larry_menzin

<p>Actually, the film, photofinishing and entertainment group was the only profitable part of Kodak. The other two groups took heavy losses.</p>

<p>I've been using Dorian E6 for 4x5 and 8x10 sheet film. Highly recommended.</p>

<p>The V500 scans look out of focus. The Nikon 9000 has auto focus. Flatbed scans of film do require sharpening to compensate for film layer thinknesses and scattering effects. The DSLR shot also looks out of focus. I would put much more credibility in a test that used scanners with autofocus functionality to ensure that focus is correct.<br>

I'm not a big fan of flatbed scans of medium format film (unless the scanner is a Scitex). The Nikon 9000 gives great results with medium format. I personally use an Imacon for MF scans. I'm currently trying an Epson 10000XL for scanning 8x10 slides. Since non-high-end flatbeds are really only good for 4x enlargement, I'll be scanning 8x10 at 1200dpi, providing for 32x40 prints with acceptable quality. </p>

 

<p>When do we get this film in 4x5 and 8x10 sheets?</p>

<p>I use a 3 series Gitzo with an Arca Swiss 8x10 and heavier lenses. A 2 series would be insufficient for 8x10, but might be usable for 4x5.</p>

 

<p>The Arca 171mm front frame can hold just about anything as well. I use a 360mm F6.8 Symmar-S on it with no problems. IMHO the Arca is a great combination of rigidity and portability. The 20lb metal cameras will do just about anything, but lugging them around is problematic.</p>

<p>For 8x10, I've been using f22 in optimal situations where camera movements can be used to maximize focus area and f32 where more depth of field is required. f45 is used rarely, and only for normal and longer lenses.<br>

Usually, stopping down is limited by environmental factors. Yesterday was one of those unusual days with bright sun and deep snow. Even though the wind was blowing, I was able to shoot using 1/30 at f32. That is pretty rare.<br>

In most cases we are dealing with 1/2 at f32 or worse and a windy day is fatal.</p>

 

<p>I've been using a Gitzo 1325 with an Arca-Swiss B1G ballhead for 8x10. Works very well.</p>

I always thought this lens was built by Schneider. It also exists for the Rollei cameras.

Horseman has the SWD II cameras that take digital backs. They use the same lenses as the SW612.

There is also an ultra-wide 6cm bellows. I am using it with a 35mm Rodenstock HR lens.

Horseman 612 lenses are supplied in helical mounts. Although you can remove lenses from helical mounts and mount them on lens boards, putting then back into helical mounts may affect alignment.

There is a lighter strip within the rectangle that is almost rectagular in shape. The film is Velvia 100.

I have what looks to be a light leak on one shot out of six using a Sinar Zoom

roll film holder set to 6x12. I got the holder used and ran a quick test roll.

5 out of the 6 shots had no problem. Any idea what the problem is?<div></div>

I'm using a Rodenstock 35mm HR lens on an Arca-Swiss 6x9. You can probably use the Rodenstock 28mm HR on the same camera, but the lens costs about $5000.

I've been using Fuji FP-100C45 instant film that expired 11/2007 (last month).

My first results were yellowish in the corners and I thought that maybe the

film had fogged. Later, I just developed an unexposed sheet of this film. The

upper corners were still bright yellow and the other areas were a muddy brown.

Do I have bad film? Shouldn't an unexposed sheet be solid black all over the

frame? Has anyone seen this phenomenon?

Where can I get Rodenstock and Schneider bands?

Are the aluminum bands containing aperture scales for Copal shutters

commercially available, or do they need to be custom made?

With LF cameras, panorama stitching should be accomplished using camera shifts rather than rotating on the tripod axis. The nodal point only seems to be relevant in the 35mm world. I've been stitching together four shots from a Phase P20 to get a final 60mmx60mm frame. What Ellis says is important since I shift the rear standard holding the digital back on an Arca-Swiss 6x9 and there is no focus change with shifting. If there were, my entire approach would not be workable.

I think 690 has a strange reciprocity curve. Are you using exposure times greater than 1/15?

 

Also, even though it seems primitive, I put the exposed polaroid in my armpit for 90 seconds (60 seconds for Fuji) in both winter and summer to ensure a 90-95F temperature.

I second Justin's opinion. I'm a landscape shooter with a P20 mounted to a Flexbody. While waiting for an adapter plate to mount my P20 on an Arca-Swiss camera, I've been shooting 4x5 Velvia quickloads and scanning them on my Imacon. Results are incredible. I would have to stitch at least four P20 shots to get the same file size as my 4x5 scans.

I just got an Arca-Swiss 6x9 classic camera that included a polaroid film

holder. When using this holder, it captures the entire polaroid image area,

which is larger than the 6x9 film image area (56x82mm).

 

Is there a commercial product available to mask the polaroid back to 6x9, or is

this a do-it-yourself project?

I'm still waiting for the Hassy plate so that I can use my P20 on my Arca 6x9. Doesn't a sliding back adapter move the film (chip) plane about 10mm back? I've also ordered the 5cm ultra-wide bellows, but Arca doesn't seem to stock much in the USA.

Thanks for the suggestions. The problem was with the color developer. I'm now trying to salvage the roll by scanning and replacing colors.

 

Yes, I do need to find a new lab. Needless to say, labs are fewer and harder to find.

I just got back a roll of 120 E100GX processed by my lab and the black areas

are a reddish color, including the spaces between frames. With the processing

error, the film base almost has the same color as a negative. The lab mentioned

it may be a bleach issue. Any ideas?