philip_sweeney

January 31, 2003

I am thinking about buying a good air filter for the darkroom. I am

looking to reduce the increase in dust that occurs in the winter. I

may not run it in the summer. Air quality is not the issue for me,

just a reduction in air-borne dust. One properly sized with a hepa

filter supposedly collects alot of dust. Can I expect good results?

January 28, 2003

I hope you have done your tests. It sounds like your desired neg is fully exposed and developed probably the equivalent to N + 1. I have used HC110 quite a bit; however: I used non-standard dilutions such as 1:15, 1:31, 1:62. This always allowed me to mix up quart batches and easily deal with minus developments. Even at 1:62(or 0.5:31) 4 ounces in a tube will develop a 4 x 5.

You probably should be able to continue with HC110 despite the Kodak claim, with a couple of tests. I switched from HC110 to PMK last year.

January 28, 2003

I use PMK in homemade tubes made of ABS plastic and they are not smooth. The amount of developer that gets behind the film is limited. I have not had any problems. I did have to modify the agitation. Rotating only left streaks on a flashed film. See my site for further details:

<html>

<a href="http://home.att.net/~shipale/index.html">phil sweeney's website</a>

</body>

</html>

January 26, 2003

Vince;

or do you mean when its gray

January 26, 2003

Vince: do you mean a 95 degree, 100 percent humidity day where there is virtually no blue in the sky and these filters would have no effect on the sky?

January 24, 2003

Once its in the computer it does not matter where it comes from. However: suppose the image will not posterize at 425lpi @ 3600dpi. Let's suppose we want to make an 11 x 14 neg. Then we would need a file = 65Mb (grayscale). FYI: 425lpi we probably want a 650 dpi file (425lpi x 1.5). So 11 x 14 x 650 x 650 = 65Mb. The original RGB file would be 195Mb. Hope you see where I am going with this. Even a 8 x 10 would require a 34Mb grayscale file.

January 24, 2003

I forgot to mention in case you do not know: no yellow or red filter will darken a sky if the sky is not blue.

January 23, 2003

Referring to AA books: upon occasion AA used heavy red filters: I recall he pointed out in his opinion often times a #12 is as about dramatic you may want to go for landscapes. Primarily we are talking about what will happen to the sky. I use a wratten #8 and #12 alot. I have no experience with the #9 or #16. Depending on the sky even a #12 can render it fairly dark and unnatural looking. I have found a #15 to be too much for me. Remember I am only talking about darkening the sky. Filters affect shadows and contrast so they all have their place. #25 will render a blue sky very dark. You will have to experiment some: film is cheap!

Incidendally polarizers are usually not a wise choice with wide angle lenses. Remember maximum polarization is with the light at a 90 degree angle to the lense: therefore many times with a wide angle lense the effect will be uneven throughout the view.

January 19, 2003

Like Bill I'll agree depending on the ambient light its hard to see when one stops down. For myself with 6 inch lenses and above, at adequate distances (I know thats one hell of a relative statement but I hope you will get the point), outside, I never use anything wider than f22. Closer in - smaller.

In low light with a 90mm lens I have a prefocus pencil mark for 12.5 feet at f22 (CoC = 0.1mm). No swing, no tilt. And manytimes stop down to f32

January 19, 2003

I use homemade tubes and have achieved even development even with PMK. Just an FYI:

<html>

<a href="http://home.att.net/~shipale/index.html">phil sweeney's website</a>

</body>

</html>

Regardless of which lens you pick. Check your lens/lamp combo for uneven illumination. See "The Print" Ansel Adams. 4 x 5 lamps do not do a great job with 4 x 5. Depending on how you rotate your lamp in the head the character of uneven illumination is different. I have a mark on my lamp and use it in the same position everytime. I have corrected my combo's uneven illumination with a mask. The mask is made as described by Alan Ross in view camera magazine. With that mask, I never edge burn anymore. This will not be a problem in every print, but it will sooner or later.

January 19, 2003

As a general rule: at 8X the lense focal length or greater, one can forget about the bellows factor. formula: bellows length squared divided by focal length squared.

January 14, 2003

Eric: Getting a good drum scan can be difficult. I currently use Nancy Scans. And their prices are very reasonable. Do not cheat yourself out of some side by side comparison of a drum scan vs whatever! Some subject matter may not need the extra quality: however; many do! A rich color night time cityscape is a difficult subject and I would not think twice about anything but a drum scan. Highlight contrast and detail is destroyed by anything but a top notch scanner. Midtones and shadows suffer too.

Remember a grayscale image that will not posterize at 16 levels of gray may not need a pro scan, but an image that posterizes at any level less than 256 would! You might be surprised by the numbers of images that can do fine at 72 levels of gray. Color can be more critical (millions of colors).

Perhaps we should have asked what are your goals?

January 14, 2003

On testing: I had to read the "Negative" twice and referred back to it numerous other times. If you do not mind the heavy tech stuff I'd recommend "Beyond the Zone System" also, although I personally do not care for his test methods. My zone system is derived from both those books primarily: I determine my N number and then select ASA (I keep a small chart taped to my meter). I think that is better than having a base speed and adjusting (and remembering) fractional stop values for 6 or 7 developments! I know many folks do not have the room, but I have a zone board (The Book of Pyro) permanently standing in a room for testing. As for making charts, just get the raw densities and make some photos, charts are for teachers etc. FYI some of my test data:

<html>

<a href="http://home.att.net/~shipale/index.html">phil sweeney's website</a>

</body>

</html>

I really like PMK and FP4 and do not use HC110 anymore. For me the increased sharpness is reason enough. There are alot of people using PMK for good reasons. My tube developments will slow you down, but the rewards are considerable.

