djl251

Some of these scams are getting very crafty.

Required reading on internet fraud

http://www.ifccfbi.gov/index.asp

Ebay Scams

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=439805

No batteries, no viewfinder blackout, no camera shake, no shutter delay, no auto focus,no

auto exposure, no excuses.

I too have had bad results with HC-110. Your first scan looks a lot like mine used to. I

cut way back on the recommended development times, and shot the film at half its rated

speed (100 for tri-s, 64 for plus-x). That seemed to help dramatically. I think others

haveobtained the same result by using dilution H, which may be a better idea.

However, I don't think one should be so hasty to dismiss what Scott Eaton says. I have

found that my nikon scanner V ED, seems to accentuate the grain beyond reason. I think

it must use a highly specular light source, sort of like the difference between a condenser

and diffusion light source in printing. You might take some of your "bad" negatives and

see how they print. There is a lot of black magic in scanning B&W negs.

As usual, you posed a good question and stimulated a good discussion.

I have some light clock oil, the kind you use in old spring and pendulum clocks, that

seems to work really well. I figure that if it won't gum up a clock it ought to work pretty

well here. I bought it off the internet someplace that I cannot remember now, after

searching under clock repair supplies.

This is how you can lubricate this lens.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=273817<div></div>

The lens is pretty easy to disassemble and lubricate. I have some pictures that I will post

tomorrow when I get home from work.

This is a remarkable structure,so grand in its size and in its detail. It's a place of difficult

lighting with its bright stained glass illuminating a relatively dim interior. In addition to the

cavernous interior, the place has a sound and feel that make it an experience that is

difficult to convey in a photograph. I think you've done a pretty darn good job.

Here's a couple of mine:<div></div>

Old Chinese saying "Good advice hurts the ear". Keep shooting and trying to improve. I

think we will see some fine work from you

OK say you don't have the moon available or any object at infinity. You can do this. Draw 2

parallel lines spaced 69.25mm apart (the M rangefinder base length). When the camera is

properly adjusted and focused for infinity, the two lines are superimposed in the

rangefinder. This is independent of viewing distance.

The seller says that this camera flares, and he has taped an ND filter over the window for

the lucky buyer. HA

Here's a suggestion - Use Dilution B (1:31) for 4 minutes. Put your roll in the bottom of a

120 size tank with an empty 135 reel on the top. Use 280 cc of developer. Give yourself 7

seconds to pour in the developer, then shake vigorously immediately and once a minute.

Ditch the stop bath, Drain and rinse with water (instead of stop) after four minutes and fix

in your usual way.

Looking at the pictures - I swear you can't tell one from the other. I have all of them

except the Summarit. God knows why. Gear lust thats all. It's a sickness.

Tan - I am at a loss to understand whats going on here. Tri-x at 200 and HC110 is my

favorite combination , producing great tones and fine grain. Here you have what should be

a high contrast scene (judging by the shadows) but its just flat. So you pulled the

development. So where is all the grain from? Maybe your scanner is working against you

here (grain alaising).Or did you scan a print? What did you do with the histogram? And

contrast? I'd like to know.

I would agree with Richard. I shoot tri-x at 200 and develop in HC 110 dil B - 20%. Try

this combination - you'll like it.