bruce_m._herman

I have a fairly simple approach.

<p>

All of my Copal shutters will accept a PC sync cord. I have a 3 m

cord with a basic shoe to which I attach my flash. I've been using a

Pentax 280T, because that's what I had. Tripping the shutter trips

the flash.

<p>

After composing, setting the aperture, and preparing the film for

exposure, I set the shutter to about 1/250'. I use this speed because

I can do multiple pops of the flash without exposing any areas of

the composition that won't be flashed. After all, how often will

ambient light be effective at 1/250' and, say, f 45?

<p>

I expose the areas of interest that need fill flash to -1 to -1 2/3

stops from the ambient. It's a matter of taste. I use the scale on

the flash to determine the number of pops for a given aperture.

<p>

Now turn off the flash. Set the shutter to the appropriate value for

the ambient light and make your exposure.

<p>

Source of frustration - it takes about 4' for my flash to recycle.

This is a long time when the sun is setting and 4 or more flashes are

needed. Sometimes it's better to do the ambient exposure first, and

then the fill flash. That way you get the image if the light is

changing. A larger flash would also work, but they are heavier.

<p>

Best wishes,

Bruce

Raven,

Vignetting should not be a problem in most situations. Your logic

is correct.

<p>

My 135 mm has only 200 mm of coverage and I have never had a problem

using it for landscape photography. 231 mm may not be enough for some

table top compositions involving tilt and rise/fall if your camera

height is near the height of the table. IF you think that's an issue,

you could consider a 155 mm f6.8 Grandagon-W, which would have a 382

mm image circle. But you would pay a significant penalty in weight.

It weighs 1460 g, vs 250 g for the 150 mm S. It's front filter is 105

mm, so there's a lot of glass there. Personally, I'd stay with the

150 mm S if you want that focal length.

<p>

A better alternative would be to move to a longer focal length lens,

such as Rodenstock's 180 mm N has a 262 mm image circle (400 g), or

the 180 mm S with a 276 mm image circle (410 g). Other brands are

comparable.

<p>

I'm not sure what drove you to the 150 mm focal length, and how

important that is. I started with a 90 mm, and then added a 210 mm.

But we're all different.

<p>

Hope this helps.

Bruce

Mark,

<p>

I've stored film in holders for a couple of months at a time outside

of a refrigerator and not had a problem with light leaks.

<p>

Regarding condensation in a refrigerator - that could be a problem if

you lived in a humid environment. The water vapor in the air within

the holder and the plastic bag could condense on the holder or the

film. It's pretty dry where I live in southcentral Alaska, and that's

not a problem.

<p>

Best wishes,

Bruce

I, too, use Fuji quickloads in my Kodak Readyload holder and have had

no problems.

<p>

Bruce

This is something that I learned from Pat O'Hara.

<p>

First, you should make at least two, and preferably 3 images having

the same amount of light falling on the film. If the light is

constant, you use the same exposure. If the light is changing, spot

meter the same place or use your incident meter in the identical way.

Take the meter reading and expose accordingly.

<p>

Next, process only one sheet of film for a given composition. Put it

on the light table and decide whether and how much you need to push or

pull the remaining sheets for that composition. You will double or

triple your film expenses, but you will be guaranteed at least one

correct exposure and a lot less worry while you're making the

composition. That will put some of the fun back into your

photography.

<p>

I don't think that this is as useful for people using negative

film, in which the final product is the print. But for positive films

like Velvia, where the transparency is the final product, this is a

way to insure that you get the results that you want.

<p>

Best wishes,

Bruce

One minor correction to the notes above - you can use Fuji Quickloads

in the Kodak Readyload holder. I work with both Velvia and E100SW,

and can only carry one holder. But I've had no problems with

sharpness in my Fuji transparencies.

<p>

As I've said regarding other subjects - try to borrow one of each of

the holders and try them before making your purchase. It likely a

personal issue.

<p>

Bruce

If you've been working with transparency film, you may find the switch

to B&W awkward because of the negative vs positive that you're used

to. One way to try some black and white is to use Agfa's Scala.

Scala is a positive film, and so you still have a transparency to look

at.

