jerry_hyman2

I have been having problems getting my custom printer profiles to

work correctly in CS2, and I believe it is because I don't

understand the new options and terminology that CS2 is using so I am

asking for your help.

 

I had been using CS2 and using custom printer/paper profiles by

Cathy. In the older CS2 version I would go file>print preview and

then under Color management select Proof setup and pick the profile

(ex. CathysMoabEntradaWhite) then under Profile I would choose "Same

as source". Rendering intent would be Relative Colorimetric and

check blackpoint compensation.

 

However in CS2 you have options, such as Let Photoshop Determine

colors, and another new area that says Proof Setup Preset with two

check boxes for simulate paper color and simulate black ink.

 

What do I chose to say consistent with my previous work flow?

 

Also: Under View>Proofsetup>custom I can figure out most of it

since the terms are similar such as changing Preserve color #'s in

CS to Preserve RGB #'s in CS2. However, it has a new area called

Display options (on screen) that has two check boxes one for

simulate paper color which I assume is the same as paper white in CS

and simulate black ink which I assume is the same as Ink Black in CS

but when do you use them if ever with the custom profiles I had made?

 

Thanks in advance for your help on this!

 

~jerry

Thanks everyone for your responses! They were very helpful.

 

~jerry

My grandaughter 85mm f1.8 EOS (Leica 90mm soon).

I have read a lot of threads on the qualities of the different 90mm

lenses for the M series cameras, but I was curious if anyone has

personal experience with the 90mm 3 element (not the 4 element) elmar

for the M body, and how you would describe it's characteristics? I

shot a lot of head and shoulder/ waist up portraits in B&W as well

with Astia 100F and will be purchasing a lense soon. I thank you in

advance for your help.

 

~jerry

I shoot 5X7 B&W, and so far I have used 8X10 trays with good results, but I still on occasion get a few scratches but not nearly as much as I did the first 2 or 3 times I tried it.

 

From all that I have heard if you have the space and funds (around $1000 used) for a Jobo CPA2 or a CPP2 with the 3006 Expert drum (6-4X5 or 6-5X7) you will get great results all the time and the development will be even.

 

I just recently purchased a "slosher" from Summitec in Utah which is a plastic insert with open compartments (very well made) that you insert into a 16X20 tray of developer which is suppose to allow very even development with no scratches along with intermittent agitation rather than continious. I purchased this because I will be experimenting with Pyro and it is suppose to perform much better with intermittent agitation. It holds 6 sheets at a time.

 

Good luck - 5X7 is really a neat format!

 

~jerry

You folks are just terrific! I really appreciate your comments and your expertise. I did mount the GG correctly and the camera back is not warped, and the springs if anything are too tight. My film holders are mainly new. Dave, your gg is extremely well made and perfectly flat, so I know it's not the GG (VERY smooth and small grain to the glass by the, way and substantially brighter than the GG that was on the camera). I have not checked the focus after closing the lense since it was just way too dark for my eyes. From what has been said I think it's highly likely that I have a focus shift problem with my Commercial Ektar combined with a very limited depth of field at f22 (I had no idea that it was under 3 inches!!!). I will run a test this weekend using a ruler on a slant or a board with nails, and I will also bring in an additional Fren-L Lowell 600 watt fresnel to use to check focusing after stopping down the lense.

 

Again, thanks for the terrific advice!!!

 

~jerry

It's been awhile since I have posted on this forum, but I could

really use some help. I have been shooting 4X5 for some time now,

but recently purchased a 5X7 Ansco and I really like the format a

lot. I have now shot about 25 images with it and have not had any

problems focusing with my lenses out doors on landscapes but I am

having a terrible time focusing accurately on close-up portraits

under modeling lights or outdoors in the shade.

 

Here is what I am using: 14 inch f6.8 Commercial Ektar, FP4+ film,

and I replaced the original ground glass with one of Dave Parker's

satin glass (VERY nice by the way).

 

Technique: I am shooting from about 5 feet with the camera and my

strobes are at 400 watts and about 3 feet away at f22, focusing on

the closest eye to the camera with a four power loupe.

 

Results: I am consistent in that the hair on the subject directly

above the ear is in sharp focus but the eyes two to three inches

forward are not in sharp focus. (I have attached a recent photo

taken yesterday that shows my problem, although it may not be clear

at 72dpi). This is a quick set-up image and is a test - not

represented as a work of art ;-}

 

I have thought about adding a fresnel, but any other suggestions

would be appreciated since these 50 something eyes of mine appear to

be having a problem.

