janko_belaj

(ok, ok... "janko - read more carefuly)<br>

<i>might this produce crossed shadows</i> I think this may happend. What about light reflected form opposite wall and from flour (is that the name for <i>wall above us</i>? :-))<br>

<i>with my power output do you think i'd get any trouble from day/gallery light?</i> I don't think so, but there should always be option of masking windows or shoting at night.<br>

<i>materials are painted wood i think and they are quite reflective. </i> ouch... do you have polarizers for reflecotrs? if the wood is very reflective, that may be the only option. (in combination with polarizing filter on the lens).<br><br>

good luck with light... <br>Janko.<br><br>It is hard to give suggestion without seeing the particular subject... can you make a test shot and show it to us? (...I'm on vacation right now, clouds have gone with the wind, it is to hot (for me) to walk around with my camera to shot some details, so I'm looking for something else to think about ;-)))

hi rosie, <br>

I have some experiences in those kind of jobs (learned 20 years from parents who worked at museums and than few years on collage (history of art) and than some years of practice). So, generaly speaking, person who is making exibithion should place subject (sculpture in your case) at the best position with the best possible lightning...<br><br>

When I have a freedom to choose lightning (or to create light) I usualy use ambiental lightning with some kind of fill-light (my modelinf light) to create accent on parts of subject (and than some background lightning...). This is, ofcourse, good in b&w photgraphy, however, if someone have to shoot colors, than there might be some problems with colors of light... <br>

Here we don't know how big the sculpture is, what quality of light is (the one from windows) and from which material the sculpture have been made. So I will suggest you to shot some test shots 1st: take just one strobe, make some test (with polaroids, smaller camera or digatal maybe) without your modeling light and with it. Show those test photos to the artist and listen to his comments. The sculptures usualy don't move, so using slow exposure speed wont be a problem ;-)<br><br>

have a good light. Janko<br>

(P.S. sorry on clumsy english, I'm on unknown system and can't find spelling checker... and my whife who knows english is alreay sleeping)

135mm is (in my opinion) wonderful focal lenght for 4x5". it is little bit wider

than normal lens used in 35/6x6 mm, let say it is somewere between 40mm in

leica format and 60mm in 6x6 format. So, it is normal if you look at "geometry"

of subject - no huge perspective "distorsions" (sorry guys, I know this isnt

the right term, but its my kind of english;)... but a little bit wider. <br>

About your deal... well, some lightmeters cost more than your future

complet... I have seen Toyo 45C, don't know how CX works, but I like "center

tilt" - no (much) refocusing after changeing dof...

Ike, I have to agree with Wayne and Ken. If you won't earn money with your LF system,

dont rush to buy 3-4 lenses. I had to buy 3 lenses because of work I'm doing, but

for pure pleasure - one is just enough to start with. I will suggest 135mm or 150, just

maybe 180. Your choice will depend on what would you like to shoot. If that is macro,

go to something like G-Claron 150, but expect small movements. If your primary

subject will be landscape, older symmar (135) is excellent lens. Very wide lens (90mm

or even smaller focal length) are usually very dark (as is my S-A 90 f8) or very

expensive (version f 6.8). I have no experiences yet with portraits so can not suggest

lens for that job, but have tried few lenses from 75 to 355... and I'm pleased with my

little complete (90-135-210). Just that 90 is heavy and dark and I'm calling him "state

enemy no1"...<br><br>

<i>Picture attached was taken with Super-Angulon 90mm f=1:8 @ f 22 1/2 with 4

strobes and 12 "fires" with those strobes: I had to lay on the flour and the ground

glass was so close to my face that I wasn't able to see whole picture. Well, I wasn't

able to focus my eyes on it! All I could do was focusing with loupe and inspecting if

the whole... (well, what is opposite of flour? under the rouff?). My assistant give me

polaroid back to made test, than some more movements, and shot which took me 2

hours more in photoshop to make lines parallel (my bad english...) </i><br>

o.k... that was out of topic, but I had to share my experience with that "state enemy

no1"... <br><br>

Janko<div></div>

Hello Ike (have to say that I'm happy that here will come someone newer in

LF than I'm :-))<br>

I wanted a wooden 8x10, but I'w got a 4x5 Sinar for really good price. A new

one. Now, I'w found (and have to disagree with John) that Sinar is the best

think happen to me since I'w got my 1st Rollei. I'w learned that I didn't have

to buy a new one, it is so robust that you have to be really clumsy or unlucky

to broke it. I have bought 3 used lenses and they are fine (one of them is

really great one), so you don't have to give a lot of money for Sinar system (I

have F1 model), but that is the end of used thinks - film holders and bellows...

