gabriel_benaim

<p>Quan:<br>

The only person I can think of is Jorg Colberg who writes the blog Conscientious. Other than that, I'm not sure who else may do e-reviews. If you get the chance, even locally, I'd definitely try to do a live review, as there's a lot that can get lost/misinterpreted online.<br>

GB</p>

<p>Hi everyone,<br>

I just recently got back from my first portfolio review at the Rencontres d'Arles festival, and wrote up my thoughts and suggestions for other photographers interested in such things. Here's the [url=<a href="http://gabrielbenaim.blogspot.com/]link[/url">http://gabrielbenaim.blogspot.com/"]link[/url</a>]. Let me know what you think, and send me any questions you may have about the whole process. It was definitely a worthwhile experience for me, one I'd recommend if you're interested in promoting your work.<br>

GB</p>

<p>Ron, you can see them larger simply by clicking on them or on the +enlarge button next to each photo. Let's see if that makes the road photos any more interesting.</p>

Hi all,<br /><br />Just wanted to let you know my new site is up and running, and I'd love to hear what folks here have to say about it, both its content and form. All of the work up now is 8x10 contact prints, either on Azo or Lodima. The address is:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.gabrielbenaim.visualserver.com/" target="_blank">http://www.gabrielbenaim.visualserver.com/</a><br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />GB

<!-- / message -->

In addition to detail, what you get, and remains through enlarging, is TONE, looads of it. Even Sheldon's small image shows this, even on a monitor. This is reason enough to move up from MF.

Hi all,

 

Finally got the De Vere home in one piece, and have started trying it out. It

sure feels well built, and the low focusing knobs are a great design feature.

I've been using a condensor enlarger so far for my 6x6 and 35mm work, and some

of the flatter negs which I print at G4 on it can't barely get enough contrast

at full magenta filtration on the DV dichro head. I tested it w the ilford

filters too, soo it seems to be a diffusion effect. Now, I know about the

contrast difference between cond and diff sources, and have just re-read the

relevant section in Ctein's book, but am still a bit surprised at how little

contrast I'm getting at full strength. I still have to reprint my important

6x6 work to see how it looks, and before I remodel my very small darkroom to

fit the DV and remove my Durst condenser, so I'm curious if this is something

you just live with using a diffuser head, and from now on just aim for

contrastier negs, or whether there's a way to squeeze more contrast out of thhe

diffuser and therefore not have to keep the condenser around. Anyway, learning

all the time, glad to get some experienced input,

 

GB

I talked to the guy and it has the 32x42in baseboard, which is quite cramped for me. Am I right in thinking that I can use a smaller board?

Steve,

 

What's the size of the baseboard and legs, i.e. what's the enlargers footprint horizontally, and do you know if the floor version can be turned into a bench enlarge by simply removing the base? Thanks.

Hi All,

 

Well, I found a local college geting rid of their darkroom, and they have a

free standing De Vere 4x5 enlarger. I may not get a chance to see it before I

pick it up, and was hoping someone here can tell me what its dimensions are (to

see how big a car I need) and how to best take it apart. Thanks a lot,

 

GB

It's not light leaks, and the hangers are stainless, tanks plastic. It might be that some of my hangers are Carr, nt Kodak, and have much less holes in them, so I'll try it w just the kodak hangers.

If rodinal were the culprit, why would it only show up on some of the sheets and not all?

Hello,

 

As some of you might remember, I'm in search of a method for deving 4x5 that

works consistently and can be done w DBI. So I'm trying tanks and hangers, and

keep getting one or two sheets in every batch with higher density along the

sides, in the shape of the hanger rails, very straight lines. In one case, I

got a denser bottom rail. I've been using Rodinal at 1:50 and 1:100 w pre-

soaking and agitation for 15 secs once a minute. I'm guessing the problem is w

the agitation. So far, I've followed Bruce Barnbaum's instructions in is book,

of lifting out of the tank, tilting to one side without stopping at the end,

neither slowly nor fast.

If any of you have dealt w this problem successfully, tell me what worked for

you. Thanks, and at least I'm not getting scratches in the middle of every

shot as I was w shuffling!

 

GB

Hello,

 

I live overseas, and recently had a friend in the states send me some sheet

film. He sent it by ship, so it'll take 4-6 weeks, and it'll probably be

exposed to a lot of heat. So, I was curious just how much I should worry

about this? Will the film definitely be fogged on arrival, or will it just

have a shorter life span? Isn't most film shipped by sea nowadays? Thanks,

 

gB

Brian,

 

I did the tests without a camera, just put some paper in them and put them outside for an hour. The fogging pattern looks like a triangle with iits base parallel to the flap, in some cases one triangle on each side (no scanner, sorry).I'm thinking of just getting some newer ones and not bothering to fix these, as there doesn't seem to be an accepted fix and diagnostic. Thanks for your help though.

