watson___

Hi Ted..

I use a narrow photography tank than can be filled with water onsite. A front glass panel approx 8"x16" on a 6" wide tank is plenty for most fish, a smaller tank could be used for small specimens. The sides and back are made of 3/8" plexiglas sheet, and painted on the outside with dark streaky colours for better contrast. Use aquarium grade silicon sealant to glue the rig together.

The lighting should be from the side at 30* to 45* angle to reduce reflections. In a studio an umbrella with ribs covered works even better.

Live fish look better with fins fully extended, not clamped up huddling in a corner. To reduce fish anxiety, shade out any distractions that may spook the fish, and move slowly.

Cheers..

Hi all..

Are you into later winter photography? Any favourite tactics? How did

you do this year?

This is a favourite photograpy season for me because receding winter

gives a lot of roundness and texture to snow, creeks, and landscapes.

This is a different look from early and mid winter where the fresh

snow tends to blanket everything evenly. I like the crisper transition

between objects and backdrops. Longer days, more sunshine, and milder

temperatures make field trips more enjoyable. Footprints in snow are

useful for tracking and locating wildlife.

The toughest part of winter shooting for me is making the exposure

tradeoffs needed to manage lighting contrast. My shots on sunny winter

days are more interpretive than usual.

Bye..

Hi all..

I agree with Rene that 645 cameras and lenses are not much bulkier and are almost as convenient as industrial strength 35mm slrs. The bigger negative resuts in more pleasing quality of prints. My 35mm stuff is relegated to long lens work which means that it does not get out of the house often.

For wideangle to short telephoto shots the P645 has no problems keeping up with 35mm for landscape and large wildlife work. For medium telephoto work the 300mm and 1.4x converter on 645 gives me the equiv of 200mm and 300mm on 35mm. (The next step up might be the 400mm and 1.4 which would give the equiv of 250mm and 400mm in 35mm.) This is plenty of length at convenient weights to keep me happy. It is interesting that the lenses can be from the P645 series or the P67 with adapter.

The 500mm and 600mm lenses on 35mm needed for small birds and critters also require bulging muscles, monster tripod techniques, and big bucks. This specialized activity is beyond my attention span and financial reach so I have not bothered to duplicate the capability in 645. Indeed, I think that it is better to concede that this stuff to 35mm.

Dave, P645 instead of P67 for monster telephoto work will allow you to use shorter monsters to fill the frame. The P645 using 500mm or 600mm with 1.4x will be only a bit more difficulty (assuming enough light) than 35mm slrs using the same lengths without the extenders. The 35mm slrs might still be king in this 10x+ despite the smaller negative because they have more headroom in lens speed, can get the magnification without extenders, and can get additional range with extenders.

Cheers..

Hi Stefan..

For rangefinders I use one round filter on the lense and a separate smaller filter on a lanyard for viewing. The angle on the viewing filter is then transfered to the lens filter. It would be straightforward to attach a lump or bead to the rotating ring of the lens filter so that you can orient it and rotate with a pencil etc without moving the lenshood in and out. Saving the lenshood is a good idea to reduce flare and minimize the number of pieces to pack. Cheers..

Hi all..

I am 160 pounds and set a day hiking weight limit of 15 pounds. For more serious hikes the limit is 25-30 pounds which includes the same or less camera gear. The carbon fiber tripod lets me pack 645 kit or a 4x5 with 6x12 back. I reduce the amount of gear to fit within the weight limit, and take even less if possible. Part of the calculation is to use a small lightweight magnesium head or slightly larger magnesium head as needed. With nornal creativity the photographic image can almost always be captured with the gear that is taken.

Cheers..

Hi Peter..

It is easy to switch over to Beseler 23c enlargers which handle 6x9. You can get a new enlarger, or get used 6x9 or 4x5 beselers at great prices. The 4x5 gives future capability for 4x5 and 6x12 enlargements.

Cheers..

Hi David..

The P645 is great for landscape, large animals, medium critters, and macro. It is not convenient for small birds or distant birds because of the magnification needed. Lots of MF shooters switch to 35mmm for small bird stuff. The most accessible collections of MF nature photos seems to in various Haaselblad pamphlets and books.

