james_chinn

Erin, try the follwoing URL- http://teachnet.edb.utexas.edu/~leica/hc110.html

 

A very good article on processing with HC110 as well as dillutions from the concentrate for small quantities.

If you absolutely cannot find room for a 4x5 enlarger, then go to 8x10. However, if it is more a money issue, I would continue shooting 4x5 for awhile. you can save some cash for a used enlarger and good lens and in the meantime you can contact the 4x5s and have all the negs for enlarging at a later date. Yes, 8x10 contacts are wonderful, but so are 16x20 enlargements of 4x5 negs.

 

You don't mention how long you have been a LF shooter, but if it has been for a year or less I would keep with 4x5 untill you really understand how to use the camera and all the creative possibilities.

4x5 is much more portable than 8x10 and you will find that there are many subjects that are more easily accesible to the smaller camera.

 

The route I took in LF was to buy a used 4x5 camera, D2 enlarger and a new enlarging lens. Then as I gained appreciation for LF I bought a used 8x10 and a 300mm G Claron lens that could be used as both a camera lens and an enlarging lens for 8x10 negs. Then bought a better used 8x10 and converted the older one into an enlarger for my 8x10 negs.

Hope this gives you some ideas.

Tuan,

 

While I have been involved with LF for a number of years, I have only been a regular on the forum since late 2000. This knowledge base and resource of LF practioners has greatly increased my enjoyment of all formats I shoot, literally saved me thousands of dollars with advice and input and has helped me greatly advance my craft and creativity.

 

I would prefer to keep the premise of the old forum as you discussed in your post, a community of LF enthusiasts sharing knowledge and experience in a simple, straightforward interface. I don't really care for the sign in or the symbols denoting those who contribute services or money to photo.net.

 

So if the opportunity presents itself in the future to move to an independent server, I would support the move and be willing to make a small contribution to help it along.

Go to Graflex.org. it is the complete guide to Graphic cameras. I have used a Speed Graphic 4x5 for about 3 yrs as a back up camera to my monorail 4x5 and quickly began to appreciate its handheld capabilities.

 

The nice thing about the Speed Graphic is it has a focal plane shutter (1/1000th on the high end) in addition to the typical lens mounted shutter. Mine was very accurate and consistent when purchased. The other advantage is it allows you to use in barrell lenses with the camera. Lenses such as a 127mm Ektar are perfect for hendheld and can be sometimes found with various graphic models on Ebay.

The next logical step is to scan the local classifieds for any tree cutting and trimming services going out of business. you may be able to pick up a 50-80ft cherry picker on the cheap.

Jeff, I would expose several transparencies of the same subject and have a variety of labs process them. Pick out the best one and then discuss your work with the lab and any questions or concerns. The problem with color in the darkroom is unless you are producing a great number of prints, the costs are quite a bit higher than a lab on a per print or trany basis (as opposed to B&W where the cost is a fraction of a labs). Add in the cost of materials while learning and an enlarger and JOBO processor, (easiest and most consistent way to home process film and prints),and you have a pretty good start up investment.

 

I have a lab do my color processing and am migrating to digital to make my color prints. I still find a wet darkroom the way to go for B&W (i work with 35mm up to 11x14) and my 6yr old daughter can process film and make prints as good as the best custom local lab.

 

BTW, the speed graphic is a great camera to start out in LF. I still use mine as a hand held camera with TriX or HP5. If you don't already have one, try to find a flash unit on Ebay or go to the Graflex.com site. I think they have some instructions for adopting modern flash to different shutters.

Sandy,

 

<p>

 

You can insure just about anything for any occurance for a price. I

always get a supplemental theft and damage rider for personal

property if I travel overseas. I had to provide the insurance

company with serial numbers, photographs of all gear appraisal of

value and attest to the effect that I do not derive my sole income

from the use of the gear. Professionals would have coverage as part

of the business policy.

