john fleshin

<P>Got results with some Ilford satin paper, but ultimately found some surplus film made for the Air Force, was ortho, so it had similar results, but you had a negative more easily printed.</P>

<P> </P>

<P>As I recall paper negatives were much more common at one time. </P>

<P> </P>

<P>John</P>

Bought mine at SkodaFoto in Prague, but I hear all kinds of adapters are being made in Former Eastern Europe and

of course China.

J

With current prices, you can buy several.

Saw a Bronica 645 with prism, two backs and three lenses change hands for $300 a week ago. If something like

that falls in to your lap, you have to think about it.

I think there is room to use and sell if you do not like it. ;-)

Mamiya TLR's were reasonable at the show as well, but not "reasonable" as the Bronica, which was a crazy price,

but not all that unusual. Guess that is why they call it a panic? Nikon F5 in mint, sitting at $300.

Whole Mamiya 645 systems are similar in price, and am waiting for a Hassy for a friend, under $500, my friend

missed one for me for $350. The parts are often more expensive than a complete camera.

I was at a big camera store in central Ohio, and someone came in with his dad's Hassy system in a nice bag, they

would not even look at it, a friend bought it, I think two bodies, couple lenses, couple backs, prism, -- $500.

If I am carrying a camera around and want MF, I reach for my Fuji's, I just cannot handle a lot of gear unless I am

driving, the airlines just reduced carry on size by six inches.

Have done the Kiev thing, got killed with the shipping and re-shipping for repair, finally carried it to guys who sent it

back to Ukraine for a new shutter, and then sold it to someone very happy to get a system that had a lot of frequent

flyer miles on it. Same with Pentacon, great ideas, but not reliable in any sense. I use my old P6 and Kiev glass on

Mamiya bodies, when I use them.

Our (folks who bought MF when the price was L) loss is your gain for sure, jump in now, be a little patient, haunt the

camera shows, or pay a little more and ask your shop to keep an eye out for a good trade in.

Have some fun, ;-)

Regards, John

Renner is still at it, just do a search, lots of links to pinhole matters.

I think it is Pinhole Resource?

regards, John

MM

Had to download a new plug in from Adobe to get CS to read M8 raw files, or convert them via software included with

M8, which was Capture One, and not fast, nor easy. As I recall, Adobe has instructions for installing it, if needed,

and there are several versions of Raw plug in, I just took the most recent. Probably not a bad idea to get the latest

and greatest free downloads until PS upgrade time arrives.

I understand if you are shooting raw, and converting to tiff, you want to make sure it is 16 bit, I think Leica files may

come up looking 8 bit, but are supposed to be 16 bit. I also understand, as probably everyone else here does, that

there is much more advantage to 16 bit.

Hopefully some of this applies to the OP, Leica uses DNG raw, but the plug in download from Adobe lists a lot of

cameras. Am hardly a digital expert, FWIW.

Regards, John

When I shot weddings on film, proofs in books were generally a one week thing, and that was when I collected the balance of the package price.

If you wait a month, they may not be married any more.

I have a friend who modeled for me and has been going to photo school in Seattle, I have set her up with her film

gear, and she seriously uses it, am always on the lookout to complete her kit, I know she does more with it than I

would.

I have also donated to the local schools, unless the photo instructor is really only a computer instructor, they often

begin in film photography. I have had several enlargers either offered to me or just given to me and I have passed

them along.

Yesterday at a camera show, I saw a guy sell his Bronica with three lenses, prism and two backs for $300. An F5

was offered at about the same price.

A guy had a bag of Nikon and Canon film bodies, fairly recent stuff, no buyers.

The market is flooded right now with film gear, so except with few exceptions, selling is not much of an option.

If it has Leica or Rolleiflex on it, you can sell it. Well, the IIIf's were going a little light, and by going I mean offered,

condition 9, serviced, reasonable, and sitting there. People were generally selling, not buying.

Other than recouping your investment, you have options.

I can probably get you an address in Seattle and you have your local schools.

I have had some pretty good return on students who have gone on to do some good work often much better than

money.

Regards, J

Jorge, thanks a whole bunch, now I have to go out and buy another pocket digital.

I think I will just add it to your tab-- or add a bottle of single malt, after which I will think my shots are much better.

Nice shot, you are going to have to make some prints for me, have you made some A4's yet from this file?

And, are you telling me your machinist does not have time away from making diving gear?

