dave schlick

sorry i didnt read all the posts completely if someone else brought this up.. but yes as mentioned earlier the verticles are fine..simply using a buisiness card on the above photo shows this. its the building shrinking off to infinity to the left that makes one preceive the verticles are off.. its the horrizontal lines that need to be corrected with swing of the rear film plane.. ive never done it as i dont care, becouse infinity shrinking is not a problem for me, but going after this en mass is very interesting.. dave.

a crown graphic with 90mm needs no bag bellows,.. i like the 135 rodenstock sironar s... . a 65mm scneider i looked thru on a crown in bozeman didnt need bag bellows or recessed lens board either with lens set on inside of camera box on rails and bed dropped.. so im guessing some other field cammeras coud do this also wo special bellows.. to me some urban shots will need to be quick.. im not saying to get a crown but look into your wide angel and switching bellows and stuff.. of course the crown has poor movements especially in 65mm lenses.. i liked doing train wrecks.. i would see one and pull over set up quick as possible, tripod,and one bag of gear. if you have alot more it will inhibit some urban shooting, that is day to day stuff to me, and you need the camera with you to and from work when you encounter unusual stuff..

I would put camera on tripod, quick relesas snap it on, pulled lens out to the pre set stops, slide focus to bed setting that worked for almost all shots that 35 feet to infinity was close enough, metered, set time and apeture, put subject in fresnel and shot. about 5 minutes or less.. oved and made another shot.. the yard bulls were on the way and after they were there it would be 400- 1000 yards away from then on.. photography is very personal, and youl need to go the way you want to.. if your into setting up a half hour or hour for the shot and making every thing exactly correct then get the big camera and with bag bellows etc.. just another opinion from an ameture... dave..

look at the trash can,its strait.. as stated above the pole is tilted it isnt the view or lense.. if your going to get that picky get a good wide open lense, a good loop, a great dark cloth and go to work.. no need to hurry on this shot.. after looking it over with care, take it.. process it, come back another day, take it again, process it etc.. it took me a year to get the shot i wanted of a church.. couldnt belive it ,, finnaly no new cars in parkin lot.. i didnt want a 1990s car in a 100 year old church..if your on vacation or in a hurry, get a poloroid full size image 545i i think its called.. and look it over, correct and shoot.. get a tripod with levels on it.. i have never had noticible trouble with rise when film is level.. but then im not as picky as you.. but that is what this is all about getting what WE personally want.. im guessing camera was not level.. good luck dave. my ameture opinion only.. dave

i had a single rodenstock 135 5.6 sinar s on my crown for many years.. my developer had a hasselblad and was VERY impressed with my better shots.. im seeing on ebay that the rodenstocks sell for less than the schneiders when offered used.. i think they would be a better buy simply becouse of that.. in 4x5 if you cant get it all in the shot your in trouble.. if its too wide you just blow it up.. but you dont want much distortion when you get out of level on the building uprights.. so for me the 135 worked well, covered alot, was bright for looking at the fresnel with very little if any falloff of light on the edges.. all the lenses mentioned will be good choices, and i doubt youll notcie much real diffeence in 110 to 150mm as long as you dont go smaller than 5.6 apeture of viewingand get a properly working lens.... ..im an ameture so its just another opinion, dont weight it too much.. dave

all grandagon N are multicoated.. the other grandagons may not be,?.. the mc is not easily visable on the lousy pictures i have to go by.. what is the filter size of the grandagon n 65mm 4.5? thanks..what is the smallest appeture of the grandagon n 65mm 4.5? its hard to distinguis which is which from your response.. thanks dave..

did the 65 4.5 come in uncoated lens'.. how old does this model

go back.. is the multicoated lens in this design tend to be a good

wide angle lens?? thanks dave..

what is the best center filter in each of your opinions to go with

so i can get a wide angel lens to suit it.. im thinking of future

purchases. hopefully i can get a 65 schnieder with 67 mm filter

thread.. to go along with my 90.. am i on the right track?.. i

started looking for a multicoated super angulon in 65mm 5.6, but

when i looked thru an older one at the store it seemed like it should

have a center cense filter.. any comments appreciated.. dave.

