vinny_walsh

<p>I had some ABS material laying around so I built a couple tanks to the specs I required. Several years later, I'm knee deep in shavings making tanks for large format shooters worldwide. Check them out: http://www.vinnywalsh.com/#!products/c2jd</p>

I just received a bunch in the mail. 100asa. Google is your friend.

<p>I hope you can make it Tim. I know jet fuel prices are on the rise so I understand if you don't. I wouldn't hold out for the cheese n crackers though, more along the lines of Italian food and wine. </p>

<p>Larry, click on the item and you'll see it's out of stock. expected april 30th.<br>

Fuji has been terrible with shipments and announcements the last couple years.</p>

<p>nat geo sells their images as prints online, dirt cheap for the real thing, not stolen. also, it's not a large format image as this forum pertains to.</p>

<p>As allen said, quality is highly subjective. My Pentax 67II negs hold up to my standards to an 11x14 enlargment, typically. I also shoot 4x5 and 8x10 mostly so i'm kinda obsessed with details in my prints. There are folks that print 24x30's from that camera all the time and are happy with the results. The pentax is loud, the shutter vibrates a lot, and I wouldn't recommend it for off-tripod shooting. The lenses are great though, some better than others. <br>

The bronica gs-1 would be a better choice as it uses leaf shutter lenses but they are harder to come by. Cheap though and you can swap backs on the camera.</p>

<p>Hi everyone,<br /> I'd like to invite you to a group show featuring my work and the work of several friends here in Southern California. Join us for food, wine, and photography at the Elias Gallery in Whittier during the opening <a href="http://vinnywalsh.com/elias%20poster.htm" target="_blank">reception</a> on May 8th from 6:30-9pm. The work is up now and the show will continue through the month of May. My prints in the show are on sale.<br /> <br /> I hope to see you there.<br /> <br /> Vinny</p>

<p>no and no. pack film vs. individual sheet film.</p>

<p>as your first responder said, it can't be done. No just kidding. I've done it with my field camera and reducing back on a 120mm nikkor macro lens @ f16 or f22 I think. The only example I have online is in the new work section of my website. That was done with a 75 watt mr 16 light bulb and about 800mm of extension on 4x5 slide film. He was sedated and moved a bit during the 30 sec exposure. I use strobes now for macro stuff. You don't get much working distance at these magnifications so not much room to place lights. Instant film is very helpful.</p>

<p>I get those same questions as most of us shooting film do. I have no interest in changing the way I make photographs. There's not substitute for composing an image on a large ground glass. All the gear I have works fine with film and paper. Everyone else's need for the "easier" and "cheaper" route has changed and will continue to change product availability for those of us who aren't looking for the latest and greatest high resolution whatever. Color film will be the first to go unavailable and that stinks! I'm in the process of doing a "special order" for c41 chemicals here in los angeles. Why? Because no one uses the stuff anymore. I don't care what type of gear everyone else is using but I don't like being forced to change my ways.</p>

<p>They do have a nice catalog, that's probably why that tripod of theirs costs what it does!</p>

<p>apples to oranges, not very scientific without the proper equipment and settings.</p>

<p>It's quite big an cumbersome compared to an slr for everyday capture. I know there's one high payed fashion photographer using it but I can't remember his name. Other than high speed recording, I don't see the point. </p>

<p>I'm in the same boat. I recently paid $35 for a and I to do a roll of 36 exp. I didn't notice til halfway home that the borders were crooked, all of them.<br>

A week later I did the walgreens thing. They mixed up my order and gave me the wrong prints so I had to come back later. They still had it mixed up. The prints are pretty bad, I'm use to seeing good quality opticals. The scans are okay. A couple exterior shots came out very very blue which leads me to believe no one was watching the machine. I have asked them to "not correct" in the past and they did it nicely. The less you ask them to do........</p>

<p>Nope. that's it. The holders were about $100 less last year but as demand went up so did the price. I've got two. there's a smaller pack film that fits in fuji's other holderr the pa-145 or the older polaroid 4x5 but neither are full frame, 3.24x4.25 instead. I use this as well because it's less than 1/3 the cost. </p>

<p>omg!</p>

<p>Hopefully you get it before they announce a better model with more pixels!</p>

<p>processes film of all kinds.<br>

yup, if it works.</p>

<p>both great films, I prefer and shoot velvia when I can since I like the saturation better. Provia performs better on sunny days and when it's windy.</p>

<p>"Most" folks I know of who own any type of digital gear (scanner, camera, printer) these days don't have a problem dropping $800 for ink refills, or $3k on the newest D whatever. I realize that there's a big price difference but my 3200 wasn't $200 when I got it (when it was toted as the best thing epson had made so far). I reason most folks shoot MF film or LF film is for the image quality, right? Why sell yourself short?</p>

<p>"archival" is what many using inkjets throw on the description of their prints to keep the public from asking "how long will these last". Look up the Wilhelm testing site to see if your ink has been tested, there's lots of examples there.</p>

<p>"If you don't plan much more than 16" square from 6x6 you should be more than happy . That scanner should readily beat a good enlarger lens in terms of detail from MF at that sort of size (the older 3200 does)."<br /> whoa! I own an epson 3200, screen drum scanner, and a 90mm apo enlarging lens and the 3200 doesn't cut it, and I'm not talking just about resolution. The factory film holder is also as useless as tits on a frog. I also own the betterscanning 120 film holder w/o glass. That was the worst purchase I've ever made. Try getting a 6x6 curly piece of film to lay flat in that thing. I can't speak for the glass version but the clips look the same. <br /> The 4490 may be a better machine than the older ones but the results I've seen from a nikon were outstanding.</p>

<p>I've been a customer there for about 8 years. I just paid $35 for a 36exp roll of b+w for processing and double prints! The borders are crooked as hell. This was personal work. They've done great work on the weddings I've shot as well. If this was the drug store I could see that happening but at these prices this is unbelievable. This summer they gave me a contact sheet printed backwards. While they do great e-6 work, I won't be using them for anything but that in the future. </p>

<p>michael, provia in quickloads may be gone where you are but it's available here in the states. Try badger graphic.</p>

<p>I recently looked into doing the same with my sx-70 that I've been using 600 film in. Here's a link http://www.chemie.unibas.ch/~holder/flashbar.html I found on the subject. I've contacted the guy he hasn't responded. There are additional articles and I did see a photo of something similar to what you're doing but I can't find the link. I think your camera may stop all the way down as the sx-70 does when flash is used, not sure. Keep me posted if you figure something out. </p>