reinier_de_vlaam

I bought a clean M6 + 35/2, 50/2 and 90/2.8 with all boxes, documentation, caps, etc, etc. for just 1600euro, which is almost exactly the amount I got for my R7, 24/2.8, 50/2 and 90/2 and winder. So I don't see the cost increase ;-)

 

Actually I sold the R7 because in reflex I will go digital (I know I know) for specific reasons looking at where I use it for mostly (shorter exposures at night, direct feedback in the studio to check light settings). But I missed the Leica sound and feel so much so couldn't resist buying this M, which in the end will most likely replace my Hexar (I'll keep it a while to see if I miss the AF and awkward controls ;-)).

 

BTW how do find out what the magnification factor of the finder is???

Now this must have been asked before and I'm sure I must exist...I

just can't find it

 

After I sold my Leica R7 with lenses I could not stand the emptiness

in my life ;-)

So I bought a M6

 

Now I'm looking for an overview of Leica M lenses, which generation

belongs to which serial numbers. How can I recognize which lens I

have... Something like the excellent pages of Doug Herr, but then for

M

the spots are really pretty dark. I heard that the potasium chlorate may damage the paper when brushed in to hard...is that so?

Ah that is good to know...That Tmax 100 doesn't work well. I almost ordered a box of 120euro+...Have to check if Tmax400 is available in 5x7...

 

Any other film suggestions, that respond well to overdevevlopment to create a contrasty neg

subbing is important on glazed ceramics. Then the liquid light will probably come of. I have bad experiences with varnish, I simply use a gelatine solution (on alumunium plates), I beleave 1 teaspoon on .5ltrs. I spread it with my fingers until it makes a smooth surface

I have a small problem when sentesizing my arches platine with a

palladium solution. I use 10 drops of ferro oxalte, 2 drops of

potasium chlorate and 12 palladium solution. I use the potasium as I

think the negs from my Bergger BPF200 5x7 stay pretty soft, even with

over-development (I tried Tmax and D76, will change to Tmax 5x7

soon). I apply the chemo with a brush.

 

When I sentisize I sometimes get darker spots, if I look at the dried

sentisized paper I see several 'drops' that are clearly darker than

the surroundings. It is however not always the case. After exposere

and development the hardly can be seen anymore.

 

Anyone know what these are?

No, I'm refering to the pure palladium print

 

I just found out that de lithium palladium mix is for Ziatypie,

 

Zo that leaves to mixes for palladium prints, the B&S and the Mike Ware variants. What is the difference between the two?

Hi

 

Can anyone tell me the difference between the Palladium Chloride

mixes I found (Palladium solution no3)

 

Bostick& Sullivan specify

 

Lithium Chloride or Sodium Cloride ((kitchen?? salt)

 

Mike Ware specifies

 

Ammonium Chloride

 

To be mixed with Palladium Chloride to make upto 25ml (5% solution)

 

What is the difference between the 3, I'm looking for a deep warm

black. What would be the best solution

With the lattitude modern film (like neopan and tmax) has, you really have to over-expose and over-develop a lot before your you get a problem in highlights

 

I remember once I did series (see my photo album) where I wanted to over expose the model upto it was completle bright white and a totally black background. I used TMAX100 4x5" sheet film for it. I over-exposed 2 stops and pushed also pushed 2 stops. I still had lots of detail and needed a hard filter to get the result I wanted...

 

The toe of the (b&w) film's curve and the shoulder are about 11-14stops apart (depending on the film used), useally a normal exposere is so that the mid-grey is about 4 stops from the toe (better would be .5-1 stop more, that's why they recommend to shoot Tmax 400 on 250 or 320). That means you still can push 4-5 stops before your bright whites loose detail. The picture you show do not have exreemly bright whites so you can push even more. A descent scanner (dmax >3.6) will cover the whole possible lattitude of the film.

 

By under exposure you loose some shadow detail (which you can see in the trees of the 1st pic) but as you used a flash, the main object is still good in detail.

 

BTW Tmax 3200 is according stories, just a bit more sensitive than Tmax400 if you expose it as 400 you will get good results. 3200 is reached by development by default...

Ofcourse you are right, should have been minutes....and it is 5x7" 13x18cm

 

No, there is no mix up of sheets and I used 0.5ltrs of developper. Indeed I did not change. Temp was 20c and both had about the same agitation.

 

Bergger does not specify times for Tmax devlopper, is the combination not right maybe? I got 6.5 min from the 'digitaltruth.com', specifiying 100asa istead of 200.

 

There is only a slight difference between the sheets, I would have expected a major difference when increasing time with 50%

I have an odd behaviour of Bergger BPF200, maybe someone can

explain...

 

From the 'digitaltruth.com' I got a time of 6.5sec for this film,

using 100asa, when using Tmax developper. Now I did a test and

exposed a two 13x18 N-2, and developped 7.5 and 11sec with this film.

 

Now oddle, there is only a very minor difference between the two

development, even it looks that the dark area's on the film

(=highlights) for 7.5s are a bit darker of the film than for 11sec

 

anybody any idea why???

In the end ofcourse it is the image that counts, not how it's made. People tend to forget that...

 

But that's not the point, it's a response to a worry that (sheet)film will soon no longer be avialble

I don't worry too much, film will be there for many, many years. Just don't believe those silly hype statements that 'nobody' uses film anymore.