<p>

The film is rated at ISO 200, but I was told by the folks at Duggal to

expose the 4x5 film at 50 for starters, and then adjust. I now expose

it at ISO 80.

<p>

It's a bit grainy compared to Velvia, and it has no more latitude than

any other transparency film (about 5 stops). But I like its look.

<p>

You can make prints from this film on Ilfochrome or Fuji Crystal

Archive or have it scanned and make Iris or even inkjet prints.

<p>

The downside is that you may not be able to find anyone near you who

can process it. I still send all of mine back to Duggal in NYC. A

pain, yes. Another downside - it does not come in ready load or quick

load holders. Slow and heavy - a bit like me these days!

<p>

Best of luck,

Bruce

Artie,

I use a TK45 that I purchased as a used camera. I've been very happy

with it except for two things. In very cold weather (-15C and below),

the camera is difficult to set up and take down because the components

of the multi-piece monorail do not slide past each other as well as

they do in warmer temperatures. The second problem that I've had in

the US is getting replacements parts. I ordered new spirit levels

over 4 years ago. I got tired of calling and asking them if they had

arrived. This may not be an issue where you live.

<p>

You should read the article about the Tecknikardan on the main page of

this site. You'll see that some people have difficulty mastering the

camera. This is a personal issue. Try using the camera before you

purchase it, if possible, even if it's only in a store or in your

home.

<p>

Good luck!

Bruce

I use transparency film (Velvia and E100SW), and up until now now, have had my prints made on Ilfochrome paper. I'm now considering digital printing, either with EverColor or Laser Light Photographics (Bill Nordstrom). Does anyone have any experience with either of these?

<p>

IlfoChrome appears to have an almost 3-dimensional quality to it when the prints are well made. Do the digital prints look as well as the IlfoChrome?

<p>

Thanks,

Bruce

The large format camera is not the best solution for all compositions.

In situations such as the one you describe, dropping back to 35 mm

may be the only way to make the photograph. I personally believe that

the camera is only a tool, and you use the appropriate tool for each

task.

<p>

Bruce

The less expensive filters are as thin as film (<< 1 mm). Normally,

you would mount them in cardboard holders. Unlike resin filters, they

cannot be used in front of a polarizing filter (i.e., subject,

polyester filter, polarizing filter, lens).

<p>

I purchase these filters when I'm uncertain about how frequently I'll

use a filter or whether I'll even like it. Once I see that I'm a

regular user of the filter, I purchase a resin version. My personal

experience is that they are more scratch resistant than the resin

filters.

<p>

If you don't use a polarizing filter much, these would work well for

you.

<p>

Bruce

Here are a few articles which should be of use. All are from a

magaznie called View Camera.

<p>

Dagor Lenses. May/June 1992. pp 54-56.

History of Lens Design Pt. 1., July/Aug. 1995. pp 52-56.

History of Lens Design Pt. 2., Sept/Oct 1995. pp 54-56.

History of Lens Design Pt. 3., Jan/Feb 1996. pp 56-60.

History of Lens Design Pt. 4., Mar/Apr 1996. pp 54-56.

<p>

In the event that neither the BYU library nor your local faculty have

View Camera, you can contact the publisher, Steve Simmons at

largformat@aol.com. Their URL is www.viewcamera.com. Good luck.

<p>

Bruce

I had vignetting problems with the lee system on my Fuji 90 mm f5.6

(82 mm front threads). I couldn't use any tilt or rise. I moved to

the Sinar system, which had a larger diameter opening. I say "had"

because this was about 6 years ago. It's possible that the newer Lee

holders have a larger diameter opening, but from your comment, perhaps

not.

<p>

The one drawback to the Sinar system is that they use 1 mm thick

filters. No one else makes filters this thin to my knowledge. That

means that a lot of interesting filters are not usable unless you mill

their vertical edges. The Lee polyester filters can be used with a

paper clip instead of using their cardboard mount, but this is not a

satisfactory solution.

<p>

Good luck,

Bruce

I regularly work in temps to -15F and have seen no effect on E-6 color

tranparency film speed.