ive found a schneider 65 5.6 super angulon at a camera store.. it is

truely verry minty.. glass is perfect.. we put it on a crown and it

fits fine on back bed and with front bed down there is no

vinyetting.. lots of fallof tho.. copal shutter, 67 mm filter, sn

1237804x.. what is aprox age,, he says its single coated? lens test

page shows a 14xxxxxx sn lens with very good resolution.. this is

probably not the same generation of lens?? he wants 590 and will

throw in a lens board.. seems a little expensive for what im guessing

is a 1970 - 1980s single coated lens.. ill be shooting velvia if

their still makeing it.. on vacations and occationally for fun.. ill

also be using it to make my 6x9 roll back a standard view with rise

if the crown will alow it.. i probably will have to take off the

external view wire from the lens holding board of the camera.. what

say you all.. all comments good, bad and the ugly appreciated.. will

another lense like the 5.6 75 or the new 55 rodenstock be

considerably better? thanks dave..

i agree burning( or special proccessing ive never done) will be nessesary when doing large stained glass.. severely cloudy day is good advice as you will get the window or the pew, not both in one exposure in bright day light.. if your going to do several churches id' do at least one good outdoor shot so you can get the "feel" of where your at as your looking at the interiors.. with cathedrals with extensive stained glass some of the best (multiple) window shots are at night taken on the outside, with lights on inside.. our church is a very old catherdral in helena montana and its a nightmare for everyone, including wedding photograpers.. except one guy who makes and sells 360 degree interior shots .. they are pretty awsome, probably done on the the computer.. exposure is good(balanced) throughout the long thin mounted pictures that he sells. i would practice this tecknique as it is the best interior rendition of the cathedral ive seen.. dave.

shawn,would the wall on the right and the drapes on the left still be leaning out if the lens was perfectly level? i really dont see the terrible light falloff your talking about.. the view of the room must entail an in credible expanse?... whish i could take a couple shots to see if id like one... shawn, are you going to keep this lens or do you not like it and its problems, or do you find it has its purpose?? i have a sa 90 f8, it does a good job except its hard to set up becouse of the low light on the fresnell, so the set up problems is a big negative to me on the r 55.. what lens would you recomend now that i have a 90? someone above said the 75 sa was a good lens?? other comments?. the cost is incredable so i would err on the side of caution dave... thanks dave.

i would like to buy a rodenstock 55mm wide angle for my crown

graphic..i feel the bed will cut about 1/2 to 3/4 inch off the long

side of the negative.. i can live with that... im normally a strait

on shooter, live in montana, and love to photograph glacier and

waterton park when i can get up there.. i want the super wide to

cover without the bother and distortion of tilts etc.. i will use it

when my 90 wont cover.. what say you all??? im an ameture, and like

super clear, sharp, distortion free scenics with velvia... dave..

i was intersted in the tilt used for increased depth of field.. with properly positioned piece i can see how it would work.. what i do is use a good flash meter as stated in the thread below on closups.. i guess one should start with the fastest film available apropriate for the shot.. the flash meter will give exposure settings for 10 flashes..possibley doubleing or tripling your flash amount.. it has limitations as reciprocity is a problem with some films with long exposures,not so much with flashes but with ambient light... i use two or 3 flashes to get even lighting.. ring lights were deveolped for closeups and similar shots.. light as disclosed earlier is a major funtion of depth of field.. getting to f 64 is very diffucult with any 1;1 by the time youve paid the bellows factor pennalty etc.. so i havent had much experience with this. a 405 polaroid (10 shot pack) back is priceless in getting exposure and dof analized,withoud haveing to do it over. .. dave.

if your doing bark as you mentioned and your lens makes you get too close, then as there are shadows in the bark you may not be able to get flashes in there as the lens and camera will be in the way..the camera may also block natural light. (going one to one,) the further your away the longer the lens or vice versa.. the longer the lens the closer to the lens center, so to speak, you can get with a flash, thus getting light down in deep creveses of the bark.. if you want the effect of the dark crevase you can do this with setting the flash further out, but if not you can move it in. i have great luck with 135 for all around shots and close ups with or without flash.. i would prefer a lens with f 64 for maximum depth of field, if you can get enough light on the subject. with bellows factor and the slow films usually used in large format its rare youll get to use it.. dave

the big problem with polaroid is it is not fast.. i set up on a wild flower in the roots of a tree in a narrow valley with lots of trees.. it was highlighted beautifully by the sun.. by the time i got the camera unfolded, on tripod and started to focus the sun was in a differnt position, and the flower was no longer highlighted.. when shooting large format ive found the sun actually move quite rapidly acroos the sky(as the world turns daytime tv watchers would say). in this case polaroid is simply out of the picture, literally.. so like anything of value, there are ups and downs, good days and bad days..back to the flower , in such situations one learns to glance at the watch and return the next day a half hour befor that time and be darn good and ready.(if possible. some shots have to be redone the following year.. i wanted this church shot once in my home town.. i went down there every day at 10: 30 to get the shot, and finnally no cars were in the parking lot side of the church. i wanted to get an older era rendition.. a new car kind of ruined the effect i wanted.. dave.

