nicholas_t.

I think Marc's gesture is great. Philanthropy is underrated.<p/>

10 assisting jobs for an M6 classic - heck, if I wasn't on the other side of the world I'd be there in a shot!<p/>

I just hope I earn enough to be able to keep up me subscription next year ;-)

I have been playing around with tech-pan in Gainer Vitamin C developers. No pictures - sorry.<p/>

However, the interesting question to me is why do so many leica users use tri-x? Or any other 400 film for that matter.<p/>

100 films for sure, but as Mr Puts often states, you might as well use your momma's p+s if you use fast film (well he doesn't quite say that).<p/>

Or for that matter a tripod...

I am really enjoying my late model Rolleicord (Va type 2), I've had it fully serviced and it is a real treat to use.<p/>

FWIW, a '3.5 Rolleiflex is much smaller and lighter than a '2.8.

Apart from the obviously blurry example, those tests are actually quite good - for the Pentax!

Ditto what Grady said :-))

I've emailed Jan Exner, the inventer of Foto timer, and asked if he can give us a more clues as to the enlarger timer function of his software.<p/>

Perhaps, if someone knows how to speak French they could ring him, his phone number is on the website. Just a thought...

"The Heliar Type... 2-inch and 3 inch Enlarging Ektars"<p/>

Rudolf Kingslake (Director of Optical Design, Eastman Kodak Co.), Lenses in Photography, Case-Hoyt, NY, 1951, p. 129

I don't know and don't take responsibilty for the enlarger thingy. Something about if your pda has a serial connection.

I found this piece of palm freeware on the net, it times and archives

a gazillion processes and can even turn your enlarger on and off! <a

href="http://www.jan-exner.de/software/fototimer.html">Foto timer<a/>

I mean 'overrated'.

Woops, my mistake, Acros is an ISO 100 film. However, it does seem a tad underrated, even when compared to other films of the same ISO (100/21).

I have exhibited in a dealer gallery situation for 8 years and have had several public gallery exhibitions including one which toured for 2 and a bit years. I am currently enroled in a Masters in Fine Arts programme. This programme is half research based and half course work.<p/>

The more I look at my earlier work, I am afraid to say, it isn't what's called, 'art'. I asked the question specifically in a critique a couple of weeks ago, and the answer came back, 'if it isn't concept based it isn't what we call art'. So, this counts out most of what most people consider art, traditional portraits, landscape, architectural photgraphy and so on.<p/>

To stir things up, Sherman and Kruger's work is art, even if they are portraits; Misrach and Mann's work is considered art even if they're landscapes; Gursky's architecture is, and so on. They are artists who work conceptually. In many ways, Cartier Bresson's recourse to draw, might be considered an act of art. Not because he is practising a known and accepted art-form, but, because he's making a statement through his actions.<p/>

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy photography, the darkroom and especially photographs by Cartier Bresson. It's just that the world is bigger than the insular photographic world, with all our camera and lens idolatry (I include myself when I say 'our')... It's a postmodern world - right?

Acros, is not really an ISO 100 film. I don't know how 'they' get that - I get an EI of 40. All said it's a good film but it does seem to require more time in the soup compared to other films I've tried.

Thanks for the article and link. Refreshing and enjoyed it very much.

I should have said: all the lenses were stopped down to F8. One stop for the Nikkor and Axinon lens, 2 for the Rodenstock. So, the test favored the Rodenstock. I suppose my point is that they all proved good enough for my use.

I did a test once with a late model 80 f4 Rodagon, 80 El Nikkor N 5.6 and an 90 Axinon 5.6 (?). I could not tell the differance in sharpness and tonality (stopped down) at a print size of 24x30in! The Rodagon and the Nikkor are 6 element lenses and the little french Axinon - a four element beauty! The enlarging ektars are reputed to be good lenses, some are heliar designs (?) from memory.

Artcraft in NY are good (friendly and good service) and you can order online.

An 'AGRIF'. 8^p

I don't have the article Salt to taste, I couldn't get a hold of it at the time it came out. I am going on the previous threads on Photo.net for this as well as the <a href="http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Rodinal/rodinal.html">appreciating rodinal<a/> article.<p/>

2 parts Ascorbic Acid to 1 part Sodium Bicarbonate equals (close enough anyway) the equivilent of the acid in Sodium Ascorbate.

I have a 10-20 year and a 30-50 year old cache of metol - both work fine. Keep out of light and tightly capped.

The ratio of acid to bicarbonate, according to Patrick, is 176/84.<p/>

2 tsp of acid to 1 tsp of bicarbonate will give you your 4 gms.<p/>

It is important you neutralise this before you mix it in with the other developer solution. <p/>

So, in a small beaker 50ml's or so, mix in about 30-40mls of warm water (warm/hot for your pinky). Mix in the acid and bicarbonate to your warm water and stir in thoroughly and wait a full five minutes at least until all traces of fizzing dissipate. The fizzing is CO2 and will ruin you lovingly crafted negs... <p/>

Finally, mix in with the rest of the solution.

Justin, have you thought about mixing up Gainer's Phenidone based Vitamin C developer as a substitute for the Xtol?<p/>

As a developer it is very good and as a bonus it is designed for people like us who live in remote places. There are many ways to mix it up (you can use teaspoons as a measure) and there seems to be a lively bunch of enthusiasts able to provide assistance if any is needed (on Photo.net). Patrick Gainer often pops up as well!<p/>

unblinkingeye.com has the basic article and there is much written here on Photo.net as well. For instance, to make this developer the only photographic chemical you would need to source outside of Singapore is the Phenidone. Artcraft in NY will be able to send you some no problem.<p/>

Good Luck whatever you decide, Nicholas (the Vitamin C evangelist) Twist

60mm and 95mm Focotar F4.5 lenses.

Thanks Jason, very helpful. I don't think he's too worried about making a million dollars from it (good thing too), more curious that these lenses get used. Anyway one of those PUC shutters sounds like the way to go, if someone were to use it.<p/>

I am familiar with the actual lens design, which should (?) be a more highly corrected design than the Tessar. I thought the vintage would be close to being coated, but that those are called Color Heliar.

Russ, you obviously haven't tried Forte 400 or even 100 which are both grainer than APX 400 by far. APX 400 is equivilent to Tri-X and HP5+ of which their technology is similar. APX is different, in the developers it likes and doesn't like (for grain that is), it beats Tri X in some developers and in others it doesn't. Personally I can't stand Tri X in D76. It is grainy in Rodinal at 1:25 for 9 mins, but 1:75 for 13mins - beautiful. The Gainer developers it loves. It's a pity they don't make it in 4x5 and 8x10. I reckon then you'd get a few large formatters converting. It definatly beats many of the medium format 400's (Tri X) in the tonal range department.