Cheers..

Hi Roberto..

A 645 negative enlarged to 11x14" should be quite excellent. You may need to adjust the combination of film, setup technique, and processing to achieve that excellence. Of course the 6x7 negative will look much better at 16x20" enlargements, but the gap using good technique at 11x14 is not so visible.

Can you describe whether it is sharpness, colour, saturation, grain, etc that is disappointing. Has the camera been checked for alignment? Can you also describe your lighting, film choice, lenses, aperture, tripod, tripod head, shutter release cable, and accessories etc and we may be able to help tune your technique.

Most of my landscape shooting is with a Pentax 645 and some of it is with a 6x12 back on a Toyo 4x5 A2. I plan to move to a Fuji 690 for a bigger negative than the Pentax and much easier handling than the Toyo.

Best regards..

Hi Irving..

<p>

The Toyo 45A is an excellent performer for field and city use, and I

think that you will enjoy using it. Since you can get it at a very

good price there will be no problem in selling if unsuitable.

<p>

For hiking I worry about weight and handling. I use a 6x12 rollfilm

back. Watch out for some Calumet 6x12 backs which are said to scrunch

the film. Sheet film is a real hassle to handle and process. When

sheet film is needed I use Fuji pack film. For lighter weight avoid

fast lenses and select lenses in the f8 range, but check the specs for

sufficient image circle. Carrying two lenses at a time will be enough

to cover almost everything. The folding focus hood on the Toyo is very

handy and can be supplemented with a jacket or sweater. The Gitzo 1227

tripod is light and sturdy.

<p>

For hiking landscapes I plan to switch over to a Fuji GSW690 camera.

The 4x5 Toyo, film back, lenses, and tripod weigh almost 15 pounds and

the 6x9 Fuji with a lighter tripod should be about 6 pounds.

<p>

For city use, the Toyo has also worked out very well because a little

lens movement goes a long way. For a little extra side shift drill a

spare lens board off center.

<p>

Good luck with your camera..

Hi Al..

<p>

A 6x9 negative can be cropped to 5x9 or 4.5x9 easily to give you the

1:2 panoramic format. In some cases you can take advantage of the

cropping to gain a bit of perspective shift. Careful use of a tripod

and modern films will keep the quality within reach of 6x12.

<p>

The Fuji 6x9s are available with excellent 65mm or 90mm lenses, and

are much more versatile than the Linhof 612s.

<p>

Cheers..

70mm backs and inserts work really well. Just load a bunch of 70mm

cartridges with lengths of film convenient to you. Cheers..

Yes.. Autofocus is useful for medium format nature work in exactly the same way that autofocus is useful for 35mm format nature work.

<p>

Years ago I switched to Pentax 645 for most work and relegated the 35mm Canons to secondary equipment.

<p>

The bulk and weight differences of 645 compared to 35mm are trivial especially when comparing total packages including tripod. Modern features and batteries bulk up 35mm cameras while the longer mirror box on 645 requires less lens barrel length, etc etc

<p>

The improvements in image quality going from 35mm to 645 are large even at asa 50, regardless of the yattering of armchair theorists. The advantage increases when using 100-200 and faster films. (For a visible example of the difference even at magazine print sizes, compare the full page and half page images in the Canon LensWork books. The full page prints, less enlargement, look consistently better than the half page enlargements.)

<p>

Other clunkier medium format cameras were passed over because I saw no reason to give up fast handling, lens metering, TTL metering, and autowind. I expect my medium format gear to display the same all purpose versatility as 35mm gear. I see no reason to cripple medium format gear to conform with the subculture of clunky minimalism, and hope that some of that klutzy stuff is swept from the market by a new generation of modern gear.

If autofocus were available at that time it would have been a basic requirement. It would be used for active subjects or ignored for static subjects in the same way for 645 as for 35mm.

<p>

2-5x lenses are plenty for most nature photography. Many of us do not spent much time shooting small birds or critters so do not often need 10x lenses.

<p>

6x7 or 6x9 cameras would have been even better except that it is definitely a major eacalation and offered no general purpose gear. I am, however, considering a Fuji 6x9 to replace a Toyo field camera that has been tolerable for landscapes only because it is used with a 6x12 rollfilm back instead of sheet film holders. 4x5 for landscape photography is really more of a personal statement than a practical necessity.