 

<p>

 

Insurance companies being what they are (they exist to make a

profit), you would probably collect on one claim and after that the

premiums would skyrocket or you would be discontinued as being

considered "high risk". My experience over the years with insurance

companies is they will find various ways to minimize any payout to

you and use any payout as a justification to raise your premiums.

Ally,

 

<p>

 

My first lenses purchased on a budget were Kodak Ektars: 127mm and

203mm. Both excellent lenses sharp and good contrast. They are

getting harder to find but check Shutterbug and Ebay. They are not

normal lengths, but I found they allowed for a nice range of options

at first.

 

<p>

 

Also keep in mind that any used lens will have a used shutter. You

need to make sure that where or who you purchase from allows you to

return if the lens and shutter are not in the condition as advertised.

That doesn't mean the shutter will be accurate, but it should operate

to some degree at all settings.

 

<p>

 

Old shutters usually stick and are way off on slower settings, also

off but consistently so at faster settings. So you will need to test

film to establish an exposure index for the shutter you have and when

you get the chance have it cleaned and adjusted, usually $100 to $150.

 

<p>

 

I would advise you review the archives of this forum, the Large

Format Photagraphy Page and SK Grimes website for excellent

information about shutters and lenses. If you have no one local who

can work on LF lenses he is highly reccomended.

42, have been shooting 4x5 for 15 years, 8x10 for about 4yrs and

gathering components for a home brew 11x14. Have been shooting 35mm

since 20yrs starting with a good old reliable college issue Pentax.

To answer the question on labels, they were made 15 years ago by a

local sign shop from material used for clear decals. The only way to

remove them after they have "cured" for awhile is to literally chip

them away. I don't know if that is a property of the decal or 15

years of aging and sunlight.

This past Saturday I had gone out early to use my 4x5 gear to do some images of some buildings sceduled for demolition in my area. After returning I removed my 4x5 case with two cameras and usual gear as well as my 35mm Nikon gear in its bag. I left the objects sitting behind my car but in my open garage. I live in a very nice neighborhood, but when I went out 30 min later the gear was gone.

 

<p>

 

Miraculously, the police called me Wednesday morning to tell me the gear had been recovered at a pawnshop and identified becasue of hard to remove name and address labeling on case, bag and cameras. Upon inspection the gear was not damaged, the perp desperate for cash traded $4000 worth of equipment for 50$.

 

<p>

 

Because the items were labeled, the police are able to match my theft with the person at the pawnshop and will be able prosecute if the thief is apprehended.

 

<p>

 

Moral: It doesn't matter if you are out of site of you gear in a supposed safe location for even a few minutes, someone will probably see it as a soft target of opportunity. I just want to present this recent experience as a reminder to maintain constant vigillence. I hope no one else here experiences the awful feeling that gear you had accumulated over the years is suddenly gone.

I used my Nikon FA as a meter untill i bought a dedicated spot

meter. I also used the 50mm lens as a focusing loupe for awhile.

It is no wonder that the rise and influence of pomo in photography

parallels that of television and now the internet. The public has

less attention span and less time to interpret images. the way you

get the attention is to produce shocking, in your face sensationalist

images. Nothing is about substance and content anymore. Once you get

past the facade of many of these images there is nothing there. They

are souless attempts at attracting eyeballs and appealling to the

lowest common denominator.

 

<p>

 

The popularity of these images as evidenced by their predominance in

many galleries and due to the fact that most of the buying public s

wants that same shock value on their walls to show others and pretend

they have some knowledge about photography.

 

<p>

 

I have seen pomo work at galleries in Chicago and New York, and I

don't remember any that I would want to return to ever see again, let

alone hang on my wall to see everyday.

 

<p>

 

Most of the work is so pretentious it screams, "it's all about me!"

And just in case you can't figure that out, there is always a essay

or piece by the photographer that explains how bad his life sucks or

how much of a victim he is etc.

 

<p>

 

Of course there may be a few good ones out there. But IMHO most of

it is simply the work of people who are to lazy to learn another

medium, to lazy to understand and appreciate the history and

foundations of art, and especially to lazy to learn how to use a

camera.

