bob_moulton7

I use Permawash, 3 oz to one gallon of water. It works fine. And it elinates measyrement and dissolving dry chemistry.

Bob

John,

The Arca-Swiss F line field camera is reasonably ligthweight, will set up quickly and is solid. The movements are silky and stay where you want them. I use the Arca B1 head and have found it solid and quick to use. Tripods: a variety of the gitzo, bogen, etc. will work. I do not find the carbon fiber weighty enough. Saving on heft of the tripod on the trail is fine, but friends tell me they must use a bag or ballast in any kind of wind. I use a Reis backpacker and find it meets my needs well.

The Arca backpacks well. I would certainly study it. The Jack Dykinga text on landscape with large format will present you with a reasonably good look at the camera. Dykinga clearly loves the system, but even with his endorsement, one can read the text to see the features of the camera.

Bob

Scott,

Schneider ha dnot promoted this lens a lot, and the Nikkor and the Fuji lenses are smaller, using #1, not # 3 shutters. That said, I uased the Schneider lens for many years in 4x5 on a wood field camera and on an elderly 8x10 . The coverage was stellar, the sharpness excellent. I sold it to get a smaller lens that i could carry about in my pack.

bob

I have used a 3010 expert drum with 10 sheets of film and 850-900 ml of chemistry on the unicolor base for several years sucessfully. The drum tends to walk down the base even when the base is leveled. To prohibit that I put rubber bands and tape around the base so that the roller base wheels were trapped between the tape. The height of the tape plus rubber bands stopped the drum from walking.

My negatives are fine. I have used the same drum in a CPA-2, read negatives from each system on a densitometer and found the results to be identical.

One point: I process only b/w film. I have not tried this with color. My guess about color: If you can control the temperature of the chemsitry there should be no problem.

Hope this helps,

Bob

One hopes A/S continues the old as well as the new model. The new one seems to be an Arca-Swiss rail Crown Graphic, given the sparce rear movements. It will be interesting to see reviews and pricing specs on it.

Bob

Sexton has stated in one of his workshops that he rarely expands the film beyond N+1. He has said that instead he uses selenium toner on the negative plus a higher contrast paper or filter. Of course he uses T-Max 100 and T-Max 400 extensively and rarely Tri-X.

So another alternative exists: develop for N+1, use selenium toner on the negative to achieve about N+2 and then apply necessary filtration + paper + even paper developer. The benefit of this approach is that if an N+3 introduces unwanted variables, such as excessive grain, etc. you avoid that.

Excessive grain in 4x5? I don't know how to define that, but I know I want to avoid it.

Advice that does you no good now. Technical pan loaded into a holder, EI at 100, place shadow on zone V and process as Tmax 100 N-1 does wonders for low contrast scenes.

Bob

While the previous threads suggest answers to your problem, i wonder if you use adequate developer. I belive that Jobo's recommendations on quantity apply to developer only. In some of their publications they clarify that a bit more. So if you use 240-250 ml of solution, with TmaxRS 1:9, you would use about24-25ml of developer and the rest water. itmay be you will need to increase volume of diluted solution to 500-600 ML .

Bob

Chris,

I went throught an analysis similar to yours about 7 months ago. I chose the Arca-Swiss F Line Field Camera with 24 cm bellows and the additional 50 cm bellows and 25 cm extension rail. I use the camera for landscape and urban images. The unit plus my lenses fits nicely into a Kelty backpack or into a tamtac strong box--for me the latter is easier in town. On the road I use the Kelty pack for obvious reasons.

The wood field cameras I owned are great; I sold one to make way for the A/S. I do not regret the change. The A/S, IMHO, is stable, compact, and quite versatile, everything you have probably read about it. I cannot fault the Linhof. It is obviously a fine camera. Users of it sometimes note it is a bit tricky to set up. And failure to learn how to set it up correctly may compromise the bellows. I had experienced similar problems with the wood field camera I sold, and thus it seemed to me a case of " been there, done that ."The folding rail on the A/S is easy to use, and the entire system is very smooth. I case it with either bellows and attach one lens. usually, i have an idea of the lenses I will nedd and thus outfir the camera at home with the "starter" equipment.

Thus far, Ihave no criticisms of the unit. Perhaps that is the honeymoon, but Ihave been lucky enough to use and to borrow a variety of LF equipment over the years, and the A/S seems to me to be the best that I have used thus far. In additon, its system is quite verstaile,allowing you to grow without having to replace or compromise your shooting when/if your interests develop.

Hope this helps.

Bob

I have used the dichroic head on the original Saunders LPL for about ten years. At work we have a VCCE Saunders, also the less powerful unit. I cannot say that either outperforms the other. I enjoy either and can move the same negative from unit to unit with very few adjustmenst.

As far as enlargement times are concerned, I consistently enlarge 4x5 TX,TM100 and Tech Pan to 11x 14 and 16x 20 and occasionally larger. My lenses are not special--Schneider 150 and 135 Componon-S. At a moderate aperture f11.5, my times rarely exceed 25 seconds with filtration applied. Paper is Oriental, Forte, some Ilford MGFB. Dektol 1.5 to 1 or Agfa Neutol WA are my developers. In other words no magic lenses or chemistry.

