bill_taylor2

Stephen suggests something else too. The safelights at that lab could be too bright. A film that is truly light struck will be obviously "tiger striped" or have some kind of similar mottling. The same with a camera or film cannister that has bad light traps, or if 120 film is not rolled up tightly. But a bright safelight would just fog film slightly. You might get a usable image, but proably the whole length would have a very high base density.

 

I don't mean to suggest these folks are developing open tank like in the 50s. Simply that they might have a very small light leak into a tank, or that somehow their handling involves a light source that is too bright.

Does the EKfe film have edge printing, such as index and frame numbers? Do you have good clear spaces between the frames?

 

You know the spaces between the frames and along the edges are unexposed and thus should be film base clear. To the extent it is fogged, that indicated bad or old film. Possibly under fix coudl cause this as well, but a lab isn't terribly likely to do that. At home would be another matter.

 

If the edge printing is not a "good" density, that indicates poor development process. It might not be at D max, but it is likely very close.

 

Good luck!

Whichever you choose, if it is possible, be sure to include a white target object in the scene you are photographing. Including a grey card too would be even better. The object should be receiving the same lighting as the real subject you care about. Photoshop (and I suppose others) has a color correction white balance feature. So to the extent the original object is pure white, Photoshop will render it a neutral grey tone, and bring the rest of the scene into correction with it. Then play with it from there.

I woudl try Samy's Camera. The Fairfax district one in particular. They were a bit slow with my last repair, but they seemed to know what they were talking about.

Alistair,

 

A reflex viewer is used to correct the groundglass image to be right side up. It will still be left to right inverted, but the correct orientation makes life a tad easier. Some reflex viewers have slight magnification to make focusing easier, and assuming it is a binocular reflex viewer, that is nice too.

 

I'm not a wista owner, so I'm not at all sure how to attach the viewer to the camera.

 

The biggest downside I know of is you have one more thing to carry into the field. A useful thing, but still they can be bulky or inconvienient at times. I have a reflex viewer for my Toyo and I find it doesn't pack well (mostly because I made up the pack before I got the viewer).

J,

 

The big notch feels more rounded than that, but it could be that one I suppose.

 

I should say that I think this film came from a batch of holders I was given. I'm pretty sure they aren't exposed (white side out), but other than that I don't know anything about it.

For Fuji notches look at:

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/bin/ProfessionalFilmDataGuide.pdf

 

Around page 10.

 

Feels like the mirror image of Fujichrome 64T, or Astia, if it had another small nothch to the left.

 

I'm wondering if this is either an oddball film, or an old one that has since changed.

I have some holders loaded with a film I can't identify.

 

The notch code is 4 notches. 1 small semi-circle, 1 large semi-circle, then 2

small semi-circles, reading from left to right. It seems to be the exact

opposite sequence from Fuji 64T, per the Fuji website.

 

The notches are smooth and circular, not v notch, not square. I have looked

through my back film stock and photos and can't figure it out. PlusX, HP5, Maco

IR/Aura, Portra, 64T, Velvia, Provia. I might be tempted to just toss the stuff

(just 3 sheets), but would at least like to know what it is.

 

Thanks

 

Bill

Brian,

 

I haven't shot with it yet. Busy Holiday weekend, then busy work day. I hope to get something today or tomorrow in some bright sun.

 

Bill

I just bought a used lens for my 4x5 camera on eBay. It is bright and clean and

has a functional shutter. But there is a small crack in one of the elements.

 

The element is inside the lens, just forward of the shutter/apeture leaves. It

is very small (1 - 2mm), and only apparent at very wide apetures (essentially

wide open). I don't think I'll shoot at that wide of a setting. I didn't

notice any distortion when trying to focus with the lens.

 

On the other hand, I am concerned that the crack might grow. Temperature

changes from indoor/outdoor field work, or just simple mechanical stresses might

make it worse over time. Plus, I suppose that under the right conditions it

might aggravate lens flare.

 

I have a short return period with the lens, so I need to decide. I haven't seen

many other lenses in this focal length recently. I have another one, but it is

a much slower design, f8.