Tonality, luminosity, brilliance, crispness, gradatiion, snap,

crackle, pop!

 

<p>

 

Photography is probably the most subjective of art forms and carries

with it the most subjective terminology to describe qualities in a

print. If everyone who has contributed to this post were to

photograph the same subject under favorite lighting conditions and

with format, film, developer and paper of choice (don't forget post

printing techniques: toning, bleaching etc), you would have an equal

number of different interpretations of the subject, each one

displying some or all of the above terms as defended by the

photographer.

 

<p>

 

So it really is "meaningless chatter". If you expose enough film and

make enough prints and have what you consider an excellent print to

use as an example, everyone who persues his craft seriously will have

his own definition of what tonality is.

I have never had an XTOL failure with either 5 litre or 1 litre

packages, although I did receive some 5 litre pkgs with the hard,

caked powder which I returned for new. Have always mixed and

dilluted with distilled water up to 1-3. have also been

experimenting with adding Rodinal, as per Rodinal article at

unblinkingeye.com.

 

<p>

 

I Use it with various Ilford and Kodak films in a JOBO. It is

probably my most used developer for roll film and second to Rollo-

Pyro for sheets.

View Camera had an article last year I believe authored by

GeorgeDeWolfe (sp)discussing the newest Epson printer. After

discussing the merits and improvements over previous printers he

mentioned how he had a closet full of the latest and greatest

printers, each one made obsolete by the next newer model or

technology. The last time I looked, I didn't have a closet full of D2

enlargers, just the same 30yr old one I bought second hand and have

used the last 10yrs to make many a fine print.

I am familiar with using Polaroid products in 4x5. I will be working on a few portrait projects later this year and will be using 8x10 and hopefully 11x14 for platinum prints. Because of the cost of materials and time, I need to preview lighting, composition etc. Is there any problem with using my 4x5 camera with a similar perspective lens for my polaroid tests? I already have used the 8x10 on test subjects and have worked out my lighting for the desired print densities. I feel I would be more comfortable on location with the Polaroids for confirmation.

 

<p>

 

Thanks in advance,

I happened to be listening to NPR All Things Considered yesterday and

one of the stories was about the gradual move by movie studios to

switch to all digital production in the next 20 yrs. The huge

advantage for studios is no film stock cost, processing, shipping

etc. Movies would be transmitted via highspeed ground link or by

satellite. The advantage for theatres is the ability to juggle

movies between different size capacity rooms, have many titles on

hand at one time, and even be able to dedicate screens to more indy

and local offerings.

 

<p>

 

Movies are totally cost and profict driven. Mr Spielberg may make

the last movie shot on film stock, but there may not be a theatre

left in the modern world that has the equipment to screen it.

 

<p>

 

In a way this was heartening news. After 35mm and medium format film

disappears, the remaining contingent of LF shooters will band

together to ensure that at least one production line stays open for

film and paper. After everyone has become hypnotized and then numbed

by digital, those who can create with light and film and paper, will

be the ones who rise above mass mediocrity and produce and craft

images that people will view as true art.

I would like to add to my previous post that I am not worried about

my personal work. However if I was flying somewhere to shoot for a

client, ( I am not a professional, only hypothetical), I would

probably arrange to have film available for purchase when I got there

and have it processed before bringing it home. The way things

operate in my universe, the more important something is seems to be

directly proportional to chance of something screwing it up.

I agree with the post that suggested it is safer to put film in carry

on bag and not in checked baggage. I recently took 3 seperate trips

and carried a box with some HP5. After the first trip (4 xray

screenings) I pulled some sheets and processed. 2nd Trip involved 5

screenings (cumulative total 9) pulled some sheets and processed.

3rd trip 4 more screenings and processed remainder which had a total

of 13 passes. I had a lab check each batch with a densitometer and

the first two showed no problems, the third had visible fogging.

