bob_moulton

Barely and yes. At infinity coverage depends upon how close you can

get the lens to the film. If your camera lacks bag bellows and you

cannot tilt the lens board back and then starighten the lens to

perpendicular, then you may be in for some problems, unless you opt

for a recessed lensboard. But for interiors the coverage is better,

at least for me, since you are extending lens from film plane. review

of the lens in Shutterbug last year was illustrated with an interior

shot that displayed crisp acrosss the frame iamge made with 8x10.

Bob

Try the View Camera Web site. There is an email-contact us- area that

you can use. They are in Correlas, NM now.

I have a love hate relationship with the holders. The safety factor I

like, the numbers aren't special to me, but you should make certain

the spring on the camera back is stout enough to push the button in

when the holder is inserted. i have had some problems with this

feature in a number of different cameras.

Bob

technical matters: bellows for lenses from 72mm to 450, So a camera

with interchangeable bellows, since very few single bellows are

pliable enough to handle this array of lenses with movement.

Levels, fora and aft easily viewed.

Rise/fall front, rear optional. Shift front, rear optional.

Tilt/swing front and rear. Better yet, axis tilt front/rear geared.

( Note: Presently I own Wisners.)

Ease of operation. The Wisner Pocket Expedition, which I own, has

been described as a Chinese puzzle in opening/closing. While not

nearly that bad( I was never good with Rubik's cubes either) it is

certainly more complex than my Technical field camera to

open/close.But hey, I am considering a Technikardan also, and it

requires some skill in opening/closing also. From my viewpoint

opening/closing should resemble putting a cd into your car cd player.

You should be able to do it without hardly watching what you are

doing.

All gears, tracks, knobs, etc. should turn easily, no hesitation,

lock firmly, and be usable with gloves on.

Weight: I don't care. I use an old Ansco 8x10 occasionally which is

way too heavy. But cameras in the 4-7 pound range seem ok.

Reliable mfgs. Wisner, Canham, Linhof, Ebony--the lsit goes on and

on. An mfg, distributor, dealer with whom you can actually speak and

get real world responses and advice is a must.

Bulk. The entire system must fir into a Tenba PBL or an F64 case, the

former for air travel, the latter for everything else. So large rail

cameras are out.

Price; Well the cost of the cameras I own indicate what I am willing

to pay. Anything outside the Linhof 45S is too much. The cameras in

those ranges are clearly outstanding. But I am have to consider the

cost as does anyone else. Also, I use my cameras in the four seasons,

in dusty grain elevators, in rain, in lakes, etc. So I want the thing

to last. if it gets scarred a bit who cares. But if its beauty means

it won't last or requires extraordinary care, then I would pass on it.

Ultimately it isn expensive tool, a $2000 hammer. I use it to make

images that please me, that i can exhibit, sell and teach with.

Bob

Esthetics; Well made, designed so your hands can find the controls

while under a dark cloth in a darkened room.

David,

I use the same scanner for b/w scans. I am also using Silverfast

AI5.0 software between the scanner and the compouter.

I get good scans by scanning at 1200-1600 dpi. I scan in at 16 bit,

not 8 bit, and set the gamma to 3.00.

I scan as a negative and use the invert tool in photoshop.

In photoshop I set levels and maybe curves and brightness. If not

nothing else is needed,then I printprint at 16 bit.

If my negative needs added work--most do--I convert to 8 bit . That

way i can make more corrections and use the wide selection tools that

photoshop now denies at the 16 bit level.

<p>

I print an an Epson 1160 with piezography inks fom Cone Editions.

<p>

Bob

I chose the technical; field after having tried out a variety of

field cameras, from technika to ebony to wista. The geared axis tilt

is useful for the features someone already mentioned--WA lens use

with standard bellows, but is is also useful for what it was designed

for--rear tilt. You can dial in the tilt easily and surely, altering

focus where needed with one hand and tilting with the other. The tilt

stays put, so you do not need that thrid hand-one to hold the back

and two more to tighten both knobs.

Obviously, others will disagree, since Wisner is not the flavor of

the week camera that is reviewed and touted highnly here and

elsewhere right now.

If you can compare a traditional wisner agst. the tech field before

purchasing, and see how you respond to the geared tilt.

Bob

The company existed about a year ago in Tennessee, but when I

inquired the spokesperson said that they no longer manufactured the

lens rings or the bayonet lensboards. too bad. I have a set for my

camera and wanted another lensboard for a TK45s I was considering.

Just too much trouble to change boards, and the thought of having to

buy all those linhof boards and have an adaptor made for my existing

camera was a bit too much.