buy them new, or inspect them before buying if there are used. If belows

have light leek, you can fix them, them may look ugly and with some time they

may work even worse (from case to case). But film holders... only new. I'w

borrowed some used and they ruined some of my shots (I'w bought 5 double

holders 4x5" for color work - job of mine, and borrowed 9x12cm double

holders for my joy... arhhhh - serious light leek).<br>

I'm happy (and proud) with new Sinar, and would like to have new lenses,

and would like to have... well, now I'm sorry I didn't look for suggestions

before buying that Sinar because I will have one more lens for same amount

of money, but having that Sinar really pays me back. I have played around for

few months, spend some money on slides and now (after 2 months on work)

I'w got my money back... There was only one camera which "worked so good"

for me, but that is one other story.<br>

Janko

Domenico, which device will you use for output? I mean - what printer? If that

is some ink-jet resolution of 180 dpi will be quite good. Maybe 240 dpi if you

really have excellent printer. I haven't seen any differences between 240 and

300 (or more) dpi on ordinary ink-jets. If you will use something like Scitex Iris

(also ink-jet, but high-end production) best dpi choice is 300 dpi. I prefer to

use Durst printers (in my area there is one Epsilon, few 100 km away is one

Lambda) and those accept files of 260 (little bit more or less) dpi. I like those

because they work as photo-printers with RGB light (not CMYK/CcMmYK tints)

on photo paper and have wider gamut so there isn't much to loose in color

reproduction.<br>

After that introduction, here are scanning resolutions:<br><br>

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3">

<tr>

<td><tt>print<br>

size</tt></td>

<td><tt>home<br>

ink jet (180 dpi)</tt></td>

<td><tt>pre-press<br>

proofer (300 dpi)</tt></td>

<td><tt>photo<br>

laser beam (260 dpi)</tt></td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td><tt>11x14</tt></td>

<td><tt>247 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

<td><tt>420 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

<td><tt>357 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td><tt>16x20</tt></td>

<td><tt>360 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

<td><tt>600 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

<td><tt>520 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td><tt>20x24</tt></td>

<td><tt>432 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

<td><tt>720 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

<td><tt>276 dpi @ 1:1</tt></td>

</tr>

</table><br>

It always good choice to scan at real optical resolution (if you will scan on ccd

scanner, if you use pmt scanners (drum scanners), don't care about optical

resolution) so no interferences (spelling?) will came out. Also, it always better

to scan a little bit higher than needed and to re sample files after color

corrections to "kill" possible noise in levels... sorry, my english isn't the best

one when I have some technical think to write...<br>

btw, feel free to e-mail me if you have any special question, I'm in that

printing bussines for a long, long time (went back to photography year ago

after more then 10 years of graphic/pre-press bussines).<br><br>

Janko.

"cheap" will be enything cheaper than new Tachihara. So, under 1000 USD.

Well, Bender on some lens is under 1000, but I have to take some tools,

glue... time and knowlage... and I'm afraid I don't have those too much.<br>

The best will be something under 500... I'm just looking for possibilites, time

for buying will come later.<br><br>

Janko.

