cg

The standard has more light leaks around the edges in bright shooting conditions and the flip-up magnifier lens has more color fringing. The HM2 hood offers both better light protection and a better lens.

I have a 501CM that has a grid/split rangefinder Maxwell screen. I still have a

plain Acute Matte D screen that's now a backup. When I wanted a new screen I

went with the Maxwell because I find the Acute Matte bright but not very easy to

focus with. With the Maxwell screen there is a small but noticeable increase in

contrast making it easier to focus. The only negative thing I can say about the

Maxwell screen is it is not protected by a piece of "glass" like the Acute Matte

making it very fragile and difficult to clean as the fresnel surface is exposed (at

least on a Hasselblad with a dust prone WLF) I now keep the chimney finder

permanently on to avoid excessive dust build up. Other than that the Maxwell

screen is very nice and the split rangefinder is very sensitive and accurate.

I use the Epson Stylus 900 with printable CD's made by Taiyo

Yuden. The printer does a fine job and CD's look very

professional. TY CDs are very highly recommended for archiving.

I would return the lens even though a few dust is unlikely to affect your images in most shooting situations.

I own the older 5.6 T* S-Planar and it's a great lens for anything close range. Contrary to the other poster's comment, portraits with this lens are super sharp. You will see every pore on your subject's face. For portraits and still life, I know my 120mm is way better than my 80mm.

Jay, don't be so harsh. Someone who doesn't know what V, M or X mean doesn't mean he or she doesn't know anything about photography. Do you think beginners or non techies shouldn't use Hasselblads or other 'pro' equipment? IMO it's the results that count. Who really cares about technical knowledge if you don't have the artistic vision.

I would have kept the Hasselblad so that when the prices of digital backs become more reasonable you can upgrade from the D100. We use a Fuji S2 now for 'quick and dirty' work. I've done tests and the S2 and 60mm AF Nikkor doesn't hold enough detail compared to a high quality scan from a 2 1/4 tranny (Fuji 100F, Hasselblad 120mm Zeiss).

 

Depending on the clients needs and deadlines we use one or the other. BTW. I do find that I can use the Dslr as a 'Polaroid' substitute for tricky lighting with flash. I hope that digital will soon equal and better medium and large format film in every way including better workflow and less digital post.

I would also recommend trying the chimney finder. It is bulky but lightweight. It provides less magnification (2.5X?) but it has much better optics (no distortion and colour fringing) than the WLF and blocks all stray light. The older and or more expensive version also has built-in diopter correction. The newer cheaper version has a larger lens for easier use with eyeglasses but no built-in diopter correction.

I use both Fuji instant films and I prefer them to Polaroid. The ISO ratings for the Fuji is closer to their transparency films making it easier to judge proper exposure. But you still need to learn how to "read" the Fuji instant prints to judge contrast. Overall, the contrast of 100B is better than Polaroids equivalent (PolapanPro) and the colour of 100C is better than Polaroids equivalent. And yes, they fit in Hasselblad Polaroid 100 backs.

Also check this product out. I have one and it works fine after a bit of careful sanding to make it fit on my S2. It's completely clear and does not affect viewing. It is stuck on using Permastick. You can always take it off when it becomes scratched up.

 

http://www.daproducts.com/

Short answer is yes, Matte Black will increase the Dmax, color saturation and will improve print quality on matte paper stock. Using non-Epson glossy paper with the 2200 may require custom paper ICC profiling. Switching to Matte Black ink is the simpler solution.

If your printer is connected to a USB hub try connecting it directly to your CPU. Some hubs and or cheap usb cables can cause communication errors. To speed things up you may want to resize and resample your files before sending them to the printer. good luck

Be careful because many studio flashes have 1/250 flash duration at full output. This means you will not get record 100% flash output if you set your shutter speed above 1/250. Check the specs of your Dynalite pack for flash duration.

I've had my Hasselblad 501 CM for almost four years. No problems with the lenses or body with moderate professional use. The A12 backs had to be serviced once for spacing and light seal replacement. I've not had a jam either so in my experience this is a very reliable system. The Hasselblad 500 series is a mechanical system so it's going to need some form of regular maintenance to stay in top shape. The professional Hasselblad users I know, either maintain their Hasselblads regularly or use them until things start failing and then send them in for repair. I'm inclined to think that many Hasselblad users in this forum have cameras that have not been maintained for years and encounter the usual mechanical problems that are easily remedied by a good CLA. The good news is, a properly maintained Hasselblad is a pleasure to use and gives great results for several decades. Having used Mamiya, Bronica, Pentax, and Fuji MF products, IMHO, the Hasselbad 500 series is possibly the finest mechanical medium format system ever made.