I have used both the 2509n reels in the 2500 series tank and the

expert 3010 on a uniroller #352 for several years. i don't know about

the Besler base, but the uniroller + jobo drums+ TmaxRS or HC 110

work wll. I prefer the TmaxRs .

Bob

The other responders covered the scope beautifully. I would add that

you can get a reduction back for your Wisner. With the 5x7 you get 35

sq. in of film, contrasted with the 20 sq. in on 4x5. The weight

differences between the cameras is not gargantuan. Besides, if any of

us wanted small packs we would opt for 35mm!

One final note--the lens system you acquire for 5x7 will work well on

4x5. I have a 210,a 72, a 110,a 135, a 300 and a 425 They cover both

formats with image circles that allow me little problems for movement.

Bob

Polaroid makes a tank sold by Calumet that you can put the negs into

for clearing. It is a bit bulky but works. Incidentally, try using

Permawash, 3 ounces per gallon instead of sulfite. It mixes far more

easily and rinses the crud from the negative.

After decruding the negative, back at home or wherever your hat hangs

that day you can but do not have to put negatives into standard fix

bath--Kodak rapid fix with hardener, re- permawash, wash using a

fill,refill, photoflo and dry. those steps reduce the chances of

inadvertant scratching.

Bob

Andy, I just started using the CPA/2 drum at my work rather than a

hybrid uniroller and 2500 series and an expert series.

Jobo suggests than one can wash on the CPA/CPP by using ten washes

each 30 seconds long, dumping and puring in new water every 30

seconds. They also suggest you use slightly more water in the rinses

than in the processing.

Since I use 900ml solution in processing b/w film, I cannot add much

more water. But so far the negs look as good as they do when I use my

vertical gravity works washer.

<p>

One problem: Determining the amount of wetting agent (photo flo) is

still a problem. Filling the tank off the jobo is a possibility, but

the water used is quite a bit. I am still experimenting with that,

since if I must unload film and stick them in the washer for photo

flo I might as well use the washer for wash and photo dlo.

Hope this helps.

<p>

Bob

I use a Expert 3010 and a 2500 series drum on a Uniroller base and

thanks to santa am now using both on a CPA-2. I have followed John

Sexton's suggestions that are included in his workshop handouts. i

use T-Max RS. I mix Part B into Part A and that becomes my stock. I

do not mix the developer into a gallon quantity!

Then I dilute that 1:9. For 12 sheets in the 2500 drum or for 10

sheets in the Expert drum, i use 900ML. That is 90 ML TMax RS and 810

ML water. i process Tmax 100, EI 80, for 10 minutes at 75 degrees. I

used Sexton as a guide and then made tests on my own. That works well.

Bob

Laurie White has an excellent text on the use of infrared film. Her

text stresses 35mm and kodak HIE, but I believe thje background data

and her explanation of the dynamic range of the film would help you.

Bob

No photography is a total document, since the photographer's vision

informs the image. Your choice of framing, depth of field, lens,

format, print, as Mark Citret writes " where to stand and where to

put the edges"--all that influences the image.

EOuld appreciate help on this issue: Jobo suggests that using dilute developer in its drums requires more than the mfg. recommendations. Ex: According to Jobo, Kodak states that 100ml D-76 will process a 35mm 36 exp. film. Jobo suggests that one must use 130ml per roll if one dilutes the developer (I assume the dilution is 1:1). So my question to those who have experience with jobos, is this: if you use the drums to develop 35mm film and/or 4x5 8x10 film--those are the films i will be using, what dilution with a standard developer like d-76 do you use? If you aim toward a certain quanity of mixed, diluted developer at 1:1, do you use say 200ML developer + same quantiry of water, or do you use Jobo's suggestions? or do you always include more chemistry plus water than minimally needed?

Sorry for the question's length. i've read the jobo intsructions and surfed its website and cannot find the answer there.

The only constant is change. One such change is the assumption that

one buys an appliance and keeps it forever, as many of us have done

with oour Deardorffs, Graphics, etc. They are appliance, tools we use

to create the images that poke and probe inside our gray matter.

<p>

But apparently now the day of the long lived appliance is coming to

an end. At my college we trash VCRs because they cost more to repair

than to replace. We move every one of our 500+ computers out the door

three times per decade. A commericial photographer friend wrestles

with the fact that his Nikons and Sinars will last forever, but his

Digital cameras will be archaic in a few years.

<p>

A former student who owns a good home theatre shop admits that even

the most expensive equipment he sells will probably not last much

beyond 10 years,and his clients know and admit that. He yearns for

the good old equipment--the Crown Pre-Amps and the DAhlquist 10

speakers which can still be repaired.

