James G. Dainis

Without seeing the originals I have to say that you are doing an excellent job. Good work.

Ed, I'm not sure what you mean by the specs. Do they rate corner sharpness, contrast, etc. At one time Modern Photography used to run tests on various lenses and rate the sharpness (lp/mm) contrast, etc, as Excellent, very good, good, etc. I based my purchase of a Kiron 28-210mm on those test results since most of them were Excellent and was very happy with the lens.

What with Memorial Day (USA) coming up and today is National Maritime Day. Minolta SRT-201, Plus-X, Kiron 28-210mm lens. http://jdainis.com/usmma.jpg

Ansel mostly used large format. I guess one doesn't have bromide drag if there are no sprocket holes to drag across.

NOTE: The moderator moved this thread from the Beginner's forum to this forum. The post should have disappeared from the Beginner's forum after that but it didn't. Oh well, just one of those things.

People asked dumb questions back in the old film only days. On the subway in New York with my 8x10 Korona view camera a youth asked, "Does that old camera still work?" I replied, "Yes, yes it does" although I felt like saying "No, I just like to carry it, these film holders and this big tripod around for the exercise."

That camera has a lot of good features. I like that it has 25-600mm equivalent focal length range. That is a great telephoto for animals at a distance. I like how is has a constant f/2.8 maximum aperture for consistent performance from wide-angle to super telephoto. I don't know much about bridge cameras but this looks very nice to me for your use.

I sort of like the idea that you use a "loony 11" rule rather than "sunny 16" since the moon would be too dark at f/16 so you open up one stop to f/11. Who wants a dull gray card f/16 moon? Aside from all that and eliminating all the extraneous stuff, let us do a thought experiment. Take a photo of an 18% gray card colored ball outside of the atmosphere. Not shooting through an atmospheric density of +1 stop you get a good exposure at f/22. Bring the ball back to earth and with the +1 stop atmosphere density you get a good exposure at f/16, the "sunny 16" rule. Send the ball back into space and shoot it from earth through the +1 stop atmosphere and you get a good shot at f/16. Ball in space = f/22 Ball on earth with light filtered to ND +1 = f/16 Ball in space with camera shooting through ND +1 atmosphere = f/16 In a studio on earth if you shoot an object with a one stop filter on the lens you open up one stop to maintain the same exposure. In a studio on earth if you shoot an object with a one stop filter on the light source you open up one stop to maintain the same exposure.

Personally, I like the photo just the way it is. Your changes may make it a more artistic interpretation. You can have two good photos - a real life silhouette and an artistic interpretation.

A B/W silhouette isn't the "real world" I can't judge without seeing the real world photo what it actually looked like. So you mean to crop out all the bottom black ground? Go ahead, you've already lost the "real world when you converted it to a silhouette anyway?.

Alan, if it wasn't you who mentioned the blanket working as a safelight then it must have been that other former Kodak engineer who did so. Was his name Rowland or some thing like that? I would agree that IR would be best.?

If you do use the green safelight, stand in the dark for at least five minutes to attune your eyes to the dark. I once covered a window by a sink with a folded blanket to block the light. All was totally black as I started processing some 8x10 inch Ektachrome. After about five minutes I realized that it seemed a lot lighter. I could have read the New York Times in there. No harm was done to the film. I believe it was Alan Marcus who informed me that the dark green blanket worked as a green safelight.

8x10 Seneca View, 300mm Nikkor-M, Plus-x, 1/2 sec @f/64 http://jdainis.com/benches.jpg

Let me see if I have this right. The man wants to lay 36 frames on the scanner surface all at once, scan that and then print that scan so he has 36 frames showing on one 8x10 sheet of paper. That is a contact sheet.

An Epson V800 might do it. https://www.adorama.com/iesv800.html?msclkid=eeedb075fd3b19fa5b06ecf788e9d92a&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=%5bSHOPPING%5d%20%5bADL%5d%20%5bPLA%5d%20-%20Long%20Tail&utm_term=4586750196597554&utm_content=%5bPLA%5d%20-%20Long%20Tail%20-%20Bing&adlclid=ADL-9dce152e-3eaa-4232-9035-9c8457d33ff8 "The V800 also supports non-standard film formats up to 8x10 inch when placed directly on the scanner glass." I guess that thinks of 8x10 as "non-standard" film. Perhaps 8x10 sags too much to have film holders be of any use. Laying the film strips on the surface may be okay for a contact sheet. My contact sheets were never works of art.