I have a 1280 with Niagara CIS and MediaSt. Plug-n-Play dye inks. I have to print at least 1 page a day or turn the printer off at night or it will get major clogs. Turning the printer off at night has prevented major clogs and saves me lots of hassle, time and ink.

I've used the PM5 and the older 45 degree Cds meter prism. The newer PM prisms are brighter than older ones. But prisms are all dimmer than the WLF. I have a Chimney Hood 2.5x finder that I like better than the WLF. The lens on the Chimney Hood is sharper and has none of the color fringing or distortion that the latest WLF have. The Chimney Hood also blocks all stray light and makes focusing easier. The downside is it's a little bulky. You should try it for yourself of course. Eventually, you will likely have a 45/90 degree prism(s), Chimney Hood and WLF. You will then use whichever one fits your shooting needs at the moment. good luck

That's interesting. What OS are you and your client running? I seem to be able to "see" OS 9.x/10 Mac tif files and rename them in either W2K or XP. I'll burn a test cd and verify this. If Gary's client can see the files in Windows Explorer, they can try renaming them.

I have been scanning using a Mac G4 and Imacon 848. I make sure to add the tif extension to the saved scans. Your client can try to rename the files using Windows Explorer and adding the tif extension. this should work, it works on my PC running W2k and PS 6/7

 

Good Luck

If you have the latest driver, check that in Configuration - Preview that Automatic Thumbnail Preview is off.

If you rated the film at ISO 80 then you would process it Normal. If you rated it at 100 then you would have processed it +1/3? I usually rate the old E100S at 80.

I would get a Hasselblad, Mamiya RB/RZ or Bronica SQ. An 80mm and 120mm lens, 2 220 backs, a Lumedyne flash or Metz flash for for fill flash. Most importantly a Polaroid back to make sure the camera, lens and flash are working. The Polaroid also helps to see how what the final image will look like if you don't have much experience with fill flash. If possible rent the stuff for a couple days so you can do a test run. Get the rental place to show you how to use the camera properly. If you're shooting colour Kodak Portra or Fuji Reala would be my choice. Ilford Delta or Tri-X for black and white. Bring your 35mm and a couple of rolls of film as back-up.

Let me share my experiences with the Spyder and OptiCal software. I bought my Sypder/OptiCal suite about a year ago and I was generally happy until I discovered a defect 2 months ago. The Spyder I had was defective. It was creating profiles that oversaturated yellows. I literally had or have hundreds of images that have desaturated yellows because I was overcompensating. To Colorvision's credit they promptly shipped me another Spyder. But after 2 replacement Spyders the oversaturated yellow problems still exist. I eventually purchased an X-Rite DTP92 calibrator to use with Optical. Still even with the DTP92 yellows are still too saturated. I brought the issue up in the Colorsync users group and a color scientist discovered a bug in Colorvisions code. To make a long story short, all Colorvision monitor calibration software suffer from this code bug and they are apparently working on a fix. I hope they come out with a patch soon because I do like the advance features of this product. I am now using the DTP92 with X-Rite's Colorshop software and the oversaturated yellow problem is gone.

 

BTW. I do like the Optical version better but on my monitor it looks a bit on the warm side.

If all you're doing is retouching photos then I would get the $100 Graphire. It is small but it is quite accurate. Aside from the extra features, I can't necessarily tell the difference between the Graphire and the Intous. Also remember that the bigger the tablet the more you have to move your arm around.

If you can't find a friend, use a tripod and a Manfrotto magic arm to hold the umbrella while you setup and shoot. If you have the cash, there is probably a company out there who can design a waterproof housing for you. It will probably be more expnesive and heavier than plastic bags.

Jeff Spirer wrote - "I've been kind of disappointed since I saw that she was doing celebrity portraits for WWD."

 

Jeff why are you disappointed? Many artists do commercial work to pay the bills or to keep busy. I am personally not offended by famous art photographers who do commercial work as long as the work is good. What offends me are famous people who are mediocre photographers who think they are good photographers and steal work from "real" photographers by virtue of their fame.