James G. Dainis

I guess what is being said is, when using the the Scheimpflug principle by tilting the front standard and lens down on a view camera you are increasing the range of focus but not the depth of field. Other than that it is getting too complicated for me.

Showing a picture of one of the double frames would help answer some of the responders questions.

I developed hundreds of rolls of film with Paterson tanks and never had a problem. I would just rinse them out after use and allow them to dry before reuse.

Moderator note: Let us be careful of any personal attacks.

Once you can see what happens to film when it develops the zone system becomes clear. Click here: What is the Zone System?

You can focus on a fence rail 5 feet away with a macro lens wide open and the depth of field may only be 1 or 2 inches. Yet, the edge of the fence which is at the side of the frame may be about 5.7 inches from the lens and yet is in focus the same as the fence part that is in the center of the frame. What is this lens or feature called? (As a lens that shows no barrel or pincushion distortion is called a rectilinear lens.) I am aware of "flat field lens" but I think there is a more scientific name.

If you "zoom with your feet" using a normal lens, you do not get the compressed look that you would get zooming in or using a long telephoto.

"Or if you want great image quality without lugging 30 lbs of LF camera and tripod about?" How come no one told me about this earlier?

Nothing like getting up on a cold and frosty morning and heading out to track down the wild and elusive game. Oh, the thrill of it all. http://jdainis.com/wild.jpg

Joe. You are quite right, that is quibbling on my part. At 3 degrees the hypotenuse and adjacent leg are practically the same length at 90 degrees and 87 degrees at the opposite leg. On larger angles, such at 45 degrees, there is a marked difference. At 100 feet 45 degrees would show 100 feet field of view. The correct method 2 x (tan 22.5 x 100) would give the correct field of view of 82.8 feet. A significant difference. I just wished to point out the correct method. I often did it incorrectly in the past. For a very significant difference look at an 18mm lens with a 75 degree angle of view at 100 feet. Incorrect = tan75 x 100 = 373 feet Correct 2 x (tan 37.5 x 100) = 153 feet

Joe, check your angles. The correct result would be obtained by. 2 x (100 yards x tan 1.67 X 3) = 17.49 feet. Just to be very accurate.

"Display the images of the cars on your computer screen." I assume that means reduce the size of the image to fit on the screen first. My laptop is 1366 x 768 pixels. The camera has a max resolution of 4592 x 3448 pixels. If I were to put that on my screen only about one third of the picture would show at a time.

You will need a long lens. For an example, the field of view of a 400mm lens, on a full frame camera is about 32 feet. A five foot long deer would be 1/6 the width of the frame. Your camera has a 2X crop factor so the field of view for a 400m lens would be about 16 feet at 100 yards. The deer would be about 1/3 of the width of the photo. It is only in the movies that a person can take a shot of a person 100 yards away and get a head and shoulders photo.

"Come on; hands up. Who actually exposes individual sheets of film, and then proceeds to give them tailored normal, curtailed or extended development?" I used to do that all the time when shooting 8x10 or 4x5 film. On a bright sunny day I may have had to use N-1 to lower the highlights to Zone 9 and on darker cloudy day N+1 would raise the highlights up to Zone 9. But you are right, I no longer do that. I haven't shot film in a long time.

Rick, your backyard scene reminded me very much of one of Ansel Adams' early works, "Margaret Sanger in Her Garden." https://i.pinimg.com/originals/aa/7d/75/aa7d755431a9b39d00030adaa36ac7bf.jpg

To keep it simple, the plural form of Argus would be Argus cameras like the plural form of computer mouse would be mouse devices.

To re-quote Ansel Adams - "We define a one stop exposure change as a change of one zone on the exposure scale, " Zone 7 is a two stop exposure change over zone 5. If one wants to expand a difference after the exposure has been captured, then one give increased development to move that zone 7 to zone 8. I think people are arguing over printed zones rather than exposure capture zones. The zone system starts with the exposure capture. (a one stop exposure change as a change of one zone on the exposure scale,) Modifications in development and printing come later.

Some really bad bokeh in that shot.

I had a 58mm f/1.2 lens for my Minolta system. It was huge glass and did a fine job. When looking through the viewfinder the scene was the same as if there were no glass in the viewfinder. If I looked at the scene through the viewfinder with my right eye and at the scene with my left eye, both open, everything would match up exactly. The diaphragm was slow shutting down to the set stop. I never did get it repaired,

For clarification by "flashlight" do you mean a small battery-operated portable electric light as the British call a "torch" or a photography electronic flash also called a strobe? Some people do use hand held lights to perform "painting with light".

What bothers me is the chessboard is set up incorrectly. A white square should be in the right hand corner beneath the rook. That is the correct way for a chess board to be, with the light square in the lower right hand corner. I don't know why but I would say that for the majority of times I see a chess board in a movie or TV, they have it set up wrong with the dark square in the right hand corner. Is there some subconscious level that wants the dark square in the right hand corner?

Could the darkroom chemicals destroy the bacteria in septic tanks or cesspools that dissolve the sewage waste?

So if I change my exposure from 1/125 sec@ f/16 to 1/125 sec@ f/5.6 I am only opening up 2-1/2 stops not the 3 stops that I always thought it was?

.

I believe that when Ansel Adams used Polaroid he used Polaroid 55 which also generated a negative.