kw
-
Posts
102 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by kw
-
-
Got to try out the new lens along with some other suggested fixes. Incorporated into this shot:
1) New Canon 35-105 3.5 lens
2) Time of day was ~6:30pm instead of 11am
3) Concentrated on better framing/composition
Hope these are reflected in the image quality. Thanks again for your suggestions, they're a motivator!
-
Excellent suggestions, all of you. The negative is physically fine; the film scanner itself has some issues. The vertical lines aren't my concern at all but thanks for addressing them; any advice can be good advice!
The exposure was @f5.6. Your ideas of possible filter issues and/or fungus on the lens was an inspiration to take the lens, my negatives, and a print (how embarassing!) into Cord Camera in Columbus, OH and let them take a look at it. The expert held the lens, then immediately laughed and worked the lens against itself with his hands so I could see. It jiggled. Also jiggling was the lens mount on the camera. He informed me that this was a cheap lens (low end Vivitar) and it was damaged and really should be replaced.
I bought a really spiffy 35-105 3.5 Canon which the guy seemed really proud of. It has a nice rosey glow to it, really crisp and features a nice smooth action. We'll have to see what it turns out like! As for the sky issue, he said that I should avoid shooting at 11am, it's really an unflattering time of day to do landscape work. He said early morning, late evening, etc. Very cool, thank you for your help!
-
>1)Can't say. Looks like what you might get with a polarizing filter >attached to a wide angle lens. Shoot without the filter.
The filter is SUCH a meager filter. It barely gives the slightest hint of a reddish yellow at an angle. Front on, it's practically transparent and I can't imagine it having this profound of an effect.
>2)Looks like there is a piece of hair or lint at the film plane, in >front of the film.
Doh! I've looked inside the lens mount and I did see a couple of hairs in there. For some reason I figured on a larger influence on or past the lens, not before it ;)
3)What are you scanning your negatives with? Scanning 35mm film with a flatbed scanner doesn't produce the best sharpness. Could be your lens &/or filter. Take the filter off. Do you use a tripod?
The scanner is an HP Photosmart, but it's pretty unimportant. My goal is to get good prints on my Bessler, not a scanned film. My prints are actually lacking the sharpness I seek, while the edges of the print appear pretty nice, suggesting no problem with the enlarger, I would guess. I do use a tripod, yes. Rarely shoot without!
-
To go a little further with #3, I am referring to a general softness to the image comparable to that you'd see in a old box camera or something. It just doesn't pop.
-
Sorry, here's the link to the photo.
-
I've been shooting on a Canon T70 35mm with a Vivitar 28-85mm zoom
lens. Attached is a Hollywood 62mm Sky A-1 filter, nothing else.
Film is Ilford Pan F+ 50 @ 50 ISO; the image you see was taken at
approximately f 5.6 at 1/125th. Fresh batteries; cloudless day,
approximately 11am.
Please ignore the vertical lines; they're the result of the film
scanner. What I would like to learn more about is:
1) Why is my sky dark and inconsistent? I exposed for the tree's
midtones; very disappointing. Note that some of my shots have this
darkening feature while others are fine.
2) There is a strange gray curve in the top right there. It shows
up in several shots on a roll (~5 of 35); I don't see anything in
front of the camera when I shoot and my lens appears clean on both
ends.
3) I've noticed that no matter what film I use, my shots always tend
to have a fuzziness close up. I would compare it to the halo
artifacting you see even on 'good' digital shots (~3megapixel,
etc.). Although subtle, it's obnoxious when enlarged and keeps me
from the sort of crisp images I would expect from this camera loaded
with 50 ISO film known for its resolution. I am nearsighted and
focus through the eyepiece without my glasses; I'm *very* particular
about lining up the prismatic focuser and have even tried with
glasses on. I still get these results.
Is it my lens, and if so, could you recommend a nice crisp lens with
approximately the same zoom capabilities (28-85mm or so) as my
Vivitar?
Sorry this scan is so scrubby, but you get the idea. Wish I could
get in tighter so you could see the fuzziness I've described.
Thank you to all of you for your support over the years. Last night
I subscribed, finally :)
-
I know there are countless combinations of film and developer
for "the best image." In my case, I've settled on 35mm Pan F+ 50
and Ilford ID-11 as recommended by Ilford. Do you have an ideal
development ratio/time that you've found working with this film and
developer combination? And since I haven't received my ID-11 in the
mail yet, I'm curious as what to experience visually. Any photo
samples of these two products are welcome.
I'll be using mine to [very very slowly!] shoot landscapes.
Thanks for your input on these two products together!
-
Thanks for the help. Jergen Kreckel (http://www.certo6.com/) has made it possible for me to repair/replace these parts. I appreciate your offer, Rob. And thank you for your suggestions John, Don, and Winfried.
-
Oh, specifically- this is an Apotar lens, 85mm.
-
Hi,
I've recently acquired the camera you see in the photo.
Unfortunately the first and second lenses are cracked from a botched
separation attempt. I'm looking to purchase these two lenses from
someone with a parts camera; what you see in the photo is what I
have (this is the actual camera) so all I need are the two lenses
which sit in front of the shutter. Everything else is fine. Thanks
for any info!<div>
</div> -
Great help, thank you very much. I'll go with D76 for a good long bath ;)
As this Isolette goes, yes, I love it! Unfortunately I'm having to go through the standard breakdown to clean and lubricate the mechanics. Having a bear of a time getting the first and second lens elements apart.
http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/repair/frozenfix.html
Must... keep.... trying....
-
Thank you for all of your answers... Dean, the release mechanism appears to have plenty of decent angle to depress the shutter release. I can manually press the release mechanism (black flap) and cause it to trip the shutter.
