jerry2

Epson pigmented inks are rated for 200 years. Of course, not many

beleive this is reality. However, they are probably one of the

longest lasting inks on the market. And of course there is a stiff

price you pay for longevity - color gamut. Hence the reason 3rd

party inks have surfaced and are widely accepted in both desktop and

LF printers. Also, keep in mind, inks are only rated with specific

papers...certain inks will last 5x longer on specific papers.... all

this is at its infancy, and there is a lot of unsubstantiated claims

flying around! Beware...

I have the Harrison pop up tent. I have not use other tents... I

think the tent is just fair. There must be better designed units out

there. What really bothers me is how the unit holds the support

sticks, the material tabs can rip quite easily...and have already...

too much precision required to get it right. I think I have seen

some which just spring into place when taken out of their bag, this

would seem desireable to me after my experience with the Harrison.

Also, I would want a tent with more room in it... you can never have

enough room in these things!

Thanks for the correction Kevin, I knew when I was typing Goldfield

it did not sound right!

I agree, Goldfield, by Jean NV South of Vegas about 25 miles off I15,

does have some serious distressed looking streets. But don't be

fooled lots there can sell for $100k. Great old saloon still

standing.

But a real gem that most people overlook in Vegas is the Old

Moulon Rouge Casino, active from the 50's to early 70's. It was

still in the days of race discriminations against blacks.... even

Sammy Davis jr. was forced to stay there when performing in the big

casinos. It has been abandoned and certainly looks distressed...

they have been trying to get funds to revive it, as it should be a

historic building... very unique and screams early 1950's. It is

located west off 15 North by the Las Vegas Review Jornal building and

a huge furniture store...(both highly visible to your left on I15

North, just before the spaghetti bowl, (a massisve intersection of

interstates such as 15, 95 and 93) if you could look to your right

while traveling 15 South, you can see the Moulin Rouge, but don't try

it, you may crack your car up. I forgot the street name, but you can

easily find out once you get close... the Casino now has a fence at

the sidewalk with a guarded gate, but I am sure they will let you

inside the fence to photograph.

At f22, no movements, my 110 SSXL will cover 8x10, of course ND

center filter absolutely mandatory!

Bill, I use a Toyo 810MII field. I have not experienced all of the

other field cameras, but my guess is, the Toyo is the ultimate tank.

Very solid, very precise. Drawbacks are, very clumsy, no easy way to

hold it, only geared focus, very heavy at 15 lbs with nothing on it,

not backback friendly at all. If backpacking this camera great

distances is your goal, I would strongly not reccomend the Toyo, but

if you are shooting close to the car, or use a cart to haul the

camera to the scene, then its a solid camera. I am quite surprised

at the low weight of some of the new 810's, but I suspect you pay in

rigidity. There is no free lunch at this format size, unless someone

makes a titanium one. From what I have read on this list, Ebony

users claim excellent stability with moderate weight.....

Which Kodak digital back? Are you prepared to do a head to head

comparison with film and drum scan? From what I have ascertained,

Kodaks best back still can't match 4x5 film but comes very close...

would you agree with this?

Jeff, a while back, there was seperate posts on the both the digitar

80 and the SS XL 80. The Digitar got rave revues, awesome

resolution, and the SSXL turned out to be the weak link in the SSXL

line of lenses. I would go research this in the archives and you

will be enlightened.

.

You wrote.... Digitar's 90mm at f/11 is not quite enough, especially

as I frequently focus much closer than at infinity.

<p>

Keep in mind these image circles are usually conservative.

If you shoot closer than infinity, this will increase the image

circle as the lens is further from the film, or maybe I am not sure

what you are getting at here? or maybe just a typo?

Dave, you wrote......, so then the stretch or compression of short

and long lenses is entirely relative to the format and not the focal

length of the lens?

<p>

Better said, film format defines what lens is long or short as

I described above. To alter the amount of stretch or compression

from one image to another, you need to alter the camera vs. subject

distance.