In one to one photography lighting is a big help.. as the bellows extends you need to open up your lens and or increase exposure time. opening up your lens causes loss of depth of field. if the sun is behind you and your subject is not too deep youll have good results.. a good meter will save a lot of polaroid tests.. i use a polaroid 405 back that holds pack film for 4x5 backs. this gives me depth of field and exposure verification for about $1.oo a shot.. a good flash meter will measure up to 10 pops with the flash with the exposure on same film reapeated 10 times to get maximum depth of field.. sounds strange but works.. the flash needs to be even becouse it overwelms ambient light. but again the polaroid tells you where your going astray.. good luck dave..

i was at the lybrary sunday, and found arizona hiways in the

magazine section. .. it has a splash on ansel adams, and other color

photos..the highlights of the colors warmed me up on a cold day..

dave.

being an ameture i have great success finding the sweet spots in apeture for my lens and using the distance scale on my crown graphic to bring in maximum focus from infinity to 35 feet.. this focus is at a point halfway between inifinity and 100 feet on the crowns bed markings. under that infinity starts to have problems at f22, another sweet spot with my 135 rodenstock sironar s.. so when shooting landscapes with f 22 (at above focus), i know everyting from 35 feet to inifity is ok.. im shooting with the lensboard on its stops.. if one is using tilts and etc much experience will be required, and i susspect becouse wide open apeture for focus adjustments and the stopped down version of the shot there is little relevence to what the eyes see.. hyperfocal distance charts and much time would be needed to get maximum results..probably precise measurements of all settings and some shots taken and return trips for final tweeking of problem areas on the negative.. one thing i notice even on shots that are some photographers prowd moments is that verticle rises and other problems cause center focus problems if the photographer isnt careful.. focusing the top and bottom of the the ground glass and then shooting at infifnity(with tilts) is inviting trouble in the middle of the shot.. if i level the camera, get the shot within the 135's ability strait on, and all is calm enough to shoot at f22, i usually get some very nice results, sometimes useing polaroid to verify exposure.. too bad polaroid doesnt show sharpness.. dave

sounds like from your 35mm choice youl need the schneider 58 xl, make sure your camera you buy will be able to use it.. you may need bag bellows and or receded lens board in your budget.. im very envious of your checkbook.. 58 xl, 90 4.5 nikon, 135-150 rodenstock sirnar s.. i had only the 135 sironar s for many years and its blown me and other photogarphers away on occasion.. i added a 90f8 super angulon and its very hard to focus and compose becouse of the little light on fresnel... for long range i use a mamiya c330 and tlr 250mm lens. it is less expensive for me.. the 4x5 can be unbeliveably wide, kind of like 35mm and is 1 1/4x 1 inch format.. but the 4x5 has the density to back it up, youl be very pleased. good luck.. dave...

my typeing , spelling and general english is terrible.. this forum used to have guys that would smoke me once in a while, several years back.. i complained to the moderators who started telling those who were giving me a hard time to clean it up or get off.. id like to think its me that got this site cleaned up with the more backbiting than the many other type lists at that time that im on..but i know it wasnt just me.. the civility is up to the moderators, and here they are doing a great job.. there will always be spoil sports, and they ruined my whole evenings hobby and even several days after that sometimes.. .. my hats off to the moderators who have the power to keep order, and dont use it for thier own personal gains, and problems.. people who are unhappy just love to pass it on...contact the other lists your haveing trouble with and politely give your case, i think if they want to be a good forum like this one, they will catch on.. good luck dave.

ok, ill have to agree that the 6x7,6x6 will do a great 11x14 or bigger.. but if you consistly shoot 6x7 youl get some great 11x14 or bigger shots.. if you take both cameras and shoot 4x5 when the shot warrants it, eventually youll get a great 30x40 where there are no pop cans in the foreground, exposure is right, backlight or highlights are great, no dust spots etc,,.. if you dont shoot them you wont get them... there is no comparison in the final product.. . 4x5 has 4-5 times the density. and costs a whole bunch more.. so there are its down sides.. the density advantage can also save a bad shot or when youve got some bad film.. i shot a 6x6 of my family on a nice occasion and it was old film or something.. it was kind of brown and not great quality.. i gave it to the local small proccesser and they made great 8x10's for me and the families involved.. the proscessor said if it was 35mm it would not have been a very good print. but the extra density made the shot for me.. dave..

