dave92270

Send the film through the carry-on X-ray machine (I do this with films up to ASA400 speed, both color and B&W, and all formats up to 4x5" sheet films); it will not hurt it and you'll save yourself time to wait for the hand inspection and related hassles. With sheet film I'd be more afraid of hand inspection then x-rays. My films usually get 4-5 scans during each trip (I travel from US to Europe and back) before I develop them upon arrival.

 

Films shouldn't be placed in checked-in luggage, although a few years ago I've done that by accident and films were not ruined (all were 35mm, mainly TMAX100 and HP5+), but I guess I've been lucky.

 

 

Dave

I developed a test roll of FujiSuperG+100 for 4 minutes@104F (because I've been reusing my C-41 chemistry for a while, I gave it a little longer time; I use Arista C-41 kits with listed time/temp 3:30 min @ 104F for fresh mix) - it came out nice; no problem with contrast or anything else - the high rotation speed is fine...

 

I'm not planning Ilfochrome/Cibachrome anytime soon (if ever), so I'll work with CPE-2 at high speed only. Now I can buy sheet film reels and more drums without any fear of developement problems.

 

Thanks for input to everyone, all turned out well.

 

Regards

Dave

Thank you guys all for commenting on this - it looks like that higher speed could be suitable then...

 

Until now, I've been developing all my films mostly at room temperature in inversion tanks and trays (usually around 80F), which shortens B&W processing times up to 40% for developers which I use. Since inversion tank development times will be further shortened due to continuous rotary processing, the films could come out not too high contrast because the relatively short time spent in the developer. On the other hand, for color film processing I can raise the temperature to over 100F, so I will not need to develop film for 14-15 minutes (C-41 @ 80F); if development is only 3.5min @ 104F or so, the increased agitation should have negligible impact on overall contrast.

 

I shot a color test roll yesterday and will develop it today at high speed setting, and going to shoot B&W roll test roll today as well - I'm getting pretty confident now that all will be OK.

 

Thanks again for your information.

 

Regards

Dave

Hello,

 

Some time ago I purchased old Jobo CPE-2 (model #4060, non-plus

version) from the local camera store and it was a very good deal -

there was only a single crack in the tub which I patched easily. The

only remaining problem is the rotation speed "1" (slow one, for

films); the rotation usually stalls after a short while. Either the

motor unit is bad or gears on the lift are worn.. I developed only

one batch of 35mm films in C-41 at "1" speed (had to help the

rotation by hand time to time in order to finish the run) and gave up

on film processing until I'd fix it. Those two 35mm color rolls

developed at "1" slow speed turned out very nice.

 

Anyway, the "2" speed (fast setting for papers, about 75rpm, with

auto-reversal functional) is working fine, and I successfully process

RA-4 prints in the unit. I wonder whether it is possible to process

film at this fast setting without being overly high contrast or

showing other undesirable effects. I did some reading at Jobo website

and it seems that CPE-2Plus (new) model has only one speed for both

paper and film, which corresponds to "2" (approx. 75rpm) speed on my

old CPE-2. Jobo also insists that this fast rotation is suitable for

both papers and films. Can anyone advice on this?

 

I need to process both B&W and color films, and in all formats

including the sheet film. I'll probably go ahead, shoot a few 35mm

test rolls both B&W and color, and run it through at high speed

setting to find out, but if anyone could comment on this topic I'd

appreciate. I need to purchase 2500 series tanks with sheet film

reels as well, and don't want to spend $$$ unless I know for sure

that the high speed setting is fully suitable for film development.

 

Thanks for advice in advance.

 

(I hope that I picked a correct forum for this post)

 

Dave

Thank you all for your contributions and particularly to Ake Olsson for the actual information - now I know that the x-rays are strong enough to ruin B&W paper in checked-in luggage; so I won't pack it (I don't necessarily need the contact prints).

 

The reason for taking chemicals with me and developing the film at the destination is that I'd like to see the negatives; if the shot will not turn out as I'd like it to be, I'll repeat it. I don't go for holiday trip, so I don't care about the time spent developing the film, and I won't miss out any attractions - to bring back satisfactory shots (for my purpose) is only what matters. I'm traveling pretty much directly into the rural area where is hard to buy anything black-and-white photo related (photo stores usually sell digital and 35mm point-and-shoot cameras, Kodak Gold, photo albums and process C-41 in one hour), and I don't want to spend valuable time looking for specialized photo stores in larger cities in order to buy a bag of fixer and random (whichever available) type of film developer.