 

Anyone got some helpful advise on the pros and cons of keeping it? Chances of

catastrophic heartbreak later in life? Thanks.

I've had no flatness issues with the Polaroid 545. I use Quickload and I love the results and the convienience. However, you must be careful not to get too vigourous with pulling the darksleeve or pushing it back in. A few times I have bent the film by pushing in too hard. And I've heard stories **Anecdote alert** about people pulling the film out of the camera and about getting static marks on the negative. It hasn't happend to me, but the bending incident was enough to get me to slow down. I don't know if Readyloads are any better in this regard, but I suspect not. Slow and steady is the way to go.

I just picked up a pretty cool product at Office Depot. It is a 3 Liter plastic

box made by Reallyusefulbox.com. It holds 11 double sided Lisco style film

holders. They seem to be very tough and lightweight. The top clips into place

and makes a stackable unit. They can stand a little spashing, but they are NOT

watertight. I got the clear ones, but they come in colors too. Pink, Blue, etc.

 

The 3L size seems the best for LF field use. From the web site it looks like

the 9L size would hold about 30 - 33 holders in "long shoebox" fashion.

 

Up until now I've been using an insulated softside lunch bag, but this has

potential for being more sturdy overall. It doesn't have a place for straps,

but if you aren't carrying it very far, it has more capacity and offers much

better protection.

I've got a JML Optical 65mm lens. Not multicoated. It seems sharp enough and

I'm very happy with it, shooting 4x5, though it is a tad slow at f8. One thing:

I've noticed that Nikkor, Rodenstock, and Schneider all have lenses in this

range with coverages of about 170mm. This translates into movements of less

than 10mm. But with this JML I seem to have quite a bit of movement, well over

10mm up AND down, even when stopped down. Of course, all I can do is point at a

bright scene far away, focus, then look at the corners of my ground glass. Am I

missing something critical here? I can't believe a small optical company has

found a trick the majors have somehow missed.

Pico,

 

You can't really invert a Monotank. It doesn't have a watertight seal, just a lid. So rocking back and forth is all you can do.

 

The reason I did some agitation once in a while was partly due to that, and partly due to fear of a thing called "bromide drag". I don't really believe modern fabricated films are susceptible to it, but I just couldn't find a credible source to say so in clear language. So a little shake once in a while was a compromise to break up whatever streaks might try to form.

Photo.net won't let me post the scans at full resolution. 100KB limit and the files are about 985KB. I feel that reducing the size will damage what I would like people to be looking for. So please look for them at

 

http://www.conrunner.net/Scratch/

 

You should see them in directory format. The rest of that website is unrelated to photography, but feel free to look around anyway! Thanks.

I finally got tired of 1000 expert opinions and decided to do one test. And

here it is.

 

It turns out I have quite a bit of Plus-X 4x5 sheet film. Several dozen boxes.

So, it is important to me to get a good feel for how to develop it correctly

and consistently. My developing tank(s) are the Price Monotank CF-46, and I use

Kodak style film hangers in it. Yes, really really old school style, almost

literally (I got some of it from an old school photo lab). I was concerned

about not getting sufficient agitation due to the depth of the tank and the way

fluid circulates in it. So I started looking into what people have done with

Stand Development. Lots of opinions and suggestions, but not much more. I was

getting decent results in my guesswork, but finally I wanted some proof I wasn't

just shooting blindly.

 

On to the test.

 

On a nice sunny day, I set a few objects outside and started shooting. My car

is an ivory white color, with some top coat peeling which leaves the under paint

a bit whiter yet. The tires are of course a very dark gray with good tread. It

was a sunny day, so the tread can be seen receding into the deepest shadows in

some frames. In the foreground, I set the Price Monotank, which is a glossy

black bakelite material; a sample film hanger, which is stainless steel gray;

and a true 18% reflectance gray card. All of this is sitting on the whitish

concrete driveway. By the way, the Monotank is modified by adding a 3 inch ABS

pipe coupling to the light trap with silicone seal caulk, which aids in faster

pouring of fluids.