 

<p>

 

 

There are obviously variables in machines and perhaps the intensity

with which they are used, but this has convinced me for now that your

ok depending on number of flights the trip involves.

It is quite possible. if you live in a fairly large city or in close

proximity, there are probably annual or maybe monthly camera shows

where regional vendors and collectors sell cameras. This is how I

have bought all my LF cameras. Has the advantage of being able to

inspect the cameras in person and negotiate the price. Also, contact

any local camera or photography clubs in your area. You may find

others leaving LF for digital or other reasons that have not yet

disposed of their LF gear.

 

<p>

 

A tripod is critical to ensure no shake and provide good footing

outdoors. An extended 8x10 is a large target for the wind, the

sturdier the tripod the less chance of the camera blowing over.

That being said, you a can spend hundreds on a new one. I would try

to find a used surveyors tripod. While heavy, it will be relatively

cheap and if you stick with 8x10 you can spend the bucks for new

lighter one later.

 

<p>

 

As expensive as they are, I would try to buy new film holders. I

have never had many problems with 4x5 holders, but seemed to have

problems with used 8x10s. New film holders will eliminate variables

and be easier to load.

 

<p>

 

I agree with others on lenses. Choose a focal length you are familar

with or one slightly either side. I would read the various articles

on the LargeFormat site about lenses before purchasing. Also go to

SK Grimes site for excellent info about shutters and which ones to

stay away from.

 

<p>

 

 

Finally, I would encourage you to go through the archives of this

forum pertaining to 8x10 cameras and lenses. If you find a camera

but have additional questions before purchsing, post them to this

forum. I am continually amazed at the knowledge base available here

and the willingness of so many to share their years of experience.

 

<p>

 

Good luck and enjoy,

Thanks for the responses to my questions regarding A Eastman Commercial View 8x10.

 

<p>

 

I am assuming that Kodak made a specific reducing back for this camera, but i want to enlarge the potential pool of possibilities as it may take sometime to locate a Commercial View back.

 

<p>

 

Question: Does anyone know if other Kodak 4x5 reducing backs (wood D2, Master View etc) could be modified to fit this camera, or of someone that may have knowledge in this area.

 

I have recently took the camera into the field and it was a great purchase. Light, stable and with all the movements needed. I will be adding a front tilt modification after finding out this was a common practice for those who used the camera including Ansel Adams.

Why not use what he used. I recently was looking through some old

issues of Darkroom Photography,(May 89), that had an interview with

Gibson. He stated at that time he was using Tri-X rated anywhere

from 100-1000ASA on the same roll,depending on the image, developed

in Rodinal 1-25 and printed using a Leitz-Focomat C-1 enlarger.

 

<p>

 

Gibson discussed that he would usually print on a grade 3 or 4 paper

and if he needed anything higher, would overexpose and underdevlop

the print.

 

<p>

 

He also printed mostly 11x14 and occasionaly 16x 20 at that time.

These enlargements would also lead to emphasized grain in the images.

 

<p>

 

This info predates a great deal of his work but would include some of

his better known images from Somnambulist (1970); Deja Vu (73); and

Days at Sea (75).

I have always shot portrait work with avaliable light and maybe an addition of a flood or two, using my 4x5 or medium format. I have started to use my 8x10 for this work and will use my scratch built 11x14 when completed.

 

<p>

 

With these formats I assume I will need additional control of light to achieve the requisite depth of field. I have sitting in the closet a three head set Novatron 550 with a bad power unit. The unit has a bad capacitator and the previous owner had purchased a replacement but I have never had it replaced.

 

<p>

 

My questions: will this unit provide enough light? 2nd, can someone recommend a good text or book for the beginner using studio flash?

if this setup is insufficient could you please advise on additions or other gear. Budget is important, low end suggestions dollarwise please.

 

<p>

 

As always, thanks for any and all responses.

I concur on the Film Devloping Cookbook. It is exactly what you are

looking for. After that, you can always post to the forum for more

specific questions.