 

Since I shoot only low speed film, in the worst scenario I'll bring film back undeveloped without any harm.

 

Thanks again.

 

Dave

Hello,

 

I am curious if anyone experienced any issues when traveling by air

these days with B&W or other chemistry (fixers, developers) in the

checked-in luggage? I am going from US to Europe for a couple of

weeks, and I am planning to process my B&W sheet and roll films while

staying there. I can?t find any guidance whether these chemicals are

allowed or prohibited items (they are not on any TSA list, either

allowed or prohibited); I have dry kits (Kodak fixer and Kodak and

Formulary developers), all factory sealed. I don?t want to have any

issues with TSA while checking in, because I don?t want to miss the

flight; I also don?t want to be forced to leave the chemistry out,

because that way I?d be without way to process the film at the

destination. To send chemistry by mail is questionable, because USPS

may not allow me to ship a couple of pounds of unknown powders in the

overseas destination package.

 

Also, I want to take some B&W graded paper, and wonder if paper in

the checked-in luggage would get damaged by X-rays or not. I would

say its safe due to very low speed, but off course I?m not sure? (I

am not concerned about the film, because I already shipped it ahead

and the rest taking on board with me)

 

Thanks for info in advance; maybe I am worried without any reason ?

but I want to be sure that I will not run into any problems.

 

Dave

I'd suggest eBay - you'll need to spend some time looking around and frequently checking for new arrivals, but with some luck you can probably make a good deal under $400 for the older 4x5 enlarger with lens and a few accessories. (I made a deal some 2 months ago on Chromega Dichro II/D-6 chassis/3 Rodenstock lenses in turret, all film carriers etc for $360 delivered; I had to purchase an extra diffusing chamber for $60 though, as well as a few bulbs).

 

You have chance to grab something cheap with "buy it now" right when it appears, or if you win the auction from zero or low feedback seller (that's what I did), because the interest in such auction will be most likely limited. Make sure to contact the seller before bidding to verify that you can trust him/her though - I exchanged multiple emails and spoke with the seller over the phone before and after the bidding. If you don't plan to do long research on good used enlarger and wait for the "best deal" (which may never come), save yourself a time and headache, and get whatever is available on eBay at any given moment - my guess would be that $600 should win auction for complete 4x5 enlager with accessories in a good shape. I don't know if you are realizing how heavy and tall these enlargers are, so you might want to measure if you have available space to accomodate such a unit. I got myself into the trouble with enlarger I got, and I didn't sort out the permanent placement yet - moving it on wheeled cart into the working position for each printing session - very inconvenient.

 

Good luck with your choice.

 

Dave

OK here is the outcome:

 

Since I really have need for both incident and spot metering (or at least I think I do), after repeated reading of .pdf user guides/manuals for both Minolta Flashmeter VI and Sekonic L-558, I ordered new L-558 today. It's a good chunk of money, but correct exposure is crucial and so I hope this investment is wise.

 

The main deciding reason for picking L-558 over Minolta VI was that while Minolta offers neat features out of the box with its latitude display and S/A/H instant adjustments for easy rendering of shadows/highlights and averaging, similar functionality can be most likely programmed into L-558 through custom setting/compensations, and it has advanced averaging too. Minolta seems to offer instant ease of use, but L-558 has extras which may come handy down the road, once I'll become more familiar with basic use of the new tool. From high-resolution images I judge that L-558 is possibly better built as well, including weather-resistant sealed case.

 

Obviously both meters are great, but because the price difference between them is negligible, why not to get more featured one. I dismissed the older (and now discontinued) Spotmeter F because its features don't match those of newer Minolta VI model (while price is almost the same), and I didn't go with Pentax Digital because I want to have quality digital incident meter as well (at this price), not only the spotmeter.

 

Thank you all again for the help and suggestions; I considered all the advices and hopefully made the best choice matching my personal preference.