 

I metered in both reflectance and incidence modes at ASA 100. The reading

directly off the card and using the incidence bulb were within 0.10 stop of each

other, f22 and f16.9 at 1/60 sec. I shot at f22 at 1/60 sec. Plus X should be

at ASA 125, but even when I was shooting roll film and developing by the book I

didn't like the results at that speed. Besides, I knew I'd be crossing several

developing times so 1/3 stop probably would not show up.

 

At this point I shot 24 sheets of Plus-X, one after another, all within 10

minutes. The meter readings at the end were the same as the start. The lens

was a Nikkor 210mm in a Copal shutter.

 

Now for development.

 

I used what I feel is a semi-stand development, or very low agitation technique.

 

First was water pre-wash, for about 3-5 minutes, then pour off.

 

Then 8 sheets developed in D-76 1+3 dilution, and 8 sheets developed in Rodinal

1+50 dilution. I adusted the times for temperature using the rule subtract 2%

per 2 deg F over 68 deg F. So final for the D76, the temp was 72F and the time

was 14 minutes. For the Rodinal it was 72F and 12.5 minutes.

 

I poured the developer in, then rapped sharply to dislodge air bells. I

agitated 15 sec every 1 minute for the first 5 minutes, by gently rocking along

the long axis of the tank. 64 oz covers the film and fills the film bay of the

tank, but still leaves some headspace for rocking.

 

At each full development time (14 and 12.5 min respectively) I pulled a sheet,

rinsed it in running water, and dropped it into fixer. On the D76 sheets I

tried to scratch ID marks into the sheet. That didn't work too well in the

dark, so for the Rodinal I had to be extra careful about keeping them in order,

than marked them after the fix.

 

After the last sheet at 8x development time, I fixed for another 5 minutes, then

rinsed for 30 minutes. Photo Flo, then dry.

 

The scans.

 

I scanned on an Epson 4990, 8 bit greyscale, 240 dpi. I've saved all the scans

directly to .tif without any compression or manipulation. Again, pleae ignore

the major scratches, they are jsut me lamely trying to write in the dark with a

sharp point. I also have a dust problem in the scanner. I didn't want to have

the processing software do too much, since the whole point is to get as close to

the real negative as possible. I did my best.

 

The results.

 

What do you think? Which frame shows the "best" development? Shadow details,

highlights, gradation, grain, etc. I think the x4 and x5 are about right, but

you all will have your preferences. Pleae compare and speak up.

 

Thanks!

I just stopped by the AIM Pasadena lab a few hours ago. They closed their doors

permanently yesterday, 7 July 2006. They will be open for pickup only next

week. I could see most of the fixtures are already missing from the front, so

this is the true death indeed.

 

I liked them. If they were more convienient to me I would have used them more.

But I suppose the sweep of time catches us all in the end.

What you guys are missing is not so much the thrill of the chase as the practical "don't overpay" aspects of sniping.

 

In a perfect market the highest bidder and the willing seller get together and yadda yadda yadda. In a REAL market, there is imperfect knowledge, imperfect communications, alternatives to consider, and time pressure, to name but a few flaws. The ebay softare, if used as designed and described, will allow the buyer to set a maximum price and it will keep that person on top until they are outbid. The problem with that is that is tends to maximize the amount the buyer pays. Good for the seller, bad for the buyer. The buyer may be *willing* to pay a large amount for an item, but they would *prefer* to pay less. This is a practical consideration that perfect Market theory just doesn't account for. This isn't about a philosoical meeting of the minds, this is about a buyer rying to maximize return on his dollar.

 

Thus you see people that tend to bid incrementally, trying to just top the highest bidder, but go no further. They are trying to protect themselves from having hudreds of dollars ripped from their pockets by other bidders. By just topping the high bidder, they leave the decision to go further in their own hands, not the hands of the next guy that happens to see the item.

 

The bidder that bids their true maximum early in the auction leaves themself exposed to this incremental bidding for the length of the auction. Eventually they will be overcome. Conversely, a sniper is only leaving their maximum out there for a few seconds. The only threat to them is another sniper that is bidding a true maximum. They can still lose to being outbid, but it is less likely to happen in a few seconds than a few days. Time works in the favor of the buyer, tending to lower the purchase price.

