steve_gangi2

I made the comment months ago, in response to someone's (I forget who) bear pictures that no photograph was worth your life. I am sorry to hear that what I warned about has actually happened. So what happens now? Kill every bear in Alaska? That is idiotic. Mr. Tredwell was just in the wrong place at the wrong time - his luck simply ran out.

For 6x9 I use an Agfa/Ansco Viking. It is very no-frills, with scale focus, but the results have been very good. One thing to watch out for, in some old folders the focus locks up and refuses to turn from lack of use.

The Schneider is a good lens. I have the 210/370 convertible in a Copal shutter. For maximum sharpness, it is used with both the front and back elements (210mm). For closeups or portraits, the front element unscrews to make it 370mm. If you contact print, you may not notice any lack of sharpness. If you enlarge, it depends on how demanding you are. Actually for portraits, a little softness can be a good thing. If you see a drop in contrast at the longer length, use a filter or develop the film a little bit longer to "pump it up".

Things like that happen when we (any country including mine) continue to elect (and re-elect) incompetent bureaucrats, and they in turn appoint other incompetent bureaucrats. These "officials" are stupid. We are stupid for keeping them in office. The best way to get their attention is to stay away in droves. When they don't get their little entrance fees, photo permits, "adventure permits" or whatever it is called, and the money stops coming in, you will have their full attention.

 

There are two things that are infinite, universe and stupidity, and I am not sure about the univers - Albert Einstein

You can save some up-front money by getting a used camera. If you want to do landscapes, you may want a field camera. There are a lot of second hand cameras that would work for this, and the choice is up to you. The Crowns and Speeds were already mentioned, as was the Burke and James. There are also Eastman 2D cameras and Seneca cameras (which I ended up with and are basically the same camera). A wooden field camera will not have as much movement as a monorail, but will be a lot easier to carry since it is usually lighter, and folds up in a smaller package. If you want a monorail, an old Calumet C400 will do fine, but it is heavier and it is not made to fold up. Just make sure the bellows is still good. You can also save money by getting used lenses. I had good luck with Symmars, Ektars, Commercial Ektars, and Raptars (to name a few). Any lens in a working shutter will work on any camera. Brand name is not as important as condition. A popular part of large format is contact printing - you pick the camera based on the size print you want. So, take your time shopping, think about less-than-new equipment, and have fun.

Don't give up the tanks and trays to go digital. Why not just do both?

Get the original Canon FD lenses, made by Canon. Pawn shops and swap/auction sites are loaded with them. They are plentiful. fairly cheap now, and you know they will be well made.

TMax is easy to do, even at home. Just be consistent. If you have a timer or stopwatch and thermometer, you are all set. I think the "base" or "reference" time for D76 1:1 is 12 minutes at 68 degrees F. Do a Google search for John Sexton. His site gives details for controlling the contrast.

Yashica 12 TLR, T2 point and shoot, and Electro 35 rangefinder here.

Looks good. A G-Claron should cover. I don't know if Kodak made a wide field Ektar that size, but if there is such a thing, that would be another choice. By the way, how did you get the scan to "take"? The few times I tried scanning a negative on my flatbed it looked awful. What did you do to make it work?

" ...A Deardorff is a babe magnet... "

 

They aren't?!?!? I still hope to get one SOME day, guess I just need a different excuse ;)

Try pointing it straight up at the night sky, and leave the lens uncovered anywhere from 5 to 10 minutes. The film will record things you can't see. By the way, Jan was absolutely right... get a ruler and measure the "burn distance", then divide it by the lens diameter for the f-stop. That's how telescope hobbyists do it.

Some of the folks have a good point, which is that sometimes it just won't translate into a little 72 dpi jpeg. In my case, I submitted a few elsewhere for a while, and the "scores and critiques" there had mostly to do with the lack of sharpness from the crappy scanner (shrunken down 72dpi scans of 4x5, 5x7 and even 8x10 contact prints). You lose a lot in the process. I'd rather spend money on film than on new scanners for a higher score. But mostly, I am basically lazy :)

There are a few reasons for me. Not enough time and energy after work, a crappy scanner, and just a touch of laziness.

Sunflower in open shade, 5x7 original

Little Anna<div></div>

Morning storm off the coast of Florida<div></div>

Maybe some of us don't care about rating scores and critiques from faceless strangers, and our worlds don't revolve around whether someone else thinks they are crap (and the flaming that too often goes with it). Some of it may even be crap, but who is it hurting? There's been plenty of drivel around here already, and this "no words" thing seems pretty harmless.

floral arrangement<div></div>

artichoke<div></div>

storm cloud

I don't remember if it is already on the list, but the one that always gets me is remembering to pull the darkslide out.

Oh boy. How many different answers do you want? Everyone has their favorite. I use a 12 inch Commercial Ektar (12 inch or 300mm is considered a "normal" length), other people use Goerz Dagors, or Schneiders, or Rodenstocks. There are as many different answers as there are people in this forum.

That is good news! I was staying away from the newer film because of some horror stories. Did you have any problems with the emulsion rubbing or pealing off, or any of the other things that people have been saying?

Buy a nice used camera. That way you will have more money left over for a good lens and some film. Just make sure the bellows are good.