<p>

Some of us who want rollfilm quality all the time want autofocus in the same way that 35mmm shooters want autofocus. We do not want to use separate gear for general photography and nature photography. Fuji lead the way in 120 pocket cameras and Pentax and Contax are leading the way for 120 general purpose cameras.

<p>

Cheers..

It is startling to hear that photography has a 150 year history of truth and honesty!

<p>

In my view all media including drawing, painting, photography, video, and digital are interpretations by the authors who hope to convey their points of view.

<p>

In photography the author choses the subject, choses the lighting, choses the angle, choses the pose, crops the viewpoint, applies perspective, alters perspectives, filters the colours, selects exposures, applies multiple exposures, applies darkroom techniques, culls the images, selects presentation style, writes interpretations, hectors the viewer, etc etc etc. It is not difficult at each step to change the truths presented to the viewer.

<p>

I have disregarded the truth and honesty aspects of photography since the time I first read about and started doing darkroom work. Video and digital simply accelerate and proliferate the ability to manipulate the image and the viewer. These expanded capabilities enable the imagemaker to approach the artistic scope enjoyed by writers, sculpters, and painters.

<p>

It was always too late to close pandora's box! Who will patrol the certification schemes? Will we need to disclose that that vinyard rarely has rainbows, or that that elk was actually in a herd of seven, or that that mountaintop is normally grey and not sunset red? Who will believe it and who will care?

<p>

Regular folks have seen enough interpretive photography and video (and literature and sculpture and painting etc) to understand that the truth and honesty of images varies a lot, and regular folks have rational expectations about the images they see. They knoe that even scientific work is subject to interpretation by researchers. My guess is that they will ignore the hand wringing of the photography elites in the way that they ignore the political elites, and good for them!

<p>

I am happy to make interpretive images and admire the images made by others without fretting too much about truth and honesty.

<p>

Cheers..

Hi Martin..

<p>

The entire economy of Banff and Jasper has been built around tourists for 100 years, and makes it possible for visitors to stay in comfortable accomodations and get convenient access to the sights.

Even though there are busloads of tourists in the town, each group can only be in one place at a time so the density of people at each site is quite tolerable.

<p>

Two key ingredients of photography are lighting and composition. Most of the best natural lighting is early and somtimes very early before the tourist crowds arrive, and late in the day when they are back in town enjoying local culture. Even when tourists are milling about, you can set up and plan the shot and just wait for a gap to take the exposure.

<p>

Alberta and British Columbia are extremely large provinces. Once you get out of the most touristy areas you can find equally marvelous scenery everywhere, and still enjoy the comfort of motels and serviced campsites. The automobile assn and govt tourist offices carry lots of info.

<p>

For real bragging rights plan a few wilderness hikes or do some helicopter tours.

<p>

Enjoy you visit..

Hi George..

<p>

My ancient 45M has always printed 35mm evenly sharpness and evenly lit. It prints 35mm well with with my 50mm and 75mm lenses, but I use the sharper 75mm lens.

<p>

When the red pointer on the condenser head is at the 35MM mark on the scale it is 6" above the negative stage. The distances on the scale are 4x5" - 1 1/4", 3x4" - 2 1/2", 6x7cm - 3 1/2", 6x6cm - 4 1/2", 35mm - 6".

The aluminium condenser focusing scale and two set screws are probably universal for all 45M variants, and should be available at a very reasonable cost from Beseler, website http://www.beseler.com.

The condenser focusing scale would be easy to make. The factory piece is made of 1/16" aluminium angle. The front is 3/8" wide and the side is 3/4" wide at the bottom tapering to 1/4" at the top. A 7" piece 3/8' x 3/4" or 3/4" x 3/4" or 1" x 1" profile etc would work well.

<p>

Good luck getting your printer set up. Write again if you have more questions.

<p>

Regards..

Hi Francesc Muntada..

<p>

You might want locate each thing that interests you on the map and see how they cluster. Then pencil in some circuits that cover the main clusters. Consider planning your stops in 2-3 day chunks so that you don't spend all your time driving those distances. If you enjoy spending time talking people and admiring their interests they will point out the best things to see and do.