<p>

A couple of hints if you're just starting to work in cold

temperatures. 1) Use an expired credit card to scrape your condensed

breath from the ground glass. Holding your breath while you're under

the dark cloth will minimize the need for this, but some condensation

seems unavoidable. 2) You breath will also condense on the cold

surface of your lenses and filters so be careful of where your

exhalations are directed. It will also condense on the camera body

and monorail or bed. I use a TK 4x5, and if I've exhaled too much on

the rails, collapsing it for travel can be aggravating.

<p>

Keep warm!

Bruce

A solution that was relatively easy for me to implement in my house

was to use a spare bathroom for loading film. The key is to put hot

water in the tub, and then close the door. I've never had a problem

with dust as long as the humidity was high enough to cause some

condensation on the mirror.

<p>

Here are a couple of things to consider, although I suspect that

you're already doing them. 1.Blow compressed air through the felt at

the top of the film holder. 2. Clean the holder and dark slide with a

camel hair brush, or some other anti-static brush. 3. Avoid wearing

clothing that sheds when you load your holders. Wool sweaters and

flannel shirts are two great offenders.

<p>

I can't help you with the changing bag. I, too, have switched to

Quickloads and Readyloads when I'm away from home.

<p>

I kow this is incredibly frustrating. Best of luck!

Bruce

Like Ellis, I'm going to sound like a broken recording.

<p>

It probably doesn't matter which camera you chose, at least in theory.

In practice, it depends on which feels more natural to you. I

strongly recommend that you try both cameras, in a the field if

possible. Then go with the one that you feel most comfortable with.

<p>

By the way, I like my TK45 VERY much.

<p>

Bruce

I was told that the US packages are not x-rayed because they are freight. I didn't ask about international shipments.

<p>

You can call FedEx and ask them.

<p>

Good luck,

Bruce

I read an article, I'm not sure if it was in Outdoor Photographer or PDN, in which the author claimed that the new x-ray machines will ultimately become more widespread to the point of being used for carry-on baggage.

<p>

Rather than risk a scene with the security guards who become suspicious of the buldging object in your pocket, why not send your film back via an air courier such as FedEx or UPS? You could mail it directly to your lab or to your office.

<p>

Good luck,

Bruce

Michael,

Gitzo makes a series of metal tripods with numbers in the 500's that would work. Several of them have four section legs and are short when collapsed. However, they may be too short for you if you're tall. Look at the B&H web site for details.

<p>

By the way, I have the 510, which I think weighs 9 lbs without the head. It's a 3 section, and is fine for day hikes.

<p>

Best wishes,

Bruce

I have a Linhof Technikardan 4x5, which I like very much. However, I purchased it as a used camera for about what you would pay for a new Canham 4x5! One other advantage of the Canham is that you supposedly don't need to purchase bag bellows ($$$!) for wide angle lenses. You can read a review of the Canham at the View Camera web site (www.viewcamera.com)

<p>

All of that aside, I think that you should ask yourself what kind of landscape photography you tend to do. Do you concentrate on wide angle images, or are you more into long focal length images? Or do you do a bit of everything? If you prefer long focal lengths, you may not find the Canham adequate. Alternatively, if you work mostly with wide angle lenses, another less expensive camera may be what available. I don't have suggestions for these end members. But I do think that purchasing a one-does-it-all camera, like the TK45 or the Canham, isn't necessarily the best choice for everyone.

<p>

Finally, I would try to borrow or rent one of whatever you consider purchasing. I've never had a problem operating my TK45, but as you can see by one of the articles on this site's main page, not everyone would agree. I suspect that the similar issues apply to the Canham or any other camera.

<p>

Best wishes,

Bruce

Here are a couple of things to check.

<p>

1. Are you sure that both the front and rear standards were locked before you put the film holder into the camera? The rear will likely move when you put in a film holder if it isn't locked.

<p>

2. Your concern about the age of the camera suggests that some components are loose. Is that true? Can you move either of the standards when they are locked?

<p>

3. Assuming that they lock tightly, you can verify that they are parallel when you want them to be so by using a good quality level. Use the level to position the camera base so that it is horizontal. Check that both standards are now vertical. Use the level to aim the camera vertically downward. Now verify that both standards are horizontal both left to right and top to bottom along the standards. If there is play in the system, it should show in this test. Doing these two tests will at least confirm that the standards are positioned where you would place them for a conventional image.