Well, as 1st - there is no need to rush with answers - *that* 8x10 is

something like my next year (or two years?) project ;-))<br><br>

When I bought my Sinar some 6-7 months ago I was just thinking of buying

Bender's 8x10 kit, but my "teacher"* have told me that for my job I need

more robust and complex camera. Well, he was right - the F which I bought is

just perfect for combination of "in-studio" and "on-location" shots. But now

I'm thinking (again) of buying and/or building something for "larger" contact

prints. The enlarger isn't problem, dust is - I have both of them, but the main

goal are contacts. I don't believe I will have time and nerves to build camera,

already existing one seams to be matching for me.<br><br>

Now, when Jason asked about cheap lens for 8x10 might be a good time to

ask for cheap 8x10 camera:<br>

I would like my camera to hold "international" film holder (double

sided?),<br>

I would like my camera to have some at least front movements (shift and tilt

will probably be enough),<br>

sure, I would like my camera to be "not heavy"... don't have to be the lightest

possible.<br><br>

What will you suggest? I'm thinking of buying it on a second hand market

unless I found somewhere some extra money to buy new... (Tachihara? have

anyone some good link about that camera?)<br>

Well, that is all for (new) beginning of planing ;-))<br><br>

<i>*that "teacher" is one of finest photo-equipment seller in my town... he

<b>is</b> teacher at university (academy of visual arts), he is photographer

and did help me a lot in buying (not just from him) my equipment - sad that I

didn't managed to study at his school.</i><br><br>

Oh, yes: what I would like to shoot with it are just landscapes. No

architecture, no reportages, maybe some day some portraits... macro (or

better to say some details in nature) is also in my mind... Everything just

B&W, probably not 8x10 but 18x24(cm!)...<br><br>

Tnx, Janko.

<i>What's to lose...?</i> Maybe some (non)important screw? ;-))<br>

This morning I have a big cleaning of my bags and cases, and I have found

(after traveling and shooting for 11 days) 2 screws I have no idea where they

came from... Strobes? Tripods? Sinar? Mamiya? Hass? Bronica? (I haven't

touch my Nikons...) I don't know, but everything is working fine...<br>

Yes, yes... this is slightly off-topic, but I just had to share *that* experience

:-)

>Patric::<br>

<i>Do you know if Fotokemika makes other films in the 127-format than

R100? I know they once made R17 (now R50) in 127, but it was never sold

here in Sweden</i><br>

I can check tomorow but I'm not sure if I will catch fotokemikas's ceo... (I'w

just got from my trip and I'm tired as old horse) he is usualy out of office

when I wake up ;)<br>

Will notice you and maybe we can arange something..?<br>

Janko

Patrick, I live in Zagreb, some 15 miles from efke factory, and yes - it is same

as maco film (which is made in fotokemika's factory). I'w just phoned to

fotokemika (maker of efke films) and ordered a few boxes...

<p>Robert, which one you have in mind: <b>Efke PL25</b>, or <b>Efke

PL25<i>ortho</i></b>?<br>I'm using right now the "ortho" version and I'm

developing it in rodinal 1:50 for 4 to 7 minutes (depending on contrast of

subject). If you wish, I can scan one of negatives when I came back to my

town (I'm on location right now...) that will be in day or two.</p>

<p>I haven't find yet lens which is so perfect not to be sold... well, all my

lenses are bought "second-hand" so will probably once go away in same way

(3th-hand:))<br>

But, however, there are some of them which I like more than the others: in LF

that will be my G-Claron 210. Sharp with rich colors (little bit warmer). In MF

that will be Nikkor-H 50/3.5 for Bronica ECTL, and in leica format... one

surprise: old nikkor zoom 43-86: sharp, sharp and in 86mm so thin DOF that

on 1.1m only the eyes in portrait are sharp. nose and ears are blurred. and

was cheap.<br>

Those 3 I would like to keep. If there is anyone crazy enough to pay me 3 or

4 time more than lens is actually worth, I will sell them, in other way - I don't

need to (now).</p>

<p>In my case, there are many, many think which make me feel that way.

Some made me feel just opposite (like camedia 3030). The first one, long time

ago was Nikon F2AS (still working, but most of the time it is in my small

camera gallery).<br>

In question of money, on the very first place there is Mamiya Universal - I'w

paid for it about 600 USD (with polaroid back) and that "little" and sharp gem

brought me back Apple Mac G3, 2 monitors, big scanner, Bronica ECTL with 3

nice lenses (nikkor H 50/3.5 - just perfect for me), Nikon F90 with 2 lenses

and finally Sinar...<br>

Here, the "best" investment so far are G-Claron 210 and fresnel lens

(specially in combination with S-A 90/f8). And for the end of my story, one of

cheapest things with is just making me very, very happy is small Canonet

(G-III 1.7)</p>

<p><i>Perhaps you could find the 16" rail somewhere, but I suspect it would

have an entire camera attached to it.</i>...wouldn't that be nice? to buy a rail

and somehow get a camera too ;-))<br>

(I would like to buy a lens cap for 355 G-Claron. with fixed lens beghind it... It