And Sorry, I know when folks here see my name in connection with you, your reputation suffers, just tell them I am the poor relation who shows up for the odd free meal. ;-)

You should post the Capa link, BTW, as I am not mentioned at all. ;-)

Will talk to your secretary soon.

J

Couple of suggestions, obviously pop any flash before you trip the shutter, so you can see what is reflecting.

If it is important to have everything square, either take it that way, or use photoshop to correct perspective.

Take a few shots of people under this lighting, or something you will know the color, or do a white balance, well, do

all of the above.

If it is really granite, it should be close to 18% gray, but in sales, they may call anything granite today, or even

marble, so expose accordingly. Granite is often pretty boring, so, FWIW, if it has banding, it is probably Gneiss so

you may wish to bring this out in post, -- the stone will look different under various kinds of lighting, I would try to

figure exactly what they are trying to accomplish. Look at the brochures, there are probably plenty of samples of

photographs of the goods, ask if they are expecting you to duplicate that kind of work.

They will probably also have some small sample squares cut, you can snag some and use them to adjust your

prints.

Most shops in which I have shot slabs had sky lights, but you are coming early?

Try to get them to throw in a nice counter for your office, there are often some very nice smaller pieces left from

cutting someone's kitchen, and they normally lie about until someone knocks them over. Real expenses are in the

finishing of the edges ;-)

J

I arrived just on time to a well known Czech photographer's daughter's wedding, which was on the largest square in

Europe, I mean very large in at least ten minutes to cross, half a dozen tram stops and one metro station, and I had

to find the correct building as the Taxi driver did not speak much English, or did not know where the town hall was.

I was invited as I knew a friend of the family and I was living in his studio that summer in Prague, in fact, my rent was

paying for the honeymoon.

As a favor, I brought my Fuji RF and a roll of HP5, and while walking in to the building, I saw the bride and groom in

an archway near the entrance, illumated beautifully by streaming light, so I shot a few frames. Great stuff, arches in

the distance, I mean, portfolio shot, hang on the wall image.

That was when I realized that there were weddings just about every half hour (the law says you basically have to have

a civil union and they are set up like clockwork on any given Saturday), and this was not the right bride. Clue was

there was another bride coming out of the building.

Someone had to be the right one and it follows someone had to be the wrong one, and neither might be the one I

was looking for, which turned out to be the case.

I finally realized where the wedding was being held, ran upstairs, rushed in, cut in front of the bridal party just starting

to enter from the doorway, walked quickly down the aisle with the music playing in front of the bride and her father,

turned to grab a good full length shot of the bride and father, and sat next to my friends. Bit of laughter, got a few

more shots, and some nice portraits afterwards, guy was one of the best known photographers in the country, and

did not have a pro photograher. I souped the film in his studio, had a couple of nice A4 size prints made, and gave

them to my friend to pass them to the family.

I always felt badly that I did not have time to find the bride and groom I had shot in the outside arch to give them a

print.

Probably the closest I am going to come to getting married myself.

Am pretty sure people will remember me from this wedding.

Not really from 2008, but not likely to occur again. J

Nice show Joe, impressive, you are the one I will keep in mind in figuring out these things. ;-) Do you do eclipses?

Have you published this type of valuable information? I messed up a few Moon shots until I realized it was always a

sunny day on the moon when you see it, however the albedo is low so I have no idea why the sunny 16 rule works,

or does it become the Sunny 11 rule?

One thing, I was in Cleethorpes near the winter solstice, and as I recall the sun at noon hardly cleared the neighbor's

one story house, at noon. ;-)

Which might be good, low sun is generally more interesting, and you do not have to get up so early to catch sunrise,

is it about 11? ;-)

My pal in Cleethorpes, with a terrific name, John, is taking a digital course for help with his D60, and has purchased

several books. He tells me he likes the "D60 for Dummies", I knew I should have copyrighted that phrase when I was

teaching in the public school, well the administration fit the requisite description.

Good stuff, and good luck to the OP, sounds as if you are going to have fun, will there be a Solstice celebration there

with all sorts of people running about in various states of dress celebrating the return of the sun?

And yes, I missed the Moon over Half Dome one January, by one day, nice group on the bridge chatting and

freezing.

As to the people worrying the cost of a photo, what is the value of a good one? Starting to sound like a Mastercard

advert?