<p>

Vancouver is the best place to load up on film. Try Leo's Camera downtown, Keerisdale Cameras midtown, or Lens & ShUtter or London Drugs anywhere. No need to check in advance for availability of film - the selection and prices are good in any North American city with a population of a million or more.

<p>

Enjoy your visit.

Hi Robin..

<p>

For 6x7 an 80mm or 90mm enlarger lens will usually be needed to get enough coverage. For convenience in switching back and forth get another lens board and mounting ring.

<p>

Crank the 23C condensor pack adjustment knob located near the top of the enlarger to get even 6x7 illumination.

<p>

If a 6x7 negative carrier is hard to find you can enlarge a 6x7 carrier with a file. Smooth out the burrs and then coat the aluminium with matt black paint to avoid reflections.

<p>

Have fun..

Hi Frank and Peter..

<p>

Thanks very much for the interesting followups. I had assumed that edge dimming was a distance and spread angle aspect of optical geometry. The particle physics aspect is intriguing. Perhaps a good experiment for some rainy day might be to borrow a lens that has edge dimming and meter the falloff zone vs centre zone on the 4x5. Cheers..

The image circle of a given lens depends on the laws of optical physics, the goals of the lens designers, the designs selected, and the costs of manufacturing.

<p>

Here is a webpage with a list of image circles for some large format lenses. Notice that the image for the same length can vary widely.

<a href="http://http.cs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong/photography/lf/lenseslist.html"> http://http.cs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong/photography/lf/lenseslist.html </a>.

<a href="http://http.cs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong"> http://http.cs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong</a>.

<p>

For distances from about 5' to infinity the lens circle can be cut off by:

1. Edges unacceptably fuzzy. Usually because they are outside the intended design circle.

2. Edges sharp but progessively darker especially with lenses designed for very wide angle images. This is because light from edges has to travel so much further than light through the center that it is noticably dispersed and dimmer. Often the lens makers will sell a compensation neutral graduated filter with a dark center that evens out the lighting across the film. Lens designers describe this as the COS Square something something law of optical physics.

3. Mechanical cutoff by square or rectangular masks at the back of the lens. In these cases the designers anticipate a specific use of the lens and put the mask in to limit the image to a specific format and to cut off edge flare and internal reflections. This is common for 35mm and 120 but rare for sheet film camera lenses and enlarger lenses.

<p>

For distances less than 3-5 feet the extension rate needed to focus the lens increases rapidly which spreads the image circle and allows lenses to cover larger formats. For 35mm and 120 mounts the extension for large magnifications (close shots) will become greater than the camera mount limitation and thus allows them to focus when mechanically attached to cameras with a larger film format.

<p>

Lenses designed for normal or long perspectives only need narrow light spreads of 50 degrees or less. This is a simpler design problem for designers. They have the choice of using simpler designs and often end up with good designs with wider image circles than needed for the format. When designers aim for lens mechanical lengths less than the optical length (telephotos) they need to bend the light path in more ways and may or may not end up with excess image circles.

<p>

Lenses designed for wide angle perspectives, 60 degrees and more, push the limits of natural light spread. Designers need all the spread they can get and rarely end up with excess image circles. For 35mm and 120 they often gather the light with a wide angle fron design backed with a reverse telephoto back design to clear SLR mirrors limitations. Extreme wide lenses for rangefinders and bellows cameras usually allow gradually dimming towards the edges and compensate with graduated neutral filters.

<p>

Designers have a range of common design types that they start from. When you examine the list on the link above you will notice that simpler designs with fewer lens groups and elements often cover smaller image circles. The large image cirle lenses usually have more sophisticated designs with more groups and elements and often very large fromt elements to gather maximum light.

<p>

Decades ago, computing a new lens by hand took months or years and limited sophisticated designs to expensive or high cost lenses. Sophisticated designs often cost much more to manufacture than simpler designs. Today, high speed computers, improved optical glass, and computer controlled manufacturing have narrowed setup costs and made better designs available to more markets. Extreme performance lenses with extremely sophisticated designs remain expensive especially when they serve a narrow market.