I wouldn't know how to get my pictures on aluminium digitally, many my cyano's and palladium look much better from Tmax than from Pictorio transparencies (Yes, I tried a lot). Film is there for a long time to come. And many have the same believs as I have. And one sheet of film is certaily a lot cheaper that a digital camera AND expensive quality transparencies. So there will be many people shooting on film, also 35mm for a long time. Have a look on ebay, 35mm quality stuff still sells well. I sold a Leica lens for the same amount as I bought it 4 years ago. Yes, the happy snappers will turn digital and dump there 35mm crap, but most advanced amatures still will use film for a long time. Hey, Nikon introduced the F6 and Fuji introduced new film. If they didn't think there will be a markt for it for a long time, would they have invested in it?? Price performance film still beats digi, unless you shoot tons of rolls a year (ok 4-5 a month, but for most amatures that's alot)

I would say, don't worry for 9x12 or 4x5" the hit the dust soon. Maybe there will be less suppliers and you have to order it via the internet, but they will be there for a long long time. He, you still can get 10x12" film, guys like lotus view have it on stock and still sell camera's for it. Actually LF is making a revival, looking in the forums I'm member of (no not LF forums! ;-)).

I do my subbing with gelatin, add a table spoon unflavoured powder to a cup of hot water, maybe also add a few drops of glyoxal for hardening. I use it to sub glass and aluminium plates and it works fine. I spread it with my fingers or rubber roler, just make sure it p0late is absolutely clean. What is your problem with it?

I tried to make a table in word and removed all junk (like head) but get a message that photo.net can't use certain tags because of mis-use. When I search for these tags, I can't find them in the doc I made.

 

 

-I have an extra comment on pictorio. I proves that the gray areas from 4 to 50% in Dan Burkholders test scale (using his curves) flatten out, while the ends of the scale have increased differences between steps. The difference between no curves and with curves is noticable, but not enough. Probably this can be solved with improved curves but it's clearly an area of concern.

Hi Joseph

 

Wow, how did you do that. I have a plain text field I enter my text in when doing in response.

 

Should I make a table in a HTML editor and then paste it in???

 

Reinier

grrrr, this auto restructering is awfull

 

Ok, on a scale from one to 5 (translated a bit)

 

BASE FOG

 

Acco 5

 

Pictorio 3

 

Backlight 1

 

Tmax 4-5

 

BLACKS

 

Acco 3

 

Pictorio 4

 

Backlight 4

 

Tmax 5

 

GREY LEVELS

 

Acco 3

 

Pictorio 4

 

Backlight 4

 

Tmax 5

 

SMOOTHNESS (grain)

 

Acco 2

 

Pictorio 4

 

Backlight 3

 

Tmax 5

 

 

RUGGEDNESS (can't give any 5'es here ofcourse)

 

Acco 4

 

Pictorio 2

 

Backlight 4

 

Tmax 4

After the discussion in e previous thread I finally managed to get

hands of Pictorio OHP through Nova Darkroom in the UK (excellent and

quick)

 

Eagerly I tested it and I must say it is pretty good but a bit of a

disappointment after all the 'hurray' stories, but a clear

improvement to the local brand.

 

I compared it to a local brand transparency (Acco Nobo inkjet

transparrency), epson backlight and tmax 100 (which is base for the

test)

 

This is my impression

 

base fog blacks grey levels smoothness ruggedness

 

Acco ++ + +/- - +

 

Pictorio + +/++ + +/++ -

 

Backlight -- +/++ + +/- +

 

Tmax ++ ++ ++ ++ +

 

 

The Acco Nobo has a suprisingly low base fog, it's better than anu

other, yes even better than Tmax.

Acco has problems with grays (causing detail problems and the prints

turn out to be towards red, while epson/Pictorio have nice greys.

Also Acco isn't very smooth and shows speckels in the inklayer, while

Pictorio is almost as smooth as Tmax.

Pictorio has a clear blueish base fog but the blacks are pretty good.

They are just that bit darker than Acco

The main problem of backlight paper is the base fog, otherwise it

performs pretty well.

Main problem for Pictorio was that its very sensitive to damages. The

guiding wheels caused clear damages on the inklayer. This means I

have to adapt the printer, removing guiding wheels. I didn't have

this problem with Acco and much less with Epson.

 

Now I did not use pigment inks, but these are more for lasting colors

than more deep colors. It could make some difference thought. However

it will not impact things like base fog and ruggedness

 

Compared to a well developped (this is the main point) Tmax 100 all

have their problems. I found that pictorio performs pretty well and

will in many cases provide the result wanted, certainly better that

the Acco I used sofar. But for a full range from deep black to an

almost 0 base fog Tmax 100 outperforms all of them.

 

these are my personal findings, other opinions are allowed to exist ;-

)

The aol address worked and we are in contact

 

thanks

Reinier

That mail address doesn't seem to exist... can you please check?

Yes I saw that. That was so inspiring I had to lock my credit card away ;-)

Hi Manuel

 

Thanks very much, I just ordered a pack there...

 

regards

Reinier

Are there any advanced pt/pd workshops in the EU somewhere. All seem

to have stopped. Mike Ware, Permadocument, all stopped. I'm looking

for an advance workshop (e.g. the right negative, chemo handling,

contrast control) to improve my process and get expert advice. I

would prefer the UK (and make it a short holliday as well)...

 

I found some basic alt process workshops, but hey, I know how to coat

a paper. That's not what I'm looking for.

 

anyone a tip???

I read Dan's book too, but probably I have an older version, he only mentions Epson backlight and even recommends it. I was able to get several acceptable results from it, but high-key never worked well. So I thought to use transparency. Aperently the wrong ones, but I'm chasing Agfa copyjet. Probably Lotus view can supply my with a limited number...

I found a dealer (according to agfa the only one in the Netherlands) they will ship only 100sheets minimum, at about 100euro ex shipping...

 

Hey I want a few to test, not 100 pieces...