Neil wrote.....I'm with Conrad on this one. The sense

of "compression" is dependent upon perspective, which is dependent

only upon the position of the camera.

<p>

I agree with you and Conrad, but to answer Davids original

question, we assumed both hypothetical images were taken in the same

spot. His question was about the difference in the final photograph

when using a 35mm with normal lens vs. an 810 camera with normal

lens, shooting from the same position. He felt the final images

would be noticeably different. But in reality they would be near

identical. (putting aside, DOF, aspect ratio, movements, etc.)

David, here is a better way to think of it... your description of

compression for long lenses and stretch (or exagerated) for near

objects with wide angle lenses is very accurate! The question is,

what is normal, what is wide and what is long? The answer to that

question is dependent on the film formats diaganol.... a normal lens

equals the diaganol of the format, a longer lens is greater than the

diaganol, etc. So you have the right idea, you just have to change

the middle point (normal lens) for each format.

<p>

If you take the diaganol of 35mm, 6x7, 4x5, 8x10 and use a

lens for each format exactly equal to their diaganol, you will get

the identical image, on each piece of film, (correcting for aspect

ratio a tad) If you use a lens for each format that is 6x the

diaganol, you still will get the identical image on each peice of

film. Does this make sense?

Dave, I think you are confusing yourself here.... Lets take your

example.... you set up tripods side by side. You shoot 35mm camera

with 50mm lens and 810 camera with 300mm lens. Assuming the aspect

ratio of the 35mm is the same as 8x10, then both images would have

the exact same image within its borders, no differences.

<p>

Now, if you shoot 35mm with a 600mm lens, and 810 with a 600mm

lens on it, and you crop the 810 film down to 35mm size, (or use a

35mm back) you once again will have the identical image! But if you

compare the 35mm image vs. the full 810 image, the 810 image will be

much wider in its view. so to answer your question.....

<p>

If I take the same photograph with a 35mm camera and an 8x10, the

35mm cropped to the same aspect ratio as an 8x10, and appropriate

lenses on each camera to give the exact same field of view on both

cameras, am I wrong in thinking that the final photographs will have

a fundamentally different, if not immediately obviously different

appearance?

<p>

Yes, you are wrong, they will look identical. Whats

considered normal on 810 camera is considered long on 35mm! It's all

relative to film format.

Spot meters have to be calibrated to a given reflectivity % ,

otherwise there is no way you can quantify the amount of light

hitting the subject, which is the goal. As you know, in the same

light, if you meter pure black, vs. pure white, you will theoretcialy

read a 5 stop difference. Pure grey, 18% would read dead center of

these two readings, ASSUMING the meter is calibrated for 18%

reflectivity. (18% is dead center of white and black) Sekonics are

not, they chose 13% vs. 18%, many 35mm SLR's chose the same! So if

you want to match your reflective meter readings with your incidient

meter on your 508, then you need to use a 13% grey card (which no one

makes, of course!)

<p>

If you want your refelctive readings to correspond to 18% grey,

sure makes sense, huh, then the best fix is to always always remember

to open up 1/2 stop, or change the ASA accordingly when in reflective

mode only! I have always been amazed how little this information is

offered by meter companies. Photographers bang their heads against

the wall trying making perfect exposures not knowing the reflective

meter is 1/2 stop off from what they assume. I used a Sekonic 778

spot meter for 1 year before I was informed of this fact by Mam USA.

<p>

Be careful if you don't use a Sekonic spot, I heard that some

makers, maybe Pentax do use the more accepted 18% standard. If

anyone knows, please post, I am curious myself.

A few itmes I can add.

<p>

1. All sekonic spot meters are calibrated to 13% grey, not 18%,

therefore you need to close 1/2 stop to acheive 18% grey. This is

why its hard to match grey card readings vs. incident readings.

<p>

2. The 608 also does % of light coming from ambient vs. flash.

<p>

3. For low light incident readings, -8 EV and above, Quantum makes

the only meters that can read this low.