If you really want to save money, cruise the gallery here, and "download" the low res files to look at on your

computer and sell all your kit. A Google search should even give you a few shots. (Just kidding of course, am sure

everyone here are good pals, ;-) )

I do not know if you can fit the old 500 Mirror lenses in F mount, but I have some nice shots for those times you need

that size bore. I had the Nikkor and found the second brands caught up in quality and sold it, kept the Tamron that

came with a bag of "junque" some one wanted to dispose with me at a camera show. I think it has an adaptall

mount, which may be a bit of a dinosaur now, but I got a few good shots with it, so I guess those shots were

expensive. ;-) I would recommend anyone finding one at a low cost to have it, it also keeps the door open, and when

you need it, you need it. Would be terrific if the adaptall concept bled over to digital, I have a feeling I may have

heard the D60 might not take all the old mounts?

Regards, John

Rui, Jorge can tell you the real reason Ford sold the T,---- the parts business, he could give away the car and just

sell the parts, people are still buying them.

And, Jorge, you and I want a nice size lens, with possibly the capacity for a bit of single malt, I can see it on your

desk, about an f1.2 about 200 ml?

A bit more seriously, it is a niche market, and they have a kind of dynamic balance, the nature of the patent for the

G2/G1 Contax could be a strength.

There are plenty of folks with some lenses to draw in market for such a body in digital, and the possibility exists of

selling more lenses in various developments, would be a plus, as Ford might have made more from the parts on a

Model T than the car.

The car people could have made many of the cars accept the same wheels, mufflers,and mechanical parts in

general, but surprise, they did not.

A little different is good for business, and check the evolution of lens mounts, I have a couple Mamiya 35mm lenses

if any one is interested?.

The Contax has a name and a following-- some people are converting the best glass to M mount, in the US and in

Japan, not cheap.

Jorge, can you get your machinist on this?

OTOH, If there was an RD2 with an upgraded chip and any kind of reasonable price, I think many of us would give it a

hard look in the $2K park. Six MP is OK, and I would love an RD1 with a 28mm in the trunk at all times, but I get

more comfortable with Ten and up for the 11x14 size to fit on Jorge's walls.

And, as in the "day" there are some fixed lens that may succor us through the years we are waiting for "our" camera

to emerge, it is one choice and many fixed lens RF film cameras have cult followings. I personally like the Fuji MF

RF's. Does not Canon have a few that you would not feel unarmed with if it was the camera in hand at an interesting

event? Could interchangable good glass be somehow fitted to one of these?

If someone does make an upgraded M Digital at a reasonable price, and has a stable of lenses, I am reasonably

sure they will sell their glass not only to their clents for their bodies, but to other M fanatics.

(Fanatics in a nice way of course, but cult, and a degree of lack of rationality seem to fit in with my use of a 135mm

Hektor and Summarit this weekend, and there is nothing wrong with using some of this "junque" for fun, well not too

wrong) Leica has always been complex, and perhaps a church to be worshipped at for amateurs?

Contax, "should" attract and reconnect with their "orphaned" customers, and the rising tide would raise the used and

newly created market for the Zeiss glass for them. Contax might have to raise itself from the grave as well, but I am

hoping for classic films and photo paper to do the same, so why not?

It is all speculation and a gamble, I make suggestions, but do not pretend to be able to dial up a company and ask

them to divert their efforts from making yet another wonder P&S for the popular market, but it is pleasant to think

about. Hope springs eternal. From our lips to perhaps Mr. K's ears?

Finally, for those who made it this far, both in the thread and my post, (anyone still counting words?) is there not

news of someone with an new interchangable lens digital RF from Photokina? Is this a serious camera?

Personally, my favorite post in this thread is something I have dreamed of, the digital roll of film I could put in the IIIf

on Jorge's desk?

Jorge, we both need a personal lab assistant who can quickly process our prints, maybe HCB was really ahead of

his time? I will come down and help in the interview process, ;-)

Finally, the digital Nikon RF will of course use my S2 lenses, with the supplied adapter to LTM. ;-)

Hopefully, as this stuff seems to last forever in Cyber heaven, we can look back at this post in Ten years, when the

large cheap sensors are common, and see how close we came in theory. I have a good 50's article on those flying

cars we should be getting any day now.

Regards, and Jorge, I expect the usual payment in November, John

Steve, I have a 90mm Angulon lens on a Graflex board, have been thinking the same thing. ;-)

Would like to have a 6x12cm back, but probably cheaper to just cut it from a 4x5 sheet, or I have some old friends who tell me they used to cut a slide to shoot the top then the bottom half.