January 14, 2003

Hey dave:

I was fortunate to have a eye doctor spend a little extra exam time with me on this issue. Oddly enough the final analysis was go get the 3.25 (very strong) and if convergance is an issue, that close, then he would make me a set of 3.25 glasses correcting the convergance. I use the pharmacy 3.25s.

It may be obvious but the doctor pointed out: Reading glasses are made for reading at a given distance. That may not be optimum for viewing a computer gg etc.

I also use a 4X loupe. I have more powerful ones but they magnify the image too much.

You know you are getting old when you wear your glasses on a string and you see a woman with a little gray in her hair: you don't mind the gray!

January 12, 2003

Grant: I apologize in advance. I think you need to see what a good drum scan will do, particularly in comparison to something you have already scanned! I have scans done locally by a guy who has a professional grade UMAX ($15 a scan) and they do not compare to drum scans - even the owner admits that.

January 12, 2003

I see and hear so much about platinum prints. I am a little isolated

and would like to see some. I am 90 miles from Philadelphia PA and 25

miles from Harrisburg PA. Does anyone know a platinum printer close to

me? Or recommend a museum which may currently have a platinum print

exhibit? And what book would you recommend as best for platinum printing?

January 12, 2003

Grant:

are you advising the epson scans compare to a drum scan? I would consider professional quality to mean worthy of sale or display as a fine print.

phil

January 12, 2003

I would like to see comparisons of the epson scanner vs drum scans. I have had non-drum scans done and mostly find their quality limit there use to on-screen. None of these scans came close to the drum scans.

4 or 5 drum scans a year is affordable to me. Are we claiming the epson will allow for professional output eventually?

January 11, 2003

I would like to redirect the question. It looks to me like the depth of field issue is a big one for the 11 x 14. Are there many lenses available with apertures smaller than f64? It looks to me like one would be required to use f64 or smaller all the time to achieve good sharpness (depth of field) and even then at relatively long camera to subject distances. Does the typical 11 x 14 user (if there is a typical) have more than one lense or do most work with a normal lense? A "normal" lense would be 18" (appx 450mm)?

January 11, 2003

many field cameras do not have rear swing or rear rise/fall. without rear swing one could pivot the entire camera and re-focus with front swing - obviously there are limitations. if your are doing studio work the limitations are significant. for the field I would say the tradeoffs are negligible. I use a wisner field camera and have my sinar F1 setup to use the wisner boards. if I need the extra movements I use the F1. I have never used the rear swing on my wisner.

January 10, 2003

I have made desktop negatives and imagesetter negatives for printing to silver gelatin papers. The desktop versions are too soft for most images. The imagesetter negs were expensive to calibrate. It is a salvage tool for me (4 or 5 hogged up negatives) and I want to print to fiber paper. The learning curve was significant. Dan's info in the appendix is as important as the main body. For halftones a good understanding of linescreen, output resolution, and posterization is very important.

As a PC user I had good luck with the lensework curve as it is, with contrast adjustment with filters. Although Dan likes the stochastic neg, I had problems with that method (imagesetter issues) and went the halftone route. I have been able to print 4 images at 425 linescreen @ 3600 dpi without posterization. Without a loupe the halftones cannot be seen. I have found as a rule of thumb sharpening twice what is needed on screen is a good value for the imagesetter neg. I probably have spent $200 on curve tests and sharpening tests! To print 4 images.

FYI: I have a curve posted for Desktop Negatives using Epson photo quality glossy film at my website:

<html>

<a href="http://home.att.net/~shipale/index.html">phil sweeney's website</a>

</body>

</html>.

I probably made 7 or 8 curves until I came up with the final.

good luck

phil

January 7, 2003

just another another way for PMK: using tubes:

<html>

<head>

<title>Zone System 2000</title>

CONTENT="zone system user data, homemade film tubes, HC110 dilutions, zone system, zone board">

CONTENT="zone , system , HC110 , dilutions , large , format , view , camera">

</head>

<a href="http://home.att.net/~shipale/index.html">phil sweeney's website</a>

</address>

</body>

</html>

January 5, 2003

I develop in tubes and have recently posted some PMK times for FP4. http://home.att.net/~shipale/

January 1, 2003

this is my second post on this and I see the original was in July. I hope you already solved your problem. I looked and I do have one of those meters, it is not a spotmeter. I tried to use that meter in my beginning days with the zone system and it did not work (for me). To me once I had a decent grasp of the zone system (working system) and the spotmeter, I came to believe using an averaging meter is really more complicated. I do use that meter for incident readings occasionally.

January 1, 2003

I am a FP4 fan and do use PMK. It sounds like you may not have done enough testing. I do not see how you can practice the zone system with the Luna Pro: is not that an averaging meter? if I am wrong - disregard, otherwise you need a spotmeter and you must do the tests.

with HC110 and PMK I get ample detail in Zone III and can often go to II 1/2 and hold good detail. I'd like to try the Bergger. I use a zone board for all tests.

best

phil

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by philip_sweeney