bruce_wehman

Running, cross country skiing, cycling, recovering rock climber, building cameras and fighting gravity.

You might give this a shot: http://www.wehmancamera.com/llsupport.htm

David,

 

Don�t be too hard on John. He, like a few of us old timers, probably remembers when there was a demand for someone who could come back with a saleable picture in fairly predictable fashion; when you could find a decent job in the want ads. Photographers then, were an obscure bunch who had their own language, their own peculiar habits and quirks and this obsession usually referred to as the �Photo Bug.� There wasn�t much competition then, because photography didn�t have the romantic appeal that it has today. �Photographer� wasn�t a profession that was aspired to on the academic level to any extent. The GI bill was in full swing, turning out engineers.

 

That changed in the sixties with Antonioni�s film, Blowup. The lead character, modeled after fashion photographer David Bailey and played by David Hemmings, struck a chord with the growing counterculture and photography has never been the same

There's got to be something to the booze thing.

 

Consider the "Golden Age of American Literature."....Hemingway, Lewis, Fitzgerald, Steinbeck, Williams, and tracking right up to Cheever ....Ya gotta wonder.

"slightly soft overall not at edges."

 

Sounds like your negs are popping. When the humidity is high, a hot light source will dry out the emulsion side and cause the film to warp. The solution is to simply leave the light on for a few minutes before exposure.

If there are any lawyers out there willing to fund a challenge to these stupid regulations, I�d gladly initiate an �offense� to put them to a test.

 

But to try to answer your questions: Government agencies establish regulations because they can.

Tuan,

 

Thank you for your efforts and congratulations for building what, for me, is the most valuable photo resource on the web.

The masses get what they want at a price that they can afford. The Arterati get what they want at a price that they can afford. As a system for the delivery of goods and services, it seems to work well.

 

So what�s the problem? Jealousy? Resentment? Taste?

 

Me? I don�t care. I�ve got a day job

Composition is like acting, in that you shouldn�t be able to see it. Often by studying an image from the standpoint of content, you may find that the frame places itself. When that happens, IMHO, you have good composition.

You can find some of the things that I dealt with while going down this path here:

 

http://www.wehmancamera.com/vchead.htm

 

Horizontal enlargers do have an advantage in that you don't have to worry about weight. The light source, especially, can be made out of just about anything. The downside, of couuse, is that it needs more floor space.

Good topic and you have a point. LF does tend to be a bit stiff. But is that because too much time is spent under the hood, or not enough time is spent getting what we want?

Ansel used LF because he had a deep respect for nature and saw no reason to fuzz it up (with a very few exceptions, early in his career). Fine detail is part of his message and he remained true to that vision to an extent that few can match. He got exactly what he wanted to get.

 

I think the way in which we approach and communicate our subject matter boils down to respect. Just like a street shooter using a Leica rather than a Brownie, we LF folks move in the same direction. And like anything else, it�s usually the ones who work the longest and hardest who shine

Check this:

http://www.wehmancamera.com/vchead.htm

In response to an old thread, I was able to bring the file name of an

active document in to a Photoshop text layer using Java Script.<p>

<code>

var docRef = activeDocument

<br>

var artLayerRef = docRef.artLayers.add()

<br>

artLayerRef.kind = LayerKind.TEXT

<br>

var textItemRef = artLayerRef.textItem

<br>

textItemRef.contents = docRef.name

<br>

docRef = null

<br>

artLayerRef = null

<br>

textItemRef = null

</code>

<p>

The problem is that it appears as an extremely small font size,

regardless of the current settings.

<p>

So my question to all you coders out there: What Variables/literals

should I use to control the size of the text and the location?

<p>

Many thanks.

Arne and Aaron,

 

Wouldn�t the projected slit move faster, thereby compensating for the increase in size? I might be corrected on this, but it should cancel out.

Not exactly urban legends, but in a similar vien: �I have nothing but the sharpest lenses that money can buy, because as everyone knows, owning them is a sure path to success��� Not only that, �due to my superior powers of observation and way above average bargaining skills they all came into my possession at virtually no expense���or: �My wife has the deepest respect and the highest regard for all of the hours, days, months, and dollars spent in this higher calling sometimes referred to as fine art photography

Sounds to me like you need to take a little time off and re-connect with whatever has kept you in the biz. that long. Try going back over the work of photographers whom you admire��Oliver Gagliani has pulled me out of a slump more than once.

Edgar Degas, hands down. He had, not only an eye for compostion, but a feel for it as well. His designs and placements, although off-beat and sometimes quirky, were always in harmony with his subject matter.

He was very respectful of the "slice of life" look of the photograph and played it up in grand style.

I have used the Osaka 400mm tele. on a modified Super Speed. The camera is very light and because of that the rig will need a little extra support when the wind blows. But that is a minor problem..see http://www.wehmancamera.com/llsupport.htm

Yes, it actually works pretty neat. You'll need to punch in your values in either rows or columns, it doesn't matter. Then go to Insert Chart and a wizard will pop up; select custom types and smooth lines. It will chart any selected row or column. When it finishes you will be able to fudge any irregularities by clicking and dragging the points. This applies to Excel 2000. As I recall 97 was about the same.

 

The horizontal increments are equal, so it helps to either have a calibrated step tablet or one that has fairly consistent .15 increments.

 

If you are interested, there is a PDF download @ http://www.wehmancamera.com

Go to the Technical Info. Page and you�ll find the link at the bottom.

These were done in an older version of Excel which didn�t do a very good job of smoothing out the lines.

Excellence! You are obviously someone who is willing to take the time to do things right.

Best way I can think of is to find a small scrap of steel, about 1/4" thick and drill a pilot hole through it. Use the same size drill that you would use for the replacement screw. Then clamp it in place directly over the broken screw and drill all the way through to the other side of the back. Use a sheet metal screw for a replacement so that you can run it in past the remains of the broken screw.

John,

 

Robert Frost was on to something when he talked about the woods "lovely, dark and deep." and not being able to fully appreciate them because of "promises to keep."

 

You are not alone. I too really need to get in the mood....more so as I get older.

 

bw

Yea, cheap old bird that I am.

 

Get one of those burnishing tools with a rounded, smooth, bottom and if you are real careful you can line up the edge of the film with the row of bumps on the substrate and re stick it with the aforementioned tool.

 

The problem is: It doesn't always stay stuck and when it comes loose you don't know until you open it up to process the film.

 

Bottom line: It's ok if you are just playing around but not if you are trying to make a living.

I use the 400mm Osaka Tele. and have not noticed anything like you describe.

 

Is the misalignment that you had corrected the kind where the front and rear lens groups are not co-axial? This can happen quite easily to big lens groups that are held together with small shutters.

 

If you have access to a lab or machine shop, you can do a rough test for parallelism by placing the lens on a surface plate and running an indicator over the top edge.....shouldn't be off by more than .002".

 

Good luck.

.....Be a lot easier, even doable with a hollowed out pumpkin.