On the longer end, be aware that the lenses and shutters are big and heavy, almost as heavy as the camera itself in your case. They'll fit the lensboard, but may be unwieldy, and definitely heaavy for carrying around.

Hello All,

 

Having gotten a bunch of holders w my camera, I tested them for light leaks w

paper and most of the wooden ones leak from the loading flap side, none from

the darkslide side. One has torn tape holding the flap, but the others have

intact tape. What's the best way to fix these leaks? Do they usually have to do

w wood that doesn't fit together right after all these years, or is it usually

tape-related? All help appreciated,

 

GB

Sorry to piggyback, but I was wondering the same re a gowland all moves. How small are the gowland pocket view's lensboards? Can you fit a copal 3? Thanks.

You definitely need a permit to use a tripod, but from what I understood while in Palenque (very much worth a visit), it can be gotten in a few days. Mexico City is definitely more dangerous than the countryside, so watch your back. Always try to have someone call a cab for you or use one of the taxi stands so there's a record of which cab you get on. This way there's a greater deterrent to foul play. Cops, especially feds, are known for their criminal activity throughout Mexico. Nevertheless, I wouldn't hesitate going back there in a second, especially the southern states of Oaxaca and Chiapas. The whole area around Palenque is filled w natural water attractions, and San Cristobal is lovely. There's a small Indian town near SC called San Juan de something or other which is well worth the visit, if only to see their church, in which they still practice daily a syncretic christianity out of a text book (people know about it from their use of Coke bottles in their rituals). Definitely take a smaller format camera. I travelled w a rollei, and a small 35mm p&s. Have a great time.

I usually carry my mf gear in a small market cart, and walk around parks and rivers wheeling the stuff around. In the desert I've worked out of my car, but in jungle areas I've had to carry the gear on my back. I'd like to keep it light if possible, which is why the Gowland is attractive. If it's too fussy to use movements on, however, I would reconsider.

Hello,

 

I'm debating which of the two to get as my first 4x5 field camera,

and wanted to get some experienced input. The Sinar is 3.5 times

heavier but more solid and easier to use movements on. The Gowland

doesn't need a bag bellows for short lenses, and can be extended for

using longer ones I think. I don't know how much I'll use the

precision movements the sinar offers for landscape work, and I don't

really intend to do architecture or table-top stuff. Is the lack of

positive detents a real pain on the Gowland? How do most people

zero them in the field? Another consideration is the Gowland comes w

a 90m/6.8 rodenstock for $325 total, but the lens has some fungus.

I figure it's almost the price the camera alone would fetch. Oh, I

also already own a couple of lenses, a 150 caltar and a 240 sironar

5.6. I was wondering whether the 240 is too heavy to use on a

camera as light as the gowland. Thanks in advance,

GB

It may just be that I don't like the look oftmy in 35mm, or that I don't yet know how to make it work. The main problem I've had is a kind of flatness especially in the midtones (skin tones) which I haven't had w other films, like tx and np. There also seems to be great variability in how it looks depending on the type of light, much more so than other films.

Hi, all

 

I recently bought some long bulk rolls of TMY out of date, and have

been deving it in HC110 w mixed results. I've used it in 120 w

better results, so am curious how people who use this film dev it.

I expose it at 250, btw. TIA.

Take a look at Boulat's Hamas piece at www.viiphoto.com for an example of the look I'm talking about.

Just wanted to give an example of the look I'm going for. Checkout Boulat's piece on Hamas in the VII website www.viiphoto.com

Ellis,

 

Thanks for the link, that's the style I'm interested in copying. I really like compositions w several points of interest w that wide look. I'd seen Nachtwey using a wa zoom in the movie about him, but was unaware that it was standard issue PJ gear.

So, what is it about an slr wa zoom, as opposed to a rf wa prime, that lends itself better to that kind of work? Is it the precise framing, the close-up focus, the ability to change fov quickly, all of the above?

If I want to do that kind of work, would you reccomend I switch my gear?

Putting size and weight aside (yeah right!) what else makes you leave the zoom behind? I'm mostly interested in how people see differently using different setups. I know I do, and don't own a wa zoom, so was curious about others' experience. Thanks again.