get the crown or speed graphic and put a high quality 135 that will fold up in the camera.. i use a rodenstock 135 sironar? s .. its awsome.. i shoot velvia readyloads, and veiw them in glasines on a light box, and when i get a good one i wont let anyone touch them... but then again im wierd on this i guess.. id love to get some printed but only the best of the best i cant trust to others, or the post office... but with a loop and a light box with 4x5 slide, and a minute of viewing im there at that place and time in my mind.. you can just melt into it.. cant explain it, but its better than any print (or smaller slide) ever hoped to be.. a slide has a depth of field on a lightbox, somehow, a print is never 3d to me, i just cant explain it.... dave

get a crown graphic, keep it on a tripod at the job site, set the focus between infinity and 100 feet, or use hyperfocal distance chart to catch distance you are shooting.. set it at f22 or according to chart, then when you get a good shot, use a good

meter and set speed and shoot..the crown has a large pop up wires for quick shots, and is fairly wide angle.. newspaper men used them for everything in the old days and hand held.. if you could recapture this you would probably do it fine.. 4x5 and black and white has tremendous forgiveness and exposure latitude that 35mm cant offer.. an old timer friend of mine was a police photographer in the old days and scoffed at using meters, saying only ametures needed them.. so im guessing this could work with 4x5 with several years hard work.. and lots of film.. (:<).. if your doing a track meet, your going into real problems that i suppose could be fixed, but generally that is 35mm territory and magazine sized prints is the norm..fast film,witha fast lens, and a dozen auto fired shots of the scene produces great results and could make an intersting poster, giving a customer a posibility that could mean for a sale for you.. .. medium format has the fast film available, for tough inside shots, but is slow to set up and will probably need tripod becouse the lenss just arnt fast enough in alot of situations..maybe the new glob 6x7 have automatic features , i dont know.. .. so if your inside, with crowded, moving shot situation your customer will probably have to be satisfied with 35mm, ... my son said a camera man just got his neck broken at a basketball game the other day.. so stationary cameras definitly have thier drawbacks.. dave

get a hyperfocal distance chart. set the distance on the bed to the lens with the stops at infinity with your new loop.. ive found that for landscape 50 velvia, f 22, then like this &^^100 set the two arrows on the bed between 100 feet and infinity, (with a 135 lens,) will catch alot of landscapes, down to aprox 35 feet minimum and keep infinity sharp with my lens.. this stuff you will have to work out for your self with your lens.. .. if you need to get closer focus, get a small pocket notebook and keep excelent records.. then record the distance of feet on the bed and f stop that works for your lens.. this will get you started.. then tilts if you want to get into that after you get the hang of this... .. if you want to save money get a slide veiwing lens at a photo shop they are 10 power and need to be filed off the bottome becouse they a re just a little high for the film to pass under. use a sheet of sandpaper flat on a table.. its best to not let light in the sides of the lens.. i have a black 10x covered on 4 sides that works great.. if you open up f more than f22 youl loose depth of field.. if you close down thats ok to about f32 but not optimal as that starts causeing problems too as you get too small of f.. and is hard to get things to hold still for the longer exposure, that is flowers, animals, brances etc.. .. just keep good records so when you get a good shot you know your film, speed, fstop and focus distance .. if it works with your system once it will work again.. dave...

i would find the level of knowledge and desires to be learned from each student.. get them to fill out a form, or short essay of what they know and what they want to learn.. you may have to break the class up in two or more parts.. one for those who just want to take a big picture,(im one of those), those that want to get into the advanced aspects.. maybe the more advanced students can start off the first half helping the starters, and then the second half can be the complicated stuff going into what they want.. this way noone will be bored, or feel left out.. its like being a carpenter, once you think your good, you talk to a boatmaker, or bow maker, or dekoy carver,, it never ends and no-one knows it all.. dave..

i dont knowif your still reading this, but i forgot something.. if yu want prints yoll have to talk to the printer of the print type your going to use.. as over/under exposing.. some mediums go a little richer, and i dont know which. so you need to get your feet wet on this one.. under expose and you get what was stated above, over expose and youll get in trouble with the blacks.. so get a good meter, try some shots, KEEP VERY GOOD RECORDS, and send out for a small print to see how its working for you.. then you have your personal preference... im not sure but maybe cibachrom will give the best of all worlds.. so youve got alot of homework to do. cibachrome is expensive if i remember right..if you want to exppose for comercial art prints its probably differnt and on and on.. magazines require usially a smaller format size but they want thier shots exposed a certain way.. to put it simply chromes just arnt as forgiving as black and white in the exposure department.. good luck dave..