joe_lipka3

Started with a 4x5 in LF. Wanted to make Pt/Pd prints, and

considered moving to 8x10. I felt it was too much trouble for the

cost, so I settled on 5x7. I first was able to find a very

inexpensive 5x7. Wore it out completely. Then, I was able to buy

an "expander" back (4x5 to 5x7)for my Wista. I could use all my 4x5

lenses. Larger negative, less dollars. Along the way, I fell in

love with the proportion of the 5x7 negative. It seems much more

elegant than the 4x5 or 8x10 proportion.

<p>

The only downside (and this is peculiar to me) is that 5x7 contact

prints are currently not "gallery friendly" when shown next to the

20x24 or 30x40 images that are the current LF rage.

Check the printing and finishing forum section of photo.net. Paste

into your browser. Same discussion.

<p>

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=B%26W%20Photo%20%2d%20Pr

inting%20%26%20Finishing

"To make the ordinary extraordinary."

<p>

Try to inspire as many people as you can. Artists are a small

percentage of the population.

You can develop more than one sheet of film in a tray at a time.

This is a very common misconception. You can and should develop more

than one sheet of film at a time when you tray develop. I usually

develop ten sheets of 5 x 7 at one time.

<p>

I used to use hangers, but gave up on them because I was limited on

the number of hangers I could drop in my tanks. Went to trays and

haven't stopped using them for twenty years.

<p>

I use a two step developer to make sure that the developing time is

fairly extended to make sure that the development does process evenly.

Richard - The 3 min in A (elon and sulfite) and 10 min in B

(Kodalk) for divided D-23 development sounds reversed. Is that a

possibility?

Your problem was correctly analyzed as insufficient agitation. I

would like to point out that while you may develop 5x7 sheet film one

at a time, it is not necessary that you do so. You may develop

multiple sheets simultaeously, "shuffling" the film in the developer.

I have used this technique on 5 x 7 film for over ten years.

<p>

You may have to sacrifice some film to "practice" the technique, but

it is worthwhile before you start developing "real" images.

Try doing a Google search on Gum Bichromate. A popular process from

the last part of the nineteenth century.

Ed Buffaloe's www.unblinkingeye.com has an article we wrote together

on the use of divided D-23. You might find it of use, too.

I got into 5 x 7 by purchasing an "increasing" back for a Wista 4 x 5.

It is a "three dimensional rhomboid" that replaces the 4 x 5

groundglass that holds a 5 x 7 ground glass and film holder. I don't

know if that's a help, but it is an option I have successfully used

for about ten years.

If you want to see how good this really is, check out www.

Lenswork.com. Their special edition prints are made this way.

Briefly the difference between silver and platinum is money. You need

a large negative (pt/pd is contact printing only). So, either a

large camera or an enlarged negative is needed. Light source for

enlarging is ultraviolet light. The chemistry is different, and

ruined by contamination with silver chemistry, so you need a entirely

different set of darkroom trays, beakers, thermometers etc. You need

to buy paper and chemicals which are expensive. Think in terms of

$2-3 dollars per print (5x7 or 8x10)in the cost of paper and emulsion

only. Visit the Bostick & Sullivan web site for instructions on how

to coat paper. That's all I needed to learn how to hand coat. Is

there any good news? Yes, you can use a 40 watt yellow "bug bulb" as

a safelight in your darkroom. The Pt/Pd print developer has a very

long life - measured in years, not weeks or months.

Well, Aaron, you can read about making art, or you can go out and make

art. You can't make great art without first making art. So, go out

and do something. Reading a book won't make a photograph.

<p>

In your spare time (when you are not making art) I would like to

suggest a book that was mentioned in this forum, "Writing Down the

Bones." It deals with writing, but you can do the mental version of a

"global replace" of writing with photographing.

<p>

As for other books, Ted Orland's "Scenes of Wonder and Curiousity"

(think that's the right title), Weston's Daybooks (for many, many

years about the only text on the journey through photography as art),

and of course, all back issues of LensWork.

I have a Wista Field 45 (purchased in 1981), so I guess that qualifies

as an old version. There is a circular hole just behind the front

standard, so a recessed lensboard will not work. I am able to use a

Fuji 90 mm lens with this camera without a recessed board. If you

want a work around, I have used the following technique with the 90 mm

Fuji and the Wista 5x7 expander back.

<p>

Tough to describe, but here goes. When unfolding the camera, you

would normally slide the front standard into the two vertical metal

pieces, and tighten the thumbscrews that take care of the front

rise/fall. Don't do this. Let the front standard and bellows

collapse into the back part of the camera. Then you tighten the

thumbscrews so the front standard is secured against the completely

collapsed bellows. Disadvantages? Yes, no front rise/fall, and

sometimes the edge of the bed is in the foreground, so then you have

to tilt everything back to move the bed out of the way.

<p>

Don't think that you can get a bag bellows for the Wista Field

Cameras.

Now that you have the problem solved, I note that you are using the

Oxalate acid route to processing. I realize this is the traditional

process, but have you considered going with more modern (and less

dangerous) materials?

My film is TMAX 400 in 4 x 5 and 5 x 7 developed in split D-23.

Camera is Wista 4 x 5 with a 5 x 7 expander back, too. I print almost

exclusively in pt/pd in camera film sizes. I am using photoshop,

pagemaker and acrobat to create enlarged digital negatives (up to 10 x

12)for pt/pd printing.

<p>

I try to use whatever works best for the image I want to produce.

My current way of working involves creation of a portfolio of multiple

photographs. When exhibited they are hung in a specific sequence.

The best analogy I can use to describe this is that each photograph is

a word. The words must be set in a certain sequence so that they

communicate the central thought of the portfolio. When they are shown

together, the viewer is presented with the complete well-structured

thought rather than randomly placed words. I don't sequence the

photographs to get approval; I sequence the photographs to complete a

visual thought. This process may or may not work for you. Right

now, it's working for me.