ben_crabtree

I like this one better than your first one - it's interesting how the hose leads your eye around and back to the car.

Here's one more positive review for Tony. Great service, low prices.

1,8,16 & 25. In general, the B&W appeal to me more than the color, and I also do not like the red paint.

The previous discussion points made fascinating reading. Leaving aside questions of his character, I have to disagree on the photos themselves; I don't like his over-the-top color intensity. To me, it reminds me of garish paintings I've seen. I've seen much more sensitive photos of these same regions.

You could have checked out the background a bit better -- it looks as though some big black cloud is attached to her hair.

 

Otherwise, a very cute picture, and I like the degree of softness.

Assuming that the chrome lenses are not T* coated, I'd see the price as just OK -- a bit less than it would take to assemble the package for yourself. On the other hand, if you wanted to sell/trade the chrome lenses for newer T* models, you would end up spending a bunch more. I would try to get it without the lenses for $1000.

I'm trying to learn and put into practice at least some elements of

the zone system with my Hasselblad. I want to maintain maximum

sharpness, but wouldn't want to end up with seriously elevated grain

as a result of extended negative development. I've read that TMax

100 is quite sensitive to development; does this mean that it

responds to N+1 and N+2 development poorly, or well? Would I have

better results with Acros?

 

My initial intention is to use X-tol 1:1. Any other preferences?

The cropped one is vastly better -- much more focused, has much more impact.

Sorry I was too vague.

 

I'm interested in macro photography, and I would like the flash to be less than $250 (used is fine).

I've seen a little discussion of this issue, but no definitive

answer. The question: is there a currently-available and not overly

expensive ring flash that will go over my Bay 60 100mm Hasselblad

lens?

Are there any tests of Contax lenses from that same source? I would love to compare them.

Almost every responder has given you a different answer, which just goes to show that it's all a matter of personal taste. I go with Emre -- crop at the left "notch", which is to say cut out all of the guy on the far left. I think the rest of the information in the picture adds to its interest.

Is it possible to make Provia less contrasty, without destroying its

saturation, by adjusting exposure and/or processing. I like the

film's sharpness and the way it handles greens, but there is

virtually no shadow density in my sun-lit sceens. I get similar (not

quite so intense) results with Astia. If it were a black & white

film I would know what to do, but not with slides (I understand that

slide film has less latitude than negative film). I've tried some of

the portrait-oriented Fuji slide films, and find them sort of

lifeless.

 

Am I just unrealistic in wanting both saturation and only moderate

contrast? Do I need to stick to negative film to get closer to what

I want?

I'm just acquiring an RZ body. I have read a few comments that the

newer RZ lenses are much sharper than the older RB lenses (especially

the "C" series). Are all lenses marked "RZ" of the newer

configuration/quality? If I look for a 110mm, what do I need to look

for to make sure it's a newer one?

I'm a member that has used the forum to sell some items. The great advantage of this venue is that my audience is pre-selected to be one that has at least potential interest my items; in other words, my ad won't get lost in the clutter of ads for lesser (sorry) equipment. My experience, by the way, has been excellent, and it wouuld appear from my small sample that the LUG has a lot of high-class members.

Thanks for all your ideas.

 

The rollfilm back for the 4x5 is not the answer for me, for two reasons: 1) my camera doesn't take rollfilm backs; and 2) I am looking for an option that avoids the extra time per exposure I encounter when I use my 4x5.

 

Sounds like the RB67/RZ67 might be the way to go.

I'm a 35mm photographer who wants to acquire a 6x7 system in order to

make detailed, fine-gradation black & white prints, often of table-

top items (moderate close-ups), with some outdoor scenics and close-

ups; I'm not interested in 6x6, and I already have a 4x5. Also, I'm

not interested in a range-finder.

 

I know that lots of people have differing opinions, but I'm wondering

if there's any consensus as to whether Bronica or Mamiya has the

sharper lenses? Also, which specific normal-to-moderate-telephoto

lenses (for either camera) have the best reputations for sharpness.

Which are the more reliable bodies. Finally, if I'm not interested

in electronics, would an RB67 be just as good (but cheaper) than an

RZ67?

 

Thanks for any help.

On a purely economic basis, the answer is clear -- debt against an

appreciating asset (a house) is leverage that works in your favor,

especially if you're in the U.S. and your mortgage interest is

deductible. Furthermore, inflation is likely to get somewhat worse

(my guess), which would make a Leica more expensive in the future and

increase your theoretical gain on your house.

 

<p>

 

On the other hand, I don't believe that most people think about their

houses is purely economic terms. I know I don't, otherwise I would

be increasing my mortgage rather than paying it down ahead of

schedule.

 

<p>

 

The bottom line -- think seriously about which path would make you

feel better in 6 months, and then do that.

I have had exactly the same experience. It takes a lot of thought

and practice to "see" in black and white, and ignore what our eyes

are telling us through the seeing of color. When I am lucky enough

to take the rare good picture in black & white (other than a picture

of a family memeber), it is because I was focusing on some basic

graphic principles (i.e., line, shape, texture) that didn't involve

the element of color.

 

<p>

 

I think I'll be working on this for the rest of my life.

Why not combine them? In the "Appreciating Rodinal" discussion on

the Unblinking Eye webpage, Sam Elkind talks about a blend of the two

generating a nice midpoint between the grainlessness of Xtol and the

sharpness of Rodinal. I just tried it on Acros -- 15 min. @ 20

degrees C -- and the negatives loook extremely sharp but not

as "brittle" as T-Max. Probably 10-15% less time would have been

better. My enlarger is in limbo at the moment, so I haven't printed

them, but the negatives look very promising.

In Bruce Barnbaum's "The Art of Photography", he says (on page 94) the following:

 

<p>

 

"...Microdol-X has a strange flaw in its development characteristics. If the negative has a large dense area in direct contact with an area of much lower density, with a sharp edge at the point of contact between the two areas, there will be a slight "ghost" image developed into the negative. This will translate into a barely visible gray line within the light area on the final print. It is not very obvious, but it is there....."

 

<p>

 

I've never heard of this. Has anyone else fun into it?

I believe that the accessory viewfinders give you a better

approximation of the perspective of the 21mm or 24mm lenses, rather

than just the frame lines on an otherwise more normal perspective.

In that sense, they should equate to the perspective available on an

SLR-wide angle combination.

Thanks to John and Conrad for their very informative comments!

 

<p>

 

Given those comments, it would seem that the ideal film (for me, at

least) would have a very steep incline in the middle of the curve

(for sharp definition within the mid-tones), but very gradual

shoulders at the high and low ends so as to avoid blocking up the

highlights or the shadows. My question is, which mid-speed film and

developer combination most closely fits that description?

 

<p>

 

Thanks

I've read with interest the discussions about using sodium ascorbate with Rodinal. Two questions:

 

<p>

 

1. Can I mix the ascorbate with water in advance, and store it for later use, or would it deteriorate (so that I need to mix it up just before developing)?

 

<p>

 

2. I've used Rodinal 1:100 with T-Max 100 with some success, but a 1:50 dilution is suggested in the sodium ascorbate combination. Would a 1:100 w/ascorbate mixture work as well or better than a 1:50 dilution?

 

<p>

 

Thanks

I have been told by a pretty knowledgeable and experienced

professional camera store employee that when Doisneau used the Leica,

he used only the 50mm lens and couldn't understand why anyone would

use any other focal length. Interesting story, if true.