 

Dave

I'm still looking around; mpex had used Pentax Digital Spotmeter but it sold out already as I just found out. I'm pretty much narrowing down to Minolta VI and L-558 because their dual functionality. It seems that Minolta has some convenient functions which L-558 lacks, but Sekonic offsets them in the other areas...

I was able to try Minolta Spotmeter F in the store today, and I liked it a lot. The controls were pretty straightforward, and I found the meter easy to use. The meter is small (smaller then I thought), and I like that it uses a single AA battery too. It's a pity that I couldn't compare it with other models (I never seen or used any other models either). Price was reasonable (around $380) and I almost bought it. I assume size-wise it's similar to Pentax Digital - from reading .pdf manual it seems that Pentax uses bit different approach with ring dials and only internal (viewfinder) readings. I'd like to know as well how Spotmeter F compares to spotmeter usability in Flashmeter VI if anyone has experience with both of them. Since I want to take it outdoors for hiking, having both functions (reflected spot & incident)in one meter would be nice; would save a space in the bag so separate incident meter wouldn't be needed. I'm a bit affraid that L-558 may be an overkill for me with all the extra flash features and wireless stuff. Not easy to decide that's for sure.

Could maybe someone point out what is the main advantage of Pentax digital spotmeter over the other models - I see that it is really favored by many.

 

Dave

Image was too wide, hope this works..<div></div>

I wanted to post the outcome of the thread - I just purchased Mini Trekker AW at the camera store (supporting local business that way at least), and loaded it up. They had all the other bags as well, but I found them to be a little too bulky (with the exception of Photo Trekker Classic, which I almost bought instead of this mini trekker).

The mini trekker offers enough room to take basic package to the terrain, but sufficient for one half to one day hiking.

I didn't fill any outer pockets, only main compartment. Enclosing the image for illustration - all fits nicely, and I'm looking forward to go out soon.

 

I figured that I may need larger bag if I'd want to take more gear, wanted to go for longer then a day, or would carry a larger camera, or multiple heavy lenses. For 1/2 day trip I feel pretty comfortable with this package.

 

Thanks to all for help!

 

Dave

Thanks,

 

I never though about Pentax spotmeter, either digital or analog (I though these were discontinued, perhaps not); well that would be one more to consider then. I'm pretty sure all of these meters are very fine instruments - that's why I have a tough time to pick the one... Ellis, you're saying that you had extensive time to work with both Spotmeter F and L-558, and found L-558 work better... well, it sounds like a good recommendation to me. I'd have reason to believe that newer model generally should offer some improvements. I have no chance to see and try either model in store, so I have to base my pick on recommendations by others.

 

BTW, I couldn't find any review on Minolta Flashmeter VI, is there a review available somewhere? Or PDF manual? There is generally more information available about L-558, even the PDF manual.

 

I'm sure that old/older models are surely favored by many, but if you can't buy them new & 100% guaranteed to work, it's a bit problem. The eBay prices on good models are not that great lately (in my opinion)in order to justify purchase of used gear of this type, unless on really tight budget. You can save maybe a two hundred bucks on the spotmeter, but never know what you get. I do buy used lenses (exclusively so far), but I've been lucky I think; with lightmeters my experience is worse, and most of the stuff I got is either semi-working or just too old (although I have to admit that it didn't cost much).

 

Dave

Hello all,

 

After using analog incident and reflective light meters, I realized

that I�d like to have digital spotmeter for accurate (as well as

faster and more convenient) zone system metering; the main reason is

that each LF shot involves considerable amount of time, energy,

concentration and material, and so I�d appreciate as accurate

metering as possible to eliminate any errors caused by wrong exposure

right at the beginning of the process. I�m learning to shoot

landscape and table-top as my primary subjects. After some research I

narrowed down to about 3 meters ($430-$490) which have spot metering

function:

 

1/ Minolta Spotmeter F (discontinued, but still available)

2/ Minolta Flashmeter VI (current Minolta top model?)

3/ Sekonic Dualmaster L-558 (current model)

 

(I�m leaning towards purchasing brand new unit � have full shelf of

eBay�s semi-functioning lightmeters already, and don�t want any

further surprises; meters which need recalibration, battery

compartment modifications etc.)