<p>

Cheers...

Mel is right that the 'smoothness' and the 'tonality' effects can be demonstrated with real enlargements. The images in the Canon LensWork book are examples where the images printed full page are noticably coarser than the images printed at half page.

<p>

The numbers here are only used to lay foundations for the discussion. The selection of one granule per millimeter and a basketball for the image are useful simplifications. Smoothness and tonality apply to objects in the image and not to efficient consumption of film and paper surface area. The selection of a basketball focuses on a real image and avoids bean counting on media formats. The maximum size of a basketball image is limited by the narrow dimension of any media which are approx 24mm (35mm), 45mm (645), 60mm (6x7), and 100mm (4x5). For one granule per millimeter, the diameters would be 24, 45, 60, 100. Number of granules needed to form the image of the ball can be calculated by A = PI x R x R. R = 12, 22, 30, 50. R-square = 144, 484, 900, 2500. PI x R x R approx 450, 1520, 2830, 7860 which are approx 500, 1500, 2800, 7800. (the 1:5 for 35mm vs 6x7 is about the same computed by M Kary using full areas of film). Of course, calipers and high precision calculaters can be used to fine tune the pencil calculations, but the approx numbers are close enough for discussion.

Mel is correct that the calculation only illustrates the relative number of granules needed for the various formats but does not complete the linkage between grain size and smoothness/tonality.

<p>

In our example, the printed image of the basketball image is approx 16 inches in diameter. The 35mm image would consist of approx 500 granules with 24 granules across the diameter, and 16/24 = 6/10 inch per granule. The 4x5 image has 7800 granules with 100 granules across the diameter, and 16/100 = 2/10 inch per granule.

<p>

Our basketball image is mostly made up of panels and lines. The perceived quality of panels can be judged by smoothness. The quality of lines can be judged by tonality. (The quality of textures could be judged by a combination.)

<p>

The impression of smoothness depends on the extent to which the eye can see the items that make up a surface. A masonry wall might be made of concrete blocks, bricks, stucco, or plaster. The surface with the large component size looks the coarsest and the surface with the smallest component loks smoothest. Similarly for the basketball image, the large 6/10 inch granules from 35mm would look coarser than the smaller 2/10 inch granules from 4x5.

<p>

Tonality is the ability to show changes in brightness or colour. The lines on the basketball are transitions from panel to line to panel.

Each granule in the image represents either a line or panel.

<p>

The 6/10 inch granules are so coarse and sparse that most of them would show up on panels and very few of them would show up on the lines. The lines would thus be indistinct and possible not visible which demonstrates that coarse grain degrades tonality .

<p>

The larger number of 2/10 inch granules would ensure that many more of them are available to show up on the lines. The lines would be much more distinct which demonstrates that finer grain preserves the tonality of the original object.

<p>

Therefore, a small granule size results in better renditions of smoothness and tonality. The granules on larger negatives are enlarged less and result in better smoothness and tonality. (There are numerous other subleties that can also contribute, but grain size is the largest contributor.)

<p>

The relative tonality also depends on enlargement. A 4x5 print of the basketball would have 4/24 = 16/100 inch granules on 35mm and 4/100 inch granules on 4x5. Each format would have plenty of granules for good smoothness and tonalty, and the perceived difference would be much less than for 16x20.

<p>

Cheers..

Peter..

<p>

For 35mm, 120 (60mm), or 4x5 (125mm), the enlargements needed for a 16x20 print are approx 12x, 9x, and 5x.

<p>

Assume that you use a film with a grain size of one granule per mm (of course film is actually much finer grained) in each format to take a frame filling picture of a basketball, and then enlarge the pictures to fill a 16x20 print. The numbers of granules used to print a 16 inch image of the ball will be approx 500, 1500, and 7800.

<p>

The printed image formed by 7800 granules (pixels) will have the smoothest tonality and will show details and textures the best. The 1500 granule image will look coarser and the 500 granule image will look the coarsest. Which means that all other factors being equal, the largest film format will yield the best tonality.

<p>

These effects are exagerated for coarse grained films and reduced for finer grained films. 1990's films are much better than 1980's films but the tonality differences at 16x20 across film formats is still quite noticeable.