scott_walton2

We had one of the Agfa's at work several years ago. The B/w negatives were superb but the software was so out of date it was pathetic! Never could get the color end of it going... had some issues with crossover that we couldn't fix no matter what. Agfa was absolutely no help either so I say with trepidation... you might be on your own. It was PC based and that in itself was problematic... Good luck!

You could always use rack like these on Ebay...http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4204&item=3876687402&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW&tc=photo

The results are superb! I used to do alot of this and the resulting slides where full of detail with beautiful tones and very fine grain! As I recall, you need to rate your film @ 50 ASA.

I have never gotten the results I wanted with the testing I have done on ANY of the t-grained films and Diafine. Any of the "regular films" are great and that includes Neopan 1600.

There are a number of things you can do to make it easier to focus... getting a bright screen helps a huge amount... see if there is a "field shade" that fits the back of your camera (the kind that flips open to shade your GG) which does a double duty. When closed, it will protect your GG and in a pinch, when the sun is at the "right" angle (read wrong angle), if I'm wearing a sweatshirt, I take it off and wrap the neck opening around the camera back. Other than that, I usually just use my unweighted dark cloth (that I sewed velcro to to close it up on the camera and the bottom when it is on the camera). I use an unweighted one, although the weighted one (in theory) is a good idea, a good gust of wind will give you a bump on your head!

Diafine is a very nice developer! I use it with 4x5 TXP and other non t-grained films when I don't need to boost (push) negs because of flat scenes. I shoot at rated speed (400 for TXP, 125/100 for PXP APX100 ect) and love the high acutance and gentle gradations I get. It is a compensating developer and will only develop the highlights so far so as stated above, use on high contrast scenes to cut your printing headaches! The contrast of the negatives is snappy resulting in glowing prints. If you want a recipe to mix up from raw stock, email me and I'll send you a PDF of the recipe I have used for years.

If you get a fog, overexpose like Bradford mentioned and pull your development starting off with a 15-20% pull. It should clean things up a bit. Do a roll for clip testing... 10% pull, 20% pull 30% pull (at the high end). If the film was stored at a regulated temperature, you should be fine.

FP4+ can surely be used and if that is all you have, fine. A 400 speed usually cuts your exposure down in half. My pinhole camera (240mm equivalent) has an exposure of about 5 sec. on a bright sunny day and 11 seconds on a partially cloudy day... it all depends on the focal length, optimum pinhole for that focal length and the conditions... Polaroids help.

Josh, B/W is one thing but reciprocity with color can do funny things... color shifts and the like. If you shooting that long with color, use some tungsten (type L film) and that will help more.

I typically use Diafine (gallon kit) for over a year, (with hundreds of sheets) filtering through a white coffee filter when needed. You will find that your Bath A will deplete faster because of carry over... just mix up a small Qt kit and replenish for volume loss!

Have a pro lab develop and contact. This way whenever you do something for "effect", you'll see it in the contact sheet. Getting small prints, the machine/operator will correct to reproduce a "normal" looking print... Develop and contact may run about $6-10. in a pro lab but worth the money!

I didn't like the t-grained films since Kodak sent me some to try, before they came out with it years ago... until I tried it with Divided D23! I tested D76, D761:1 (it was, at best ok), Divided D76 (very thin) Microdol, Diafine (miserable), Acufine, HC110B, Tmax Dev (there again... ok) and was seriously writing that film off totally. I went back to it after a week and exposed 50 more sheets and started with DD23. I liked what I saw in the negatives and the desitometer readings as well... next, I printed some on my cold light system... and an understated wow came from my mouth. The prints were snappy, the gradations were smooth and the grain was fine and sharp... suprisingly so because of the high sodium sulfite content! I was able to print, filterless with my cold light and got a 2.5 contrast with glowing, detailed, highlights and shadows that were full of detail.

The further tests were the same result, from very sunny, snowy days to heavily overcast, shadowless days. Having to develop the 4x5's for 10 minutes in Divided D23 (Bath A) on cloudy days, raised the levels of the highlights so they sparkled, I have used the Readyloads only when I have a weight restriction and do prefer non t-grained films but the use of DD23 helped me, sort of like TMX, TMY, Delta 100 and Delta 400 enough to use them.

Congrats. Agreeably, it is better to do your own developing although a good pro lab is useful if your doing production work. A shooter doesn't get paid enough to do our own "production" work, the control in processing is ALWAYS warranted! Bear in mind, there will be the occasional snafus... when you least need them!

Divided D76, Diafine, Divided D23...

Rubber stamp, healing tool, dust and scratch (used with caution), time and with image blown up to at least 100% in PS... the more preproduction cleaning though, the better.

Before I got mixing valves and tempering chambers, an aquarium heater worked well but I needed to turn it on 1/2 an hour before.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-one-category?topic_id=1547&category=DIY+(building%2Crestoring)

and here is a beautiful one! Very nice guy from Europe! http://job.webstar.nl/newcampg.html I would say this is as point and shoot as your going to get!