 

I�ve been reading all the available threads and searched Google, but

didn�t find any in-depth reviews except of L-558, which was reviewed

in the last issue of View Camera by Ellis Vener (unfortunately for

me, the large portion of the article discusses flash and wireless

features, in which I�m not interested too much for now � still, from

the article I understand that incident and spot features of L-558 are

very suitable for zone system implementation). I want to do careful

subject illumination metering based on evaluation of both incident

and reflected (spot) values; the actual exposure will be based on

metered values and their desired placement on the zone system scale.

I will use meter both indoors and outdoors during shorter hiking. I�m

aware that Spotmeter F is spot-meter & flash only, while two other

models have combined spot, incident & flash features. I checked .PDF

user guide for Spotmeter F, and some info from both Sekonic & Minolta

websites; I also checked the comparison sheet between Flashmeter VI

and L-558 available on Sekonic website, which insists that L-558 is

much better in more then a dozen of comparable features.

 

OK, which meter to get? They all cost almost the same. I�d like as

many features as I can possibly use for my purpose; also durability,

size/weight, weather resistance and logical placement of

controls/ease of use, good manual/user guide would be helpful too.

 

Thanks for help with this decision in advance, and sorry for the

longer post.

 

Dave

After thinking about that again, I'm leaning towards getting maybe a slightly larger backpack, such as Nature Trekker AW II - it is the next size after Mini Trekker, and it seems to offer more space and better carrying comfort (waistbelt) - that should be big enough for most stuff I'd ever want to carry at once for 1-day trip.

 

I have small 35mm SLR pouch/bag by Lowepro already, and it is manufactured and padded very well - that was one of the reasons why I was considering the same brand. I checked eBay too, yes there are good deals. Also, thx for the images!

 

Dave

Thank you guys for your numerous opinions - a few things to consider certainly; currently I'm not planning longer then 1/2 day hikes for now (not during the summer anyway, because temperatures are too high in my area, some 100-120F during the day), so I need as light equipment as possible and donﾒt plan to carry more then absolutely necessary. As long as the backpack fits the minimum of required gear, I should be fine with it. To get the waterproof (AW) bag is probably a good idea though, because I can't eliminate the possibility of sudden storm; they're not frequent down here in the desert, but they could happen in the mountains which are relatively higher elevation (9000ft+).

 

Well I'll think it out - I'll look in a few retail locations as well whether they have something in stock - if not, I'll order online. At least I know that mini trekker series is suitable; I could also buy slightly larger backpack such as mentioned photo trekker or similar, and not pack it full (hope the camera wouldn't wobble inside the half full bag though)...that would give me more options if needed, as long as it wouldn't be too bulky.

 

Thanks!

Dave

Hello all,

 

I very recently bought Shen-Hao 4x5, and after short hike with the

camera and accessories (all carried in the shoulder bag) I realized

that this is not going to work for longer hiking. I need small

backpack which would fit the camera (with 150mm lens folded-in), 5

holders, lightmeter, darkcloth, loupe, 1-2 filters and a few other

small items; ability to attach bottle of water from the outside would

be great. I can carry the tripod in the hand or on the strap over the

shoulder, possibly alternating both options, so it�s no problem, it

doesn�t need to be attached to the bag� I�m not planning to carry

more lenses right now, but wouldn�t mind to be able to fit lens in

Ilex #4 mounted on extra board if necessary. I�d definitely want

padded bag, so that possible smaller impacts wouldn�t hurt anything

inside.

 

I�ve seen some images of Lowepro Mini Trekker with 4x5 field LF

cameras nicely fitting inside, so I though that this model could be

an option. B&H sells �Classic� for around $80, Freestyle seems to

have the same item (maybe newer model according to mfr #) for $120;

Badger sells �AW� (all weather?) model for $110�. Could anyone please

comment on this backpack with regard to Shen-Hao carrying capability?

Are there any other, better options beside Mini Trekker? I don�t have

strict budget, but don�t see the reason to spend too much if basic

model such as Mini Trekker would be sufficient.

 

Thanks for advice in advance.

Dave

Thanks for response, Brian.

 

Unfortunately, I'm in California, and don't have any of these centers nearby where I live - the scanner has to be shipped to repair shop - the closest one to my location is some 100 miles away...