 

Thanks in advance for your suggestions!

 

~jerry<div></div>

I just read a news release today at mark@photographyblog.com that told of a new Epson dedicated film scanner that goes up to 4X5 if I remember correctly. You might want to look into that scanner if you are not in a hurry. I use my 4870 with 4X5 and 5X7 film and think it's a great value for the money, and the ICE works fine (had the 2450 before and I really appreciate the ICE)but it's not too fast in that mode.

 

~jerry

Tom, I am a serious amateur and not a Pro, but I will try to answer your question as best I can. Hopefully someone like Ellis is monitoring the site (he is a working pro) and will give you some better answers.

 

In reference to "the art of using the accent light" I will use it generally in three situations. If I have a woman with her hair pulled back and I am shooting a 2/3rds view using short lighting I will most likely want to accent the far outline of her face (forehead, brow, cheek, chin). By putting a bright outline that is usually a stop or more brighter than the key I can really enhance the beauty of that curvature. Since I only want the light at that point I really have to control the spread and direction.

 

I like doing low key work and often I like to accent the legs or arms from the side and will employ one or two kickers to get that effect. It really adds a lot of dimension to the image. A person who is a "true artist" that really employs that a lot (I don't mind admitting that I try and copy him) is Oscar Lozoya. If you haven't seen any of his work or books (Amherst) it is a must if you are serious about light control on art portraiture.

 

And of course on the simple head and shoulders especially on a dark background I like to rim the shoulder area but only that area.

 

I don't think it matters that your reflectors are silver and I don't think you need to paint them black, the snoot should do well enough in restricting the light.

 

I think your choices on the chimera is a good one especially that you went for the PLUS version that has the recessed front and the front is diffuser is removeable.

 

I hope that I answered your questions but if not someone else may give it a try. Good luck!

Thomas, I have tried it a number of ways and my experience is that a straight reflector with barn doors doesn't ususally give me as tight of control as I want from the light, so I ususally use a snoot and sometimes even narrow that beam somewhat by using cinefoil (black aluminum foil). I am generally shooting portraits of one to three persons. I have also found that putting the light on a small stand and placing it slightly behind and to the right or left of the subject works best (10:00 position). I leave all the modeling lights off except the fill when placing the light so I can see the effect (if the key is on it overpowers the accent light and I can't see easily). When I use an accent light it is used to highlight the rim of the face, or the head and shoulders if I am using a dark background.

 

All that being said I plan to try a strip box with egg-crates in the future to see how much control I can get, and still get a soft diffuse quality when I want it. I have also purchased an old mole-richardson baby fresnel spotlight that I am converting to flash to use as an accent light, background projection, and key light.

Patrick, I would bounce the light off the ceiling or wall so that the light striking her was very diffuse and that would soften the shadows substantially, however if shooting color the walls/ceiling would need to be neutral in color to avoid any unwanted color cast.

Denis, I have owned a few Plume softboxes and they are very well built and designed. To me the Pros are (in order of importance to me) fit well in tight studio spaces because of their shallow design, beautiful quality of light, can change the contrast because of two different interior light panels that come with them, great support from the manufacture (Gary Register in Colorado). The cons for me were: Very expensive, a little difficult to set up (poles fit VERY snuggly so make sure you get the proper speed ring) and on my 100 model one of the snaps holding the inner baffle came off.

 

Photoflex is priced right but I sure don't like the quality and unless they were used sparingly I wouldn't get one.

 

Chimeras are a great compromise in that they are well built and priced right in my opinion. Make sure you get the Pro + model that has the detachable recessed front diffuser. I think these are the best value overall and I also like that they are made in the U.S..

 

I have no personal experience with the Broncolor but I did attend a seminar that Will Crockett gave in which he was using them and at first blush they looked well designed and made. By the way if you haven't been to Will's web page you should he has a tremendous amount of great information and tutorials - Free (smartshooter.com).

 

I also own a Westcott softbox which is made of very heavy duty material but doesn't have the fit or finish of the Chimera or Plume. However, this particular one is a new invention called "The Masters Brush" which was developed by Master Photographer Ken Cook and is based on Wescotts Box 1. It has a barn door and a VERY unique front diffusion screen which is made up of a variable density screening that starts out very thin in the center and in a circular fashion builds density as it progresses outward from the center. I have never, ever, gotten as much light control as easily as I have from that softbox when I am doing portraits. So even if the quality of the build is not as good as Chimera if you are doing portraits you might consider getting one (about $175.00 from Samys in LA).

