michael_kadillak6

How about unclipping the bellows and sliding off each standard sideways from the rail. Much less bulky and easier to put this in a soft case. You have a rail tube, two standards that can be wrapped and a bellows. Give it a try.

With the guidance of Richard Boulware, I recently acquired an Arkay

gas burst sink to develop sheet film and hope to get into the swing

of the bubbly shortly.

 

Considering how many replicate postings occur on this and other

photographic forums make me wonder why we even bother to maintain an

archive. In any event, I was shocked at how little attention this

subject has received when I did a search on this technique prior to

this posting. Commercial labs have regularly utilize this procedure

to perform their C41, E6 and B&W developments for large format

photographers for years. Reminds me of the old saying - If it ain't

broke, don't fix it.

 

Does anyone else out there use nitrogen gas burst to develop their

film? In the interest of not wanting to re-invent the wheel, can you

share some specifics on the latest B&W films and developers to get me

in the ballpark? If this game at the end of the day is all about

results, surely it does not get any easier than turning on the switch

and pulling hangers at the correct time.

 

Thanks in advance.

I am sure that a Majestic head would work for your application, but I am curious why the exclusion in your post for the Ries? My 11x14 sits nicely on my Ries A250 double tilt head as though they were made for each other.

Thank you Brian for taking the time to post this for the benefit of the forum. Enjoy!

Ellis, I think that you are potentially missing an opportunity to make some great money. Take that portrait of Ken Lay and and print it circular so ex-Enron employees and stockholders that got the shaft can purchase it and affix it to their dart board for inexpensive therapy. You would make a killing.

Great comment Ron. It would be fantastic if someone with access to the WSJ online could please paste the article here for the forum to enjoy. Many thanks.

In this morning (March 26, 2003) there is an interesting article on

Large Format entitled "An Old Tech Camera's Enduring Appeal" found on

D8 in the Leisure and Arts section - last page.

 

It is not ofter we get excellent coverage in national publications

and it is a well written piece of journalism Check it out.

 

Cheers!

I met a professional photographer recently that lived near me here in Colorado that did something that I felt was extremely creative with arriving at the 8x20 format. Because of the costs of the 8x20 camera, film holders and the limited film selection (he shot color negative sheet film) and the weight associated with this set up, he found a way to have his cake and eat it as well.

 

With his 8x10 camera he took a shot and then rotated the camera to either direction for the next "slice" of the image and took another and took the two negatives to a digital services lab that took these two 8x10 negs and melded them into a master 8x20 file that he printed from. I took out my loup on his prints to see if I could see the seam where the two negatives were put together and I could not see anything but wonderful imagery. He had a couple that he had printed to about the five to 6 feet width and they looked incredible.

 

When I asked him how he arrived at this workable solution he told me that he at one time did have an 8x20 camera and got so frustrated with the weight, costs of the custom ordered film (he is a color photographer) that he sold the equipment. Since he loved the proportions he needed a way to get there by some other means. The lab convenced him to let them show him what they could do with technology and he has not looked back.

 

Just though I would throw in my two cents. Good Luck!

If Nikon is good enough for John Sexton, it is plenty good enough for me. Sure anyone can run tests of lens A against lens B and draw some conclusion. But who claimed that they were designed with the same balanced end result in mind. The 135mm Nikon is one kick ass lens in terms of sharpness and contrast at a price that is impossible to beat. Backing into this decision - the question you have to ask yourself is will the Rodenstock provide give you an exhibition print that will be twice as good as the Rodenstock? I would bet not.

 

Get the Nikon and save your money for film. Worse case scenario, if it falls short, you will not lose any money in the re-sell market.

 

Cheers!

My bad. I used the wrong nomenclature. I was making reference to the simple fresnel that fits behind the ground glass on the back of the camera under clips. Linhof number 002522.

 

My Master camera had a "Super Screen" in it and I could not get it to focus evenly across the ground glass so off it went to Marflex. The item I am making reference to are the screens that go under the ground glass requiring re-focusing of the ground glass. The service technicial I spoke to there told me he does not recommend these because they can warp and shift focus. I have no idea if Linhof has subsequently come out with a NEW screen that overcomes these experienced shortcomings.

The Linhof Super Screen mentioned by Geoff is the way to go. Clips right on the back of the ground glass and makes a huge improvement. If you want to view it in person, I am in Aurora, Colorado and I would be happy to let you take a look at mine in person. Cheers!

Yes, this is the camera that was produced under names such as Calumet and $200 would be a top price. Great starter camera if you find that a monorail fits your bill. Always check the bellows with a flashlight in a dark room as while the camera may look like mint and the exterior of the bellows may look fine, but when extended then may look like the outside surface of your Great Aunts pin cushion. Cheers!

Tim. I pulled out my TK and measured the fall/rise. There is a total of 2.75" of total rise/fall distance from the lowest position of the front standard to the highest position. From the set zero position it drops .75" down and it goes 2" up. The back does not have that much straight distance down in the 90 degree position because of the film holder dimensions. However, you can get much more than this amount by intelligent utilization of the movements. You can elevate the front of the camera and rotate the standards to the zero position and get as much rise or fall as your optics will afford you. Yes, we are comparing apples and oranges here, but while I dearly love my Canham 5x7 to death, having this many scales and a zero detent on each standard and such a secure lock down on the Linhof TK45S is heavenly.