<p>

The question unanswered is whether or not the equipment will make a

difference. The image lurks inside our head, about two inches behind

the eyeball. Are we all certain the final print--and I assume that

remains a constant--will be decidedly inferior if it is produced by a

Nikon D-1 and an Epson printer and not be a Nikon F100, the film of

your choice and a Saunders Enlarger?

<p>

It will be different, but ???

<p>

Bob

Aaron,

The previous answers cover the field excellently. I suggest you look

at the portfolios of Ansel Adams. They are sequenced, the portfolios

are small, and you get a good idea about the ways one can sequence

images. Another work to examine is Michael A. Smith's Visual Journey,

his retrospective work. The sequence in either work make sone aware

of the challenge, fun, and power, in not special order, of sequencing

strong by themselves images.

Bob

A 300-450mm lens range will work on your Wisner. I use a 300 a lot .

The 450mm lnes, specifically the Fuji, is excellent, but you have

almost 23 inches of bellows being buffeted about by the wind. A lens

similar to the Nikkor T lens gives you the reach of the traditionally

designed telephoto but with less bellows draw.

No free lunch with the T lenses. They tend to be heavy, and have much

less movements than the 450 type and are quite costly.

I find the 300mm to be the longer lens I use most, but in the midwest

where I live, there are few wide open spaces.

Bob

If you can keep the camera in the trunk or in the back of the truck

so that it remains near the outside temperature you will reduce the

fogging problem. Bob

You may find some light leakage from either the holders or from the

bellows of your camera. Infrared light can penetrate both.

Bob

I have used a uniroller with the 2551 tank to process film for

several years with no problems. recently, i added the Expert 3010 to

soup 4x5 film in also. Both work.

One footnote. To keep either drum from walking along on the

uniroller, I placed the tank on the roller, saw whenre it touched and

added large rubber bands around the tank fore and aft to keep the

tank in place. Never had a problem since.

Bob

The Darkroom store tests are quick and rather easy. You do not need

their tubes. You can process the film as you would normally--tray,

jobo, hybrid jobo, etc. and produce resuklts that, used with that

nifty little program they sell, will get you what you need. The step

wedge, some glass to use a contact printer, etc. and you are done.

Bob

Sextone uses a 3010 which allows for processing 10 sheets of film.

According to the handout he provides, he uses 850-900ml of mixed

developer. 10 4x5 sheets equal 200 spquare inches. Two 8x10 equal 160

sg. inches.

<p>

I would try increasing the quantity of developer. And yes Sexton does

recommend processing full batches of film. As a practical matter, i

have processed less than ten with 850-900ml developer and produced

fine negatives. But I hardly ever use less than that amount of

developer.

So i would retest using much more developer and see what happens.

Bob

I own a 72mm. I sold an older 75 mm to get more coverage. It provides

that.

As others have said, check with the mfg or spokesman for the mfg. of

your camera to make certain you can use the lens on your camera. It

is large and heavy. The front standards on some field cameras may be

overwhelmed by its weight. Extremely tapered bellows on some 4x5

cameras may be restrictive.

If you use filtration frequently, be prepared for extreme filter

costs--in glass or gelatine or plastic, purchasing and mounting a 95-

110mm filter on the front is costly. Rear mounting the filter is a

viable option.I know that is a controversial procedure, but ity does

work. But there again tapered bellows on smallish cameras preclude

that possibility.

<p>

I use both a Pocket Expedition and a Technical field--Both are

Wisners. The lens works well on either camera with a bag bellws. Rear

mounted filters are not an option, however.

I wanted a lens which would allow for ample movements. The 72 will

cover a 5x7 with ample movements. On my 4x5 it is eye candy.

But mounting and filtration provide questions one should address

before shelling out that cash.

Bob

My photoshop 6.0.1 locks up quite frequently on my Mac G4, 400 Mhz, 784 MB RAM when I use any tool, especially rubber stamp + the zoom tool. The file sizes vary from 212K to 80 MB; all are grayscale from 4x5 scans or photoCDs. Adobe reps have suggested reinstalling, reinstalling with extensions off, turning off virtual memory, allocating more RAM to Photoshop, hitting the return key before using any tool, installing without plug ins to see if they are a problem.

I have done all that to no avail.

HAs anyone experienced similar problems, and if so are there any fixes?

I use some of these same negs on a similarly equipped MAC at Santa Fe Workshops and had no problems. The sole differences were at Santa Fe I used Photoshop 5.5 and the Mac had 256 MB RAM.

Any help would be appreciated.

Bob