Anyways, I think either is a joy to use. I have no need for the stronger and hotter bulb, but others may.

Bob

I fill the tank up above the film holder. Important: Do not use the funnel pouring method, as chances are very good you will overdevelop the edge of the film adjacent to the intake hole a lot. I kill all lights after premeasuring pre wet and developer, load the film carrier, place in tank, pour in prewet, time for 1 minute, dump, and pour in developer. Start clock, cap tank, turn lights on. I repeat these steps for stop bath ( for me that's water) and fix. I haven't had any problems with this setup. Moreover, should you ever need significant minus development--similar to that John Sexton has developed (no pun intended!), the Combi tank works fine.

Last hint: see if you can find a second tank, That makes the blackout steps quicker as you only have to transfer the film carrier from one tank to another.

Bob

Are there any midwestern LF photographers interested in occasional

free workshop gatherings similar to those announced by LF--ers in CA

and the east coast. Surely Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Indiana, etc. has

some LF photographers who don't spend all of their time planning

trips west and east.

Bob M

Matthew,

My help is tangental.I had similar problems with Kodak Readyloads and with the old Mido I holders The Kodak Readyloads can be disassembled easily, allowing the owner to vaccuum, blow out and clean its innards. You might check the apparent fasteners of the quickload to see if that is possible with those.

Bob

I have used that system for several years. I would suggest two possible problems: The pink images suggest depleted fixer. and/or the failure of the fixer to remove the dye Kodak incorporates into Tmax films. I don't use Ilford film, so I cannot comment on the specific problems.

The amount of solution you are using seems small. I know Jobo says you can use 560ml, but Jobo also would add that should be straight not diluted developer.

For what it is worth, I use 900ml of solution for 12 sheets of TMax 100 all the time successfully. I use TmaxRS, since Kodak stipulates that Tmax developer is inappropriate for sheet films. I add the B to the A solution, and call that stock, and then mix it 90ML TmaxRS + 810 ML water. I prewet 5 minutes and process Normal at 10 minutes.

I would check the freshness of the fixer and maybe try a new bottle of TmaxRS. Unless you have some critters in your water supply I can't see what else could be going wrong.

Hope this helps.

Bob

I would like to make a LF backpack that would pass airport scrutiny

but I'd like to avoid the price and the problems that many have

commented on about the current packs made by the "usual"

manufacturers. In the past, I have used Lightware cases, Tenba pack (

too small for my current system), and f64 8x10 pack ( my current

default pack, but it is an old one that will fail airport scrutiny

and is not quite large enough.)

I have two questions: Which packs from makers like Kelty, Osprey,

Marmot, etc. would users here recommend, and equally importantly,

what materials would you recommend for the dividers?

I have researched packs on the WWW, but the dimensions aren't

mentioned uniformly, and knowing that the pack holds 3600 CC doesn't

help me too much. The local retailers carry a limited variety of

packs; none I have seen aeem large enough, and I have decided that a

top opening pack is inconvenient. As far as divider material is

concerned, I have thought about everything from foamcore to thin PVC

sheets covered with material, but before I leap I would appreciate

some advice.

I will carry an Arca-Swiss Field Camera ,one extension rail, one long

bellows, darkcloth, 5 lenses total, glass filters (lenses and filters

probably in Gnass gear type cases, meter, glasses,maybe a 545 back

and some polaroid, readyloader and 20-40 sheets of film.

Brian,

Try one of these contacts. Good luck.

Contacts

Arca-Swiss International SARL

29 quartier de l'Europe

Espace Valentin

FR-25048 Besançon

33-381-85 40 60

arca-swiss@swissonline.ch

US Distributor

Arca-Swiss Inc.

532 West Grant Place

Unit 1

Chicago, IL 60614

773-248-2513

Fax: (773) 248 2774

E-mail: arcaswiss@aol.com

US Service & Repair

Arca-Swiss Authorized Service

Precision Camera Works

8047 Washington Street

Niles, IL 60714

(847) 340-4864

Bob Watkins

E-mail: bobpcw@attbi.com

Bob

Scott,

I use a 3010 and a CPA-2 constantly with Tri-X and other Kodak B/W films and process 10 sheets simultaneously. I use T-Max RS, diluted 1:9 from the stock (that is Part A with Part B poured into it). So for 900 ML of solution I use 90 ML TMax RS A+B and 810 ML water. I have been using this solution and this equipment for 3-4 years with few problems.

Now TMAXRS is no golden developer. One should be able do do the same with many developers. Perhaps the problem with HC110 is the dilution you must use vs. the amount of developer needed to process your sheet film.

Hope this helps.

Bob

Constructing the cloth is a very good idea. I would add to the suggestions given earlier only these : material-- Black ultra-suede with a white cotton backing obscures light extremely well. The cloth can be folded, abused, etc. and retains its shape and efficiency. As an added feature I had a tape measure sewn into one edge of mine, useful for quick determination of exposure increases when moving close to the subject--or extending the bellows significantly.