J

Nathan, perhaps (and I am passing on the obvious joke here) the balls lose their grip?

It would not be a bad idea to put a stainless steel hook in the middle of plastic reels to allow center out loading as in the old fr tanks.

Seemed to work more easily than stainless with less possibility of film spirals touching.

Regards, John

If you have some time on your hands, and enough interest, and hopefully some expired film, you might fix enough of each film in a given amount of a divided batch of fixing bath to the point of exhaustion.

The first one to exhaust a given volume of fix should be the highest?

Hypo check might be sufficient to measure exhaustion, or some sort of titration. I suspect it changes the silver to an insoluable compound, which is what you are seeing when it tests bad.

I suppose if you have a few rolls of new pennies, you can see how many you can plate with silver in the used baths, and determine a "new penny" scale to rate the films.

Only a bit tongue in cheek, I suspect a serious chemist could state a better method for how much silver is going in to a given volume of fix.

When it comes to B&W paper, it was common to comment on a "high" silver paper as capable of producing a higher quality image, and a "blacker black".

And yes, I miss the great papers of Ansco, Dupont and more recently, Neobrom, Orwo and the old Zone VI.

Now, to digress further, when playing Trivial Pursuit in French in Morrocco, the question was, "Which US Company maintains the highest quantity of Silver, second only to the US Mint" -- we won a drink. I remember seeing the bars at the silver storage facility at Kodak in one of their publicity photos in a Kodak data book.

When silver spiked the last time, film prices went up, and as I recalled, stayed up.

It is my understanding C 41 films return all the silver to the processing solutions, so when Kodak was processing more film, they got it back.

X Ray films were said to have very high silver content to enable minimal exposure to X Rays.

Now, can we get back to whether digital X Rays are as good as silver halide? ;-)

Regards, John

I have some SM body caps, drilled with a pinhole fitted, now I have to find a LTM - M adapter, think I have a few, the results look better than what I got on film, so will try out the pinholes I have for sure.

Thanks for the post. John

Any uneven feelings in advance in an M Leica, and it should be CLA'd, if it feels at all sticky, or jerky in the advance, -

- you run the risk of shreading the curtains, and dry surfaces will wear.

Like a watch, cameras that sit dry out, and lubes today are superior to many of the 50 year old greases. An expert

will also clean and adjust the RF, possibly replace the half silvered mirror, clean, time the shutter, and relube for a

reasonable fee.

Shutter curtains are best to be replaced if necessary at the same time.

Ask some dealers, they might get you a dealer price at one of the major repair stations. Larger dealers will send out

a dozen a week for service. They can clean up the lenses as well for a small additional fee.

Value of the camera will be improved as well, and any reputable repairman will stand behind their work, so any

problem should be covered for at least a year.

Regards, John

The accordian bottles are even worse than mentioned above, the pleats increase the surface area of the plastic, which I understand are low density enough to breathe.

As mentioned before, and I used to sell bottles and caps, most of the caps, including the most expensive, leak air. Whatever air left in the bottle is only 20% or so oxygen, the nitrogen seems to be relatively inert, and if you use Saran Wrap under the cap, you get a rather good seal, so once the small amount of oxygen in the bottle reacts, there should be no new oxygen unless the cap leaks, or the bottle breathes.

If you are still having problems, you can try the heavy inert gases sold to "float" on the surface of wines when introduced in to the bottle, you might set up a system with a nitrogen bottle and get D76 on tap.

;-)

Anything else you probably can deduce from the posts here.

When young and contact printing, I bought a 2 1/2" x 3 1/2" which used 620. The image size would be close to 6x9 cm.

For what ever reason, I suspect it was an attempt to co-op the 120 film trade, Kodak made the dimensionally equivalent film 620 and made Kodak cameras to accept 620 film, I do not buy the idea that the smaller spool made for a more compact camera. Kodak made a lot of 620 cameras and sold a lot of 620 film. I have several early 20th century Box Kodak cameras that take 120 film.

I recall 119, and the autographic films, and I printed old family negatives which were very large, perhaps 616 size from large folding cameras?

As I recall, during my youth, 135 was considered Miniature film, and everything else was roll film, or sheet or plate film. People would still refer to sheet film as shooting plates, the holders were often converted from glass plate holders. Some cameras today, such as 5x7, will accept a plate size, metric film- 13x18cm, or 5x7 inch film or plates depending on the holder you put in to them.

