a better scanner later. I don't work professionally and I only need moderate enlargements that fit A4-size inkjet paper and images for the web.

Miha, I haven't been able to check XPan negs or slides 'live' - only on the web, so I can't say much about the sharpness difference with 35mm negatives/slides. In my mind the 24x65mm XPan negs seemed not sooo much bigger than a regular neg. (and a lot smaller than 6x7 or 6x9 negs from MF cameras anyway) Could you perhaps explain how working with the XPan compares to a SLR equipped with a 24mm lens and a grid screen? For example, would the Xpan help seeing the world differently and would this be harder with that SLR?(I imagine so because the viewfinder image of the XPan would be bigger and brighter)

Thanks in advance, Conny.

Thank you for the interesting links.

Hi,

After spending a lot of time stitching the images from my 4MP digital

camera and not being 100% satisfied with the results and the effort

involved at the shooting and behind the PC, I thought I'd try a

different approach. The XPanII is tempting but I am seriously

hesitating to spend that kind of money, especially since I could very

well use my F3HP or FM2n with an E grid focussing screen (perhaps

masked with two pieces of thin black paper) and my Nikkor 24/2.8 lens

and then crop in PS. After all, the viewing angle of the XPan 45mm

lens corresponds with a 28mm lens in 35mm photography, doesn't it? I

would save a lot of money that way or am I missing something here?

The negative of the XPan is of course larger but I don't intend to

enlarge that much anyway. Thank you for your thoughts on this.

My guess is that Nikon and Canon are simply trying to find out how fast the wallet of *some* of you can follow the brand switches...

As Albert said, the self-timer lever takes indeed about twice the force of that needed to move the on/off switch. But no creaking sond on my F3HP (S/N 187xxxx) - just a clear click sound on the end of the travel.

I have the same problem with the E-screen for my F3HP. Perhaps Nikon cannot be expected to etch the grid lines correctly? I believe that my F3 is O.K., since another screen in the shop behaved the same way...

My bet is on an F3D instead of an FM3D... Remember : Nikon made the F3 soldier on until not so long ago. They only stopped production to give the retailers a chance to clear their shelves before the F3D arrives. The MF-3D digital back will look like a film back (+ LCD) attached to a MD-4, because extra space is needed for batteries and electronics (the Leica digital back also has a bottom 'winder' part under the camera for that purpose). Remember Nikon released the F3AF many years ago and now they can draw on that experience for the new DE-3D viewfinder with focus confirmation, extra info displays, spot and matrix metering, lens contacts for compatibility with P and AF lenses and... with a regular TTL hotshoe on top. My source further confirms that the back is completely interchangeable to enable further use of film with a regular back on the body... this also means that the digital back will be available seperately for use on our older F3 and F3HP cameras as well. I'm pretty sure The F3D will hit the shops right before Xmas and thus well before the Kwanon T90D. Asked 'Why?' the Nikon officials apparently answered that since they could hardly keep up with Kwanon they decided instead to concentrate their efforts on their loyal customers and produce more 'niche' products! (see the Nikon S2 rebirth, the FM3a, the AS-17 TTL flash adapter for the F3, etc.)

Way to go Nikon! This is what I have been saving for all those years!

FFFFF33333HHHHHPPPPP

You can also use a glass fiber pen to clean the metal and then

clean the dust away with a Q-tip dipped in alcohol or something

similar. These pens have replaceable tips and are very handy for

all dirty contacts or batteries - they won't harm the shiny nickel

surface if you stop in time. What I don't know myself is what to do

after that when it becomes apparent that the corrosion has

attacked the plate so severely that the shiny nickel coatings is

gone... the bare metal will remain vulnerable for oxidation and

corrosion, but I don't see how you can re-plate the contact...

The SB-20 was the flashgun that the F501 (N2020) was

advertised with. It has a built-in AF assist light, M, A, TTL, and

rotating flash head for wide, normal and tele + tilting... great flash

- I own one and it is IMO underrated and underpriced in auctions.

That's great Spencer. I hope you enjoyed yourself in Brussels.

Thanks Eric. And here's the last one. I know I look silly on this

picture, but if I'm filling up this thread I thought I might as well

give you all a little laugh...<div></div>

That didn't work right, did it...

I hope you don't mind another one...

Eric,

This was taken on the Sabon (Zavel) in Brussels, Belgium.

There were about 200 glass fiber cows on display this summer,

all over the city. Each cow was treated by a different artist and

people could bid on the different on a website. The money went

to charity.

Sorry for the large 'Coloured Cows' picture... forgot to crop it. The

moderator(s) can delete it if necessary.

Coloured cows...

Dear Santa, Last year you gave me GAS, now please this year

bring me money to cure it. Just kidding... a lens for my Graflex XL

will do.

I got myself a minty GSN a short while ago and was indeed very impressed with the results : very sharp, very high contrast and splendid colour (Fuji Superia 200). The Gear Acquisition Syndrome now makes me want a GTN or a GL (hard to find and expensive I hear). Perhaps also a Lynx IC 14E.

In fact I am so satisfied with the GSN's results that I decided to sell my Retina IIIS, Automatic III and Retinette IIb. The Yashica's results are far better, perhaps equal to those of my Nikon gear...

I am a bit less impressed with the ergonomics of the controls around the lens though, and also with the viewfinder. The VF is bright, but for my taste too wide around the brightline frame - I tend to forget that not everything I see in the VF will be recorded.

Hi Timber and Jay, Thank you for your replies. As a matter of fact I paid $150 for the camera, which is -I think- a reasonable price for its condition and compared to other XL bodies (sometimes wrecks) on *bay lately. If you like you can check out item nbr.2960625689 on the auction page or copy-paste the following line : <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2960625689&category=710&rd=1>

Of course I will only know if it was worth it when it arrives, but I have confidence in the seller. Now 'all' I need is a Graflok adapter, a film back, a lens and a grip... (oh boy, what did I get into? ;-)

I think I will go for a Planar 80mm, but I would like to go wider later (how wide can you go with a regular XLRF body?) : I was seduced by the DIY project on Bigcamera.com to modify an XL into a SW body, but the price of modern WA lenses with their own helicoid focussing mount is much to steep for my budget. Perhaps later. CONNY

Jay, thank you for your expert reply. It is good to know that lens

and barrel have to match - I will keep that in mind.

Re. the film backs again if you allow : I saw RH-10 backs with

yellow levers and others with a black lever. Does this have

anything to do with their age (production date) perhaps? Excuse

the dumb question, but do Mamiya 6x7 backs use the same

mount as the XL's? in other words : can you just swap a RB67's

back to an XL body and vice versa?

Thanks, Conny.