While reading Hutchings book, the section on the options of developing with pyro caught my eye. Yes, tray developing is considered the most inexpensive option, but he talks extensively about gas bust with nitrogen as another methodology that does not get much air time (no pun intended)IMHO on this forum. I personally do not like gloves and am about to go the path of gas burst with some assistance of one that has enjoyed the simplicity of this technique for years. No gloves, the volume of the tank dictating the number of sheets per run and pulling out hangers on their own time to get individual minus, normal or plus development. and yes, you are probably over reacting a bit.

 

However, I remember a professor a long time ago telling me that when I was at a crossroad and it does not feel right - to innovate.

 

Cheers!

I have both the Master and the TK45S and feel (as Bob just mentioned) that if you want the highest degree of flexibility in terms of dropping or raising either the front or rear standard, you could not ask for a better candidate than the Technikardan. Don't know where you are coming from relative to cold weather. Surely the camera will not freeze up as I have had it out in the cold without a hitch. With heavy gloves on, any camera controls less than about the size of a silver dollar could create some difficulty, but you can work around them. I remember reading that when Sexton wanted to shoot technical subjects, he always went to the TK45S for that very reason over the Master. Can't beak the price in the new or used market. Cheers!

Ha! Those inquisitive kids will get you every time. The thought of one of my children playing catch with one of my lenses made me create a safe place high in the closet for my photography equipment.

 

The film should be fine as the inner material is very heavy and black and moisture resistant as long as it has not been compromised.

 

On another note, make sure that all of the household chemicals for cleaning and washing dishes are in a safe place far from the potential of junior accessing them as well.

As you said, both lenses are fabulous and even if you were to go into color materials, the single versus the multi coating will probably not make any difference in the quality of the results. I do not notice that big a difference in brightness between them, but maybe you can put them on a lensboard and see for yourself. I have found that among many photographers, brightness is very much an individual thing that you need to decide for yourself. No question the 250mm lens has a larger illumination circle and is heavier, but given your limited movements I feel that the decision comes down to weight. The 240 is very tiny and light as a feather. If you are going to be out and about much with your 8x10, I would do the 240 if you do not find the difference of brightness between them affects you. If you will be relatively static or near the vehicle for your photograohy, the 250 will not let you down. I have the 250 and will shortly acquire the 240 for my 8x10. Good Luck in your decision.

No brainer. If the glass in the lenses is just dusty and the surfaces are not excessively scratched, abused and/or separating, go for it. Commercial Ektars are high quality products and will perform wonderfully for you. The shutters while old can always be brought back to life by having them serviced. I would recommend SK Grimes as he does his magic regularly for large format all day long. You would spend more than that price for just one lens that will cover 8x10.

 

Good Luck.

With such a light weight camera, save yourself some money and get a cheap Bogen 3030 head with the quick release plate. Probably under $50. Works like a champ. I find that I use this head more than the Arca B1 and the Linhof 3 way leveling head because it is so simple. By all means if you are going to splurge, do it in the optics department where it will mean something in the final product.

I would respectfully decline as the task has been offered to for one very important reason. With 500 people in the image, each person will naturally want to be able to clearly identify themselves in the photograph and that creates a set of objectives that is very demanding indeed. I am not a computer guru by any means but assuming that you could get someone with a banquet camera (this is why they were made) to make this image, scanning this and getting it to post would be a real challenge. Is there any way that you could get the organization to break out into smaller groups along some defined responsibilities that would make it an easier task?

I would second what Clay just said about delivery and customer protection. Until you have the camera in your hands, it cannot make images for you. As personal preferences go, if a Wisner works for you great. I would make one serious recommendation if you go this direction. Call Floyd at Quality Camera and order it through them. The costs will be the same and when I talked to him about this option recently, I only had to put down a deposit and he said that he would insure that worksmanship was up to par before he requested the final payment and shipped the camera. I ended up getting a used Wisner from Midwest and solved my problem, but there is a lot to say about inventory that is available immediately ie. the Canham.

 

You need to decide the level of patience you are willing to undertake as a Wisner will very likely require a considerable amount of it.

 

Good shooting!

Irrespective of personal preferences for manufacturers, I have seen many images made with the Nikon 135mm and they were all as sharp as a handful of razor blades (as Richard B. would say) as long as the images were managed on the ground glass and were subsequently processed to strict standards.

 

I am surprised that it has taken you four years of use to determine that the lens is unacceptable. Could your ground glass be off a bit? Are the elements screwed fully into the shutter? I would bet you that a new lens alone will be the only variable inhibiting you from realizing your photographic objectives. If you are going to 50x60, have you considered 8x10?

Does anyone have experience with the Durst Multigraph 10x10 condenser

heads for primarily B&W printing that are put out bu Durst Pro USA?

Being able to control power output along with a guarantee for eveness

to +/- 1/30 of one f-stop looks good on paper, but does it amount to

a hill of beans?

 

Yes, it is expensive as hell, but so are quality cameras and lenses.

 

Thanks

Philip:

 

Try escrow.com for starters.

If you wanted to purchase from a stranger online, to feel completely comfortable you can always use any number of escrow intermediary companies that protect both parties.