I like how back then 35mm cameras were considered "miniature".

When a lens is at infinity focus, the glass is nearest to the film than when the lens is at a close focus. (Move your lens in and out from close to infinity to see that such is the case.) A 50mm lens may be 50mm from the film when at infinity focus. If you put, let us say, a 10mm thick adapter between the film and the lens, the lens can only get 60mm close to the film, not the 50mm needed for infinity and infinity focus is lost. A 10mm thick adapter would be like adding a 10mm extension tube; it would be good for close up macro shots but that would be all.

Using the sunny 16 rule to determine exposure: f/16 = 1/30 sec. f/11 = 1/60 sec f/8 = 1/125 sec f/5.6 = 1/250 sec

I never had trouble with Paterson (note spelling) reels. I could load them in a dark closet standing up with no table before I built my darkroom. 120 film was a problem but 35mm film was easy.

The Zone system is not about getting a correct exposure. It is about getting the values on a film that you want or "Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights." On a poorly lit day a person's face values may be too dark (Zone V) with an indicated exposure of f/8 - 1/60. If you were to increase the exposure to f/4 - 1/125, the face values would be fine, raised to Zone VII, but the shadow areas would also be raised two stops from Zones II and III to Zones IV and Zone V. The shadow detail is now too light. You can print it darker to get the shadows back down to Zones II and III but the face value will also print at Zone V, too dark. What's a fellow to do? Take the shot at the original f/8 - 1/60 then give N+2 additional development. That will raise the face values to about Zone VII and keep the shadow details at Zones II and Zone III. The one thing about digital is you can now do the same thing with color. With digital editing one can keep shadow details down and only raise highlights, or raise middle tones or keep highlights and raise shadows or raise middle tones and keep shadows and highlights or .... and ... Great stuff digital. "Often, for me, I like to let things go black and protect blown-out areas instead." If this were black and white film you would expose for the shadows and give the film N-2 development to bring the blown out highlights back down to Zones IX or VIII and keep the shadow detail.

Vincent, In his book "the Negative", Ansel Adams describes Zone VII for "Very light skin, light gray objects, average snow with acute side lighting."

How can the Zone system allow one to be more creative, you might ask? Take a photo of an old codger smoking a cigarette. (Old codgers are always smoking cigarettes.) Instead of placing his face value on Zone VII, place it on Zone V. Use +2 development to push the face values up toward Zone VII. The lower shadow values are not raised as much as the higher values. Exposure dropped the shadowy wrinkles and pores from Zones III and IV to Zones I and II. Exposure did not change them; they stayed that dark compared to the now lightened face values pushed up to Zone VII, resulting in darker wrinkles and pores than would have been captured at a normal exposure and development.

The Zone system was not about getting the right exposure, it was about developing to get all the important values where they should be - "Expose for the shadows; develop for the highlights". Take a gray card reading outdoors. At f/16- 1/125 the shadows are where they should be but a person's face in the sunlight may be blown out white. Take the shot at f/16- 1/125 and underdevelop the film abut 50%. This will keep the shadows as they are but drop the face value down to Zone VII the proper value for the face. If one tried to adjust the exposure setting, closing down two stops to get proper face value, the shadows would also be closed down two stops resulting in black shadows with no detail. Using the Zone system allows one to be more creative and artistic.

I take a gray card reading and it reads 1/500 - f/16 which is Zone V. I take a shot at 1/250 - f/16 and that is one stop more or Zone VI. I take another shot at 1/125 - f/16 and that is another stop more or Zone VII. I take another shot at 1/60 - f/16 and that is another stop more or Zone VIII. Going from Zone V to Zone VIII is a three stop difference. Ansel is quite clear about this in his book, The Negative.- ..."we define the one-stop exposure change as a change of one zone on the exposure scale, and the resulting gray in the print is considered one value higher or lower on the print scale." As far as I can tell, 99% of his references to exposure/Zones is given as direct exposure stops not sensitivity readings.

Area varies as the square of the linear measure. Even engineers sometimes forget that. "This 4 inch diameter water line is plugged. I will use two 2 inch lines to bypass it." Sorry that will provide for only 1/2 the flow. You would need four 2 inch lines to bypass and get the same area and flow as the 4 inch line. 4^2 = 16 2^2 = 4