 

I decided just to let the dust alone - even if it would get removed, possibly more dust would get inside sooner or later again. I dust-spot images in software when necessary.

 

Thanks for suggestion though..

Dave

Vincent,

 

I don't know if this could be the possible source of problem, but when I first started to use this scanner (Epson3200Photo) with Epson Scan (Professional mode), I clicked preview button, but in a "thumbnail" mode - on some frames the scanner would report error like there is no film in the scanner. If you click the little arrow on the right of the preview button and select "normal", then there is no problem you just need to select the scanned area manually and all OK..

 

I'm not saying this is the problem, but it took me quite a while to figure this thing out.

 

Good luck.

 

Dave

"I have the 8x10 Legend, and a Shneider 360/6.8 Symmar-S. It's a huge lens! It's a huge camera! 3 feet from the car will be ok! More than that is pure madness! ;-)"

 

:)

 

I scaled down my original intentions, and ordered a used 4x5 Toyo monorail instead... it's not easy to determine the Legend's real size out from the web images only - but got the shipping estimate over a $100, with the same remark from the salesperson: huge..

 

I'll see how the things will work in the terrain with this 4x5 camera first, and then I'll decide on suitable 8x10" in the future.

 

Thx

Dave

Thank you guys all for your valuable input!

 

I still got to make some decisions, but at least I know that the lens selection is correct; the particular camera model may depend on the stock availability - but seems that even the most basic SC would be sufficient for me.

 

I currently have the 3228 wilderness tripod setup (includes 3030 head) which I�m using with MF setup; hoping that I�d be able to use it � so (possibly) lighter SC model would be the right choice. I understand that I may need to get a different head to accommodate for the weight though�.

 

Regards

Dave

Hi all,

 

I'm about to purchase a LF camera and seem to have interesting choice

of 3 possible (used) models:

 

Cambo SC 8x10"

Cambo SCX 8x10"

Cambo Legend 8x10"

 

all are in about equal condition (good to very good) and all include

basic components; Legend costs some $300 more then cheapest SC; SCX

is priced roughly between them.

 

Would there be any serious reason to prefer one model over another?

Is there any quick answer what to get? Or is just personal preference?

I'm new to LF but want to have good setup so don't have future

limitations given by design. I will not need all the features right

now, but is possible I may need them eventually. I'm not planning to

hike with neither of these cameras, but will shoot outdoors often

(will setup nearby vehicle).

 

One more question; I know it depends on the particular case (I need

somehow normal lens, such as 50mm in 35mm photography), and I

narrowed down to 2 possible Rodenstock Sironar N lenses:

 

240mm which covers 350mm image circle

360mm which covers 435mm image circle

 

Should I get the 360mm since 240mm has hardly any coverage margins? I

checked the focal length tables (at this site, by Ed Scott), and

understand that 360mm lens in LF would correspond about 55mm in 35mm-

format photography?

 

Thanks for help.

Dave

Thx Lenord fo additinal info - I'll check some more links befor attempting the cleanup.

 

The option to position the window on the different spot could be a solution - I think I'll do a "blank" scan to see where else is dust located and go from there; this is what the guy in the .pdf instructions suggested.

 

I regret that I didn't inspect the scanner closely after buying it - but I didn't have experience with film scanners before (beyond my old 1200dpi CanoScanD660U which was really poor), and definitely not with 3200dpi resolution which will pick up film grain easily, not to mention dust ...

 

Regards

Dave

Thanks Doug,

 

downloaded the .pdf file and started to read it - looks quite possible to do the job at home, just hope that 2450 and 3200 chassis and connectors are somehow identical.

 

Thanks a lot, this is exactly what I've been looking for.

 

Regards

Dave

Thx for response..

 

yes I have also one huge speck - visible when scanning MF negatives, it's been there since I bought the scanner, but I originally thought it's on film or on top of the glass..

 

I wonder if anyone attempted to open up their 3200 and get under the glass; I'd like to only get this single dust piece out, since at 3200dpi resolution I think there will be always some dust visible - just don't want this big one to stick out, requireing manual cloning of every frame I scan - small dust usually won't bother if resized for web etc.

 

Thx

 

Dave