 

I was going to purchase a Profoto softbox (I have their mono-lights) but even though the materials were quality it was embarrasing how difficult their box was to set up (and I mean real strain on getting those poles in) so I didn't get one, and if you are going on location with these softboxes and will be constantly be tearing them down and setting them up I would certainly NOT get one of those.

 

Hope this helps.

I took this image last Saturday using a Norman 500-D pac with three heads along with a slaved Norman 202 pac with one head. I set the exposure on the fill first to read f8 (photogenic umbrella directly behind and above the camera)then added my key to camera left to read f11 (Westcott MasterBrush softbox - just released at Vegas). My background light was set to f11 and the hairlight was also set to f11 (snoot). I used a dull silver reflector at 45 degrees to camera right for just a little fill. If I were to do it over I would have decreased the intensity of the hairlight one stop. I used LH500 lampheads with blowers and conversion cables to enable them to run on the Norman 450 series pacs. Shortlighting is what I now like to use most of the time especially for women (prefer broad for men most of the time). I used a Canon 300D digital shooting RAW and Wizards to trigger the main flash.<div></div>

Mike, I used to use a Profoto beauty dish and it worked fine, but I didn't like the donut hole catch light it produced in the models eye. I don't have the experience in lighting that Timber and Ellis have, and they may know of beauty dishes that doesn't have the donut hole effect (if that bothers you as much as it did me).

 

~jerry

Latham, according to the instruction book that came with my 300D the RAW file size is 6.30MB and 7MD with the attached jpeg.

 

~jerry

I have the BTZS tubes and they are great to use with very even development, however, you are correct that in the film loading stage with the caps filled with developer you need total darkness. The rest of the process can be done in dim light with no problems at all.

 

You can not use a changing bag, so you will have to get into the dark some how. You can close off a small bathroom with black plastic on a foam core that friction fits to the bathroom window and is easily removeable, or you can make a mini-darkroom such as mentioned above or a darkroom tent like Roger and Francis Hicks used for many years.

 

I think once you work with the BTZS tubes you will really enjoy them, and you can tailor your development on an individual sheet basis. The only thing I don't really like about them is that 4X5 film really sticks hard to the inside of the tubes and it takes some effort to pull them away before putting them into the fixer (although I have not damaged any film).

Jorge, you might also want to look at the Berlebach tripods. I just recently bought one from HP marketing for I believe under $175 and what a tripod for the money. The model I bought comes with a leveling head that allows me to direct mount my 4X5 field camera and have ample movements to about 30 degrees. It acts like a ball head and is very secure. This allows me to leave my tripod head at home and also reduces the weight of the tripod and head to about 7 lbs but it will support a 26 pound load. The tripod is beautifully made (both the ash wood and the metal fittings) and again I couldn't believe the quality for the money.

 

I also looked at the Ries tripods and they are really beautifully made but the cost was substantially higher. Anyway it might be worth a look.

I had good results with 100G. It had fine grain and scanned well, but BOY do I like the new Astia 100F. Extremely accurate colors, very fine grain and much smoother tones. If you are shooting subjects where you want saturated colors it's not the film you want, but if you are looking for accurate colors and great tonality you really ought to try some. I bought my Astia quickloads from Calumet (my local dealer didn't have any)and I believe that Calumet may have some store in Europe.

I have owned and used Maxwell screens in both 35mm and Minolta Autocords, and Rolleis. The are terrific and nothing compares, however their one weak point is they scratch and abraided (sp?)very easily. So if you get the screen dirty and try to clean it be very careful. But again these screens are wonderful and they are easily focused.

Wayne, I have only used a Pentax 645 briefly some time ago but I was impressed and liked the handling. My only concern would be that it doesn't have the capability to use a digital back in the future if you should want to go that route where other 645s would.

 

For a portrait lense I would choose the 150mm if you shoot tight frequently, but if not I would choose the 120mm macro so I could get dual usage from one lense.

Antonio, I have owned several TLR's and the Autocord is one of my favorites. It would also be one of the least expensive ways to get into medium format. If you go the Autocord make sure it doesn't have the Citizen shutter (noiser and less quality). You might also consider a Maxwell screen which brightens the image considerably (but is easily scratched). Also, you should figure on a CLA by someone like Paul Ebel who is an expert on them.