I am guessing most film sold when I was a kid was roll film, probably 127 and 620, in the US, along with No. 5 or 25 flash bulbs, which were the same size, and Verichrome or Kodacolor, unless you had a "slide camera". People asked if your camera would shoot slides-- meaning 35mm.

Press cameras were Graflexes, and Leicas were fairly exotic and expensive, SLR's and were just developing, but were expensive by community standards. I may have seen one SLR, my Pentax H1a, by the time I was finishing High School, and the school had 4000 students.

People thought Hasselblads were Swedish Cars, at that price they had to be. I probably had the only Rolleiflex in the school. There were a few "slide" cameras, Argus, and Kodak Signets. I worked at a Camera store, and watched the shift to SLR's with the Pentaxes, and for the rich, Nikons and Leicas.

I know also from some old cameras with stickers recommending you use their film, that there were other number designations for roll films from other suppliers.

In more modern times, with more serious roll film cameras and international markets, 120 film was used for many formats, and these format cameras were essentially not made in the US, so certainly there was little reason to use both inches and cm in their common description.

As far as the actual dimensions of the image size, relative to film size, what we say is a 6x6, or 2 1/4" square as an example, -- I am not too sure of the precise size, but as long as it fits the camera and the film holders, it is convenient designation.

When I got my Rollei in the 60's, everyone here called it a 2 1/4 square, but with all the formats derrived in Europe and Japan from the same film, eventually everyone started using metric sizes to describe them.

As to the OP question, I do not recall when people just started calling anything from 120 - Medium Format, I hear younger people calling it Large Format as I am guessing 99.9 % of film today is probably going to be 35mm or 120.

220 being much later was clearly derrived from 120. I was very happy to have 24 exposures to shoot a wedding, first I shot was with 4x5, and I had to go home to change film, and I changed a few 120 rolls on the move with the Rollei. I looked at my M8 with a 16gb card, and it is still reading 999. ;-)

I, for one, would read a book about the history of film size names, am not sure millions of others would ;-). I expect to find only limited logic in any of the names. Time may be running out to find their origins.

I suspect Medium Format as a term will be defined in terms of its current usage. Is 6x17 Large Format?

Sorry, guess this is a "large format" post to actually what to me is an interesting topic.

Regards, John

As I recall, Paterson began with some sort of transparent plastic reels (first ones I found in the Major series in the 60's), then made the newer reels out of what appeared to me to be nylon, and the last ones I bought seemed to be much thinner white plastic, some of which I managed to break. Never broke one of the "nylon" reels.

This factors in more variables, but I agree, really clean your reels, and after 20 years, if you have problems, swap them out for what ever you prefer, I think most of the reels made in the past 35 years interchange OK, and as the early tanks were prone to develop cracks in the bottom along the lines of the internal fins, I would not hold on to those if any problems arise. Paterson did replace those for a period of time, but do not think that program is still going. ;-)

I am curious though, have you tried loading them with a scrap roll of undeveloped film with the lights on and checking for any visible problems?

I have the occasional problem with a particular reel, and always try to have a few spares on the counter ready to go if I have a difficult one in hand. Getting too physical, especially with MF films, is asking for cupping marks and other physical damage.

Regards, John

Gordon, Adams first had a set of six, then the update was a series of three, all are worth while as you mention,

though I thought they required a second or third reading for me. ;-)

There was a show here in Cleveland last year, and indeed, after looking at photos on a screen, or a book, it shows

what a great print can look like.

Both Minor White and Ansel Adams had a Cleveland connection, I think AA was more connected with the Institute of

Music, and Minor with the Museum and Western Reserve University, (now CWRU). I know Adams gave a rather

large print to the CIM.

Always good to take in a good show.

John

John, I know someone in Mexico who broke his Nikon F on someone's head who was part of a group trying to mug him, and he did not hang around to find out how the guy made out, but I am thinking, now well.

Someone got my wallet on the metro in Prague. I had a pretty good idea it was the guy shoving me, so I snapped his photo (not recommended in more violent cultures), chased the guy down and he was with a group of four others, who sold me my wallet back for $20. I was prepared to get a bunch of prints made and plaster the metro stations with them the following day.

I had a Domke bag full of equipment, I started using smaller formats and leaving my wallet in the apartment, and also to avoid certain crowded metro stations, like Museum, and Mustik.

I should not have tried to carry stuff on a crowded metro. Live and learn. They like cell phones as well.

John