won't make me any trouble to drill a hole on lens cap ;-)))<br>

(sorry Jerry, i just think that sentence is a best "dream" of the day:)</p>

<p>Paul, <i>"use synthetic chamois cloth"</i>... sorry, but my english isn't

that good, and my knowlage of cloths isn't much better. Can you describe me

that material? Like: where that can be find - not a shop, but where is it using

in "other" world... like sherts, pants, or whatever...<br>

Tnx, Janko.</p>

<p>Yesterday expirience: (well, freiday-sunday work)<br>

I have been on location (7 small baroque churches) where I had to shoot 14

LF slides (and several 120 roll films). The last day, in very last church, on very

last shot - I was with THE last polaroid... the strobes give me 1:8 and I

needed 1:22 for DOF... that will make 8 fills with srobes... and to fill strobes

aftrer each "fire" I need 2-3 seconds. about 20 seconsds... but lightmeter

measured f 1:22+1/3 for those 20 seconds (widhout flash light). so, I'w put

THE last polaroid in the holder, made exposure and I'w (naturaly) forgot to

put knob on "P"... and I have destroyed the last test sheet... 1:32 with 12

fires of my strobes and I'w got good (not perfect) slide which can be easyly

controled after scaning...<br>

Yes, your problem sounds like darkslide... or (!?) lighted film (my clumsy

english) during inserting in film holder?<br>

What I want to say: don't trust enyone, not eaven yourself ;)) (double chech

every time)<p>

<p>Erik, friend of mine have done such test while ago. (Lab have send he's

negative to Kodak with all specifications...) rated up to ISO 102400... yes so

much. Developed in T-Max RS, but I don't remember times and temperature,

however, I can get info in day or two.<br>

Maximum I'w pushed T-Max 3200 was ISO 25600 developed in ordinary T-Max

developer and I can say I didn't get much better grain.</p>

Don, have you ever got a chance to look at Schneider's Symmar 135/5.6? Not

the new one "S", but old single-coated. Thay are very cheap and mine is realy

fine sharp. Sharp as "new" Rodenstock (have worked with one 5-6 years old)

Sironar 135, just the color isn't same (better is on Rodenstock, and price is

3x...). Just an idea... And yes - there is ebought coverage for basic

applications (tabletop in my case).

<p>I have mixed (few hours ago) positive developer based on kodak D19b recepie, but just a

little bit stronger. I know I should wait for chemicals to get stabilized a little bit, but I couldn't wait

so I developed another one... about 4 minute. yes, a plenty of base fog but finally some dark

areas. I'm still not happy with result, but is getting better. <br>

if I proceed with that rithm, I will know the "good" combination at the end of box ;-))</p>

<p>I just got box of old 4x5" film (plus-x professional: end-date 04-1994). The first two sheets

are very, very soft, almost thin. Both were developed in D76 in trays, first rated at ISO 50

developed for 7 minutes, second at ISO 100 10 minutes. Still very soft. I will use it just for fun

and to learn LF techniques, but would like to get out maximum.<br>

I know that I can use harder developers (positive developer, or 2-bath ortho developing) to get

higher contrast, but would like to hear if anyone have ever "played" with such combination:

out-dated "plus-x pro" and... </p>

<p>Tnx,<br>

Janko.</p>

Take "efke kb 25" and "pl 25". That emulsion have much finer grain. btw, we (me and my friends

here in Croatia) have found that the best developer match for efke film is Rodinal 1+50 and

more...

Mark, I don't know what is "exactly" size you want, I have or can get 9x12 cm (that is more like 3

1/2 x 4 3/4 of inch). I have one small box (25 sheets) of "efke PL 100" which I can give you for

free, but it is old - january 1992 was end-date, and have few boxes of recently produced film

efke "PL 100 M" (50 sheets) and "efke PL25ortho" (100 sheets). but those you can buy on-line

from several sources (even on "e-bay stores"). Look at http://jandcphotography.com/

Back in 2000 or 2001 Mattel sued Tom Forsythe for taking shots (and making art exhibition) with

their favorite doll, Barbie. Mostly in erotic or provocative poses. Mattel have lost. Art is art

whatever you choose as subject as long as you don't violate someones privacy... as Long as

Barbie (or any other doll) herself can't complain, there is no violation of privacy...