<p>

4. Does the camera have a fresnel lens or bright screen? If it isn't correctly installed, your plane of focus won't be coincident with the film plane. I believe that there's an article at the View Camera web site that explains this in detail.

<p>

5. I'd be inclined to use T-max for these tests. It's relatively inexpensive.

<p>

Good luck,

Bruce

John,

I use a Peak 8x loupe. It's cheap, but then I do landscape photography, always seem to be in a rush, and so the poor thing takes a beating. But it seems to work OK. I haven't tried a 4x, but I've been told that they are better because you don't get confused with the texture of the screen. I don't really know if that's true, but I do know that few people use more than 6x loupes. Perhaps you could borrow an 8x to see if it helps you.

<p>

One trick for focusing that I learned from someone is to look at a black mark on your ground glass. The black mark will appear to be sharpest when the background around it is sharpest, i.e., in focus. This is easy for me because my camera has a black grid on the glass over the bright screen. You can make a regular series of small black dots with a grease pencil if your view finder lacks such marks. It takes some getting used to, but it really does work.

<p>

Best wishes,

Bruce

I think it depends a bit on the type of lens that you plan to purchase. For a long lens, such as a 360, the difference is not important. But for a wide angle, it can be critical.

<p>

For example, I have a Fuji 90 mm f5.6. Last summer, I used it in a rain forest in southeast Alaska. I wanted every stop of light that I had and more to see whether the image was initially focused where I wanted it. I could not stop the lens below about f22 without losing the corners to total blackness.

<p>

I pay a penalty for using this lens. It has an 82 mm front filter element. That's a lot of glass to haul around, but I know that there are times when I need it. However, you may not. A lot depends on the type of photography that you like to do. If you work in darker places, or need the extra movement possible with an f5.6 wide angle than with an f8, then go for the faster lens. Otherwise, the f8 should be fine.

<p>

Good luck,

<p>

Bruce

I find that I disagree with several points made by the previous respondant.

<p>

1. Fuji quickloads work very well in the Kodak holder. I regularly use Velvia in my Kodak holder. It is true, however, that Kodak Readyloads do not work in the Fuji holder.

<p>

2. The relative flatness is irrelevant to field photographers. I've read numerous articles in this web site in which the writers get "hung up" about differences that can rarely be percieved on the film. If you're doing field photography (not studio) keep in mind that your ability to focus will be limited because a) you will often be working in morning or eveing light, and you'll be in a hurry due to the short time that you have good light, and b) it's somewhat dark, and so you can't see anything when you stop your lens down, anyway. Consequently, you will find yourself using a smaller aperature than would be ideal just to make sure that you make the photograph. This is art, not engineering.

<p>

I own and have used both holders extensively. Here's my read on the subject. If you prefer Fuji's film, and do not plan to use Kodak's film, buy the Fuji holder. If you use Kodak's film, buy the Kodak holder. If you use both brands of film (I use Velvia and E100SW), buy the Kodak holder. Later, when you've become more experienced and have begun to develope more personal biases, you can get the Fuji holder if it is appropriate.

<p>

As an artist, your composition and palette (i.e., film in this case), are more important than nuances in sharpness. Worry about these. That means that you should try several films until you understand them and develope of preference.

<p>

As a side note, you'll find it interesting that an article in View Camera magazine concluded that the Kodak holder gave sharper images than the Fuji holder. An article published on this site concluded just the opposite!

<p>

Best wishes,

<p>

Bruce

I have the same lens, although mine is in a Compur shutter.

<p>

The filter size is 60 mm, not a common size. I suggest that you purchase a step-up ring, like a 60 to 62 mm or a 60 to 67 mm to get to a more usable filter size. The only place that I could find a step-up ring that started at 60 mm was in a used camera store.

<p>

Oh, by the way, if your lens is like mine, it will have a relatively low contrast. You'll find it easier to focus if you stop it down about 2/3 stop.

<p>

Bruce