Dan, Diafine is a compensating developer, albeit a more active one. My recommendation is to do a clip test (without dilution) with starting times as stated... 3A & 3B. and pull a print. Diafine is beautiful stuff and usually has a way of pulling out surprises... If in fact this doesn't work, Divided D76 works great with a 3min A and 3min B time rating it @ 80. You will get great tonality with the super fine grain that TP is known for! You can get the DD76 at Photoformulary or if your interested, I have a recipe from raw stock. DD76 works great on most other films too but I don't like the results when using split developers (except DD23) with Tgrained films (either Ilford or Kodak!). The idea of diluting Diafine doesn't jazz me because now you have a stock that cannot be used normally... just my opinion.

Divided D23 is the only developer I use when I have to shoot Readyloads (TMX) due to weight. It gives me the tones I want for my cold light system... a long and extended toe!

Mine looked like Espresso after a few months of time, the amount of film I put through the gallon kits! I used to pour the developer through a white coffee filter to remove the sludge about 4 times a year and after filtering, let it settle out before using. This way, the particulates wouldn't settle on the film causing a plus density. I used to get a gallon kit and a Qt kit. The Qt. kit was mixed up for the use of Part A to replenish for crossover as this is where you will lose the most volume. After awhile though, I mixed up just Part A from a recipe I have of a duplicate homebrew... if your interested, I can send you a PDF. Email me if you want it.

The Adams is the only way to go... that is if you want to delve into the dead art of manual retouching. If... you can find the Kodak retouching liquid (try WB Hunt's at www.huntphoto.com) (it used to be the best compared to others as far as giving a good amount of "tooth"), paint some on the emulsion side and let it dry. There is a little paint brush in the bottle. The medium isn't absolutely necessary but you will be able to do more with it as the emulsion will fill with lead quicker. The medium can be reapplied over each layer if you need more. Most emulsions don't have enough tooth for effective retouching... When I used to use the Adams, you put the negative between the clamp, turn the thing on and by using different grades (hardness) of leads in a technical pencil, let the machine's vibrations do most of the work! For most jobs... lightening wrinkles ect., a very light touch is all you need. Think of it this way... your adding density to the negative which will print lighter. Suggestions... if you still want to do it manually (it really is much easier doing it in Photoshop!), keep your magnifier spotless! Make sure your leads have a sharp point (400 grit sand paper should be close at hand!) as well as your etching knifes (very fine bladed Exacto blades). An Arkansas wet stone will also handy to keep your blade razor sharp for any etching you'll need to do.

With using leads, to much is going to be WAY to much! Start off by doing very small corrections and then make a print to see the effect. Etching is permanent! Leads can be erased.

Get a VERY comfortable chair, use the plexiglas for leaning on and use a VERY LIGHT hand. Your eyes will tire but with the Adams I have (dust covered) had a adjustable lower light stage and helped.

At work, I have the Fuji with a 90mm. Because of the format, I find that the 75mm would be beneficial to have. For distance shots, the 90mm is sort of "the norm" and does a nice job but when I had to go to NM for a job, it seemed like I had to be more selective do to the fact that I couldn't back up or the vista was to large... Definietly go with the 5.6 as there will be times when you need the extra stop. It is a range finder so your viewing will be through a viewfinder but tripod it and cable release will be the way to go for some nice sunsets ect. You do know that 1- the focus is in Meters and 2- you cannot print with a 4x5 enlarger... If you you haven't bought the camera yet, look at the 6x12 format also. It is very advisable to get the center filter! It saves alot less work when trying to dodge in post production! The thing with the CF Schneider, it is matched for the lens as far as ND and placement. B+W filters work well and with filters, you get what you pay for... I'm not saying buy a Kaesemann Polarizer, or for that fact... a circular polarizer, but a decent piece of glass won't degrade as a cheap one will.

There are a number of things that need to be considered. Having owned several, both mono and flatbed (field cameras), If your going to be always carrying out into the field... with a monorail, you'll need to protect the groundglass and the lens. With a field, it just closes up. I love my Linhof Tec III and have found NO restrictions when shooting in the field... I have even taken it on my mountain bike and with the use of a Bogen Articulated Arm, used the bike as a tripod. In the studio though, I prefer using a monorail as you do need more movements than some of the more decent fields will offer.

In your case, I would look for a field camera, like the Linhof's, that will offer you more back movements as this is used for straightening out the "bowing" that you'll get with the use of wide lens (straightening buildings, trees ect). For portraiture, you won't really need to many movements unless you want "funky" effects by raking the front lens plane out giving a shallow DOF.

Microdol X is an especially fine grain developer and with the right times, yields stunning results. The times, as I recall for Micro are in and around 16 minutes and for me, is a long time to be in the soup. A truely extremely fine grain developer is Divided D76. With D76 1:3, the grain will be softer yielding a mushy looking print vs Microdol.

If in fact, the shots are very low contrast... and if you have your processing nailed down as far as time is concerned, a push of around 15% will boost the upper range so you can print the images down. Pushing the film will raise the level of your highlights and give you more contrast which will help in your prints. I'm not crazy with Tmax but when I need to keep weight down, I shoot readyloads and develop in Divided D23. This comes close to the tonal range I feel comfortable with.