 

I would also recommend the Mamiya 6 (compact, interchangable lenses, and extremely sharp) if you can afford it.

 

One of the nice benefits of the TLR's is that when you go to use a tripod it can be very light weight as compared to what you would have to have with an SLR (huge difference).

 

Digisix would be a great light weight meter, and if you are using either B&W 100/400 speed or color negative film (lot's of flexability in exposure) you will be surprised how quickly you will be estimating the correct exposure with a little practice.

I live in Arizona, and during this time of year the water from the

tap is around 82 degrees F. I have just switched over to processing

my 4X5 sheet film in BTZS tubes and have no problems bringing the

temperature down to 68 degrees using ice and then developing, stop,

and fix at the constant 68. However, the wash temperature is the

problem since I don't have a chiller (no room and the cost).

 

I will be experimenting with Pyrocat HD and Barry Thortons new

ExactolLux with APX100, FP4+, and Delta 100 this week. So I have a

mix of traditional and new emulsions.

 

I know that I could process everything at the 82 degrees but I am

concerned about what effects that might have and the reduced times

causing inconsistant results.

I am looking for suggestions on how to handle the wash temperature

issue. I thank you in advance for your suggestions.

I thought some might find this interesting. and I will try and make

it relatively short.

 

I have always been curious about the Bosscreen after reading a two

part review of focusing screens and brightness in older issues of

View Camera Magazine. I never had seen or used one in this area of

the country (Phoenix). I recently purchased a Shen Hao from The

View Camera Store (really great camera) but it came with a very dark

GG. So I decided to experiment (decidedly unscientific) with several

approaches.

 

I purchased a mint Bosscreen on Ebay which I compared to the

original ground glass and a ground glass that I had made myself

(instructions from a recent article in Photo Technique magazine)

with all three being used by themselves AND with a fresnel.

 

I focused on a lamp with my 180mm f5.6 Symmar, removed the screws

holding the springs that held the GG in place and substituted non-

sticky tape to hold the variations so I wouldn't jar the camera as I

changed GG's etc.. I used my spotmeter under the darkcloth to

measure brightness differences and a Peak 4X loupe to test ease of

focusing.

 

The Results:

 

The fresnel helped the original ground glass significantly in

brightness (especially in a more even light distribution) about one

stop. However, you could see the fresnel ring pattern and with the

loupe the GG was very course.

 

The hand-made GG was extemely smooth to focus on and was brighter

than the original GG by about 1/2 or more of a stop without the

fresnel. With the fresnel the entire screen was about a stop

brighter with very even light distribution, however I could still

see the fresnel rings under the loupe. The grain of the glass under

the loupe was very even and smooth.

 

The Bosscreen without the fresnel was about as bright as the hand-

made GG but with an even better smoothness of grain but not by much.

However, the real surprise was that with the fresnel I got the

increased brightness and evenness as I got with the others but you

COULDN"T see the fresnel rings (I have no idea why).

 

Since I live in the Phoenix area I am afraid of using the Bosscreen

outside in the heat or leaving it in the car since it is made with a

wax layer, but in the studio or mild climates I would imagine it

would work fine. I will personally be sticking with the handmade GG

for all outdoor work but probably without the Fresnel. BTW the

fresnel was on the inside of the GG towards the lense.

 

These were my results and your milage may differ but it was an

enjoyable and interesting experiment.

9 out of 10, but i was lucky! It really is amazing what you can now do with CG. Thanks for the interesting link kevin!

Sam, I have owned to Moskva's and had nothing but grief. Very poor QA. I agree that if you can afford it the Mamiya 6 would be the way to go. It is very compact and has incredible lenses. The smallest and most fun folder I have had is the Perkeo II. It took excellent photos (for a folder) and was extremely compact. Try to get one with the Compur shutter and not the Prontor. Don't get the Perkeo I or you will have to use the red ruby window for advancing to the next frame. The Perkeo does not have lugs for straps so make sure it comes with a good case. The Perkeo is used by estimating the distance and then setting it on the front cell. A very nice camera and probably one of the smallest 6X6 cameras in the world. Also, don't get the Perkeo E (very rare) if you come across one. Even though it has a uncoupled rangefinder you have to use the ruby window to advance the film.

 

Have fun!