merg_ross

I got my hands on the 45CF last Saturday in the Bay Area. It was, according to the MAC rep, a prototype; the only change to the shipped version being a better finish. It is indeed light and a lot of camera for the money. The lack of rear movements I consider a disadvantage but this might not be true for everyone. I was told shipment would be later this month in limited numbers so be prepared to wait.

The Project Prints by Brett were printed on Haloid Industro, a contact paper.

I hesitate to jump in here being not only very familiar with but also somewhat biased regarding the work of Edward Weston.

First, Ellis makes a good point. If your opinion is based on viewing reproductions then you are not familiar with Weston prints.

If, however, you have viewed original EW prints I do not understand how you could not have seen the beautiful detail in the blacks.

Toko Marketing introduced two versions in 1985. The Toko FL-452 with 14" extension @ 3.8 pounds and a list price of $699 and the Toko FL-451 with 12" extension @ 3.5 pounds and a list price of $599. At the time they were advertised as the only wooden field camera with rear focus. I have never used one and can't help with the parts question.

Has anyone had experience with the (new?) Toyo 45CF? An earlier post

indicated no rear movements. The Toyo site mentions rear tilt and

swing but specs on their site only note rear base tilt. Thanks for

any insight. Merg Ross

Interesting subject but I couldn't access the story.

During the late teens Weston used an 18" Wollensak Verito on his 8x10

Century.

The Van Dyke film titled "The Photographer" was begun in 1947 for The

United States Informatiom Agency. A later film (around 1955-6) done

by Lou Stoumen was titled "The Naked Eye" and had parts from the

daybooks read by Raymond Massey.I am uncertain of their availability

but you might check with the Center for Creative Photography which

houses Weston's archive.

The CCP book has 32 reproductions of the Ektachrome and Kodachrome

transparencies. It was published in 1986 and may still be available

from the Center. It was titled simply: Edward Weston/Color

Photography.

Nick, Some very good developer formulas use Acetone which is highly

volatile. I have used it for years but always mix the stock solution

away from ignition sources. The working solutions are too dilute to

cause a problem.Other than that you should not have a problem. Be

sure you have adequate fresh air intake for the exhaust fan.

Since we are on this tired topic once again, let me draw your

attention to the March/April issue of Photovision Magazine and

comments made by Carol Williams, owner of Photography West Gallery in

Carmel: "Digital images (to date) still feel contrived and lacking

in palatable soul. Despite rational arguments that the computer is

simply a tool, I am not alone in detecting a cold disturbing,

inexplicable void in the final visual result, no matter how

superficially beautiful the image may appear at first glance." She

certainly is not alone.

 

<p>

 

By the way, this is a magazine dedicated to photography -- no

digital. They will soon be launching a second publication, Digital

Fine Arts -- no photography, states the editor.

Ben, I think Carl has the answer. Darkroom illumination for wet print

evaluation is an interesting topic. I have found a 40w incandescent @

3' works well for silver gelatin.

Does anyone know of a good source for replacement bellows for an Omega D2?

Thank you for your help.

Pete,

thanks for clarifying my jumbled post. Yours makes sense. Cheers,

Merg

The stop plates are scored and can be punched out to form square

openings of different sizes.For photo-engraving they can then be

pushed into the slot and rotated for a range of 45 degrees in order

to place the square in different relative positions to the screen

lines.

Perhaps with proper filtering you could make a good copy negative and

go from there. Just a thought. Regards, Merg Ross

Outdated papers sounds better. Thanks, Merg

Tom,

My comments are intended to encourage your creativity and possibly

cut your costs. You have, in a sense, answered your own question--you

are an" equipment junkie". Why did you replace a usable Ektar with a

new lens? Uncertainty, you say. That is your decision and not

necessarily a bad one if you are not concerned about cost. However, I

have been photographing for over fourty years, the bulk of them

professionaly, and purchased my first Ektar last year. I like the

performance of this lens as well as that of my Artars, Dagors and

Symmars. If your commitment is to large format, I would suggest you

divest yourself of the other formats you mention. And,yes, don't shy

away from outdared papers, the results can be excellent. Regards,

Merg Ross

The lens did not bear a maker's name but the iris diaphragm was

marked R.O.and C. CO. (Rochester Optical and Camera Co.) The smallest

opening was marked "256" which was the old "Uniform System"

equivalent to f/64.

This is the lens Weston purchased used in 1924 for 25 pesos. It is an

unsymmetrical form of Rapid Rectilinear and 11.25 inches focal length.

It had no shutter and was used with a behind the lens Packard

shutter. He later gave it to Brett (1937) and Brett in turn gave it

to George Eastman House.

Clarification: +0.4 lbs.

For weight clarifucation: Toyo lists AII @ 6.2 lbs. and AX @ 5.8 lbs.

for a difference of .4 lbs. as noted by Andre.

I have used the services of Steve on several occasions, (last year a

rush) and have referred colleagues to him. I anticipate the use of

his services again soon and believe that your experience of

satisfaction is not unique. Thank you Steve. Merg Ross

Andy, so sorry to hear your tale. Take a few deep breaths, buy a used

lens or two, and by all means take the trip you planned. You will

feel better in a few days. Regards, Merg.

Bruce, I think it is possible to utilize both formats without

abandoning one for the other. The two are really very different tools

and permit a different way of seeing. As an example, view the work of

Brett Weston who used 11x14,8x10,5x7,4x5, 6x7 and 6x6 formats. As you

suggest, some things can not be done with the larger format and

certainly there will be a slight technical sacrifice. But for an

extension of your vision using multiple formats might work. Give it a

try.

I just reread your remarks and see that you can't afford both

formats. Perhaps you can if you keep it simple, maybe 6x6 with with a

single lens for starters. In any event, there will become a day when

you can no longer lift an 8x10 and the decision will become very

easy. Trust me. Best regards, Merg Ross

You mentioned Brett Weston, his father and influences. From a 1981

Robert Holmes interview,Brett speaks of his father: "I love his work.

I was influenced by him. He was influenced by Imogen Cunningham,

Steiglitz, I'm sure Paul Strand. He was influenced by me, so he said.

He was a big man. He was open to influence." Darkroom Photography,

Volume 3, Number 3.