 

Even if you don't like or believe in last second sniping, just think of a person randomly trolling ebay. If they see a bid one week before the end of the auction, they have one week to decide how much to bid. If they see it one day before the end, they have one day. Similarly with one hour and one minute. If they have only one second, they are effecively out of the running. Time matters.

 

One last thing on time. Other auction sites have, and I suppose still do, work on the "time since last bid" principle. They died off. For whatever reason they didn't make it. I suspect it is because buyers eventually realized they were being squeezed for their last dollar. Every auction will always be of the highest possible amount at that time. There will never be any "deals" to hope for, so there is less motivation to search deeply for an item you might want that seems to be getting little attention (like on ebay). Might as well just buy from a store.

 

Like it or not, keeping the buyers happy is a necessary condition of any auction site. Sellers are important, but buyers are critical.

Looks very good. How secure do you geel going long distances? Things shift and bump and grind. When you open up the pack, you don't want any nasty surprises.

I've used Pelican, and while they are an excellent choice, I now say go with Stormcase, http://www.stormcase.com/product_info/indexproduct.html.

 

Overall they have better ergonomics in a case that is just as sturdy. I can't speak to the quality of the watertight seal, but hopefully you aren't SCUBA diving with your LF gear!

How about a Forum specifically for upcoming events? Something that

might interest photographers in a given area or with the same

interests? People try to put things on the forums now, but you either

have to do massive cross-posting, or you have to be satisfied that

only the Leica people will see it, or 35mm, or Large format, or b/w,

etc. One area with all events that every one knows to look at would

be better. Plus, it will spur people to go to events, or to find more

shooting opportunities in their areas.

Assuming the processing didn't completely hose you, then color correction is probably it. One nice tip I learned in Vocational Photography is to try to include a target of known color (white) in the scene, and preferably with the same lighting as the subject. No matter what else is going on, you can use the target to zero in your color corrections. And that was 25+ years ago, before Photoshop made it a 1 button instant fix.

I have a Price Monotank, which seems to be made of black bakelite. It

works, but It has some hairline cracks. The time to retire it is coming.

 

What I would like is a daylight tank that works with the T-style,

Stainless Steel 4x5 sheet film hangers, just like the Price. I can

load 1 film per hanger and 8 hangers per tank load. 48 ounces to

cover the film, 64 to minimize risk of exhaustion.

 

Does anyone make them anymore, or am I stuck with trolling Ebay or

custom fabrication?

To Bill,

 

Thanks for the article reference. I had the opportunity to speak with Ctein a few months ago about this, but I didn't ask him for the deatiled run down like this. His short form answer was that the new Fuji formulations 160S/160C were a good continuity to the older ones NPS/NPC.

 

To David,

 

160S is available in 4x5 I have two boxes in my freezer right now. I wish they would put 160C out in 4x5 though.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ansel12sep12,1,3313554.story?coll=la-headlines-california&ctrack=1&cset=true

 

Go see the article quick, or you'll have to register with the Times.

 

Basically, some astronomers have calculated that the moon will be in

the same position as it was in 1948 when Ansel Adams made the Autumn

Moon photo. They've worked it out as to where he stood and what phase

the moon was at. Bottom line, you can see it again from Glacier

Point, this Thursday evening, just after 7pm.

 

"The Texas State University astronomers, who have built a reputation

for pinpointing historical dates and events, also determined that the

celestial clock is ticking toward a rare encore performance early on

Thursday evening, re-creating the same dance of moon and mountains

Adams captured on the same date more than half a century ago.

 

That cycle repeats itself only once every 19 years, so folks in

Yosemite are expecting a crowd of amateur photographers, astronomers

and Adams aficionados atop Glacier Point, eager for a brief chance to

relive a scene documented by one of the 20th century's greatest

photographers."

 

This is a chance for you and a few hundred of your closest friends to

be like Ansel and get it on film. Unless it's cloudy that day.

 

bill