j_c13

My statements have nothing to do with unquestionable faith, or calling anyone dumb. Not surprising the point was missed. But, you yourself try to impose your own beliefs of composition that if one�s eye doesn�t flow around the image its not appealing. Please, put down the textbook or are you just reading too much Shutterbug? Like you said, I respect peoples right to voice their opinions�

Mr. Smith, Don�t take the negative comments to heart. After all, do these people�s comments really count? The majority of them are dauntless hacks who merely dream of having the talent and lifestyle you possess. Some of you dare comment on composition? You criticized because this ACCOMPLISHED Artist dares not fit into your, undoubtedly, textbook ideas of comp or subtle comp. I bet you think there is such a thing as a true portrait lens too? You do, don�t you?

 

I don�t argue with anyone�s right to dislike the images, we all know what we personally like or dislike. But, to criticize on the technical, vision, or comp aspects of these images or to put your personal �rules� for image content is baseless unless you are on equal footing with this Artist. Which, I am pretty sure almost all of you are not.

If you have a spool you could use as a sample, I would talk to a local machinist and see if he can make what you want. Even without one I am sure they could help in replicating what you need in plastic or aluminum.

Rodinal Rodinal Rodinal!

 

Use at 1:50 and 1:100 dilutions.

 

Its a matter of personal taste but, I don't think I could compare APX to any film that Kodak "allows" to be produced today.

 

For development times, either the Kodak or Agfa website or look at www.unblinkingeye.com or www.digitaltruth.com both have developing charts. The one on unblinkingeye gives more on technique.

 

Good luck!

If you guys are going to be in NH or Boston area and want another tag-along, email me!

If you are looking for film quality results than 5 megapixels is not quite enough for this size enlargment, it does an adequate job if you are printing 8x10 what is generally accepted as adequate is 2.5 megapixels to avoid any noticeable softness for 8x10. However, one must also consider that some photographs also require cropping to be just right. Cropping just 25% off the sides would require 5 megapixels for an 8x10. Add to that some possible losses in the printing process and 5 megs is not going to cut it for 17x22 to achieve film quality. I am sure you could get by with a 5 meg camera but put it side by side with a quality film set up and the results will be very obvious. It all depends on what is more important in your project.

 

Kodak and Canon have just introduced full frame 35mm digital camera's these would suit your need if you have 4k to spend.

Thank you Gentlemen,

 

I couldn't remember the View Camera Store, as soon as they are open I will check their stock!!

 

I have checked a good majority of Bergger dealers but 12x20 isn't a common film for them. If I get stuck I will try the Photo Warehouse as well.

 

Much thanks,

JC

Hi Folks,

 

I can't seem to find anyone with 12x20 film in stock. I perfer the

Bergger, but they are not expecting a fresh supply for at least 2

weeks at best. I am headed out on vacation in 4 weeks and have made

the mistake of misjudging how much film I had left.

 

Does anyone know of a supplier where I can get a box of 12x20 in the

next week or two?

 

Much thanks

JC

Hi,

 

Does anyone know of a US supplier for Shen Hao 8x10 camera? Badger

Graphic won't be importing them at this time it looks like.

 

Thanks,

JC