Andrew, I've checked the T switch from both directions. Neither works; although, oddly, both directions give the same feel of resistance, which leads me to Winfried's response.
I seriously suspect an internal issue inside the top plate and am struggling to open it. I've attempted to turn the forwarding knob clockwise (looking down on top of the camera) while using pliers to maintain the "+" piece position inside the camera. No luck; I actually bent the extended cross pieces slightly so I'll have to be more careful as we proceed ;) Fortunately no harm done.
Side note: Having a bear of a time getting lenses 1 and 2 separated, as seen here:
http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/repair/frozenfix.html
But first thing's first... the shutter release.
Thanks again, good help so far!
-
I just acquired an Agfa Isolette, Compur-Rapid shutter, Apotar lens.
The camera is in practically mint condition with the exception of
standard lubrication issues.
When I set a shutter speed and pull the tension lever, then try to
press the shutter trigger, it won't budge much at all. The button
goes down maybe 1/3 of the way. I notice that I can manually reach
in and trip the shutter by lifting the vertical black lever with my
finger, and it will snap. Also I can pull the chrome shutter lever
(designed for trigger by the trigger mechanism) manually and I get a
snap. The problem seems to lie in the mechanism directly connected
to the shutter button, not the lens apparatus at all.
Also, what sort of lubricant do you recommend for the elements of
this camera?
Thanks for your help!
-
Thanks, Michael. I'll repost there.
-
Oh, yes- this appears to be an Isolette I camera. This might help with dating of the film and so on... Keep the age in mind with times and such!
-
I just bought a nifty Isolette folder camera on ebay. Lo, it was
loaded with film, ~10 exposures! I've carefully unloaded the roll;
it reads "Plenachrome" which I've found a little bit of information
on here at photo.net. However, I'm curious as to what exactly you
would recommend for processing. I can handle any detailed D-76 type
processing myself, if you give me specifics. Otherwise any other
info on this stuff (and what to tell the lab) would be appreciated.
I'll be happy to post any interesting images here if something turns
up!
-
I just acquired an Agfa Isolette, Compur-Rapid shutter, Apotar
lens. The camera is in practically mint condition with the
exception of standard lubrication issues.
When I set a shutter speed and pull the tension lever, then try to
press the shutter trigger, it won't budge much at all. The button
goes down maybe 1/3 of the way. I notice that I can manually reach
in and trip the shutter by lifting the vertical black lever with my
finger, and it will snap. Also I can pull the chrome shutter lever
(designed for trigger by the trigger mechanism) manually and I get a
snap. The problem seems to lie in the mechanism directly connected
to the shutter button, not the lens apparatus at all.
Also, what sort of lubricant do you recommend for the elements of
this camera?
Thanks for your help!
-
If it is cross processed, I wonder how they manage to keep the color cast to a dull roar. My cp images tend to have a severe yellow, cyan, or fuschia cast...?<div></div>
-
Hi,
I'm interested in finding an affordable, C-41 process 35mm print
film which will give a look similar to the attached image (borrowed
from the Kings of Convenience website at www.kingsofconvenience.com,
thank you).
In the past I've managed a similar slightly cast, muted feel but it
was by shooting Sensia slide film and scanning the results. Here's
an example of what I got:
http://www.photo.net/photo/2624214
But I'd like a cheaper, more accessible option strictly for print.
Thanks for your help.<div>
</div> -
These are all very kick*ss ideas. Thanks so much! I particularly like the lighter idea ;)
-
I just got back from Italy. The gypsies were always more than happy to pose for a photo, especially with the addition of a smile and a few euros to the transaction. I'll post something in this thread soon. Thank you all again for the great conversation on this topic.
-
I've seen b/w prints which feature some very unique textures, as if
someone has taken a sponge to the negative or something. What are
some ideas on how to affect an already processed negative to give it
texture, since it's too late to 'cook' it in the processing stages
(reticulation, is it called)?
Another thing- In the event that I don't want to permanently alter
a negative, is it possible to perhaps effect a blank frame and put
it in the enlarger with the actual image negative to give the
impression of a distressed negative? I'm far from home and my
darkroom but would love some info ahead of time to get the gears
turning. Thank you!
-
Steve,
Yes, war will always be a part of us. But many times key photographs have lead to the resolution of conflict simply by conveying the horrors which a given public was previously unaware of. Just as photos of slaughterhouses have led many to become vegetarian; we may already be aware of these things but as "typical" people we numb them out in our minds. When we see the photographs, that is when we're forced to acknowledge them. And many people are on the fence, just needing a little nudge to put them in proactive motion. I have to agree with the pornography statement, however... sadly true, I admit.
Greg, very cool. Your advice is right up the alley with what I came here to post today. I came across a book entitled, "Homeless- Portraits of Americans in Hard Times" by Howard Schatz. Amazing- excellent photos and each person featured tells their story. Photo on right of page, story on left. Simple and shocking at times.
I hope this link stays available, since the editor/guest reviews sum it up:
His procedure was similar to yours, Greg, and is fully outlined in the preface. The end of the book gives a great deal of insight into our public programs and so on.
-
Flowing cool tap water for 30 minutes (i don't use hypo), then 2 minutes in Photoflo. Hang to dry. I *just* ran a T-Max 400 for the first time (it's drying) so we'll see what happens.
Other specifics (now with T-Max 400) that I probably should have mentioned:
D-76, 8 minutes
Kodak Stop bath, 45 seconds
Kodak Fix, 3 minutes (although I went about 1 minute longer this time just in case)
Inconsistent, dark sky/fuzzy print/mysterious object?
in Accessories
Posted
The results:
<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3295928">http://www.photo.net/photo/3295928</a>