The elastic works well around the "mouth" of the cloth. But I suggest you make certain the cloth will fit on and come off the camera easily. The BTZS cloths I have had fit so tightly that removing them for film holder insertion ia a problem. Hope this helps.

Some would use velcro strips sewn in rather than elastic. Either works, but the velcro picks up all sorts of dirt, etc. over the years.

Bob

If you can process your film in your bathroom I suggest you do the tests needed to derive your N processing times and basic EI for the films that you want to use. Generally, an N+1 will be N x1.20-1.40. An N-1 will be N x .6-.80. N+2 you can get with N+1 and Selenium toner. N-2 will probably require dilute developer and slow agitation.

If the problem is in the amount of film to be shot to derive the speed and developing time I suggest you buy three used 4x5 holders. Take three of the dark slides and drill a 3/4 inch hole in each . Hole 1 at the top. Next slide Hole 2---1.5 two inches down drom the top. Next slides hole 3 1-1.5 inches down from hole 2 slot.

Now you can make 6 images on a sheet of film, or 12 on two sheets.You simply shuffle the slides to reveal the circle you want to expose at a given exposure. You can expose the circles of film to a test target--gray card, etc. vary exposure, and process them.

If you can find a friend/processing dealer who can read the resultant images with a densitometer you're in business.

Even better you can scan those neagtives in and establish an N curve for use with your film.

Hope this helps.

Bob

I too am getting a lot of this spam recently but not at thios email

address. instead it arrives at me work email. I do sign onto this

page through that account from time to time, but strangely I never

receive the spam at this--home address. go figure!

Good news is the labels are so crude one can delete them all quickly.

Bob

At a workshop a few years ago Jay Dusard demonstrated tea toning

using simple bags of instant tea (he joked that Tetley was the

photographer's tea de jour!). Anyways, the process worked quite well.

An added feature is that tea, unlike some toners, possesses few toxic

and environmentally harmful ingredients. Try drinking Selenium toner

sometime.

<p>

Asked whether or ot the process was archival Dusard or his co-teacher

Michael Schultz pointed to oriental papers toned with tea that had

lasted a few thousand years.

<p>

Seriously, the process is well worth an afternoon's experiment.

Bob

The extension back may also fit a Tachihara.

Bob

I echo the other posts. I have used the nikkor and a Shneider 90mm

without finding a center filter a must. By the way in Large Format

Landscape Photography Jack Dykinga, who does use center filters

explains how one can consider the composition of the scene carefully

when using a WA lens without center filter.

Bob

I sympatize and empathize with the contributors who have narrated horror stories about camera dlivery and service. But my experience, at least with one of the firms mentioned, Wisner Classic, reveals an alternative picture.

I have purchased cameras and accessories from ron wisner since 1988 and have experienced none of the problems mentioned here. When a camera was not delivered at its promised date, i received a phone call indicating it would arrive within 10 working days. It arrived, 9 working days later.

Accessories, including lenses, tripods, etc. were shipped from wisner or through his company on time or within a reasonable window (1-4 days) of order.

When I ordered one camera he and his representatives warned me that they had experienced back orders and would be going on summer holiday and that I was late in the line. When i inquired later about the status of my order I received a phone call or an email. The camera took a long time to get here, but teh Wisner firm kept me informed. i had the option at any point to pull the plug.

Obviously others have different experiences with Wisner.

Anyone can find an alternative view camera; many are celebrated on these pages as the "ideal camera de jour", and so we read about Canham, Technikardan, Ebony, Arca-Swiss, and the hits keep coming. So to some limited extent each of us who orders a specific brand and waits, drooling, for its arrival--myself obviously included!--should do a reality check. Would it make any difference if we used a different camera that we could readily purchase from a large retailer--Samy's, CPI, B&H? Are Avedon's images better because he uses a XXX, John Sexton's because he uses a YYY, or Jack Dykinga's because he uses a BBB?

Those of us who insist upon this or that tool--and all a large format camera is is our craftsman or home depot hammer after all should recall Fred Picker tirading against a participant in a workshop, saying that his(the paticipant's) images would be better if he did not make them all in the desert southwest, if he did not use that T-Max 100, if he would just follow all of Picker's dogmas about exposing for Zone VIII, and especially if he would get rid of that west coast special--a Linhof. Sound familiar??

"All art is conceived two inches behind the eyeball--the rest is tool manipulation." A pretty darned good workshop leader--obviously not Fred-- made that comment while discussing art, artists and life one night at Canyon de Chelley. Not a bad view.

Bob

.

Can someone define for me a Silver Chloride Contact Print? I understand the Gelatin Silver and Chlorobromide print designations, but I saw references to this type of print in B/W magazine and cannot figure out what it means.

Thanks, Bob

Spencer,

<p>

I have been using this meter for over ten years for LF photography. I

use both b/w and color films. I have found the meter very accurate,

the dynamic range of the scene easy to identify, and the exposure

easy to determine. And you get a spot flash meter that is equally

accurate. Previously I had used a Soligor digital spot meter and a

pentax digital spotmeter.. They were IMHO equally accurate and

featured meters. I prefer the minolta becuase I find it easier to

read, and it has the flashmeter function.

Bob